Naturally, Asaf Ali voted against a Panama- Guatemala resolution that
called for a visit by the UNSCOP to the DP camps in Eu rope.^16 However,
a resolution to this eff ect was adopted by the committee, by an over-
whelming majority of thirty- six votes in favor to eight against, with four-
teen abstentions.
The second major contribution of the Indian representative pertains
to the composition of the proposed committee. Asaf Ali concurred with
the U.S. position that permanent members of the Securit y Council should
be excluded from the committee. Much to the annoyance of some, he
pointed out that with the sole exception of China, other great powers had
strong po liti cal and economic interests in the Middle East and would be
unable to perform their tasks objectively.^17
The Indian representative off ered explicit support to the Jews when he
endorsed the motion for inviting the Jewish Agency for Palestine to testify
before the General Committee. He felt that, as with the Arab Higher
Committee, the views of the Jews and their representatives should be
heard: “we are playing Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark.... Where
are the great representatives of the Jewish people who are also interested
in this problem?”^18 This “Prince of Denmark” remark drew widespread
domestic criticism, especially from the Muslim League. In India, the Con-
gress Party and Muslim League were not only fi ghting over the status of
Muslims, in the about- to- be- divided India but also over who would repre-
sent Indian Muslims. The Muslim League perceived, projected, and pro-
moted itself as the sole representative of the Muslims of the subcontinent.
It was not prepared to accept that the Congress Party could represent the
legitimate interests of the Muslims. If they could do so, there would be no
rationale for a Muslim League— let alone a separate Muslim state. Nehru
once again pushed back against this notion by appointing a Muslim to
represent India at this crucial UN debate, which had strong Islamic under-
currents and overtones. Asaf Ali’s “Prince of Denmark” remark thus
complicated the situation.
In a letter to the Arab Executive Committee in Palestine, a functionary
of the Muslim League observed: “Asaf Ali was not representing the Mus-
lims of India. He was selected by Pandit Nehru, the Congress leader, and
the Muslim League had no hand in his appointment. The statement of
Mr. Asaf Ali runs contrary to the sentiments of 100,000,000 Muslims
in India who stand and always will stand by their Arab brethren of the
Middle East on the Palestine issue.” The Dawn, a Karachi- based daily
the partition of palestine 89