(528 pages)
This was very much worth reading. Not just for the role of the Indian Army in WWI (highly interesting for various reasons if not highly affecting the outcome), but for what it reveals about British policy of the times, the evolving Indian independence movement of the times, life in the villages from which the British drew recruits, etc.
Britain continuing to rely on Indians for military personnel in the prewar years . . . but aggressively maintaining "prestige" to keep them in their place. Also a color barrier existed - Indians were not allowed to fight against white armies anywhere in the Commonwealth (what if they succeeded?!) Let alone become officers with any form of authority over whites. Selection by race, not merit.
Most of the recruits were drawn from select villages in northern India; many (Afridi, Pashtun) from loosely-organized territories outside British India (these areas functioning like buffer states between British India and places like Afghanistan). The Afridi/Pashtun types were, and definitely considered themselves to be, independent of British India - and so behaved sometimes when serving in the Indian army.
Some British Army leaders foresaw the coming conflict, and prepared even the Indian army to assist. Thus they were in position to land Indian troops at a critical juncture of 1914 - before the trenches were developed, just as France and Britain were running out of troops to stand up against German units still trying to break through in the initial drive to Paris. The presence of those Indian troops - even if they didn't end up with lots of fighting - was essential in plugging the weak points. Then the Western front settled into years of trench warfare.
Some of those troops were cavalry - and used in charges in a few instances - over time they figured out how to somewhat effectively support ground troops following "softening up" bombardments.
Indian troops were kept in Europe for years in many instances; it seems that they were well treated by the French citizenry in particular. This was an eye-opener as compared to treatment by the Brits.
I don't want to sound too negative toward the Brits - I think the author does a pretty balanced job on this topic - many of the Brit officers were really good about how they treated their men. But still.
I also thought the author did a good job exploring the mixed feeling of various of the Indians serving the British. Genuine loyalty mixed with the primary driver - serving in the Army was a pretty good job for those recruited, and they were able to help the folks back home. The Indian independence movement didn't have all that much traction as yet - folks like Gandhi were early in the process - and folks recruited from villages into the Indian army were mostly unaware of "independence" as a concept.
While some of the Indian troops - especially those with lesser preparation - were ineffective, the author points out that the Indian army - due to action in various skirmishes or engagements around the British empire - had greater experience than many or most of its European counterparts. They were not struggling "fish out of water" as the artillery boomed - they had seen versions of this, if smaller scale.
Something I hadn't appreciated - Indian units fought all over the world during WWI. Heavy action in Iraq. Chasing Germans around East Africa. Gallipolli. Palestine (including encounters with "Lawrence of Arabia" - who had unfriendly encounters with their officers). Minor forays into Afghanistan.
Indians transferred from the Western front often were unhappy about this - they enjoyed being in France.
Significant number of Muslim soldiers - this was a touchy subject as fighting occurred in Iraq (Ottoman emperor as caliph, after all).
Lots of change among those who served outside India - they came back with different views - but still tended to remain participants in the Indian army - resentful of some of the mistreatment, but the compensation remained attractive and they had been through a lot of shared experiences alongside their white officers. Independence movement slow to gain traction among this group.
Amritsar massacre in 1919 - mostly Indian troops firing at the order of their white officers. Led to repressive steps.
Folks like Gandhi had supported Indians fighting in WWI based on promises that this cooperation would hasten independence after the war ended. Disillusionment, the transition to a more confrontational (though nonviolent for Gandhi and his group) style.
No comments:
Post a Comment