British Indian divisions criticised

Discussions on all aspects of the The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Andy H
User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

British Indian divisions criticised

#1

Post by Peter H » 05 May 2010, 01:54

From Trevor Royle's Orde Wingate Irregular Soldier

Orde Wingate:
..Wingate's reasons for disliking the Gurkhas lay mainly in the distrust he felt for the Indian Army;according to Mountbatten he caused great offence in New Delhi by describing the Indian Army as 'the largest unemployed relief organisation in the world' and made it clear that under no circumstances would he have Indian soldiers under his command.In particular he was 'pathologically opposed' to the close ,almost mystical,family relationship which existed between the officers and men of most Indian regiments.This was particularly true in the Gurkha Rifle regiments..

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#2

Post by Peter H » 05 May 2010, 02:03

From Allies against the Rising Sun Nicholas Evan Sarantakes,page 277.

MacArthur's views on excluding Indian troops from any invasion force of Japan:
.."Where homogeneity of language with the [British] corps is required I doubt the advisability of employing troops of native origin.Likewise there is a question of the advisability of utilising troops of tropical origin in a temperate zone without an extended acclimatization period..."

MacArthur had two real reasons for rejecting the British-Indian Army.First,it did not have a great reputation for combat effectiveness,particularly its units serving in India.Such a reputation was not entirely fair,since many units were assigned policing duties..Another factor was race.MacArthur's invasion force would consist of armies from white nations.This force would teach the Japanese a lesson about challenging the West..


User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#3

Post by phylo_roadking » 05 May 2010, 02:05

Likewise there is a question of the advisability of utilising troops of tropical origin in a temperate zone without an extended acclimatization period...
Puts me in mind of the story about the Gurkha patrol on the slopes of Monte Cassino... :wink:
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#4

Post by Peter H » 05 May 2010, 02:09

Agree,Sarantakes relates:
The Indian army had fought in a variety of environments from desert to jungle..Indian units had also fought in Italy,which is quite similar in its weather to Japan..
Stilwell also had a poor view on the efficiency of the Indian Army as related in Tuchman's book on Stilwell.But then he criticised everybody.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#5

Post by Tim Smith » 05 May 2010, 11:21

To an American instinctively and culturally opposed to the mere idea of the British Empire, using 'Imperial' troops of any description was anathma.

Many (perhaps even most) Americans liked Britain, but hated the British Empire, believing that all peoples should be free.

rcocean
Member
Posts: 691
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#6

Post by rcocean » 06 May 2010, 04:45

Peter H wrote:From Allies against the Rising Sun Nicholas Evan Sarantakes,page 277.

MacArthur's views on excluding Indian troops from any invasion force of Japan:
"MacArthur had two real reasons for rejecting the British-Indian Army.First,it did not have a great reputation for combat effectiveness,particularly its units serving in India.Such a reputation was not entirely fair,since many units were assigned policing duties..Another factor was race.MacArthur's invasion force would consist of armies from white nations.This force would teach the Japanese a lesson about challenging the West.."

Really? Is this actually supported by a MacArthur quote or written statement, or it just another "mind-reading" exercise by a historian?

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#7

Post by phylo_roadking » 06 May 2010, 16:26

How then did MacArthur describe the Army of the Philippines in 1941??? :wink:
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#8

Post by Tim Smith » 06 May 2010, 18:38

phylo_roadking wrote:How then did MacArthur describe the Army of the Philippines in 1941??? :wink:
"The heroic and free soldiers of the Philippines standing shoulder to shoulder with their American brothers in democracy, defending to their last breath the eternal and sacred cause of world freedom and justice?" :D

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#9

Post by phylo_roadking » 06 May 2010, 21:46

...with a few minor reservations! :lol:
...in so far as may be practicable, original appointments by the President in grades above third lieutenant shall be made from among those formerly holding Reserve Commissions in the United States Army, from among former officers of the Philippine Scouts and Constabulary, from among former officers of the National Guard and from such others who possess exceptional ability or special training and skill
And one VERY major one...the creation of United States Army Forces Far East (USAFFE) on July 26, 1941. Units and personnel of the Army of the Philippines indicated in orders issued by a general officer of the United States Army were mobilized and made an integral part of the United States Army Forces Far East (USAFFE).
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#10

Post by Peter H » 07 May 2010, 10:14

rcocean wrote:
Peter H wrote:From Allies against the Rising Sun Nicholas Evan Sarantakes,page 277.

MacArthur's views on excluding Indian troops from any invasion force of Japan:
"MacArthur had two real reasons for rejecting the British-Indian Army.First,it did not have a great reputation for combat effectiveness,particularly its units serving in India.Such a reputation was not entirely fair,since many units were assigned policing duties..Another factor was race.MacArthur's invasion force would consist of armies from white nations.This force would teach the Japanese a lesson about challenging the West.."

Really? Is this actually supported by a MacArthur quote or written statement, or it just another "mind-reading" exercise by a historian?
No idea, reference is given as Memorandum by the United States Chiefs of Staff,July 18 1945,FRUS,Berlin,Vol 2,1336.

rcocean
Member
Posts: 691
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#11

Post by rcocean » 08 May 2010, 01:09

Peter H wrote:
rcocean wrote:
Peter H wrote:From Allies against the Rising Sun Nicholas Evan Sarantakes,page 277.

MacArthur's views on excluding Indian troops from any invasion force of Japan:
"MacArthur had two real reasons for rejecting the British-Indian Army.First,it did not have a great reputation for combat effectiveness,particularly its units serving in India.Such a reputation was not entirely fair,since many units were assigned policing duties..Another factor was race. MacArthur's invasion force would consist of armies from white nations.This force would teach the Japanese a lesson about challenging the West.."
Really? Is this actually supported by a MacArthur quote or written statement, or it just another "mind-reading" exercise by a historian?
No idea, reference is given as Memorandum by the United States Chiefs of Staff,July 18 1945,FRUS,Berlin,Vol 2,1336.
I've just read FRUS Vol 2, Pages 1336-1337. Its contains MacArthur's opinion on the use of UK and British Commonwealth troops in Coronet. In summary, it states MacArthur thought their should be a Commonwealth Corps consisting of 1 Canadian, 1 Australian, and 1 British Division. The British Division should be "Anglo-Saxon" since he wanted homogeneity in language within the Corps and thought tropical troops unsuited for the temperate fighting. No where is race mentioned nor is the fighting qualities of Indian troops denigrated.

So all that crap about "Another factor was race.MacArthur's invasion force would consist of armies from white nations.This force would teach the Japanese a lesson about challenging the West". is unsupported - lying BS. Par for the course with current day 'historians.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#12

Post by Peter H » 08 May 2010, 03:41

I assume differing rations for the Indian troops also played its part.The US wanted to equip,supply,feed all British & Commonwealth allocated to CORONET along US lines.This meant British,Dominion troops being trained in US weaponary in the United States.The British X Corps from Italy was meant to be shipped to CONUS in late 1945 enroute to the Pacific.This would have been the 46th & 56th Infantry Divisions?The Canadians proposed deploying the 6th Canadian Infantry Division,made up of volunteers,all single young men.Around 75,000 Canadians voluntered to serve in the Pacific in 1945,culled down to 39,000 finally accepted.

I'm curious with Stilwell's view on Indian troops though.He and MacArthur got on quiet well,I'm assuming Stilwell provided MacArthur some feedback on the capabilities etc of British & Commonwealth troops.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#13

Post by Tim Smith » 14 May 2010, 13:43

Peter H wrote:I assume differing rations for the Indian troops also played its part.The US wanted to equip,supply,feed all British & Commonwealth allocated to CORONET along US lines.This meant British,Dominion troops being trained in US weaponary in the United States.
Makes sense, given the vast logistical supply line involved in invaded Japan.

User avatar
Matt Gibbs
Member
Posts: 3005
Joined: 23 Mar 2002, 01:46
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#14

Post by Matt Gibbs » 05 Aug 2010, 12:19

phylo_roadking wrote:Puts me in mind of the story about the Gurkha patrol on the slopes of Monte Cassino... :wink:
Given the sterling efforts of the Gurkha Rifles at Hangmans Hill and on the other Monte Cassino slopes when the 4th Indian Division took part in several flanking manouvres and two of the main attacks I would be particularly interested in hearing the story of the Gurkha patrol you mention. The Gurkha's at Hangmans Hill held their position for far longer than any of the troops from units of the British Army within 4th Indian Division. Indeed the Divisional commander particularly praised them and their efforts and made sure they were to be extracted when the order was given to pull out as the main attack failed.
Other Generals have falled foul when taking up the comments which appear based on pre war generalisations of the Indian Army, rubbishing them without first hand experience, as Montgomery did early in his tenure of the desert war. Later on he no doubt hoped no one would point out his mistake when he especially praised the 4th Indian Division and 7th Armoured as "my two best divisions". In 4th Indian Div less than a 3rd of the troops were attached British regiments.
I'm not sure that one quote from Wingate, as a generalisation about the quality of Indian troops is a strong basis for an argument on the general opinion of Indian troops. ? Many of his opinions conflicted with those of his superiors, which is why he wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms in many of the commands he became attached to. He is an interesting personality to read about though, as is Wavell.

Mil-tech Bard
Member
Posts: 678
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 16:50

Re: British Indian divisions criticised

#15

Post by Mil-tech Bard » 05 Sep 2010, 19:08

>>Another factor was race. MacArthur's invasion force would consist of armies from white nations.This
>>force would teach the Japanese a lesson about challenging the West.

This reflects very poorly on the author as it is easily proven as false.

See:

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/ ... pter20.htm
A host of small units were employed in every theater and in almost every type of operation, forward and rear. Negro engineers were ahead of other ground and air troops in the early days at Port Moresby in New Guinea. They went in as soon as possible after the successive invasions across the broad Pacific, pushing out ahead of other ground troops at times to construct the airfields required for the planes that kept the ever-accelerating Pacific timetable on schedule. On bulldozers, in trucks, and on foot they cut their way through the frigid wilds of Canada and Alaska and through the jungles of Burma, building and improving roads for military transport. They provided a garrison for Liberia and protection for the American-built Roberts Field there. They provided antiaircraft defenses for Trinidad in the Caribbean and for the Pacific islands on the route to Australia and, later, on the route to the Philippines. Negro port and amphibious truck companies were attached to Army and Marine divisions and corps for the invasions of the Pacific islands, notably Saipan, Tinian, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. Port comparties manned great ports around the world, and sometimes places that were never ports before. Negro engineer, chemical, and quartermaster troops landed at Salerno and Anzio. A Negro barrage balloon unit, the only American unit of its type present, unleashed its captive balloons to protect the cross-Channel invasion fleet and the troops on the Normandy beaches from low-flying aircraft, while amphibious truck, quartermaster service, and ordnance ammunition companies there began jobs which were to last through V-E Day. Negro quartermaster truck and transport companies were more or less permanently attached to infantry and armored divisions fighting across Europe, many of them, through their long attachments, becoming almost integral parts of the divisions to which they were attached, some of them joining in the fighting as riflemen when needed. Medical ambulance companies attached to divisions and hospitals evacuated wounded to the rear and medical sanitary companies loaded evacuated patients aboard ship for return to hospitals in England. Companies of ordnance ammunition battalions stocked and dispensed ammunition along the routes of the armies. Smoke generator companies set their smoke pots and generators just behind front lines at Anzio and along European rivers, sometimes, as along the Garigliano, mingling their smoke positions with infantry outposts. In rear areas, at depots, bases, and ports, service units handled the supplies required to support the armies and the services, while quartermaster truckers sped them forward over the Red Ball Express route in Europe, the Motor Transport System in Iran, the Stilwell Road in Burma, and numberless coral roads in the Pacific..
and
The use of such units was so widespread that a detailed narrative of their contributions would require a separate volume. Most small units, their designations and functions changed as the need arose, must therefore remain anonymous in this account. The ease of shipment of these units was in direct relation to the need for them; their assignment to duty was equally a function of need, though need was at times created on the spot as a headquarters found more and more duties that could be attended to if soldiers were forthcoming to perform them. The quality of their training played a less important role in their shipment, although individual unit reputations for performance in the field were directly related to the continuing use of skills acquired in training, especially in the cases of combat support and the more technical of the service units. Units shipped "in current status of training," a phrase used generally to denote a unit that had not completed its training but which was nevertheless shipped because it was needed or because it would complete its training at its destination, often performed as well as better trained units which went out to areas that had relatively less need for them. A relatively untrained unit, therefore, was often as successfully employed when faced with a visible mission and a demonstrated need for its services as a well-trained unit employed in a routine manner. Certain units, like the engineer dump truck companies, always in demand, always used, and almost always Negro, were considered of great value by the using commands and were therefore well and fully employed; others, like chemical smoke generator companies, also with a heavy Negro representation, were less generally used for their primary missions, often being put to guarding warehouses and prisoners and operating depots. When formally converted to other missions, units developed high efficiency in their new tasks when they were convinced that these tasks were of more obvious and immediate value than their former assignments. Such was the case, for example, in two quartermaster service companies whose personnel came from disbanded units. These men learned rapidly, gaining "in efficiency until approximately seventy per cent were performing technical duties and only thirty per cent were performing general service duties."1
Two of those converted Smoke Generator companies were the 70th and 170th.

They had been converted to quartermaster companies in the SWPA and were being converted back to Smoke Generator Companies for Operation Olympic.

They were going to land with the V Marine Amphibious Corp on Kyushu and screen their beaches with smoke from Japanese Aerial Kamikaze attacks and observed artillery fire using smoke tactics developed at Anzio.

See page 402, Chapter X "Large Area Smoke Screens in the Pacific," in CHEMICALS IN COMBAT, from the US Army Green Book Series.

Post Reply

Return to “The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth 1919-45”