9. Nehru and the Era of Deterioration, 1947–
1947– 1964
Panikkar’s prognosis, which he made in April 1947, was quickly
proved wrong, either because of misreading or wishful thinking. Within
months of his observation, India not only opposed a Jewish homeland in
Palestine but also had voted against the UN partition plan. Jawaharlal
Nehru did not radically alter India’s policy toward the Middle East. If he
was the chief foreign- policy spokesperson for the Congress Party during
the nationalist phase, he laid the foundation of free India’s policy. Earlier,
Nehru had to compete with Mahatma Gandhi’s towering personality;
now he emerged as the uncrowned monarch on foreign- policy issues. As
such, much of India’s foreign policy was designed and institutionalized
by him. No account of India’s external policy or relations would be com-
plete without understanding and recognizing the Nehruvian model. As
Michael Edwards observes: “No other demo cratic Prime Minister has
ever had such a free hand in the formulation and execution of his coun-
try’s foreign policy.”^1 For his entire seventeen- year tenure as prime min-
ister, he was also India’s foreign minister and personally nurtured the
ministry.^2 His infl uence was so overwhelming that even the non- INC
governments that came to power long after his death could only change
the style and not the substance of India’s foreign policy. “Continuity and
Once the present Muslim policy of a separate Islamic state in India (popularly
known as Pakistan) is realized, which it will be in the course of the next two years,
Hindu opinion on the question of Palestine will fi nd its natural and untrammeled
expression. —Historian and diplomat K. M. Panikkar