Al Jazeera  /  July 21, 2010
 
    India's Israeli-Arab tightrope walk      By Ramananda Sengupta  
 
"We do have a defence relationship with India, which is no secret. On the  
other hand, what is a secret is what is the defence relationship. And with 
all  due respect, the secret part of it will remain secret." - Mark Sofer, 
Israel's  ambassador to India, in a recent interview given to 
OutlookIndia.com. 
India and Israel were born within months of each other. While the former  
became an independent state on August 15, 1947, the latter was born on May 
14,  1948, following the decision of the United Nations to partition British 
Mandate  Palestine. 
India, which had opposed this partition, remained officially cold to the  
Jewish state. In May 1949, it voted (in vain) against the admission of Israel 
 into the UN. In early 1950, after recognising the state of Israel, a 
visibly  reluctant New Delhi allowed it to set up an "immigration office" in 
the 
port  city of Mumbai. This eventually morphed into a "trade office" and then 
into a  consulate. 
But New Delhi dithered over according full diplomatic recognition to Israel 
 until early 1992, when the two nations formally opened their respective  
embassies in Tel Aviv and New Delhi.

Pro-Arab  leanings 
Indian foreign policy in the early days after its independence was heavily  
pro-Arab, partly due to the fact that India has a huge Muslim population 
which  empathised with the Arab world and viewed Israel with suspicion and 
distrust.  But that was not the only reason. 
Almost a decade before independence, the father of the Indian freedom  
movement, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, had clearly articulated his position on  
the issue. In an editorial in the Harijan, a widely circulated Indian  
weekly, on November 11, 1938, Gandhi declared: "My sympathies are with the Jews 
 
... but my sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice. The cry 
 for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me ... Why 
 should they not, like other peoples of the earth, make that country their 
home  where they are born and where they earn their livelihood? Surely it 
would be a  crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine 
can be  restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home." 
India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, agreed. Nehru was among the 
 founder members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), along with Presidents 
Josip  Broz Tito of Yugoslavia and Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt. This 
relationship with  Nasser and other Arab members of the movement made it 
difficult 
for Nehru to  align openly with Israel. Besides, while the NAM was an attempt 
to stay  non-aligned during the Cold War, Israel was seen as too closely 
aligned with the  US. 
Another reason for India's coldness towards Israel was that, after  
independence, a large number of Indian workers migrated to the Gulf. The money  
that they sent back to India formed a sizeable chunk of India's foreign 
exchange  inflow. 
This foreign policy position laid out by Nehru and Gandhi was challenged,  
however, by opposition parties in India from both ends of the political  
spectrum; they consistently argued for better relations with  Israel.

Establishing relations 
Although formal relations between India and Israel were established only in 
 1992 during the tenure of Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, informal  
relations in the areas of defence and intelligence had commenced long before  
that. It is interesting that Rao, who was prime minister from June 1991 to 
May  1996, also aggressively wooed Iran, a nation which did not recognise 
Israel's  statehood, preferring to describe it, instead, as "the Zionist 
regime". 
India's historically hostile relations with Pakistan are often cited as  a 
key reason for the India-Israel defence and intelligence link. But military  
aid from Israel (mostly in the form of artillery shells) was received by 
India  even during the 1962 India-China border war, which ended only when the 
Chinese  unilaterally withdrew to their pre-attack positions. 
Before Rao officially recognised Israel in 1992, Indian and Israeli  
intelligence officials often met surreptitiously in third countries,  
particularly 
after the India-Pakistan war of 1971. 
During that war, which led to the birth of Bangladesh from Pakistan's 
eastern  wing, Israel again helped India with mortars and ammunition. One of 
the 
Indian  heroes of that war was the then eastern command chief, General JFR 
Jacob - a  Jew. 
Then, during the Kargil war of May-July 1999, when India attempted to repel 
 Pakistani intruders who had taken up positions on the higher reaches of 
the  Kargil mountains, Israel quickly sent Heron and Searcher unmanned aerial  
vehicles, or UAVs, to locate and identify the Pakistani-held positions. It 
also  supplied ammunition for the Bofors field guns and night vision 
equipment, both  of which played key roles in the conflict.

Endorsing Palestinian  cause 
Paradoxically, India also, simultaneously, endorsed and espoused the  
Palestinian cause. On its website, the Indian ministry of external affairs says 
 
with regard to its relations with the Palestinian people: "India's empathy 
with  the Palestinian cause and its friendship with the people of Palestine 
have  become an integral part of its time-tested foreign policy. In 1947, 
India voted  against the partition of Palestine at the United Nations General 
Assembly. India  was the first non-Arab state to recognise the PLO [Palestine 
Liberation  Organisation] as sole and legitimate representative of the 
Palestinian people in  1974. India was one of the first countries to recognise 
the state of Palestine  in 1988. In 1996, India opened its Representative 
Office to the Palestine  Authority in Gaza. The office was moved to Ramallah in 
2003." 
The founder and chief of the PLO, Yasser Arafat, had made numerous visits 
to  India, where he was always received warmly. In April 1984, Indian Prime 
Minister  Indira Gandhi visited Arafat's headquarters in Tunis after a state 
visit to  Libya. When Gandhi was assassinated a few months later by her 
bodyguards in New  Delhi, a shocked Arafat wept in public. 
One might wonder how New Delhi reconciled these seemingly irreconcilable  
positions. It did so by getting the Palestinian Authority on board. Zikrur  
Rahman, the Indian representative to the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, 
told  the London-based Al-Haqeq newspaper on 12 May 2007: "When we recognised 
 Israel and normalised relations with her, we did that after taking the 
approval  of the Palestinian leadership; we said, after you agree we'll 
recognise [Israel]  .... The Palestinian leadership told us: 'There are signed 
accords between us  [and Israel] and we are now talking to the Israelis; your 
establishing relations  with Israel helps us.'" 
India has also been consistently contributing huge sums of money as grants  
for budget and development aid to the Palestinian Authority. A recent 
example  took place during the visit of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to 
India in  February 2010. 
On that occasion, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced a grant of $10mn 
as  budget support to the Palestinian National Authority. This followed 
several  earlier grants of similar amounts, as well as assistance with the 
development of  schools, stadiums, roads and hospitals. India also trains 
Palestinian  diplomats.

An 'unwritten axis' 
Over the years, however, the India-Israel relationship has burgeoned into a 
 situation where Israel is poised to become the largest defence supplier to 
 India, a position currently held by Russia. Israel also trains Indian 
special  forces, which are then deployed in the troubled region of Kashmir and 
in India's  north-east areas. 
Apart from strategic and military interactions between the two nations,  
Israeli sensors and satellites are used extensively to monitor the Kashmir  
border to detect infiltration by insurgents from Kashmir and Pakistan. 
The events of 11 September 2001 and the subsequent "war on terror" served 
to  further strengthen this relationship. So did the 26 November 2009 
Pakistani  terrorist strike in Mumbai. The three-day ordeal left some 200 
people 
dead and  more than 300 wounded. Six of the dead were Jews at the Chabad 
House, a Jewish  centre near Nariman point, which was specifically targetted. 
But it is not just defence and security that India and Israel collaborate 
on,  though those sectors form a huge, though mostly secret, chunk of 
bilateral  relations. India is also increasingly using Israel's sophisticated 
drip  
irrigation technology to boost agricultural production. Non-military 
bilateral  trade stood at $4.2bn in 2009, up from $200mn in 2001. Information 
technology,  telecommunications, energy, chemicals, agriculture, and even real 
estate and  space exploration are areas where there are significant business 
exchanges. 
India recently put an Israeli satellite into orbit. The two sides already  
have several joint working groups, committees and other bilateral 
institutional  mechanisms. Key among these are foreign office consultations, 
counter-terrorism,  defence cooperation, trade and economic cooperation, 
agriculture, 
science and  technology, and a dialogue between national security advisers. 
While officially tight-lipped over nuclear cooperation, the two states  
clearly share deep concerns about the possibility of nuclear proliferation by  
Pakistan, as well as Iran's nuclear ambitions. 
In September 2003, during the visit to India by Israeli Prime Minister 
Ariel  Sharon (the first such visit by an Israeli prime minister), his deputy 
(now  late) Yosef Lapid told journalists that an "unwritten, abstract" axis 
had been  created between Israel, India and the US. While there was no "formal 
triangular  agreement ... there is mutual interest of the three countries 
in making the  world a more secure place for all of us. There is American 
support for  development of this unwritten axis," Lapid told reporters in New 
Delhi.  Therefore, "in the abstract sense, we are creating such an axis". 
In a talk delivered at the Indian Council for World Affairs the same day, 
he  warned that both nations face threats from terrorism and "fanatic" 
Muslims, and  said the "moment terrorists laid hands on nuclear weapons the 
face 
of the world  will change". 

Noting that Israel had accepted the possible existence of  a Palestinian 
state, Lapid said this could become a reality the moment "Arabs  stop 
terrorising us". At the same time, the strengthening of Indo-Israeli ties  
should 
not be a "disturbing factor" for Arab countries, and "the Indian  government 
has a right to establish relations with any country," he  added.

Arabs 'losing India' 
"What made India change its mind and throw itself in the arms of a country  
that occupies Arab and Palestinian land, to the point where it has played 
host  to Ariel Sharon?" asked Mustafa El-Feki, the chairman of the foreign 
affairs  committee in the Egyptian parliament, and a former Egyptian 
ambassador to India,  in an article in Al-Ahram Weekly. 
"India and Israel have their own separate political agendas. India wishes 
to  have access to US and Israeli technology, particularly in the development 
of  weapons. Israel, for its part, wishes to have the political backing of 
a  powerful nation," he wrote. 
El-Feki pointed to several reasons for this cosy relationship between India 
 and Israel. 
First, we have made the error of viewing the Indian-Pakistani conflict from 
 an Islamic perspective. We have tried to "Islamise" the ongoing conflict 
in  South Asia, posing as protectors of Islam and custodians of the 
international  community. And we have overlooked the regional role of India, 
with 
Arab leaders  showing up in New Delhi much less frequently than before. 
Second, he wrote, was the rejection of India's application for membership 
of  the OIC. "A country with 120 million Muslim citizens applied for 
membership and  what happened? Islamic countries, in typical naiveté, rejected 
the 
Indian  application, imagining this would please Pakistan and teach India a 
lesson," he  said. 
Third, according to El-Feki, after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the 
 end of the Cold War, India moved closer to the US for both political and  
economic reasons. He argued: "I wouldn't be surprised to see India assume 
the  role of a policeman in the Indian Ocean and the outskirts of the Gulf, 
with US  blessing and with the aim of encircling so-called Islamic violence. 
This would  be in harmony with Israel's agenda, and it may pave the way to a 
scheme of joint  control over the Greater Middle East." 
Making a strong case for an even-handed Arab approach towards India and  
Pakistan, the former ambassador to India recalled that during his time in 
India,  the Palestinian ambassador to New Delhi enjoyed the privilege of 
meeting 
the  Indian prime minister at any time he wished to do so. But as the 
Islamic  phenomenon spread and some Arab policies acquired a religious tint, 
India grew  visibly suspicious of the Arab and Islamic worlds. To make things 
worse, Arab  diplomacy in India was lackadaisical over the past two decades 
... We have lost  India so far for no good reason, I should say .... It is 
time we mend this  error. It is time to bring Arab countries closer to both 
India and Pakistan,  rather than take one side or keep our distance altogether. 
I believe the Arabs  have only themselves to blame for India's change of 
heart on the Palestinian  question."

'Enlightened self-interest'

Despite  the rapidly increasing synergy with Israel, however, India 
continues to enjoy  reasonably cordial relations with the Arab League and the 
Gulf 
Cooperation  Council. India has been attending the annual Arab League 
summits as an observer  since 2007, and the first Arab-India Cultural Week was 
held in New Delhi in  2008. 
In a statement released on the eve of the 65th anniversary of the Arab 
League  on March 27 this year, the League declared: "There is a need for 
collective and  dedicated efforts for strengthening Indo-Arab ties with further 
building up of  relations between India and the Arab world, including in the 
fields of Science  and Technology, Education, Health, Telecommunication and 
Energy." 
As far as the Gulf Cooperation Council (UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman,  
Kuwait and Qatar) is concerned, while New Delhi enjoys reasonably cordial 
ties  with the individual states (which supply almost 70 per cent of its oil 
and  energy needs), attempts to forge a free trade agreement with the Council 
have  been held up due to issues over whether oil should be part of the 
agreement. 
India's current prime minister, Manmohan Singh, has often described the  
country's growing relationship with the US, as well as the recent endorsement 
of  US/UN sanctions against its long-term ally, Iran, as acts of 
"enlightened  self-interest". Many in his government use the same phrase to 
describe 
the  relationship with Israel. 
India - and Israel - have taken pains to spell out that this relationship 
is  not at the expense of India's relations with the Arab states. Indian 
diplomats  and politicians keep pointing to the fact that India has publicly 
condemned  Operation Cast Lead, Israel's name for the blistering three-week 
long attack on  the Gaza Strip in late 2008-early 2009. 
[ Note : Popular opinion on the part of Hindus towards the Gaza  operation 
was often very favorable because it was seen as payback, by proxy, for  
Mumbai . BR ] 
India also joined in the international condemnation of the May 31, 2010  
pre-dawn Israeli attack on the Turkish Ship Mavi Marmara, which led the  "Gaza 
Freedom flotilla" carrying humanitarian aid for the people of the  
blockaded Gaza Strip. Nine people were killed in the attack by Israeli  
commandos. 
"India deplores the tragic loss of life and the reports of killings and  
injuries to the people on the boats carrying supplies for Gaza. There can be 
no  justification for such indiscriminate use of force, which we condemn. We 
extend  our sympathies to the families of the dead and wounded. It is our 
firm  conviction that lasting peace and security in the region can be achieved 
only  through peaceful dialogue and not through use of force," said a 
statement from  the ministry of external affairs. 
But while successive governments in New Delhi have been quietly trying to  
maintain and develop India's relationship with Israel without overly  
antagonising the Arab world, there are times when the stress shows. Take, for  
instance, the article written by recently-removed minister of state for 
external  affairs, Shashi Tharoor, in January 2009. Tharoor was India's 
candidate 
for the  UN secretary general's post in 2006. He quit after losing to Ban 
Ki-moon, and  joined Indian politics. The syndicated column, distributed 
worldwide, was run by  Israel's Haaretz newspaper with the title: "India's 
Israel 
Envy". The  article, which coincided with Israel's operation Cast Lead, 
caused an uproar,  both domestically and internationally. 
During his election campaign in March 2009, the opposition used the article 
 to imply that Tharoor endorsed the Israeli military operation in Gaza. 
Earlier,  several Arab diplomats in New Delhi also voiced their concern, asking 
whether  Tharoor's article reflected the ruling Congress Party's position 
on Israel. 
Tharoor was subsequently forced to write another article defending himself, 
 and clarifying that he had not endorsed Israel's military campaign in 
Gaza, and  pointing to what he regarded as his long and consistent 
pro-Palestinian stand  during his stint at the United Nations.

India-US  relations 
Another critical factor in the changing Indo-Israeli relationship is the  
rapidly developing ties between India and US. Given the strong US-Israel  
relationship, New Delhi does not want to rock the boat by openly antagonising  
Israel. Besides, the Indian diaspora in the US, which is growing 
increasingly  active politically, admits to looking at the American Jewish 
Council 
(AJC) and  America Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) as role models. As 
one analyst  put it, India and Israel move closer together each time the 
India-Pakistan  conflict escalates. 
Officially, New Delhi insists that this relationship does not signify a  
change in its position on Palestine, or its ties with the Arab world. 
Privately,  however, Indian diplomats point to the fact that despite numerous 
Indian 
 overtures, the Arab world consistently backed Pakistan's position on 
Kashmir,  while Israel endorsed the Indian stand. 
In 2003, after Ariel Sharon's visit to India, then Indian foreign minister  
Yashwant Sinha had tried to allay Arab fears by telling the Pakistani 
newspaper  The News: "The fact that Sharon visited New Delhi in no way  makes 
us 
complicit to what the Israeli are doing or saying. We have explained  our 
position with regard to Palestinian cause in very clear terms as indeed we  
have done repeatedly to Israel." 
Responding to a question on India's relations with the Arab world,  
particularly in the context of Israel's decision to expel PLO leader Yasser  
Arafat, Sinha said: "I don't think Palestinians are in any doubt about Indian  
policy. The problem arises only with those people inside India and outside 
India  who are more Palestinian than the Palestinian themselves." 
Recently, a senior Indian foreign ministry official (who requested 
anonymity)  remarked when quizzed on the status of India-Arab relations: "We 
are 
very keen  to maintain friendly relations with both the Arab world and Israel. 
But it would  help us a lot if the Muslim world took a more nuanced stand on 
Pakistan and  Kashmir."

Ramananda Sengupta is the chief editor of the  Indian news website 
www.sify.com.

The views  expressed in this article are the author's own and do not 
necessarily reflect Al  Jazeera's editorial  policy.

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to