Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T11:02:14.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Burma's Struggle for Independence: The Transfer of Power Thesis Re-examined

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Hugh Tinker
Hugh Tinker
Affiliation:
University of Lancaster
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On 3 May 1945, British—Indian forces landed in Rangoon. The Japanese had pulled out. The city was liberated. On 16 June there was a victory parade, though the final victory over Japan was still distant and most of their conquests were intact. Admiral Mountbatten, Supreme Allied Commander, took the salute while detachments representing the one million men under his command passed by in massed array. Famous regiments from Britain, India and Nepal; the Royal Navy; the Royal Air Force; men from the United States Air Force. It was an impressive sight, though the ceremony took place in pouring rain. Amongst them all was a somewhat ragged band representing the Burma National Army which, having been raised by the Japanese, had fought for three months alongside the British. Watching the parade from the central dais was a young man dressed in the uniform of a Japanese Major-General, though he also wore an arm-band with a conspicuous red star. The outfit was incongruously crowned by a pith sun-helmet—a topi. Probably most foreigners present assumed he was a Chinese officer. He was actually Bogyoke Aung San, commander of the BNA.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , July 1986 , pp. 461 - 481
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Arrangements for the inclusion of a detachment of the Burma National Army on the parade, and the attendance of Aung San were made in signals between Mountbatten and his British commanders. They are included in the voluminous SEAC papers located at the PRO in various series collectively identified as WO 203. Those reproduced in this paper are all from Burma: the Struggle for Independence, 1944–1948; Documents from Official and Private Sources, ed. Tinker, Hugh, (2 vols, HMSO, 1983/1984).Google Scholar Besides series in the PRO, the sources used were in the Burma series in the India Office Records, as well as the Mountbatten papers in the Broadlands Archive. A few documents came from other sources. The exact location of each document is indicated in Burma: the Struggle for Independence (hereafter cited as Struggle), and the reader is asked to refer to this work from where he can locate the original documents. Vol. I of Struggle is subtitled ‘From Military Occupation to Civil Government, 1 January 1944 to 31 August 1946’: this first note relates to vol. I, p. 319.

2 Struggle, vol. I, pp. 331–4.Google Scholar

3 Ziegler, Philip, Mountbatten: The Official Biography (Collins, London, 1985): see pp. 51–2, 314–15Google Scholar, also Glass, Leslie, The Changing of Kings: Memories of Burma, 1934–1949 (London, 1985), p. 185.Google Scholar

4 Struggle, vol. I, pp. 311–13, also p. 335.Google Scholar

5 Burma: Statement of Policy by His Majesty's Government, May 1945. Cmd. 6635, in Struggle, vol. I, pp. 262–4.Google Scholar The wartime Coalition was dissolved on 23 May 1945.

6 Struggle, vol. I, pp. 258–9.Google Scholar

7 Ibid., pp. 291–7.

8 The official version of the Cumberland meeting is in ibid., pp. 339–40, and Dorman- Smith's own version on pp. 345–52.

9 Ibid., pp. 363–5.

10 Ibid., see pp. 380–1.

11 Ibid., p. 381, also pp. 384–5; ‘Aung San is the most important figure in Burma today’ (Dorman-Smith to L. S. Amery, 25 July 1945: his last letter to the outgoing Secretary of State).

12 Ziegler, , Mountbatten, pp. 299, 312.Google Scholar See also Report to the Combined Chiefs of Staff by the Supreme Allied Commander, South-East Asia, 1943–45, HMSO, 1951, B. Strategy and Operations, May to September 1945, paras 634–6.

13 Struggle, vol.I, pp. 398–401, and 408–10.Google Scholar This came to be known as the Naythuyein Mass Meeting.

14 The Kandy Conference is reported at length in Struggle, vol. I, pp. 432–56.Google Scholar Slim's pithy comment is on p. 433.

15 Ibid., pp. 456–9.

16 Ibid., p. 479.

17 Dorman-Smith reported the breakdown of negotiations with AFPFL and the decision to select his Council from the old guard on 27 October, ibid., pp. 522–5.

18 Communications from governor, 7 and 14 November (Struggle, vol. I, pp. 531, 538–9), permission to go ahead given by Cabinet, 19 November (pp. 548–9).Google Scholar

19 For the situation in Java, see Report to the Combined Chiefs of Staff by the Supreme Allied Commander, South-East Asia, Post Surrender Tasks (HMSO, 1969), paras 50–79.Google Scholar By mid-December, British Indian forces had suffered over 1,000 casualties. See also Allen, Louis, The End of the War in Asia (London, 1976), p. 93.Google Scholar

20 Minutes of Inter-Command Conference, 7 November, Struggle, vol. I, pp. 531–3.Google Scholar

21 Ibid., p. 608 (20 January 1946).

22 Presidential Speech, 20 January, ibid., pp. 608–13; for the governor's assessment of numbers, etc, see ibid., pp. 624–5.

23 Ibid., pp. 676–8, statement published 9 March: Aung San explained why he joined the Communist Party and why he left when he disagreed with Thakin Soe and his ‘sectarianism’.

24 Ibid., p. 694.

25 C.f. Conference at Government House, 27 March (ibid., pp. 703–6) and advice by Chief Secretary, 30 March: ‘Whether we like it or not the prosecution of Aung San for murder is off’ (ibid., p. 716).

26 Petition dated 8 April (ibid., p. 728) and telegram from governor, 13 April (ibid., pp. 731–2).

27 Governor to Prime Minister, telegram dated 6 May (ibid., pp. 769–70).

28 Ibid., p. 773 (telegram dated 7 May).

29 Ibid., p. 783 (telegram dated 11 May).

30 Ibid., p. 799. An inquiry by British officials and Burmese politicians disagreed over who provoked the firing: see Struggle, Vol. II, pp. 515–18.Google Scholar

31 For Governor Knight's ingenious solution, see Struggle, Vol. I, pp. 895–6.Google Scholar

32 Rance was kept waiting, expecting the offer, from about 11 to 27 July. The War Office commendations are in ibid., p. 897, n1.

33 ‘Line of Policy for Sir H. Ranee as Governor of Burma’, circulated to Cabinet, 29 August (ibid., pp. 970–2).

34 Private letter in Struggle, vol. II, ‘From General Strike to Independence, 31 August 1946 to 4 January 1948’, pp. 6–7.Google Scholar

35 Text of statement (handed to governor 23 October), Struggle, vol. II, pp. 94–7.Google Scholar

36 Telegram dated 5 November, ibid., pp. 113–14.

37 Rance to Pethick-Lawrence, 8 November, ibid., pp. 129–30. Pethick-Lawrence to Rance, 9 November, ibid., 131–2.

38 Note by Sir Gilbert Laithwaite, 16 November (‘caucus’), ibid., p. 147, and Memorandum to Cabinet, 22 November (‘deteriorating’), ibid., pp. 153–7. Acceptance of delegation proposal signalled, 26 November (ibid., pp. 163–4).

39 Transmitted by Rance as received, 5 December, ibid., p. 174.

40 Telegram, Rance to Pethick-Lawrence, 7 December, ibid., 175–7; seen by Attlee, 8 December; Cabinet agree to temporize, at meeting, 10 December, ibid., pp. 182–3.

41 GOC Burma to War Office, 13 December, ibid, pp. 189–90.

42 Rance to Pethick-Lawrence, 18 December, ibid., pp. 201–3.

43 India and Burma Committee of Cabinet, 19 December, 10 a.m. ibid., pp. 203–6, Cabinet Meeting, 11 a.m., ibid., pp. 206–7.

44 H.C. Debs, vol. 431, cols 2343–5, in Ibid., pp. 209–10.

45 The Burma Conversations, together with memoranda exchanged between the two sides, are reproduced in detail in Struggle, vol. II, pp. 257–354.Google Scholar

46 The Sunday evening meeting extended into two sessions (recorded as 8th and gth Meetings), ibid., pp. 361–72. The 10th meeting next morning was a formality to witness the signing of the ‘Conclusions’ by Attlee and Aung San, (ibid., pp. 376–7. This was issued as a White Paper, Cmd. 7029, ibid., 378–82.

47 Secretary of State for India to Viceroy, telegram 27 January 1947, ibid., pp. 377–8.

48 Text of Panglong Agreement, with signatories, ibid., pp. 404–5.

49 Analysis of the election results is given in ibid., appendix, pp. 919–21.

50 Report of the Frontier Areas Enquiry Committee (signed 24 April 1947), ibid., pp. 483–90. An emergency Karen Congress passed resolutions on 26 April (ibid., pp. 494) and thereafter a steady stream of Karen statements appeared, e.g. 6 May, ibid., p. 512.

51 Aung San to Attlee, 13 May, ibid., pp. 519–20). Draft constitution, adopted by AFPFL Convention, 20–23 May, details, ibid., pp. 527–9. See also The Times, 20 May 1947Google Scholar, ‘A Republic for Burma’.

52 Listowel to Rance, telegram 7 June, Struggle, vol. II, pp. 566–8Google Scholar (Listowel took over from Pethick-Lawrence as Secretary of State on 23 April 1947).

53 Rance to Listowel, telegram, 9 June (‘time seems ripe’), ibid., pp. 574–5; Rance to Mountbatten, 11 June, Ibid., pp. 581–2; Mountbatten to Rance, 12 June, Ibid., pp. 584–5; Malcolm MacDonald to Creech Jones, 26 June, Ibid., pp. 615–18.

54 Burma Goodwill Mission, 1st Meeting, 25 June, ibid., pp. 607–10.

55 Rance to Listowel, telegram, 29 June, ibid., pp. 631–2.

56 Press Communiqué issued by Council of Ministers, 25 July, ibid., p. 685.

57 Britain-Burma Defence Agreement, text in ibid., pp. 734–6.

58 Constitution of the Union of Burma (Extracts), ibid., pp. 759–67; Nu's speech, 26 September, ibid., 769–71.

59 Treaty Between the Government of the United Kingdom and the Provisional Government of Burma, text, ibid., pp. 794–8.

60 Debs, H. C., vol. 443, cols 1836–1960.Google Scholar

61 Tin Tut to Laithwaite, telegram, 4 November, notifying new auspicious date, in Struggle vol. II, pp. 806–7.Google Scholar

62 Harris, Kenneth, Attlee (London, 1982)Google Scholar devotes a chapter to Burma and India. The Burma section (pp. 355–62) contains numerous errors; the most egregious being to refer to Aung San as ‘Aung Sang’ throughout. His verdict—‘From start to finish he [Attlee] moved steadily and unshakably, coolly and adroitly, according to his plan’ (p. 386)—bears only a limited resemblance to the reality. Morgan, Kenneth O., Labour in Power, 1945–1951 (Oxford, 1984)Google Scholar, reviews the process of decolonization very briefly. He observes that the record in India was ‘a kind of triumph’ (p. 218) but his only reference to Burma is as follows: Labour was ‘morally committed to speed up the process of independence for India and perhaps for Burma and Ceylon as well’ (p. 219). One cannot quarrel with that.

63 Struggle, vol. I, personal memoir by F. S. V. Donnison, Chief Secretary February-November 1946: see specially p. 1010.Google Scholar