I've been reading Max Hastings' "All Hell Let Loose: The World at War 1939-1945" (ISBN 0007450729), and noticed that he described servicemen of the British Indian Army as mercenaries.
A quick google reveals that he's expressed this opinion fairly regularly.
I was a bit nonplussed by this, not least because my father did his national service in India 1945-1948, and spent part of this time attached to an Indian regiment.
How is a mercenary defined, and is it accurate to describe servicemen of the British Indian Army as mercenaries?
If the British Indian Army were mercenaries, why weren't the Canadian or Australian armed forces during WW2 considered mercenaries?
I don't know enough to say whether or not the British Indian Army was effectively a group of mercenaries. However, I think the comparison between Indians and the Canadians/Australians in quite unfair. The Australians and Canadians were never really considered 'inferior' like the Indians, were, the relationship between the Dominion countries like NZ, Canada, Australia and the relationship between Britain and colonies in Africa and Asia were completely different.