India's switch during WW2

Hi guys,recently i came across an article which informed it's readers about an alliance being negotiated between Hitler and India's chamber of princes during Berlin olympics.

http://m.timesofindia.com/city/vado...end-Sayajirao-Gaekwad/articleshow/6313013.cms

The secret pact was forgotten when the prince
helming this initiative died in 1939.What if he had somehow survived during ww2 and carried out his plans at an early stage when the British were losing on all sides.

fyi-the chamber of princes controlled large swathes of Indian subcontinent and some were one of the wealthiest people of that time like the nawab of Hyderabed.

It could have had multiple repurcussions for the allies-
1.Numerical loss of colonial forces.(India was one of the biggest contributer of British forces)-British Indian forces totalled 2.5 million men by the end of ww2.The indian forces were involved in some famous endeavours like operation compass and furthur battles against the desert fox,indian forces in Singapore and Burma against the invading Japaneese and the allied invasion of Italy.
2.An easy passage for the Japaneese in comparison to the deadly battle of Kohima-The advancing Japaneese forces were stopped in the battle of kohima and a successful counter offensive was launched in Burma.
3.Possible soviet invasion from south(The opposite of soviet invasion of Afghanistan)-Division of forces is always a better alternative than concentration of all forces along one front.During the initial days of operation Barbarossa,the soviets still kept some of their best forces along the Japaneese border fearing a possible Japaneese invasion and a 2 front war.An invasion from south would have been a crippling blow to soviet resistance.India had almost infinite supply of men in comparison to axis powers.
4.Loss of material support to china through stillwell road-The stilwell road was an alternative supply chain from the allies towards the Chiang shek government.It could have dealt a heavy blow towards the kuomintang war efforts.
5.Britain's loss of a major supplier-Indian provided more than 70% of its wartime requirements and produced more than 50 kinds of arms and ammunitions.India had a bumper harvest in 1942 but still suffered from famine as most of the produce was shifted for allied supplies.

These are some of the issues i was pondering about.Any new POV is highly appreciated.I will keep on researching about more alternative possiblities.
 
The Princely States went along with things with the British for a number of reasons. They got money out of it, the British helped keep down rebels and usurpers, they were used to loads of empires in the past but now they had ones being fine with lip service (in comparison to invading and overthrowing them), and... Yah, I don't think they would have been able to get all of society behind them. This would lead to civil war perhaps, with the British, Imperial Indian regiments, neighboring Princely states wanting to gain land and prove their loyalty, plus the brothers, cousins, nephews, and children of the revolting princes who want to take power for themselves.
 
The Princely States went along with things with the British for a number of reasons. They got money out of it, the British helped keep down rebels and usurpers, they were used to loads of empires in the past but now they had ones being fine with lip service (in comparison to invading and overthrowing them), and... Yah, I don't think they would have been able to get all of society behind them. This would lead to civil war perhaps, with the British, Imperial Indian regiments, neighboring Princely states wanting to gain land and prove their loyalty, plus the brothers, cousins, nephews, and children of the revolting princes who want to take power for themselves.
The british conquered India not because of numerically superior armed forces or by using society's support.Infact it is said that the debacle of crimean war and 1st anglo-afghan war were one of the reasons for the 1st major revolt against the british in 1857.The British greatly feared loss of prestige among Indians as it was that which had a large bearing on India's submission.The continuous battle losses till 1942 could have had an impact on fence sitters.
 
I'm not an Indian but I think you're building a house out of straw here - the Chamber of Princes was a bit of a talking shop which means that the speaker of the chamber has influence but no actual power. Also, the Indian States Forces only comprised about 10% of the total strength of the Indian Army during WW2 - I'm not sure if they were bigger to start with, but as I understand it until they came under British command they tended to be a bit deficient in motor transport, artillery, etc. Any rebellion would probably have been suppressed in 1939 - the postwar Operation Polo probably gives you a good idea of what to expect if any state does rebel.
 
The Princely States neither possessed real power, or could truly field it. The Princes were not popular at all during the 1940s, and most people supported either the INC, or the Muslim League, both of which were pretty anti-Hitler (the INC for understandable reasons, and the Muslim League needed British support for the partition). So, as far as I can see, it would end in the execution of the Princes and complete annexation of all princely states involved.
 

Ak-84

Banned
Muslim League opposed Hitler because they thought he was nuts and being comprised of upper and middle-class origin leaders, distrusted fascism, while the Congress has many admirers of Hitler esepcially amongst their younger groups who were heavily into Hindu Nationalism (which to this day is supportive of fascist ideals). Muslim League did not ask for partition per se until 1946.

This should give you an idea as to what was the chances of Princes supporting Hitler, facism was mostlyt a working class phenomena, the rich, upper and professional classes, which comprised most of the leadership on INC and AIML and all of the Princes disliked it.
 
Top