Krishna Kumar studies, evaluates, and analyzes events in Indian history with particular emphasis on the British Period.
Krishna’s interest in Indian history and analysis started at an early age. Two chance events, the first receiving a book on Napoleon as a gift and the second a family discussion on an Indian historical figure where he parroted the standard narrative but was corrected by elders, led him in this direction. He became a voracious reader, continually assessing the cause of events and correlations before reaching conclusions. His interest in the analysis of history continued even when he was pursuing a career far away from it.
Some time back, Krishna began to pursue this interest in history more intensely, becoming an analytical author. He finds going through context and circumstances and looking at the outcomes an immersive multidimensional experience that often yields clarity on how the events happened, why these happened, who the key participants were, and what the consequences of these events and decisions were.
Therefore, Krishna’s books and articles attempt to share analysis, peel through the various levels of information, especially the deliberately built layers of misinformation, and get to the truth, focusing on how, why, who, and what, often reaching conclusions not in popular narratives.
His books and articles on the British Period of India bring out this Period’s impact on present-day India’s economy, behavior, general life, and the truth of many events of that time. With “1942 – When British Rule in India was Threatened,” Kumar provides an incisive analysis of the pivotal events of that year which challenged British imperial control.
Krishna grew up in India and now lives in the United States with his family.
In Conversation with Krishna Kumar
TBE: What prompted you to focus on the year 1942 as a decisive moment in the decline of British rule in India? What convinced you of its watershed importance?
Krishna Kumar: I have been working on the period 1608-1950 for forthcoming books and realized that the tide turned in 1942 when the British, who had been in total command of India and Southeast Asia, lost their image of invincibility and control over significant resources like Rubber ( from Malaya), Rice ( from Burma) and Petroleum Products ( from Burma). Besides, the formation of the Indian National Army changed the fight for India’s freedom completely and eventually led to freedom for India.
TBE: Your book takes a panoramic view and situates the events of 1942 within global developments. What insights did this wider perspective reveal that a narrower focus would have missed?
Krishna Kumar: To understand an event or chain of events, one must understand the external and internal environment that led to these developments. Therefore, the context is essential. A narrower focus would have missed, for example, that the loss of Burma to the British caused severe petrol rationing and was a major factor in the Bengal famine of 1943.
TBE: You devote considerable attention to narrating the experiences of ordinary Indian civilians and soldiers caught up in the war zone. What new aspects of the Raj’s unraveling did these subaltern voices bring to light?
Krishna Kumar: Because these awful experiences, especially of those army men and civilians who came walking from Burma or traveled under subhuman conditions, showed everyone that the British were selfish even when Indians were fighting to save the British Empire and that the British strategy was not invincible as they had been projecting in India for two hundred years.
TBE: How did you go about excavating these forgotten stories from archives and other sources? What challenges did you face in surfacing those muted narratives?
Krishna Kumar: I have been studying this period for a long time. I have had to do further research and continue to do so. The challenge was how to integrate the various writing styles of letters, publications, and government documents so as not to cause much disturbance to  my narrative style
TBE: Your book blends narrative flair with historical rigor. How did you strike a balance between readability and academic precision?
Krishna Kumar: For a book to be read, the reader must remain interested, and constant facts must be available with a smooth flow of language.
TBE: One of the core arguments you make is how racial prejudice blinded British leadership to properly assess the Japanese military threat. What evidence did you rely on to substantiate this claim?
Krishna Kumar: Statements of British Army officers and how less trained soldiers were deputed and defenses not built in Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, etc., to the requisite requirement. The British hype of power was way more than reality in building up their strengths, almost like expecting opponents to lose confidence just by projection. The British ignored the Japanese Samurai culture. It is very similar to Indian Martial culture being ignored in 1965, 1971, and recent incidents on the Chinese border. The opponents paid a price for that.
TBE: Your critique of British policies is unsparing but balanced. What principles or caveats guided you in retaining analytical distance while writing critically about colonial governance?
Krishna Kumar: Interesting, you say that. One of the Amazon reviewers in the United States recently commented that this book is from an Indian perspective. Yes, it is. I am an Indian-American now, but India is my mother country, and when dealing with Indian history, I have that perspective. At the same time, I wanted to be fair to the British and explain their perspective, irrespective of whether I agree with them.
TBE: How significant was Subhas Chandra Bose’s role in energizing Indian nationalism through the INA? Did your assessment of his contribution evolve in the course of your research?
Krishna Kumar: The three most important people of this period are Subhas Bose for his Vision and leadership and for getting India its freedom, Rash Behari Bose for preparing the ground and keeping the organization ready for Subhas Bose, and Savarkar for insisting that Hindus join the military, which helped INA and then saved India in 1947. The fact that Subhas Bose was able to finance INA from Indians in Southeast Asia and Rash Behari could create an organization is a credit to the love of the Indian origin people towards their motherland irrespective of where they lived.
TBE: If you were to identify the single most surprising revelation from your research about 1942, what would it be?
Krishna Kumar: That the Quit India movement was done reluctantly and achieved nothing. It led to freedom is among the biggest lies that are fed in Indian history.
TBE: How differently do you think India’s independence struggle would have unfolded if the events of 1942 had played out differently?
Krishna Kumar: Possibly, the independence would have either been delayed or India would have got dominion status at best and economic and political exploitation may have continued.
TBE: What are some of the enduring myths about this watershed year that your book helps dispel?
Krishna Kumar: The myth of the Quit India movement leading to freedom.
TBE: What do you think is the most important legacy of 1942 in shaping the trajectory of India after independence?
Krishna Kumar: Most of the lessons of 1942 were ignored in post-independence India and not used to build alliances and a power strategy.
