What's new

A Largely Indian Victory in World War II, Mostly Forgotten in India

Bang Galore

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Messages
10,685
Reaction score
12
Country
India
Location
India
A Largely Indian Victory in World War II, Mostly Forgotten in India

By GARDINER HARRISJUNE 21, 2014

INDIA-1-master180.jpg

REMEMBRANCE AT THE BATTLEFIELD Ningthoukhangjam Moirangningthou, still living in a house at the foot of a hill that was the site of some of the fiercest fighting, recalled the battle. Credit Gardiner Harris/The New York Times


KOHIMA, India — Soldiers died by the dozens, by the hundreds and then by the thousands in a battle here 70 years ago. Two bloody weeks of fighting came down to just a few yards across an asphalt tennis court.

Night after night, Japanese troops charged across the court’s white lines, only to be killed by almost continuous firing from British and Indian machine guns. The Battle of Kohima and Imphal was the bloodiest of World War II in India, and it cost Japan much of its best army in Burma.

But the battle has been largely forgotten in India as an emblem of the country’s colonial past. The Indian troops who fought and died here were subjects of the British Empire. In this remote, northeastern corner of India, more recent battles with a mix of local insurgencies among tribal groups that have long sought autonomy have made remembrances of former glories a luxury.

Now, as India loosens its security grip on this region and a fragile peace blossoms among the many combatants here, historians are hoping that this year’s anniversary reminds the world of one of the most extraordinary fights of the Second World War. The battle was voted last year as the winner of a contest by Britain’s National Army Museum, beating out Waterloo and D-Day as Britain’s greatest battle, though it was overshadowed at the time by the Normandy landings.

A Largely Indian Victory in World War II, Mostly Forgotten in India

INDIA-2-articleLarge.jpg

A military cemetery in Kohima, India. Credit Gardiner Harris/The New York Times
“The Japanese regard the battle of Imphal to be their greatest defeat ever,” said Robert Lyman, author of “Japan’s Last Bid for Victory: The Invasion of India 1944.” “And it gave Indian soldiers a belief in their own martial ability and showed that they could fight as well or better than anyone else.”

The battlefields in what are now the Indian states of Nagaland and Manipur — some just a few miles from the border with Myanmar, which was then Burma — are also well preserved because of the region’s longtime isolation. Trenches, bunkers and airfields remain as they were left 70 years ago — worn by time and monsoons but clearly visible in the jungle.


This mountain city also boasts a graceful, terraced military cemetery on which the lines of the old tennis court are demarcated in white stone.

A closing ceremony for a three-month commemoration is planned for June 28 in Imphal, and representatives from the United States, Australia, Japan, India and other nations have promised to attend.

“The Battle of Imphal and Kohima is not forgotten by the Japanese,” said Yasuhisa Kawamura, deputy chief of mission at the Japanese Embassy in New Delhi, who is planning to attend the ceremony. “Military historians refer to it as one of the fiercest battles in world history.”

A small but growing tour industry has sprung up around the battlefields over the past year, led by a Hemant Katoch, a local history buff.

But whether India will ever truly celebrate the Battle of Kohima and Imphal is unclear. India’s founding fathers were divided on whether to support the British during World War II, and India’s governments have generally had uneasy relationships even with the nation’s own military. So far, only local officials and a former top Indian general have agreed to participate in this week’s closing ceremony.


“India has fought six wars since independence, and we don’t have a memorial for a single one,” said Mohan Guruswamy, a fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, a public policy organization in India. “And at Imphal, Indian troops died, but they were fighting for a colonial government.”

Rana T. S. Chhina, secretary of the Center for Armed Forces Historical Research in New Delhi, said that top Indian officials were participating this year in some of the 100-year commemorations of crucial battles of World War I.

“I suppose we may need to let Imphal and Kohima simmer for a few more decades before we embrace it fully,” he said. “But there’s hope.”

The battle began some two years after Japanese forces routed the British in Burma in 1942, which brought the Japanese Army to India’s eastern border. Lt. Gen. Renya Mutaguchi persuaded his Japanese superiors to allow him to attack British forces at Imphal and Kohima in hopes of preventing a British counterattack. But General Mutaguchi planned to push farther into India to destabilize the British Raj, which by then was already being convulsed by the independence movement led by Mahatma Gandhi. General Mutaguchi brought a large number of Indian troops captured after the fall of Malaya and Singapore who agreed to join the Japanese in hopes of creating an independent India.

The British were led by Lt. Gen. William Slim, a brilliant tactician who re-formed and retrained the Eastern Army after its crushing defeat in Burma. The British and Indian forces were supported by planes commanded by the United States Army Gen. Joseph W. Stilwell. Once the Allies became certain that the Japanese planned to attack, General Slim withdrew his forces from western Burma and had them dig defensive positions in the hills around Imphal Valley, hoping to draw the Japanese into a battle far from their supply lines.

But none of the British commanders believed that the Japanese could cross the nearly impenetrable jungles around Kohima in force, so when a full division of nearly 15,000 Japanese troops came swarming out of the vegetation on April 4, the town was only lightly defended by some 1,500 British and Indian troops.

The Japanese encirclement meant that those troops were largely cut off from reinforcements and supplies, and a bitter battle eventually led the British and Indians to withdraw into a small enclosure next to a tennis court.

The Japanese, without air support or supplies, eventually became exhausted, and the Allied forces soon pushed them out of Kohima and the hills around Imphal. On June 22, British and Indian forces finally cleared the last of the Japanese from the crucial road linking Imphal and Kohima, ending the siege.

The Japanese 15th Army, 85,000 strong for the invasion of India, was essentially destroyed, with 53,000 dead and missing. Injuries and illnesses took many of the rest. There were 16,500 British casualties.

Ningthoukhangjam Moirangningthou, 83, still lives in a house at the foot of a hill that became the site of one of the fiercest battles near Imphal. Mr. Ningthoukhangjam watched as three British tanks slowly destroyed every bunker constructed by the Japanese. “We called them ‘iron elephants,’ ” he said of the tanks. “We’d never seen anything like that before.”

Andrew S. Arthur was away at a Christian high school when the battle started. By the time he made his way home to the village of Shangshak, where one of the first battles was fought, it had been destroyed and his family was living in the jungle, he said.

He recalled encountering a wounded Japanese soldier who could barely stand. Mr. Arthur said he took the soldier to the British, who treated him.

“Most of my life, nobody ever spoke about the war,” he said. “It’s good that people are finally talking about it again.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/22/w...ld-war-ii-mostly-forgotten-in-india.html?_r=0
 
WW2 was a european war, where these soldiers were pretty much mercenaries. Yes they fought well, and Europe owes them a lot, and must remember them but they were also the ones keeping the British Raj alive.

The more important ones were fighting with S.C Bose! Ultimately it was their deaths and post war trials that made the British Indian Army and Navy rebel against the British, thus bringing freedom.
 
Last edited:
WW2 was a european war, where these soldiers were pretty much mercenaries. Yes they fought well, and Europe owes them a lot, and must remember them but they were also the ones keeping the British Raj alive.

The more important ones were fighting with S.C Bose! Ultimately it was their deaths and post war trials that made the British Indian Army and Navy rebel against the British, thus bringing freedom.
Doing it right has no meaning if you are not doing the right thing...
 
Fighting the Japanese and Hitler/nazis/axis as a whole...

How are they different from the allies? As far as India is concerned the British were far worse. Refer to the thread on Indias lost holocaust for just a small example.

Whether the Japanese wouldve been good or bad post war, if in the event of a Japanese victory is obviously impossible to answer. But the fact is that the INA trials precipitated the mutiny of the British Indian army and the navy, which really was one of the most important points of the freedom struggle
 
Last edited:
So you think Bose was a Japanese agent, like some ngo workers creating trouble today...okay

Never doubted their good intentions but truth is they never had any clout to stop their master Japanese from committing their infamous atrocities on captured Indian troops as well as Indian civilians. Read about Indian POW in Singapore and also on Japanese atrocities against people of Andaman islands which took place after those islands were handed over to SC Bose and INA as Indian territory. Same would have likely happened in Mainland India if Japanese managed to capture it. Imagine the same happening in Kolkata what happened in Nanking.
 
How are they different from the allies? As far as India is concerned the British were far worse. Refer to the thread on Indias lost holocaust for just a small example.

Whether the Japanese wouldve been good or bad post war, if in the event of a Japanese victory is obviously impossible to answer. But the fact is that the INA trials precipitated the mutiny of the British Indian army and the navy, which really was one of the most important points of the freedom struggle
You do know how Japanese killed Indian soldiers who did not agree to be part of INA right? You also know what they did in A&N right?? I agree that Britishers weren't any better. They were killing us but ow can that justify we getting involved in killing of millions of other innocents by being part of their army? Sure we were fighting in Asia, but that would have freed their (axis force) troops to fight somewhere else and kill more innocent people..... B
Indian_POW.jpg

Above is how Japanese treated Indians...
 
India was a British colony so the Brits used Indians as slaves to do their dirty work in their wars. Brits used Indians like dogs sending them to places like Fiji for slavery. Africans were the slaves for the Yankees and Indians were the slaves for the Brits.
 
You do know how Japanese killed Indian soldiers who did not agree to be part of INA right? You also know what they did in A&N right?? I agree that Britishers weren't any better

Since we agree that the britishers were no better there is no point in discussing atrocities.
But since you like pictures...here is one.
BhsVXKtCAAAyuzF.jpg


The above were *not prisoners of war*, nor were they traitors, just normal people

This is the empire we should "do the right thing" and defend?

They were killing us but ow can that justify we getting involved in killing of millions of other innocents by being part of their army? Sure we were fighting in Asia, but that would have freed their (axis force) troops to fight somewhere else and kill more innocent people.

errr what? Better let Indians die so that someone elsewhere can be spared? yeah okay. Think about what you said here.

WRT Andamans. It's laughable that the british officers talk about atrocities when they built up the entire island to be a large concentration camp, with the notorious cellular jail at the center.
But about the reports of the Japanese rule
The events of the next three years are not easy to establish
The principal sources are an unpublished report by local resident Rama Krishna: The Andaman Islands under Japanese Occupation 1942-5, another unpublished account by a British Officer, D. McCarthy:

History is written by the victors/people in power. If you go through thevarious media reports during the elections never was a Modi wave, he is a divisive leader etc etc.

The order of the day was to make the INA something bad, and anyone it was involved with.
Indian National Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After the war ended, the story of the INA and the Free India Legion was seen as so inflammatory that, fearing mass revolts and uprisings—not just in India, but across its empire—the British Government forbade the BBC from broadcasting their story
You can see how they were trying supress any sort of sentiment about the INA.
***********************************************************************************************************

The hypothetical outcomes of the war is something that can argued forever, because it is exactly that, hypothetical.

What I'm trying to argue here is that the importance of INA which some of you seem to dismiss, as "not the right thing". The outcome of the battle had *massive* consequences, which is why I said the effects of the INA were super important.

Later historians have pointed out that the INA trials and its after effects brought the decisive shift in British policy. The viceroy's journal describes the autumn and Winter 1945-45 as "The Edge of a Volcano".[4] Intelligence reports at the time noted widespread public interest and sympathy that turned into what has been described as "Patriotic Fury" that was beyond the communal barriers in India at the time. Particularly disturbing for the British, was the overt and public support for the INA by the soldiers of the Indian army.[45] In addition, the use of Indian troops for the restoration of Dutch and French rule in Vietnam and Indonesia also fed growing resentment within the forces.[46] The Raj had every reason to fear a revival of the Quit Indian movement, especially given the Congress rhetoric preceding the elections.[45] and rapidly realised that the Indian army, unlike in 1942, could not be used to suppress such a movement owing largely to nationalistic and political consciousness in the forces which was ascribed to the INA.[4][47] Some historians cite Auchinleck's own assessment of the situation to suggest this shortened the Raj by at least fifteen to twenty years.

Clement Attlee, the British Prime Minister, reflecting on the factors that guided the British decision to relinquish the Raj in India, is said to have cited the effects of the INA and Bose's activities on the British Indian Army and the Bombay Mutiny as being the most important

So please, before dismissing things off as "The wrong thing to do", or " a Japanese muppet" do some reading. The effects of the INA are highly understated.

The last thing that Indians and Africans should buy into is the garbage that the allies spin about fighting to defend the "free world/human rights", and other feel good nonsense they wish to add to it.
 
Last edited:
WW2 was a european war, where these soldiers were pretty much mercenaries. Yes they fought well, and Europe owes them a lot, and must remember them but they were also the ones keeping the British Raj alive.

The more important ones were fighting with S.C Bose! Ultimately it was their deaths and post war trials that made the British Indian Army and Navy rebel against the British, thus bringing freedom.

You know that the mentioned battle happened in todays India, that they were fighting off a Japanese invasion attempt, right?
 
Since we agree that the britishers were no better there is no point in discussing atrocities.
But since you like pictures...here is one.
BhsVXKtCAAAyuzF.jpg


The above were *not prisoners of war*, nor were they traitors, just normal people

This is the empire we should "do the right thing" and defend?



errr what? Better let Indians die so that someone elsewhere can be spared? yeah okay. Think about what you said here.

WRT Andamans. It's laughable that the british officers talk about atrocities when they built up the entire island to be a large concentration camp, with the notorious cellular jail at the center.
But about the reports of the Japanese rule



History is written by the victors/people in power. If you go through thevarious media reports during the elections never was a Modi wave, he is a divisive leader etc etc.

The order of the day was to make the INA something bad, and anyone it was involved with.
Indian National Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can see how they were trying supress any sort of sentiment about the INA.
***********************************************************************************************************

The hypothetical outcomes of the war is something that can argued forever, because it is exactly that, hypothetical.

What I'm trying to argue here is that the importance of INA which some of you seem to dismiss, as "not the right thing". The outcome of the battle had *massive* consequences, which is why I said the effects of the INA were super important.





So please, before dismissing things off as "The wrong thing to do", or " a Japanese muppet" do some reading. The effects of the INA are highly understated.

The last thing that Indians and Africans should buy into is the garbage that the allies spin about fighting to defend the "free world/human rights", and other feel good nonsense they wish to add to it.

What is hard to understand here? There is no difference between britishers and axis power. Both thought Indians were trash, both murdered us. But if axis powers took over India, millions more would have been marched to gas chambers, without a doubt. You can post all pictures you want, but nothing justifies helping/actively killing some others for your good (ofcourse, there was no good coming to Indians). You get that? If somebody robs you, you can not rob some one else (who is unconnected completely) to make up your lost possession. You are right, it is better to die as an Indian than taking another innocent (like Indian) life (Plus, Indian suffering would have worsened under Japanese/Axis anyways). In WW2, we were not defending the empire, we were defending ourselves. For not so good reason, empire supported us. I recommend that you read some of the survivor stories from A&N. By Indians. Chilling... I remember one survivor describing how they used to kill with swords people suspected of spying (mostly poor who were going to forest to collect firewood). How they massacred all they could get their hands on before withdrawing (author himself was lowered into a pit dug by prisoners themselves but saved at last min by a japanese officer to who he has supplied eggs). After reading this you can tell me whether it was fabricated history written by victor or just plain truth which is bitter for you.

As about INA itself, I don't deny their good intention. But road to hell are paved with good intention. However, I give them benefit of doubt as they may not have been aware of full scale of atrocities committed by axis powers. Importance of INA was not how much it was made to be (they did not win any significant battle). Before writing some highly patriotic stuff, I am saying this with the inputs from a person who took part in the "actual" war. He was my temp english teacher, who did not get any pension for the service he had done to the nation (but INA people did for helping the japanese) and had to work in his advanced age to make ends meet. He described how after capturing them offer was made to join INA and people who refused were torchered and were about to be killed. Due to intervention of INA were let off with the clothing they were wearing, barefoot. He showed us the lump in his hand (broken, reset bone) which he said was due to jap hitting from rifle butt. So, please keep aside what you were taught is school aside and learn some real history.
 
I am happy that INA and japanese lost... look what they did to chinese.
Brits with all their faults at least did not treat us like sub humans. Colonialism was bad, but we were lucky to have brits not french or dutch or german.
 
I am happy that INA and japanese lost... look what they did to chinese.
Brits with all their faults at least did not treat us like sub humans. Colonialism was bad, but we were lucky to have brits not french or dutch or german.


Anyone who remembers massacre at Nanjing will be thankful that INA and Japs lost .
 
Back
Top Bottom