Why Did the Indian Plan Fail?
The fundamental disadvantage of the federal plan was that it
was rejected by both contending parties. This marked the only occasion
when the Arabs and Jews were on the same side of the debate. A strong
segment of the Zionist leadership was aspiring for the transformation of
the whole of Palestine into a Jewish state. There were others who were
prepared to settle for less. Even though the partition plan fell short of
their expectations, mainstream Zionists recognized it as the best possi-
ble solution. Despite their disappointment over smaller territorial limits
and the exclusion of Jerusalem, they saw the partition plan as the sign of
international recognition of Jewish claims to Palestine. While the Arabs
vehemently opposed it, the majority plan at least had the support of the
Zionists.^68
The Indian plan disappointed both parties. It off ered only civic and
religious rights to the Jews; they were aspiring for po liti cal rights and
sovereignty. It placed aliya under joint federal control and thus restricted
its scope. Irrespective of their ideological orientation, everyone in the
yishuv, from the revisionists to the binationalists, was unanimous on un-
restricted Jewish immigration. Aliya was the cardinal principle, indeed
the raison d’être of Zionism. It was therefore unrealistic to expect the
Zionists to subject this core issue to an Arab veto.
If the Jews opposed the Indian plan because it gave them too little, the
Arabs rejected it because it gave too much to the Jews who emigrated to
Palestine. Both inside and outside Palestine, the Arabs demanded immedi-
ate and complete in de pen dence, and they did not look kindly at Indian sug-
gestions of autonomy for the Jews as the precondition. While they were
demanding a unitary Arab state, the Indian plan called for greater and
even unacceptable internal autonomy for the Jews. Both sides were quick to
reject the Indian plan, and it was never discussed by the United Nations.
Second, the Indian plan was unrealistic. The UNSCOP unequivocally
recognized that Arab- Jewish cooperation was impossible. The committee
conceded that in Palestine “government ser vice, the Potash Company
and the Oil Refi nery are almost the only places where Arabs and Jews meet
as co- workers in the same organizations.”^69 During much of the Mandate
period, they largely operated in de pen dently of each another. Both com-
munities maintained well- defi ned and clearly demarcated spheres of
po liti cal, social, and economic activities. On July 15, a bewildered Rahman
wrote to Nehru that “even the Communists in this country are divided
the partition of palestine 101