the islamic prism 81accompanying the body to Jerusalem, to quarantine the Palestine prob-
lem from domestic Indian politics.^44 Subsequent developments in India
belied Weizmann’s expectations. Won over by the mufti’s hospitality and
warm treatment, the Indian leader became his staunch supporter and
played an active role at the General Muslim Congress or ga nized by the
mufti later that year.^45
The third Zionist contact, in October 1931, took place against the back-
ground of greater concerns over the attitude of Indian Muslims. This was
the fi rst time that the Zionist leadership established formal contacts with
Mahatma Gandhi, who was in London to attend the Round Table Confer-
ence. Two Zionist emissaries, Seliq Brodetsky and Nahum Sokolov, met
the Mahatma, seeking to keep India away from the Palestinian issue.^46 A
fourth and somewhat longer campaign aimed at India had to wait until
mid- 1936, when Immanuel Olsvanger was sent to India as the emissary
of the Jewish Agency. During his long stay, he reached out to a large num-
ber of Indian nationalists and representatives of other groups. Again his
mission was directly linked to events in Palestine and its reverberations
in the Islamic world. Olsvanger was sent to India shortly after the out-
break of the Arab general strikes that precipitated the Arab Revolt of
1936– 1939. In short, during the prestate years, even the limited Zionist
interest in India was primarily motivated by the Muslim factor.
Was there a Hindu perception on Jewish history that could have al-
tered this partisan viewpoint?
Panikkar’s Prognosis
The historian and later diplomat K. M. Panikkar recognized and
articulated the infl uence of the domestic Muslim population upon India’s
Middle East policy. He was one of the few Indians who had long associa-
tions with some of the leading personalities of the Zionist movement, in-
cluding Weizmann, whom he had met in 1926.^47 On the eve of India’s
in de pen dence, he visualized a “Hindu perception” toward a Jewish na-
tional home in Palestine. In his assessment, this would be articulated
with clarity after the partition of the Indian subcontinent. The Asian Rela-
tions Conference, held in New Delhi in March– April 1947, rekindled Pan-
ikkar’s meetings with the yishuv. Hugo Bergmann, a professor of philoso-
phy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, led a ten- member delegation
that represented the Jews of Palestine. Panikkar, the prime minister of