FOR SHAME! UK daily insults Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose by branding him as ‘Radical Hindu Nationalist’ and Azad Hind Fauj as ‘rag-tag army’

In a shocker, a prominent UK daily, ‘ Telegraph’, has delivered a massive insult to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose while reporting on Indian government's move to rename three islands in Andaman and Nicobar Islands in his hour. article, which is factually fatal, has gone to great lengths to sound as inflammatory as is feasible towards revered freedom fighter, demonstrating once again Britishers' inability to get over Indian leader who played a historic role in bringing down Empire.

article, published on January 1, 2019, makes clear how even 75 years after Bose established Azad Hind government, colonizers’ bile, ridden with spreading canards, still erupts viciously against him.

In a report headlined "Indian PM strips islands of British colonial names - and renames m after freedom fighter", London-based ' Telegraph' has taken small amount of spinning fictions to buttress its account of islands' renaming with what sounds like a ory wound to parrot an imaginative decades-long Hindutva conspiracy.

“Mr Bose, who was a radical Hindu nationalist, had raised a rebel army of Indian soldiers during WWII with help of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, to fight British. His rag-tag Free India Army was defeated alongside Japanese army advancing from Burma (Myanmar) into rth eastern India and soon after Mr Bose died under mysterious circumstances, two years before Indian independence in 1947”, article in UK publication reads.

Standing as a lost colonially-minded antiquated editorial piece which is at best half-baked on facts, is bound to spark outr across millions that revere Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

article seems almost relentless to craft a particular narrative on Bose and almost incapable of coming to terms with successful, surging, secular British-free India. In article,  word Hindu appears eight times -- on three occasions it is followed by word nationalist -- and combined term 'Hindu nationalist' is used as primary descriptor t just for Narendra Modi-led government but also, glaringly, for Subhas Chandra Bose. Netaji Bose has been called a "radical Hindu nationalist", while his Azad Hind Fauj has been called "his rag-tag Free India Army".

In article, renaming of Indian islands from colonial symbols certainly has irked British portal. “India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi has rechristened three of country’s island territories named after colonial officials, as part of a campaign by his Hindu nationalist government to disassociate itself from two centuries of British rule”, it states.

What’s more, re's almost a celebration of crushing of 1857 mutiny which translates embarrassingly into a celebration of trampling of first soaring voice of a colonized people who came toger to uprise against tyrant imperialistic colonizer. By celebrating 1857 mutiny as a crushing  of Indian people, article seems to try and nullify struggle, passion, zest and patriotism that had bubbled and has always been celebrated within India as first sign of breaking from shackles of British rule.

“Adjoining Havelock Island, that houred a former British army general who crushed 1857 mutiny by Indian soldiers against British rule, has been renamed Swaraj or Independent Island.” article reads.

While Bose is best kwn for his resolve to win freedom for India at any cost and led Azad Hind Fauj that chose “Jai Hind” (Victory to India) as its slogan, his politics and political ideology too have always risen above taint of communal colour. UK portal Telegraph and author of article must remind mselves of historical fact and re are plenty through books and portals that record history.

y must remind mselves of pillar of pledge of Indian National Army which bread essence Indian secularism and took pride in India’s intricate diversities.  

y must remind mselves that Netaji’s call for freedom had thing to do with Hindu nationalism but in his own words  “ struggle for independence  had as its aim, removal of triple bond of political, ecomic and social oppression.”

y must remind mselves that Netaji is man who spoke resoundingly for progressive ideals and declared “Fanaticism is greatest thorn in path of cultural intimacy, and re is better remedy for fanaticism than secular and scientific education”.

y must remind mselves that re are myriad published speeches and editorials in which Bose makes his disdain for religio-political organisations abundantly clear.

y must remind mselves that it was Bose who had repeatedly called out Hindu Mahasabha for "deploying sanyasis and sanyasins with tridents in ir hands to beg for votes". y must remind mselves that after calling for all Hindus to condemn this, Bose issued a call to "Banish se traitors from national life. Don't listen to m" at a public meeting in West Bengal in 1940.

What's more, it's t just in words that Bose has proven that he's as far from being a 'radicalised Hindu nationalist' that it's possible to be, he did so with his actions as well.

As CEO of Calcutta Municipal Corporation in 1920s he provided reservation for Muslims in jobs, and as president of Congress he banned members of Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League from also holding dual membership of Congress elective committee.

y must remind mselves that, most tellingly, both Azad Hind Fauj and Azad Hind Government were secular almost by design.

1945-46 Red Fort trial of Azad Hind Fauj's lieutenants -- Prem Kumar Sahgal (a Hindu), Shah Nawaz Khan (a Muslim) and Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon (a Sikh) -- resulted in coining of slogan "Lal kile se aayee awaz, Sahgal-Dhillon-Shah Nawaz, teen ki ho umar daraz". Meanwhile, his Azad Hind Government was one that adapted Rabindranath Tagore's Bengali version of Jan Gan Man into Hindi and enshrined it as its national anm, with a free and secular Government of India following suit years later.

Conclusive ackwledgement for Netaji's effectiveness in bringing people toger irrespective of ir caste, creed and race also comes from less than Mahatma Gandhi himself, who said on record, "Even if INA failed in its immediate objective, it achieved a lot. greatest among se was to gar toger, under one banner, men from all religions and races of India and to infuse into m spirit of solidarity and oneness to utter exclusion of all communal or parochial sentiment. It is an example we should all emulate."

While entire article has undertones of a kind of British colonial entitlement and antiquated onlooking of India that shines secularly and robustly as one today, words 'divine right' may also apply given extent to which author has gone to make it sound like religion was key driver for freedom movement-- an airbrushing convenient only to colonizer (and ir support club) that justified ir wrongs.

Try as it may, however, article mans to make case for why islands named after Britishers should t be renamed in an independent India. Why should re be an expectation for India to glorify ir colonisers?  As it states, three erstwhile island names -- Ross (w Subhas Chandra Bose Dweep), Neil (w Shaheed Dweep) and Havelock (w Swaraj Dweep) -- represented a Colonial marine surveyor, a British Military officer of East India Company, and general who "crushed 1857 mutiny by Indian soldiers against British Rule" respectively.

Mayhaps ' Telegraph' is better off asking for se three undoubtedly eminent persons, in ir own view, to be houred at a location closer to ir own country of origin, where y can be better appreciated. In interim, re must be an apology to every Indian.