(Morocco and Saudi Arabia), Asia (Iran and Malaysia), and Africa (Niger
and Somalia) was held in early September. It decided to convene a sum-
mit conference at Rabat, from September 22 to 24, 1969. It set two basic
criteria for the invitees: countries with a Muslim- majority population or
with a Muslim head of state.^48
Even if one takes a po liti cally correct interpretation of secularism, In-
dia did not meet the necessary conditions for attending the Rabat confer-
ence. Though it had one of the largest Muslim populations in the world,
Muslims made up only about one- sixth of India’s population. India had
neither a Muslim majority nor was its head of state a Muslim, but it was
keen to go to Rabat, pleading “that since it contains the third largest com-
munity of Muslims in the world, it should not be excluded from the Sum-
mit.”^49 It feared that its absence would result in Pakistan dominating the
deliberations, perhaps even forcing the participants to adopt an anti- India
posture. As the region was so much outraged and unifi ed over the inci-
dent, New Delhi wanted to express its sympathy and solidarity with the
Arab and Islamic countries.
Apparently, there were no written invitations. As A. G. Noorani elo-
quently put it: “The preparatory conference of the Rabat conference did
not invite India. How then did we come to be invited by the conference
itself? Because we pressed for an invitation.”^50 A more plausible explana-
tion for the Indian interests came from the parliamentarian Saifuddin
Soz, who observed:
The question is whether India should have tried for an invitation or
not? I feel strongly in favor of India’s insistence for an invitation al-
though the eff ort for participation was not vigorous enough to put
India’s case in proper shape. Egypt and Malaysia had supported India’s
claim to be invited to the Conference against Pakistan’s tooth and nail
opposition. [The Saudi monarch] King Faisal’s compromise sugges-
tion to allow an Indian delegation to represent Indian Muslims was fi -
nally approved. But, then a procedural mistake was committed which
gave psychological advantage to President Yahya Khan of Pakistan.
The moment it was announced that India’s Industrial Development
Minister Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed would lead India’s delegation the
next day and till then Ambassador Gurbachan Singh would represent
India, Yahya Khan created a virtual hell for the conference questioning
the credentials of Gurbachan Singh who was a non- Muslim.^51212 the years of hardened hostility, 1964–1984