Iran ceremony for India war dead

BBC News ^ | Thursday, 27 October 2005

[F14 Pilot]

About 3,500 Indian soldiers who died fighting for the British in Iran have been commemorated for the first time in an official ceremony in Tehran. It has only recently come to light that so many Indians died fighting for the British in Iran in the First and Second World Wars.

Delhi's ambassador said the event was a sign India had buried the ghosts of its colonial past.

Organisers hope to trace relatives in India so they can attend next year.

Closure

Buglers were flown in from India to play the Last Post for the thousands of forgotten soldiers who died here.

Wreaths were laid in a Commonwealth war cemetery, although only 10 Indian soldiers have gravestones here.

The rest were buried or cremated where they fell on the battlefield, though their names are recorded on stone plaques.

Honouring the dead has been difficult because many Indian nationalists opposed involvement in the First World War and only wanted to take part in the Second World War if India was promised independence from Britain in return.

Ambassador KC Singh said he was hopeful the families could be traced in India so they could attend a ceremony and give them closure.

For the tiny Indian community in Iran it was a surprise to find so many of their countrymen had died here.

MH Sawhney's father fought for the British in Basra in the First World War and then settled in Iran as a businessman.

"This is something very emotional for us. [For] years and years, we never knew that such a thing is here and it was only this year that we found out that, yes, we have around 3,400 soldiers lying here with Indian names."

Mr Sawhney has offered to sponsor the Indian relatives of soldiers who died in Iran to come to Tehran for next year's commemoration - if they can be traced.

[F14 Pilot]

...

[CarrotAndStick]

All this so suddenly? I guess India voting with the US against Iran must have had the mullahs in Tehran pissed off.


With this, they're probably trying to win back India. It will be tough, especially after that nutjob Ahmedinejad's comments on wiping out Israel, India's second lagrest defence partner, and friend.


However, India's critical requirement of Iran's oil and natural gas is a wildcard...

[CarrotAndStick]

Iran ceremony for India war dead
By Frances Harrison
BBC News, Teheran

About 3,500 Indian soldiers who died fighting for the British in Iran have been commemorated for the first time in an official ceremony in Tehran.
It has only recently come to light that so many Indians died fighting for the British in Iran in the First and Second World Wars.

Delhi's ambassador said the event was a sign India had buried the ghosts of its colonial past.

Organisers hope to trace relatives in India so they can attend next year.

Closure

Buglers were flown in from India to play the Last Post for the thousands of forgotten soldiers who died here.


[For] years and years, we never knew that such a thing is here and it was only this year that we found out
MH Sawhney, veteran's son

Wreaths were laid in a Commonwealth war cemetery, although only 10 Indian soldiers have gravestones here.

The rest were buried or cremated where they fell on the battlefield, though their names are recorded on stone plaques.

Honouring the dead has been difficult because many Indian nationalists opposed involvement in the First World War and only wanted to take part in the Second World War if India was promised independence from Britain in return.

Ambassador KC Singh said he was hopeful the families could be traced in India so they could attend a ceremony and give them closure.

For the tiny Indian community in Iran it was a surprise to find so many of their countrymen had died here.

MH Sawhney's father fought for the British in Basra in the First World War and then settled in Iran as a businessman.

"This is something very emotional for us. [For] years and years, we never knew that such a thing is here and it was only this year that we found out that, yes, we have around 3,400 soldiers lying here with Indian names."

Mr Sawhney has offered to sponsor the Indian relatives of soldiers who died in Iran to come to Tehran for next year's commemoration - if they can be traced.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/4382602.stm

Published: 2005/10/27 15:27:56 GMT

© BBC MMV

The Indian ambassador says he hopes families can gain closure

[kipita]

About 3,500 Indian soldiers who died fighting for the British in Iran have been commemorated for the first time in an official ceremony in Tehran.

I think there is a hidden message here to take a swipe at Britain and a "wink" at India. It's the Iranian version of Jesse's racket in the US.

[CarrotAndStick]

I doubt it is hidden, it IS the primary goal.

[Gengis Khan]

Its just an event organised by Mr Sawhney and the Indian community in Iran. It's got nothing to do with the Iranian government and hardly a recognition or anything.

[bahblahbah]

Didn't many of the Indians fight for the Nazi's?

[markedmannerf]

thanks for the ping

[GreenLanternCorps]

Rest in Peace, and Thank you, soldiers of the King-Emperor

(Flag of His Excellency the Viceroy of India)

[neither-nor]

Didn't many of the Indians fight for the Nazi's?

There were some soldiers who went over to the Japanese after the Burma Invasion, and formed 2 or 3 regiments for the Japanese army. I do not know if some of them turned up in Germany, but to my knowledge there was concerted going over to the Nazis.

On the other hand Indian regiments won 137 Victoria Crosses in service in the British Army (all wars). That is the highest number of VCs awarded to any nation's army (not counting the Brits themselves). Indian military dead in WWII, fighting for the allies, is estimated to be around 25,000.

Just FYI Australia had 91 VCs, Canada 80, New Zealand 22.

Source: http://www.victoriacross.net/stats.asp

[ketelone]

No, but a very small number did indeed do so(in the 1-2 thousands). They were deserters, and ex prisoners of war from the British Indian Army, and were treated as such at the end of the war. They were convinced that they fought for the freedom of their homeland.

Reference the famous INA Trials, in India. Although the government of free India gave freedom fighter status to those Indians who fought in the "Azad Hind Fauj" (which was independent and under the command of Subash Chandra Bose, an Indian nationalist, who believed the British had no business in India), I believe those who fought in the German SS were denied similar status.

On the other hand, some 2.5 Indian million men and women fought in the various arms of the British Indian Armed forces, during the 2nd world war, 23-24 Indian nationals were awarded the Victoria cross, the highest awaard for gallantry in te British empire, and they played major roles in the war in the east (against the empire of Japan), in north africa (tobruk), and in the invasion of Italy.

The matter also has a personal side for me, as my grandfather is an Indian, who fought in the Burma sector as a 2nd Lt. in the British-Indian army against the japanese, and was wounded in the Arakan campaign.

He finished the war as a major, and was a presiding officer at one of the courts martial which examined the cases of several of those who deserted.

[Gengis Khan]

Not for the Nazis ....they fought for India.

[Gengis Khan]

The INA's German division was called Frei Hindi (Free India).

[Gengis Khan]

The INA had 30,000 soldiers when S.C Bose launched the attack on Imphal.

"On the other hand, some 2.5 Indian million men and women fought in the various arms of the British Indian Armed forces, ....."

The difference is they were fighting for the British Empire or rather they were simply cannon fodder in the British Army. While the INA fought for India.

[ketelone]

Hey...

I was referring o the small number who had enrolled in the Legion Frei Indien (Legion of Free Indians). I agree that members of the INA proper were far larger.

Im afraid I cannot agree with the INA was fighting for free India while british Indian army was fighting fror england hypothesis. The BIA was prmarily employed for the defense of INDIA against the Empire of Japan. Im no fan of the british ruling India. But I dont think I would have been a fan of "railroad of death" Tojo ruling India either. Mark my words, the Japanese were in no mood to "liberate" India.

And the Indian troops who fought in the BIA by and large believed that they were fighing a just and good war, AND defending the motherland.

I may add, that many Indian soldiers may not have thought much of british rule in India. But they largely regarded those who shifted loyalty to gemany or the empire of japan as traitors, who betrayed their brother soldiers. Hence, there was no repatriation of these men into the military of Independent India, when independence came shortly after WWII.

[neither-nor]

Given the Japanese track record in China (Documented in 'Flyboys' by James Bradley, same guy who is the son of one of the Iwo Jima flag raisers and who also wrote 'Flags of Our Fathers') and elsewhere, I would go with ketelone.

Of course the Brit record (especially in 1942) was nothing to go by, but I would think the British to be the much lesser of the two evils. At least the the British, despite their faults, did some good to India (whatever their reasons). The Japanese would have raped the country.

The men who formed the INA were most of them patriots and I respect that. But that does not make traitors of those who fought for the British traitors. Also, the Japanese never really trusted the INA, nor did they give them adequate supplies. Incidentally Mulk Raj Anand has written about this somewhere- I think.

IMHO this is just one of those ironies of history.

[ketelone]

I agree 100%. Most of the men and women who joined the INA were and are patriots. So were Indian troops of the BIA.
I may add that the Indian military has always had a strong sense of regimental honor. This is one of the reasons that INA veterans were not well receieved by their fellow soldiers when they came back to India (although the genral public may have felt otherwise).

After all, if you a member of a body of fighting men, you would scarcely be pleased to find a former comrade changing sides and shooting at you, eh?

[swarthyguy]

Far more fought for the allies in both WWOne and Two.

Lookup the composition of Montgomery's 8th Army at the Battle of El Alamein.

Lots of history and facts available.

Without Indian soldiers, the British Empire just wouldn't have functioned, from Ethiopia to Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq and even the blood and mud quagmires of World War One France.