Our representative in South Africa will have to bear in mind that
the Indian community out there can also become either useful or
harmful to us.
It would be a grave mistake to rely for our work in India on the
Zionists there. The task is too responsible.^110Sharing similar sentiments, Panikkar was equally categorical. In a con-
fi dential note to the Jewish delegation, the then foreign minister of
Bikaner was blunt: “If there is no widespread expression of sympathy
even in orthodox Hindu quarters towards Zionist claims, this is due to a
large extent to the neglect of India by the Zionists themselves. No at-
tempt has been made in the past to create such an understanding due
no doubt to the ‘Western’ attitude of the Jews in general.” How to fi x the
problem? His advice: “the Jewish Agency should have repre sen ta tion at
Delhi.”^111
Taking note of this situation, the Jewish delegation that came to India
in 1947 recommended, among other things,
- a permanent po liti cal representative of the Jewish Agency should
be immediately sent to India. - a desk for India and Asia should be created in the Po liti cal Depart-
ment of the Jewish Agency. - regular coverage should be given to India in Palestine press; and
- the establishment of an economic liaison offi ce in Bombay should
be examined.^112
A year later, Walter Eytan, who subsequently became the fi rst director
general of the Ministry of Foreign Aff airs, observed: “The KKL [Karen
Kayemet l’Yisrael, or the Jewish National Fund] has now been looking for
sometime for someone to go to India for three purposes: (a) KKL work
proper; (b) work among Jewish youth [and] (c) po liti cal contacts.” He went
on to add that as far as he was aware, “they have still not found anyone.
I’ve been trying to help them, but have so far not hit on any bright
ideas.... It’s perfectly true that we’ve neglected that country [India].”^113
According to Michael Brecher, David Ben- Gurion, “who attached great
importance to China in the 1960s, was indiff erent to both East and South
Asia on the eve of Israel’s in de pen dence.”^114 Indeed, none of the leading
fi gures of Zionism or yishuv visited India prior to the formation of Is-
rael.^115 The Weizmann- Nehru meeting of 1938 remained the only high-
66 the congress party and the yishuv