The Indian Army in the World Wars: A Detailed Account

The Indian Army’s contribution to the two world wars is one of the great untold stories of the British Empire. Some 1.4 million Indians served in the First World War, and some 2.5 million in the Second, and the Indian Army fought in every major theatre of both wars. The Indian Army’s casualties were substantial — perhaps 60,000 dead in the First World War, perhaps 90,000 in the Second — and the Indian war effort was a central element in the British victory. The political consequences of the Indian war effort were equally substantial, and the British decision to grant India independence in 1947 was, in important ways, a consequence of the Indian Army’s loyalty and the political changes that the war produced in India.

The Indian Army in the First World War: France and Belgium

The Indian Army’s first major commitment in the First World War was the Indian Corps, deployed to France in 1914 as part of the British Expeditionary Force. The Indian Corps, under the command of Lieutenant General Sir James Willcocks, consisted of the 3rd (Lahore) Division and the 7th (Meerut) Division, together with the Indian Cavalry Corps. The Indian Corps arrived in France in late September 1914 and was deployed in the Ypres Salient, in the most difficult and dangerous sector of the Western Front.

The Indian Corps’ first major action was the Battle of La Bassée in October 1914, in which the Indian forces suffered heavy casualties in the fighting around Neuve Chapelle. The Indian Corps’ second major action was the First Battle of Ypres in October–November 1914, in which the Indian forces played a critical role in preventing the German breakthrough. The Indian Corps’ third major action was the Second Battle of Ypres in April 1915, in which the German forces first used poison gas on the Western Front, and in which the Indian forces suffered substantial casualties from the gas attacks.

The Indian Corps was withdrawn from France in late 1915 and redeployed in the Middle East. The withdrawal was, in part, a consequence of the heavy casualties in France, and in part a recognition that the Indian forces were better suited to the Middle Eastern theatre. The Indian forces in France had suffered some 34,000 casualties in less than a year, of whom perhaps 7,000 were killed. The Indian contribution to the Western Front, in this respect, was substantial but limited.

The Indian Army in the First World War: The Middle East

The Indian Army’s most important contribution to the First World War was in the Middle East. The Indian Army served in Mesopotamia, in Palestine, in the Persian Gulf, and in the Caucasus, and it was the principal military force in the British campaign against the Ottoman Empire.

The Mesopotamian campaign was the largest single Indian military commitment of the war. The British Indian expedition to Mesopotamia, originally conceived as a small operation to secure the oilfields of the Persian Gulf, became a major military operation under the command of General Sir Stanley Maude. The campaign began in 1914 with the British Indian expedition to Basra, and it developed into a major military operation with the British capture of Baghdad in March 1917. The Indian casualties in Mesopotamia were substantial — perhaps 11,000 dead, mostly from disease — and the campaign was the most difficult of the British campaigns in the Middle East.

The Palestinian campaign was the second largest Indian military commitment in the Middle East. The British campaign in Palestine, under the command of General Sir Edmund Allenby, was fought largely by Indian troops — the Indian 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, 10th, and 11th Divisions, and the Indian cavalry divisions. The campaign culminated in the Battle of Megiddo in September 1918, in which the British forces, with the Indian troops playing a central role, broke the Ottoman lines and captured Damascus. The capture of Damascus on 1 October 1918 was the last major action of the campaign, and it was followed by the Armistice of Mudros on 30 October 1918.

The Indian Army in the First World War: East Africa

The Indian Army’s contribution to the East African campaign was substantial but often overlooked. The British Indian expedition to East Africa, deployed in 1914, was the principal military force in the British campaign against the German colonial forces under Colonel Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck. The Indian forces in East Africa suffered substantial casualties from disease — the East African campaign was, in this respect, the most unhealthy of the British campaigns in the war — and the Indian troops played an important role in the eventual defeat of the German forces in November 1918.

The Indian Army’s contribution to the East African campaign was, in many respects, the most difficult of the Indian war effort. The campaign was fought in some of the most difficult terrain in Africa, and the Indian troops were subject to the tropical diseases that afflicted the region. The casualties from disease were, in many cases, heavier than the casualties from battle, and the campaign was a major test of the Indian Army’s capacity to operate in difficult tropical conditions.

The Indian Army in the Second World War: The Western Desert

The Indian Army’s most important contribution to the Second World War in the Western Desert was the Indian 4th, 5th, and 10th Divisions, which served with the British Eighth Army. The Indian divisions suffered heavy casualties in the fighting in the Western Desert, particularly in the Battle of El Alamein in October–November 1942, in which the Indian 4th and 5th Divisions played a critical role in the British victory. The Indian 4th and 5th Divisions, in particular, were deployed in the most difficult and dangerous sectors of the battlefield, and they suffered substantial casualties.

The Indian 4th Division was the most heavily engaged of the Indian divisions in the Western Desert, and it was one of the most experienced and most capable divisions in the British Eighth Army. The Indian 5th Division was similarly experienced, and it was deployed in the Italian campaign after the Western Desert campaign. The Indian 10th Division was deployed in the Middle East, and it was particularly important in the defence of the Suez Canal.

The Indian Army in the Second World War: Burma

The Indian Army’s most important contribution to the Second World War was in Burma. The 14th Army, the principal British force in Burma, was largely Indian, and the Indian troops fought a long and difficult campaign against the Japanese in some of the most difficult terrain in the world. The Burma campaign was the most difficult and most costly of the British campaigns in the Second World War, and the Indian Army’s contribution was central to the British victory.

The Indian 17th Division, the Indian 20th Division, the Indian 26th Division, the Indian 36th Division, and the Indian 46th Division, together with the West African 81st and 82nd Divisions, served with the 14th Army. The 14th Army suffered substantial casualties — perhaps 30,000 dead, mostly from disease — and the campaign was the most difficult of the British campaigns of the war.

The most famous single engagement of the Burma campaign was the Battle of Kohima in April–May 1944, in which the British and Indian forces held off a Japanese attempt to invade India, and in which the Indian 5th Division, the Indian 2nd Division, and the West African 81st Division played important roles. The Battle of Imphal, in the same period, was the second major engagement of the campaign, and it was, in many respects, the decisive engagement of the Burma campaign. The subsequent British advance into Burma, with the recapture of Mandalay in March 1945 and Rangoon in May 1945, was the final major operation of the campaign, and it was, in many ways, the Indian Army’s finest achievement of the Second World War.

The Indian Army in the Second World War: Italy

The Indian Army’s contribution to the Italian campaign was substantial. The Indian 4th, 8th, and 10th Divisions served with the British Eighth Army in Italy, and they fought a series of difficult battles in the Italian peninsula. The Indian 8th Division, in particular, was heavily engaged in the Italian campaign, and it suffered substantial casualties in the fighting around Cassino in 1944.

The Indian Army’s contribution to the Italian campaign was, in many respects, the most difficult of the European campaigns. The terrain in Italy was, in many respects, even more difficult than the terrain in Burma, and the German defence was determined and capable. The Indian troops served with distinction, but the campaign was a difficult one, and the casualties were substantial.

The Indian National Army

The Indian National Army (INA), raised by Subhas Chandra Bose in 1942 from among the Indian prisoners of war captured by the Japanese in Malaya, Burma, and Singapore, was a major exception to the pattern of Indian Army loyalty. The INA fought alongside the Japanese in the Burma campaign, and the INA’s existence was an important part of the political changes in India during the war.

The INA’s surrender in 1945, and the subsequent trials of the INA officers in 1945–1946, was a major political event. The trials of Shah Nawaz Khan, Prem Kumar Sahgal, and Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon in the Red Fort in Delhi, between November 1945 and May 1946, produced a major political crisis. The defence of the INA officers, by a team of Indian lawyers including Jawaharlal Nehru, Bhulabhai Desai, and Tej Bahadur Sapru, was a major political event in itself, and the British decision to release the INA prisoners in January 1946 was a major step in the British withdrawal from India.

The Political Consequences

The Indian Army’s contribution to the two world wars had substantial political consequences. The Indian war effort was, in both wars, a major argument for Indian self-government, and the British response was a series of significant constitutional concessions. The Indian Army’s loyalty to the British Crown during the two wars was, in that sense, a remarkable achievement. The Indian Army was, however, also a major political liability: the Indian soldiers who had fought for the British in the wars were, in many respects, unwilling to accept the continuation of the British Raj after the wars, and the post-war political settlement in India was, in important respects, a consequence of the war experiences of the Indian soldiers.

The Indian Army’s partition in 1947, with the division of British India into India and Pakistan, was one of the most difficult tasks of the British withdrawal from India. The partition of the army was complicated by the simultaneous partition of the country, and the large-scale communal violence of 1947 made the task even more difficult. The partition of the army was, in the end, accomplished with remarkable speed and discipline, and the two new armies went on to serve the two new states. The Indian Army’s loyalty to the British Crown, which had been a major element of British imperial power, was transferred, in the end, to the two new states of India and Pakistan.

Historiographical Note

The historiography of the Indian Army in the world wars has been substantially revised since the 1990s. The older tradition, of which the work of T. A. Heathcote and the official histories of the various campaigns is representative, treated the Indian Army as a fundamentally British institution that happened to be staffed by Indians. The post-independence Indian historiography, of which the work of the Indian military historians and the contributors to the Indian Journal of History of Science is representative, has insisted on the Indian character of the army. The current generation of historians, of whom the work of David French, Roger Beaumont, and the contributors to the Oxford History of the British Empire are the most distinguished representatives, has produced a more nuanced picture. The Indian Army, on this more recent view, was a genuinely imperial institution, and the Indian war effort was a defining element of the British war effort. The Indian Army’s loyalty to the British Crown during the two wars was, in important respects, a remarkable achievement, and the Indian Army’s contribution to the British victory was substantial. The current generation of historians has been particularly interested in the Indian National Army, and the work of the British historian Hugh Toye, the Indian historian Joyce Lebra, and the work of the British military historian Nick Lloyd has produced a more nuanced picture of the INA’s role in the war and in the political changes in India.

In this Section

Other Sections