India's Israeli-Arab tightrope walk

Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by ajtr, Jul 22, 2010.

  1. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    India's Israeli-Arab tightrope walk


    "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 2008 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." (my comment: I think this is now becoming official policy with the GCC)

    '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.

    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.

    This article was first published by the Al Jazeera Centre for Studies.
     
  2.  
  3. thakur_ritesh

    thakur_ritesh Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,434
    Likes Received:
    1,719
    Location:
    Land of the GODS - "Dev Bhomi".
    OT but just wanted to talk this out, may be we can have a discussion on this in the HQ section in depth.

    india's international relationships as i see them, ranked based on priority basis:

    1 USA, and Russia, with a tilt towards the americans
    2 Israel, and the EU (more importantly Britan, Germany, France, and Italy - the 4 highly industrialized countries)
    3 RoK, Japan, ASEAN, and A'stan.
    4 GCC, Iran, to a lesser extent if we can make a dent then Turkey, and certain CAR countries.
    5 China, Brazil, South Arfica
    6 Pakistan (well even if i were to not mention this country it would still be fine for they are more of a client state and the country which influences them the most, we have cordial relations with them through whom we are able to exert decent influence)
     
  4. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    I think China has to be kept as a higher priority possibly even on the top two spots because of its proximity and its present global presence--wether we like it or not. It doesn't mean we will see everything eye to eye, but smart diplomacy can take care of a lot of things. Plus they are our second biggest trade partners after the US.

    And taking trade and energy security into account GCC, Iran would definitely come into the second or third rung IMO.
    Japan, ROK don't even make into our top 10 trade partners while UAE and Saudi Arabia are our third and fourth biggest trade partners. The recent PM/King level visits between SA and India have also caused a dramatic change in the post-cold war relations as well as can be seen from recent moves of the Saudis to do a course correction on India as well as the intelligence support during the 26/11 attacks by them. Moreover along with Iran, 70% of our energy needs come from this region. Iran is also the only stable sea-land link with A'stan/CARs for the near future. All in all I think the current middle east policy is doing well except for the IAEA voting event resulting in downgrading of Indo-Iran ties in the last 2-3 years which seems to be back on track now. Israeli defense cooperation is ongoing as always but a move towards licensed local production and tech transfer can be also encouraged.


    Another important bloc missing are BIMSTEC countries like Sri Lanka Bangladesh Maldives and Myanmar which are crucial for improving the neighborhood of South Asia and Bay of Bengal region in particular.
     
  5. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    India-Israel nexus against Pakistan
    Ever-increasing defence cooperation between India and Israel, and their efforts to destabilize Pakistan are a matter of serious concern for Pakistan. Both are using their influence in Afghanistan against Pakistan by helping anti-Pakistan elements to destabilize Pakistan with a view to projecting it as a state which cannot protect its strategic assets. Afghan defence minister had visited Tel Aviv in July 2009 in a bid to modernize Afghan army. Australia and Germany have already acquired armoured vehicles and UAVs from Israel for Afghanistan. The nexus between India and Israel is too well known, and international media controlled by Jews helps India to continue its vicious campaign against Pakistan. In his recent article carried by Opinion Maker titled ‘Framing Pakistan: How the pro-Israel media enables India’s surrogate warfare’ Maidhc Ó Cathail writes: “The media component of India’s alliance with Israel affords India a powerful weapon to wage surrogate warfare against Pakistan and enables both Tel Aviv and Delhi to pursue their common objective of destabilizing the nuclear-armed Muslim nation”.

    Gordon Duff, senior editor of ‘Veterans Today’, revealed in a recent interview: “We have very little doubt that the Indians and the Israelis, that are all over Afghanistan with German passports pretending to be military contractors, are operating 17 camps along the Taliban regions training and arming terrorists.” He knocked the bottom of Indian pretense and expose Indian-Israeli unholy alliance against Pakistan by writing: “The Pakistani Taliban is in close cooperation with India and Israel who supply, finance, arm and train them to attack Pakistan.” Indian investment in Afghanistan is for long term gains to encircle Pakistan and to have sufficient clout over Afghan National Army when US/Coalition forces withdraw from Afghanistan. Indian leadership loses sight of the fact that it does not have borders with Afghanistan and all roads to Afghanistan lead through Islamabad. Anyhow, Indian, Israeli and even American interests converge on one point ie to denuclearize Pakistan. India had clandestine relations with Israel much before the former established formal diplomatic relations in 1992, which were kept under wraps till 2003 when the then Israeli premier Ariel Sharon visited India to formally declare clandestine defence cooperation.

    In March 2008, the Indian weekly Outlook’s interview of Israel’s ambassador to India, Mark Sofer was revealing. On a question about India’s defence arrangements with Israel, Mark Sofer said “The defence relationship got a major boost during Kargil when Israel came to India’s assistance. India was then in great need and we were able to bring about a turnaround in the situation on the ground.” Last year, India and Israel had struck the biggest defence deal in which Israel provided India an air defence system for a staggering amount of $1.4 billion. According to Israel Aerospace Industries, the defence deal was signed under which Israel would develop and manufacture seaborne and shore-based systems against missile attack on India, which has meanwhile been received and installed.

    The first Indian Air Force AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) platform, with the see-through capability of the IAF beyond conventional visions of ground-based and tethered electromagnetic sensors, arrived in India on 25th May 2009. “On its maiden flight from Israel to India, the veritable flying-giant with an all-pervasive electromagnetic vision landed at Jamnagar, Gujarat, and arrived at the Palam airport the following day” an Indian English daily had stated. The AWACS is an airborne mission support system fitted on Il-76 aircraft with improved engines, with radar that can help detect even a cruise missile or an aircraft at ranges far more than the ranges detected through the present ground-based radars. The AWACS radar, most sophisticated to date, can collate surface information about troop movements and missile-launches even while listening to highly confidential communications between enemy frontline units. Israeli advisors have been frequently visiting and advising Indians on how to handle militancy in Kashmir.

    As stated above, India and Israel had clandestine relations much before 1992, as India did not like to annoy Muslim countries especially Arab countries and Iran because it benefited immensely from bilateral trade relations with them. India and Israel have many commonalities. At the ideological level, Hindutva is very much like Zionism, as both subscribe to the importance of the Race-State and both perpetrate atrocities on Muslims. Another common objective is that India and Israel have usurped Kashmiris and Palestinians’ lands respectively.

    Israeli advisors are frequently visiting and advising Indians on how to handle militancy in Kashmir. In October 2008, Israeli Army Chief Avi Mizrahi visited New Delhi with a view to enhancing cooperation in training of Indian forces in anti-insurgency operations. Both sides discussed holding joint exercises and mulled measures to boost defence cooperation. Mizrahi had met Indian Naval Chief and the then Chiefs of Staff Committee Chairman Admiral Suresh Mehta, and also top army officers in Indian Held Kashmir.

    India had appeased the US in December 1991 when its UN ambassador voted for Resolution 4686 (reversing Resolution 3379, identifying Zionism as a form of racism). There was a widespread perception that India also wanted of the US to help secure a permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council, which was hinted by US administration in 2000.But America perhaps is not in a position to make it possible because it does not enjoy sufficient clout over other countries in the world to achieve this objective.

    On 9/11, the sole super power’s symbols of economic and military strength were shredded into bits. Despite bombing Iraq and Afghanistan flat, America has not been able to recoup its lost image and position. Though there is let up in violence in Iraq yet one cannot say with certainty as to what shape the events would take after American troops are withdrawn. In Afghanistan despite more than 100000 US and NATO troops and 85000 of Afghan National Army, the Taliban fighters are coming back with greater ferocity than ever before.

    After General McChrystal’s diatribe and as a consequence his sacking, the morale of American, NATO and Afghan troops is at the lowest ebb. And America is seriously contemplating to withdraw but looking for a face-saving. If President Karzai succeeds in getting some assurances from the Taliban for renouncing violence and a deal is struck with regard to power-sharing, India does not stand a chance of achieving its objective of encircling Pakistan. However, Pakistan’s foreign office and Pakistani media should effectively counter Indo-Israel propaganda, and highlight the authors mentioned above that dare expose Indo-Israel’s machinations.

    Our political leaders are also too busy in their politics of power and pelf, and do not realize that God forbid if any harm is caused to Pakistan, not only citizenry but the ruling elite also will suffer in equal measure. They should come out of stupor and take steps to unite the nation to meet the challenges and threats to the country. They should put their act together to make Pakistan self-reliant, and the first step in this direction is adopting austerity – not as a rhetoric but to practice it wholeheartedly.



    Another point of view about Indian relationship with Israel. Its conspiracy theory.
     
  6. Iamanidiot

    Iamanidiot Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,326
    Likes Received:
    1,493
    indias intrests are poly-aligned.Where there is benefit there lies her inetrests and arabs have nothing to offer except pro-pakistan resolutions on kashmir.It is good that the arabs have realized of this drift and would be better if they set course corrections in their foreign policy with respect to india.
     
  7. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    Religious difference between India and the Arab states predetermines that Indo-Arab relationship can never be warmer than Pakistan-arab relationship. But getting too cozy with Israel can be risky business as Israel is too small to offer anything other than weapons to India and India is more or less at mercy of Arab oil.
     
  8. Neil

    Neil Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    1,946
    Location:
    India
    dude..i doubt it...India is too important for arab oil export....and dont think there will be huge problem in arab countries regarding this....
    and as such even America is staunch supporter of Israel and its oil imports have no impact on this.....
     
  9. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    unfortunately India does not equal to America. As the world's sole superpower America can get away with a lot of things other countries don't even dare to try, like for example selling weapons to Taiwan.

    Sure, in peace time India shouldn't have problem getting oil from the middle east, but what about during war times? care to remember the 1973 Israel-arab war?

    Muslims are at the end of the day muslims, that's why even the most progressive muslim countries like Turkey can become touchy during a crisis. Now image a scenario where indian troops are advancing within 10 kilometers of Islamabad, guess what the reaction in the muslim countries, be it from government, media or in the streets, will be?
     
  10. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Arabs are not the only countries in the world to export oil. Indian economy is not as small as Israel . we also have enough reserve and working towards increating the capacity. Most importantly future wars between India and Pakistan will be over before anyone will have a chance to react . If it prolong there will not be any Pakistan left so how can they support pakistan against India.
     
  11. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Also they are all business man as well so if religions comes before business then they are all fools. They also know that petroleum will be over soon and then they will face the Music.
     
  12. ahmedsid

    ahmedsid Top Gun Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    2,958
    Likes Received:
    243
    Trust me, None of the Arab countries will protest if we advance 10 KMs of anywhere! The Public in those countries dont care for Pakistanis, its just that Pakistanis think that they are indispensible, while the fact is that, they are just cheap labour, just like the Bangladeshis or the others from the Subcontinent!!!

    India has more leverage in the Middle east as of now, compared to Pakistan. Pakistan lives on the handouts!!!
     
  13. Neil

    Neil Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    1,946
    Location:
    India
    isn't it that in all the major wars between India-pakistan.....the arabs have supported pakistan...??
    they criticize India for kashmir on behalf pakistan.....then how come India has more leverage than pakistan....??
     
  14. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    Can you define what you mean by support? Most Arab countries hardly make any noise on any issue in the UN other than the Palestine-Israel question. The biggest mistake in understanding pre-cold war ties with Arabs is looking at it through the religious prism and hesitating in making decisive strategic choices. Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan and Turkey were all in the same bloc with the Allies. While Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan all had left leaning tendencies.

    In the 1960s, Egypt was a founding member of NAM, they established the Arab League and were the leaders of Arab secular nationaists. Gamal Abdel Nasser use to derisively say that the Pakistanis want us to believe that Islam was created in 1947 in Pakistan. The feelings were mutual in Pakistan as well which did not like such close relationship between India and Egypt. Similarly when the Palestinians rose against he Jordanian king with demand to establish a secular republic, it was the Pakistani army under Gen. Zia ul Haq that crushed the rebellion. Similarly in the 1971 war, when US was trying hard to quickly get weapons to Pakistan, it mediated the transfers of Iranian F104 to Pakistan while newer Jordanian and Israeli F16s were sent to Iran to provide cover from USSR. This was done so that no suspicion is raised but it was too little too late for Pakistan.

    So naturally, India had lukewarm ties with the allied Arab world as well as USA for that matter while good-strong ties with the left leaning one. Infact, it was only after the throwover of the shah of Iran who was allied to the US and the establishment of the Islamic govt. in Iran did Indo-Iranian relations slowly start to improve. However, once the cold war was over and course correction started. Mike Ghouse who wrote the article "Arab blunder in Indo-Arab relations" is a Egyptian parliamentarian and I would be sure that this does reflect the official mindset as well.

    You can't expect the Arab countries to just start hating Pakistan and love India and support it in every matter. Heck even Israel had been trying to establish relations with Pakistan and had clandestine intelligence contacts throughout the cold war era. This report is must read to understand the full nature of the relationship rather than just the rhetorical one.Beyond the Veil: Israel-Pakistan Relations

    And the religion factor is really a small matter when it comes to geopolitics. China is making major inroads in the ME with becoming major trade partners with most ME countries. It has even tried to start defence partnerships with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and digging into the oil industry in Iraq. We had a huge leg up and now China is catching up fast. Simmilarly lets compare theKosovo independance issue of a muslim majority state from Serbia. While the west alonwith US and EU are vehemently for its recognition, Russia and China are against it and are supporting Serbia. The result is that less than quarter of the arableague or the OIC have diplomatic relations with Kosovo. The only countries that do are strong allies of the US, Turkey and US.

    With the recent estimates of Indian chamber of commerce pegging Indo-Arab trade to be around 150B$ annual, this will be a crucial bloc for the future of India. And the important thing is that the Arab countries realise the mutually beneficial aspect of the relationship as well. And the better India performs in terms of economy, removing poverty and inequality among its people and strengthning of its defence forces, the btter it will be able to influence its neighbours.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2010
  15. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    From my yearly experience dealing with people from south asia I've found that people from that region like to exaggerate a lot. Today it is China that has a huge leg up in that region, from Iraq to Iran to elsewhere its chinese oil companies that have secured deal after deal. Just having lots of labourers working in Dubai does not amount to a 'huge leg up'.

    And to the guy who thinks India will be able to finish pakistan before the world reacts, you better realize that even though US has 100 times more the weapon delivery power than India has, it took her months of relentless aerial pounding to subdue Iraq. Any war where India attacks and Pakistan defends, will be more or less a war between 2 equal. More importantly US will more than likely side with Pakistan because it is not in US's interest that a big regional power annexes another sovereign state. See Saddam's Kuwait adventure.

    Also the reaction from the muslim world will be devastating. Oil supply to India will be cut off completely. And modern western fighter jets like EF2000 or F15/16 from the Egypt, Saudi, Kuwait, UAE airforces could all amass in Pakistan and give IAF more than it can chew, and fanatic volunteers from countries as far as Indonesia, Malaysia or even Nigeria could be knocking on India's door. Then the nearly 200 million muslims inside India could also explode (all muslims have the potential to go beserk) and size power from inside. China, on the other hand, will for sure stay on the side line and enjoy a islam-vs-hindu spectacle.

    I always predict that in this age of islam awakening, India, which once was ruled by muslims, will be among the first to fall victim to the green take-over.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2010
  16. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Well Mr Tony we south Asians are smart people and we know how to express ourself. We are not dumba** like you people.
    and our action speak louder than our words. we did it twice and even mighty USA was not able to intervene . Do you think all other regional players will have will power to intervene into something like this ? Even china kept away in 1972 despite USA full support . And most importantly where was china in 1972 and where it will be when war between India and Pakistan breaks out ? I guess looking for its lost BALLS .
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2010
  17. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    I never said you guys are not intelligent (even though the IQ test says otherwise, which I don't agree with anyway), it's just some of you people like to exaggerate, cultural trait I guess. Remember following an Indian prime minister's visit to Malaysia, one indian news paper wrote that it was a sign that the region was desperate looking for leadership from India, really???

    As I said above China is unlikely to get involved in any future india-pakistan war because south asia is hardly a region of critical importance to us. China didn't get involved in 1972 for the same reason, another reason of course was that China herself was deeply-emboiled in the cultural revolution.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2010
  18. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    My analysis above depicts a doomsday scenario, won't happen. India is not stupid enough to initiate attack on a islam country, and pakistan's generals are of course more focused on fighting the militants.

    However, radical islam elements will infiltrate india like viruses, and in time cause havoc on the sub-continent.
     
  19. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    I always said that you guys are very very intelligent though IQ test will say otherwise. You guys are so good at reverse engineering , stealing technologies from others , if you donot have guts to fight directly creating a proxy , making fake drugs and labelling as made in India, playing dirty geopolitics . Obviously these things need brain (though of a diffrent kind). But I salute your intelligence and bravery as well. :emot112:
    Regarding your lack of interest to politics in South Asia . who is biggest supplier of arms and sensitive technologies to Pakistan?
    their nukes technology, missile technology has China written all over it .

    Stop acting like an Ostrich and accept the fact .
     
  20. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Now you are talking some sense . surprised to hear form an East Asian.
     
  21. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    Wrong! the biggest supplier of weapons to Pakistan, it's the US. And despite all the fuss about China supplying M-9/11 missiles to Pakistan, Pakistan's most capable, reliable & likely delivery vehicle for its nuclear arsenal is F-16, again made in the US.

    China did supply some nuke technology to Pakistan, but so did whole bunch western countries, chief among them of course America again.
     

Share This Page