An enigmatic bond

In one of his famous sayings, the noted English dramatist George Bernard Shaw stated that every drama must have a conflict — no conflict, no drama. Now, this is indeed true about life itself because there cannot be a greater drama than life, and when we talk about life, nothing seems to be more dramatic than the turn of political events and actions. In the course of such developments, individuals at times emerge as larger than life, and when two such individuals opine differently over the same issue, the situation attains complexity.

One such glorious example is the famous relationship between Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and Mahatma Gandhi. It is without any shade of doubt that these two names are uppermost in the history of India’s struggle for independence. They had similar intentions but with different approaches. However, history has projected them as personalities in conflict. It is not just about the difference in their paths but more about the antagonism that got focused over the years, to such an extent that while making one a hero, the other is described as an anti-hero, if not a villain. Even today, when dealing with the relationship between Netaji and Gandhiji, it is their dissimilarities that get prominent mention.

Despite their different ideologies, Bose and Gandhi had mutual respect. It was Bose who referred to Gandhi as ‘Bapu’; similarly, Gandhiji hailed Bose as ‘Prince Of Patriots.’ When the news about Bose’s plane crash arrived, Gandhiji made the historic remark — “his patriotism is second to none, his bravery shines through all his actions. He aimed high and failed, but who has not failed.” Even then, they did not always combine well; in fact, that they could not combine has been considered by many historians as a great misfortune of Indian politics before freedom, because a school of historical thought strongly advocates the belief that if Netaji had remained to work within the Congress, India might have avoided the deadly scar of Partition.

In one of his lectures, Sugata Bose, the noted historian and grand-nephew of Subhas Chandra Bose, shared his views that the differences between Mahatma Gandhi and Subhas Chandra Bose are highly exaggerated by the people of India, and more particularly, by the people of Bengal. However, the differences cannot be ignored altogether. From the very beginning, Bose and Gandhi stood for polar opposite ideologies. When the Civil Disobedience Movement was called off by Gandhiji owing to the Chauri Chaura incident, Bose was quick to react — “to sound the order of retreat just when public enthusiasm was reaching the boiling point was nothing short of a calamity.” At that time, Bose was a young leader within the Congress, and Gandhiji was the most popular leader navigating the course of the national movement. India’s two men of destiny met first in 1921. Subhas Chandra Bose had resigned from the Indian Civil Service and set sail for India. After reaching Bombay on July 16, 1921, Subhas Chandra Bose went to meet Gandhiji. However, after some years, in the Calcutta Congress of 1928, Bose demanded complete independence instead of the demand for ‘Dominion Status’ as endorsed by Gandhiji. Now this was indeed strange to many, for no one could voice against Gandhiji. Surprisingly, the cry for total independence became louder in the Lahore session of the Congress.

It is not that Bose always opposed Gandhiji or held him responsible for political consequences. Though the Gandhi-Irwin pact did not please Bose, yet he was convinced that Gandhiji took interest in the annulment of Bhagat Singh’s Death Sentence. Similarly, when Gandhiji gave the historic cry of ‘Do or Die’ in the famous ‘Quit India Movement,’ he was sounding desperate like Netaji. Over the years, Gandhiji realised that Bose was not that much wrong. Unfortunately, by that time, the gulf between the two became too wide, and, to refer to Gandhiji’s own words, suspicions were too deep to close the ranks. In a letter written to Andrews, Gandhiji wrote, “I feel that Subhas is behaving like a spoilt child of the family. The only way to wake him up is to open his eyes.” Was Gandhiji intolerant of Subhas? If yes, then it is certainly strange and perhaps uncharacteristic of Gandhi, for the Mahatma has always advocated the policy of tolerance. There were other factors too that instigated the growing differences between the two greats. One was definitely the leftist political pressure. In one of his letters, Lt Governor Brabourne mentioned the growing pressure of the leftists on Subhas Chandra Bose. Precisely, the two greatest personalities of the Indian Freedom Movement could not communicate with each other properly.

The biggest point of dissociation between Bose and Gandhi shaped up in the famous Tripuri Congress Session. Again, this is also eerie, for in the previous Haripura Session of the Congress, Gandhiji had no point of dissent. However, dark clouds started looming during the elections. Bose filed for re-elections and eventually emerged victorious against Pattabhi Sitaramyya. For the first time within twenty years, Gandhiji’s authorities got challenged within the Congress. Bose, of course, took to try and win Gandhiji’s confidence because to him, it would be a tragic thing to win the confidence of other people but fail to win the confidence of India’s greatest son, that is Gandhiji. Even then, the knot remained tied, and the infamous Panth Resolution forced Bose to resign from the post of Congress President. Gandhiji’s statement “Sitaramyaa’s defeat is my defeat” was again not called for. It created a vertical rift between Bose and Gandhi, a rift that would pain Gandhi no less because at the time when India’s partition was becoming imminent, Gandhiji longed for Bose with this belief that the latter would return to fight for the cause of united India.

The relationship between Bose and Gandhi has remained one of admiration in contradiction. In a radio address in 1944, Netaji wanted the blessings of Mahatma in the holy war for India’s liberation. The Mahatma wrote in 1946 that Netaji and his men stand for self-sacrifice and unity, irrespective of class and community. Modern India keeps on tossing tempests over teacups about who brought freedom to India or whose methods were more effective. This is an unending debate.

Apart from politics, Bose and Gandhi were not thinking in the same line in matters of India’s ways of development. Bose’s dream of an industrial future for free India varied with Gandhiji’s concept of Ramrajya. Bose was radical and believed that freedom is not to be earned through negotiation and non-violent agitation but through revolt and military means. His role was pivotal, and so was Gandhiji’s means of leading India towards freedom. Their contributions were like their relationship - contrasting and diverging. Today, both the ideologies of Bose and Gandhi are essential because neither of them believed in parochial, communal propensity in political thought and practice. According to the Mahatma, Subhas Chandra Bose knew no provincialism nor communal differences, and Gandhi has always stood for communal unity. What Mahatma and Netaji shared in their vision of nationalism and national integrity, along with equality, largely outweigh their differences. There is no point in amplifying the differences between these two gigantic minds. Instead, let us learn to combine the best of these two men for a future India standing tall on the principles that Bose and Gandhi epitomised.

The writer is an educator from Kolkata. Views expressed are personal