CIA record captures the spectre of Netaji's return in 1950

In a first instance of its kind, the world's the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has declassified and released to an Indian citizen based in India two records sought under the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The released documents make some interesting comments about India of circa 1950. Main among them is that four years after the reported death of Subhas Chandra Bose, the spectre of his return from the USSR remained strong enough to make many well-off Indians feel jittery. Since the source of CIA's information had to be but a highly-placed individual, the import of his inputs is that the belief of Bose's presence in USSR after his so-called disapperance was equally rooted among the elites, as with man on the street.

The number of documents releases is small, but it nevertheless marks a big leap for our nascent drive for ending the ecessive official secrecy in India. Here's the rub: In the world's leading democracy that is India, declassification remains an anathema -- specially for the intelligence agencies. Going by the present state of declassification, most of us would not live to see the day when R&AW and IB would began declassifying records no longer requiring security protection.

Then, the public memory is still fresh about the brazen manner in which our Government handled the "Russian-angle" finding of Justice Mukherjee Commission. On the other hand, the world's top intelligence agency has by releasing the records displayed the fairness that our government might like to follow. After all, the Government of India and its intelligence agencies are sitting on stockpile of classified information on the man who even in the estimates of his detractors was one of the topmost freedomfighters.

"The Agency Release Panel (ARP) considered your appeal and determined that the document that was initially denied in its entirety can now be released in part, with some information to remain protected from release on the basis of FOIA exemptions (b)(1) and (b)(3)," wrote Delores M. Nelson, Executive Secretary Agency Release Panel to Anuj Dhar, author of Back from Dead: Inside the Subhas Bose Mystery. The panel comprising top CIA officers handles the appeals against denial of information under FOIA. Exemptions (b)(1) and (b)(3) are invoked, as was the case in the present case, when the release of information could harm America's national security, including relations with foreign states; and name of the all-important source who provided the information contained in the records.

That the CIA should release the records sought make for a nice gesture indeed given that they were appealed by us to release the records in the interest of Netaji's admirers world over -- including the Americans of Indian origin.

CIA Information Report on the subject "Comments on political situation" [in India and Pakistan] was marked Confidential before it was declassified and sent to Dhar last week. The prevalent marking in those days in the agency were Secret, Confidential, Restricted and Clear. Which would mean that by today's standard, the document was deemed Secret. The highest level these days is Top Secret.

And one of the reasons the document is classified as such is because of the informant who provided the dope to the agency from Delhi. We would never know who this person was because his name and related details have been censored in the sanitized copy released by the agency. But we are not complaining. When the agency initially refused to release the record in the entirety, we implored them to release it in part, blocking out the name of the source that the CIA director is duty bound never to disclose.

For good measures, the markings on the record reveal that the source was "usually reliable" and his opinion was "probably true" -- just one degree below "the truth". With that sort of setting, here's is the crux of the document.

India of 1950 faced -- in source's estimate -- "some real potential danger". That is: Bose "is alive and is in Siberia, where he is waiting for a chance to make a big comeback".

The second record released by the agency is a "Restricted" one-line Information Report acquired in 1948. It speaks of the recurring rumor that Subhas Bose was alive and "active in the underground RSSS movement". In hindsight, one wonders why such a seemingly irrelevant piece of information on a man presumed dead years ago be described by the agency markings as "material requiring special handling"? Could it be that the document formed part of the many more papers on the subject of Subhas Bose mystery which was a rage in India those days?

Getting back to the first document, its source appeared impressed by the popularity of Bose in 1950. He painted this telling illustration: "Recently his life story was told in the Indian movies and I attended several different native theatres to study native reaction. Every time that the actor representing. Bose appeared on the screen, he was loudly applauded. This expression of great enthusiasm clearly indicated to me that Bose is a National hero, and in the eyes of the man on the street, I think he ranks next to Ghandi [sic]. The native Indian explanation for this is found in the fact that Bose took definite action against British rule."

Interestingly, and incredibly, "several educated Indians" told the source of their fear of the USSR sending "an imposter for Bose into India". "If Bose or an imposter should return, it is probable that a great many of the people would accept his leadership," source averred.

Chapter 3: Whether Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose is dead or alive

3.1 Five versions relating to Netaji’s death including the dates and places thereof have been received by this Commission but to answer the above question those details need not be stated here, as they will have to be discussed at length in following chapter. For the present purpose reference only to the dates and places of death would suffice. Chronologically arranged, these particulars are as follows:-

i) He was murdered at the Red Fort in New Delhi on August 15, 1945;

ii) He died in an air crash at Taihoku (now Taipei) in Taiwan (formally Formosa) on August 18, 1945;

iii) He died at Dehradun, Uttar Pradesh (now Uttaranchal) in 1977;

iv) He died at Sheopurkalan in the State of Madhya Pradesh on May 21, 1977;

And

v) He died at Ram Bhawan in Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh, on September 16, 1985.

3.1.1 Needless to say, if it is conclusively proved that he died on any of the dates and places mentioned above, the versions relating to death on subsequent dates need not be dealt with as that would be redundant. If, however, it is found that none of the above versions relating to his death has been established, the question whether he is still alive or not has to be answered.

3.2 Considering the facts that the average life span of an Indian is 70-75 years and that Netaji was born on January 23, 1897(which is not disputed) more than 108 years ago, it can safely and surely be presumed that he is no more. While on this point it need be mentioned that some of the deponents and some learned Counsel appearing before this Commission have stated, in no uncertain terms, as there in no truth in any of the versions relating to Netaji’s death it must be presumed that he is still alive for, according to them, a person can live beyond that age of 100 years. In support of this submission they have drawn the attention of the Commission to a photograph annexed to a statement supported by an affidavit filed by Shri Jyotish Chandra Bose and others wherefrom it appears that a Sadhu aged 124 years was found to be living in the year 2000.

3.2.1 It is, of course, true that it is ‘possible’ for a person to live beyond the average life span of an Indian and in a rare case even more than 100 years, but any person or authority entrusted with the duty of investigating into a question of fact has to find an answer thereto depending on whether it is ‘probable’ – and not ‘possible’. The distinction between the above two expressions is that while the former means what is likely to happen in the common course of events, the later means what is unlikely to happen in the common course of events but may happen in exceptional cases. Judged in the light of the above Principle, if it is found that none of the versions regarding Netaji’s death is substantiated the only legitimate inference that can be drawn at this distant point of time is that Netaji is no more. Thus said, the truth or otherwise of the different versions relating to Netaji’s death may now be delved into.