domestic politics 145
During the freedom struggle, Nehru’s perceptions of the Jewish na-
tional home were couched in secular and ideological language. Anticolo-
nialism dominated his views. But his understanding of the Middle East
was largely infl uenced by two individuals, the historian Arnold Toynbee
and the Indian Muslim leader Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. Both these in-
dividuals off ered a partisan understanding of the Middle East, especially
when it came to the Jews. As will be discussed, Azad was accused of sabo-
taging eff orts to normalize relations with Israel. Much of Nehru’s under-
standing of the Middle East stemmed from Toynbee’s historic narrative.
Known for his unsympathetic appreciation of Jewish history, Toynbee de-
picted Jewish and other minority groups that survived as “fossils.”^17 When
an offi cial publication, India and Palestine, sought to dismiss Jewish
claims to Palestine, it treated Toynbee’s arguments as if they were the Ten
Commandments.^18
A more categorical appreciation of the Islamic factor could be located
in Nehru’s choice of candidates for critical assignments pertaining to
Palestine. In 1947, he appointed his ambassador in Washington, Asaf Ali,
as India’s representative to the First Special Session of the UN General
Assembly, which deliberated the Palestine question. This, perhaps, was a
pure coincidence motivated by logistical considerations. But this selec-
tion angered Muslim League circles. Responding to some of his remarks
at the Special Session, the Karachi- based The Dawn declared that Asaf
Ali did not represent Muslims of India and was acting contrary to their
views.^19
When India was elected to the eleven- member UNSCOP, Nehru’s
choice fell on Abdur Rahman. A note prepared by the Foreign Ministry
observed that India would have to fi nd “a suitable Indian Muslim with wide
legal knowledge.”^20 India explicitly wanted a Muslim personality to be its
representative at the UN committee. Indeed, even before the special ses-
sion began, India was keen to be part of the forthcoming committee. Such
a role, it felt, was essential, because the Palestine question would be a ma-
jor issue on the international agenda. As discussed earlier, refl ecting the
prevailing INC thinking, the Indian representative vehemently opposed
the idea of religion forming the basis of statehood. But shortly after the
submission of the UNSCOP report, Rahman settled in Pakistan, a state
created with religion as its basis.
In the post- 1947 years, Azad functioned as Nehru’s adviser on Arab
aff airs. As Michael Brecher argued, with Nehru’s biographer S. Gopal
concurring, it was Azad who sabotaged the normalization of relations in
vip2019
(vip2019)
#1