Anita Pfaff, the daughter of Subhas Chandra Bose, is in India after a gap of four years . She took part in the 95th birth anniversary of her Austria-born mother Emilie Schenkl at Netaji Bhavan in Kolkata on Dec 26 and before wrapping up her visit would observe the 109th birth anniversary of the great freedom fighter himself on January 23. TWF correspondent Sujoy Dhar catches up with the dignified professor of Economics to discuss the issues concerning Netaji on every Indian mind.

Rags to riches On top of the world 'Netaji's presence could have avoided Pakistan problem' The Great Escape The other side of diaspora First among the equals "Audience is my motivation" A Countess with a mission The Animator

At 63, Anita Pfaff is grace and dignity personified. Ensconced in the south Kolkata living room of former Trinamool Congress MP and Bose family bahu Krishna Bose (she is the wife of late Sisir Bose, Netaji's nephew and Anita's cousin), the daughter of India's Independence hero speaks softly about his father's disappearance enigma, his marriage and what role could have Netaji played in post Independence India. Anita, a professor of Economics in Germany's Augsburg University, is a mother of three- two sons and one daughter. Her German husband Martin Pfaff, also an academic, accompanies her. Anita's ongoing visit followed the submission of the report of the Justice M K Mukherjee Commission which was probing for nearly six years the mysterious disappearance of Netaji since an air crash at Taihoku (now Taipei) on Aug 17, 1945 in which he allegedly died.

When did you last come to India?
My last visit was four year ago but that time I didn't come to Kolkata. Coming to Kolkata this time was for attending the birthday function of my mother and meeting the relatives. We are also visiting Chennai and New Delhi to attend some other functions there. I notice certain improvements in the city.

Shah Nawaz Committee (1956) and the Khosla Commission (1972) which probed Netaji's disappearance had concluded that he died in the plane crash. You have come at a time when the report of the latest Netaji Commission (Justice Mukherjee Commission) has been submitted. Do you expect anything major to come out of it?
In terms of analysing the information I certainly hope that some work has been put in and some analysis is possible but whether it would lead to any stunning new information I doubt very much. I don't really expect anything terribly new to come of it. In terms of new evidence on Netaji analysed by the Mukherjee Commission I think it is mainly documentary evidence which is of importance because some of it might have come to light after the Khosla Commission concluded its probe. So analysing these things and also combining new and old documentation may bring out new insight. Some of it may be of very high interest to historians and give a more complex canvas, but general public probably are not going to glean much from these things. Given the fact that it took so long, I got to be rather doubtful of the usefulness (of the report) but thank god we have a report now. Ideally the Commission should have been for a year or so.

You are now sort of convinced that Netaji died in the Taihoku aircrash. Why are you so sure of his death now?
I respect the emotions of the Bengalis for Netaji but some quarters have an axe to grind and stall things. The emotional side is perfectly understandable and it is not only the Bengalis but in other parts of India as well. The Tamils and Punjabis are as emotional and Netaji is very much alive in their minds. But I don't think Netaji survived the air crash. Unless some fantastically new evidence comes up, if I look at the evidence available to me, he did not survive. I have been present at the interview of some of the survivors of the plane crash, including some Japanese officers, more than 20 years ago, and their story sounded quite consistent, credible and reasonable. If you look at whole lot of evidence this is the most consistent. Some speculation also occurred in the reports that the doctor who treated Netaji after the crash when interviewed this time had confusion about what he said earlier. He is 90 years old now! You can't expect much from an interview unless it is done very carefully of a person of that age. Ultimately what he said many years ago made lot more sense. At this age, you certainly have lapses in memory, you can't deal with hostile interview. Even if his new interview sort of brought off some controversy I would not place too much emphasis on it.

But what do you say about those who firmly believe that Netaji survived the crash?
After Independence there was always suspicion on the part of many about the air crash. Netaji's associate Colonel Habibur Rahman claimed that he was on the plane and he got burnt and died as a consequence of that. Now if you look at it from another point of view, he may have sort of said what he was told to say by Netaji. But if that was a disappearance ruse, it would not have been just for the fun of it. He (Netaji) might have said that to avoid arrest by the British or to continue to work for Indian independence. Bose may hide for a while but there was no reason why after Independence he would not have come out of the hiding. If it is assumed for the sake of it that he was kept imprisoned somewhere then I can imagine that Col Habibur Rahman would have definitely come forth and said that there is something very seriously wrong and that Netaji had not died. He (Rahman) even told his wife and his children that Netaji died. Don't tell me that Netaji was somewhere in the Himalayas and became a monk and forgot everything.

Please continue..
I don't think he was a kind of a person who would be so neglectful of his country and his family.
As long as the struggle for independence was there his family always took second or third position. But it would have been rather surprising if he had done anything of that sort after independence.

There are many who still do not believe that Netaji got married to your mother Emilie.
It is nonsensical. Some heroes in India are not allowed to die or marry. Gandhiji was married and he died, Pandit Nehru was married and he died too. But if some people don't want to believe it, they might not believe it. I am not going to go out of my way to argue it. It was a secret marriage and it was done secretly because of both Bose's position and my mother's position at that critical juncture. My mother would have lost her (German) citizenship if she had married a foreigner as per rules that time while he (Netaji) too was in no way able to take care of wife and family at that time. Making the marriage public was not a practical thing to do. Circumstances were rather different.

How did your mother remember your father?
My mother had a very strong emotional involvement even when he was not around for the rest of the life besides her personal commitment. She was a very private person and there are many things she never talked about. Not to me or even my relatives or aunt. She talked more about their work together. But she never talked about their political side much. I was surprised when she produced the letters written by Netaji to her since for a long time she said she would burn them. But when my cousin Dr Sisir Bose and his family visited us (Anita and her husband Martin) and she came to our place too she brought most of them. She previously said they were personal letters and that she would destroy them before her death. So it was all very surprising when she agreed to publish them. She maintained earlier that those can be published after her death but my cousin (Dr Sisir Bose) said he wanted to publish them before he died.

What difference do you think would have Netaji made if he were present in the post-1945 political scene and during Indian independence and after?
You can speculate what role he would have played if he were around but he definitely would have played an important role. He could have been a rival to the prime ministership which is quite conceivable. There is no point in believing that he could have worked miracles and everything would have been better. Many problems in India would have remained whether or not he was there. I guess he could have taken a strong stance against corruption. But one thing I certainly believe is that if Netaji were present in the post-Independence scene, the Pakistan problem might have been avoided. If he could have got his idea accepted, we certainly would have maintained a better relationship with Pakistan. He probably would have worked very strongly to prevent the partition of India in the first place and may be an alliance of Gandhi and Bose could have made a difference. Gandhi was not in favour of partition but he was left alone by all the people around in 1947. Everybody got very enthusiastic to get India independent and some might have had their own personal issues involved too.

Do you think the Hindu-Muslim amity in post-Independence era would have been better?
Muslims trusted him (Netaji) more than any other Hindu leader and I think his being a Bengali who lived in a state which was predominantly Muslim would have helped as his ideas were different. There certainly was more trust and acceptance of Netaji on part of the Muslims than other top leaders of Congress at that time. Most other leaders at that time hailed from places where one religion was dominant.

Do you think the successive governments in New Delhi had been fair to Netaji in giving him his due recognition?
I don't think so. The acid test was the way INA (Indian National Army led by Netajit to free India) was treated. I think INA was treated in a rather poor and dishonorable fashion in the beginning. Many of them died of hunger. It took till the 1970s to even recognize the INA people as freedom fighters. Some lip service was given to Netaji as a person but you may argue that in many different way that could have been better and more because there were many INA people around and many of them died of hunger and that certainly was not a very honourable way to go about. It was not about blaming one individual for this but it was also a definite line of establishing that it was only the Civil Disobedience movement which led to the Indian independence, which clearly was not true. We now have documents available for analysis and that very clearly shows that INA though was not successful in terms of winning the war, it was successful in dislodging the hold of Britain on the British Indian Army.

What about the Nehru and Netaji personality clash?
That is part of politics. You always have clash of personalities with not only the people in opposition parties but also the leaders in your own party. In an evolving democracy this is almost an institutionalized clash because this is what democracy is all about. The idea of a possible competitor I think make one try hard and do better.

You keep track of the political developments in India?
Not very closely but some of the development of national interest.

How do you find the India of 2005-6? A positive picture or the one of same corruption-ridden society?
I think it has a long way to go but we have realized now that even those countries who have prided themselves of not being corrupt actually have high degree of corruption. So corruption is a cancer of the society. We can try to cut down on corruption. For example the eviction of the ten MPs for taking money to ask questions in Parliament seems to be a step in the right direction. It is a small step but I think there is some awareness. I think in India also corruption would be reduced step by step if not eliminated completely.