Dikie Bird Plan

The Dickie Bird Plan was an early and short-lived proposal formulated in 1947 by Lord Louis Mountbatten, the last Viceroy of India, during the final stages of the British withdrawal from the subcontinent. It was among the initial schemes considered for the transfer of power from British rule to Indian leadership. Though never officially implemented, the plan is historically significant as it illustrated the complexity and urgency of India’s political situation before Independence. It was soon replaced by the more definitive Mountbatten Plan of 3 June 1947, which eventually led to the creation of India and Pakistan.

Background

By early 1947, British policymakers had realised that maintaining control over India had become untenable due to growing political unrest, the Second World War’s aftermath, and the rise of rival nationalist ideologies. Lord Mountbatten arrived in India in March 1947 with the mandate to negotiate a peaceful transfer of power by June 1948.
However, relations between the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League had deteriorated sharply, with the League demanding a separate state of Pakistan, while Congress continued to advocate for a united India. To address these irreconcilable demands, Mountbatten initially devised what came to be known as the Dickie Bird Plan. The term “Dickie Bird” derived informally from Mountbatten’s nickname “Dickie” and was reportedly used by Indian leaders to describe the plan informally.

Main Provisions of the Plan

The Dickie Bird Plan was based on the idea of granting complete autonomy to India’s major provinces and princely states before forming any central government. Its key provisions were as follows:

1. Provinces as Successor States: Each British Indian province—such as Bengal, Punjab, Bombay, Madras, and others—would become an independent successor state immediately after the British withdrawal. These provinces would initially exist as sovereign entities.
2. Option to Join a Union: After achieving independence, each province could decide whether to join a constituent assembly to form a larger federation (India or Pakistan) or remain independent. The decision would rest entirely with provincial governments and legislatures.
3. Princely States’ Freedom of Choice: The princely states, which were under indirect British rule, would be free to join either dominion—India or Pakistan—or to remain independent.
4. No Central Authority at the Outset: Unlike later plans, the Dickie Bird proposal did not envisage the immediate creation of a central government or dominion structure. It emphasised provincial autonomy first, followed by voluntary association.
5. Transfer of Power by Province: The British would withdraw province by province, with authority being handed directly to local governments rather than to an all-India administration.

Objectives and Rationale

Mountbatten’s proposal aimed to achieve a peaceful and rapid transfer of power without forcing a hasty decision on partition. By allowing provinces and princely states to decide their own political future, the plan sought to avoid direct confrontation between the Congress and the Muslim League.
It also reflected Mountbatten’s desire to avoid a violent nationwide partition by placing responsibility for unity or separation in the hands of local governments. The British hoped that this model of flexible devolution might lead to voluntary unions formed by mutual consent rather than compulsion.

Reaction and Rejection

When the plan was discussed with Indian leaders in May 1947, it met with strong opposition, particularly from the Indian National Congress.

• Congress Objections: Jawaharlal Nehru and other Congress leaders feared that the plan would result in the balkanisation of India—the fragmentation of the subcontinent into numerous small, weak, and potentially unstable states. They believed it would destroy the unity and integrity of India before independence could even be realised.
• Muslim League’s View: The Muslim League, while favouring partition, was uncertain about the implications of provincial independence and preferred a clear division between India and Pakistan rather than the uncertain arrangement proposed by Mountbatten.
• British Concerns: Many British officials also found the plan impractical, as it offered no guarantee of administrative continuity, defence coordination, or economic stability after independence.

Given the overwhelming opposition and practical difficulties, Mountbatten abandoned the Dickie Bird Plan before it was formally presented to the British government.

Transition to the Mountbatten Plan (3 June 1947)

After the rejection of the Dickie Bird proposal, Mountbatten devised a more pragmatic and structured alternative—the Mountbatten Plan, announced on 3 June 1947.
Under this revised plan:

• British India would be divided into two dominions, India and Pakistan.
• Provinces such as Punjab and Bengal would be partitioned based on religious majorities.
• Princely states were given the option to accede to either dominion, but not to remain independent indefinitely.
• A Boundary Commission would demarcate the borders between the two new nations.

This plan was accepted by both the Congress and the Muslim League, paving the way for the Indian Independence Act of 1947, which came into effect on 15 August 1947.

Significance of the Dickie Bird Plan

Although short-lived and never implemented, the Dickie Bird Plan is historically significant for several reasons:

1. Insight into British Policy: It demonstrated the British government’s willingness to consider radical and flexible approaches to decolonisation amid mounting political crises.
2. Reflection of India’s Political Complexity: The plan highlighted the deep divisions among Indian political leaders and the difficulty of creating a unified national framework acceptable to all.
3. Prelude to Partition: The rejection of this plan accelerated discussions that ultimately culminated in the Mountbatten Plan, which formalised partition as the only feasible solution.
4. Lessons in Decentralisation: The plan underscored the challenges of decentralised governance in a culturally and ethnically diverse country like India, where local autonomy could easily turn into disintegration.

Evaluation

The Dickie Bird Plan remains an interesting but impractical historical episode. Its vision of multiple independent provinces would likely have produced a highly fragmented subcontinent, weakening the political and economic stability of the region. While it sought to prevent communal conflict through voluntary association, it would have replaced a united India with dozens of small states—making cooperation and governance exceedingly difficult.
Nevertheless, the plan’s failure helped clarify the necessity of a structured and definitive solution for India’s independence, leading to the successful formulation of the Mountbatten Plan and, ultimately, the birth of India and Pakistan.