Israel and India join forces

[Robb]

Israel and India join forces (Asia Times)

NEW DELHI - The first visit by an Israeli premier to India this week, 10 years after the establishment of full diplomatic relations in 1992 by then prime minister Narshimah Rao overruling his own Congress Party, can aptly be described as recognition of the growing convergence of Indian and Israeli interests. That the visit coincides with the second anniversary of September 11 may perhaps be a coincidence; its significance nonetheless in the wake of the ever-increasing footprints of transnational terrorism and fundamentalism cannot be overlooked.

(snip)

... it is also an acknowledgement of the important part played by Israel in assisting India at critical junctures, by providing weapons, ammunition and sharing of intelligence, even in the face of strong international pressure.

(more)

-----

See also UPI's Why India and Israel joined forces (opinion piece), and Sharon Arrives in India Today, which outlines some of the specifics of sales to India of the PHALCON and ARROW systems.

[ixion]

1. it is sad to see India flirting with the dark side

one can only hope they will see the light again soon. Ghandi would be very disappointed.

[IndianaGreen]

2. India has been fighting islamic extremists in Kashmir

and it has been attacked by terrorists in Dehli itself. This is a relationship that benefits India and Israel, I believe there is a $2B deal in the making in military assistance.

[donsu]

5. agree, India will get burnt doing business with

the Sharon arm of the bloody hands bushgang. but that's ok cause the Indian fundamentalists will get richer. (sarcasm)

[dolstein]

11. Israel's the "dark side"? What does that make Saudi Arabia?

After all, at least Israel's a Democracy, and women enjoy equal rights. And most, if not all, of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, and Saudi charities have helped fund Al Quaeda.

I think the Irsael bashers around here need to get a little perspective.

[varun]

13. exactly

no one talks about the human rights records of the "oppressed" palestinians, Pakistanis or the Saudis.

Racism, Homophobia nad Sexism rule these countries. But they are the "oppressed"...so everything is the fault of the "oppressor"!

:eyes:

[DemVet]

19. I agree

nt

[fujiyama]

25. Another thing many fail to note...

is that we are giving Pakistan $3B dollars in aid, much of this going toward its military. Many complain of American weapons used in the WB and Gaza by Israel, but there are just as great if not greater HR abuses committed by other nations, many of them in the Arab and Islamic world. Those on the left should not hav a double standard when it comes to HR abuses.

Whatever differences I have with Israeli policy toward the Palestinians, I think the partnership between Israel and India makes perfect sense. I think it's a pragmatic shift in Indian policy. While obviously they can't just say "f-off" to the Arab world, I think there is some realization that the Arab world has not helped India a single bit on the issue of Kashmir. For all their faults (and sure there are plenty), India and Israel remain democratic. Plus, there is a lot of interest in Israel on India and many tourists visit it each year. So I definetely see a lot of growth for this friendship -- with military ties, cultural exchanges, and trade -- and I don't think it should be seen as anti Islamic. It just happens to be the case that both countries face the threat of terrorism. Unfortunately, the threat of terror and the flames of fear fanned by opportunistic politicians in both nations have caused a rightward stance in both countries. The hope remains that both sides can solve their respective disputes in a peaceful manner.

[Resistance]

26. What you fail to note

is that most on the left do not have the double standard which you seem to be complaining about, regarding HR abuses. In fact, the further you move away from the left towards the right is where you find the real double standards. You know, such as demanding that Palestinian militants end the attacks on civilians, yet turning and supporting Israeli attacks on civilians. That is one example. Another example is calling for an end to the American Occupation in Iraq, yet supporting and making excuses for the Israeli Occupation in Palestine. I believe that the true leftist does call on an end to all HR abuses, regardless of racial, religious, or ethnic allegiance or favoritism.

If Pakistan is bolstering a military which is committing HR abuses, and the US supports it, you're damn right that this deserves serious questioning and criticism. Same goes for Israel, though - and I have to wonder - are you sure that is where you want to go?

[The Magistrate]

27. There Is No 'If' About Pakistan And Human Rights Abuses, Mr. Resistance

In fact, Sir, most on the left are just as most on the right are, making exceptions for their favorites, and denouncing their pet whipping boys. these are human failings, independent of the political spectrum.

[fujiyama]

31. Actually

I would prefer NOT to give any country $3B in military aid. That's what we're doing with both Israel and Pakistan. Except I hear a lot of complaining about the fact we give the Israelis this amount of aid, but there is little if anything said about Pakistan recieving the same amount, with a much worse record in terms of HR and sponsoring terror.

As for Pakistan and HR abuses there is no question. The same goes with SA, Indonesia, Sudan, and many other nations in te Arab/ Islamic world. It's definetely true that many conservatives are no better with regard to any consistancy on HR. However those on the left can do a better job themselves.

[Resistance]

15. It's Israeli terrorism against the Palestinians

that is the problem.

If you engage in terror against a civilian population with the support of the United States, like Israel continues to do, you just might end up hearing progressives "bash" little Israel. If Israel doesn't want all these pro-peace leftists "bashing" it, then it should STOP the aggression and ethnic cleansing against Palestinians!

[dolstein]

18. Israeli targets Palestinian terrorists; Palestinians target civilians

Now unless you are prepared to say that ordinary Israeli citizens are by definition terrorists due to their association with an illegimiate government, I fail to see the moral equivalency between the two. Palestian terrorists specifically target the civilian population of Israel. The Palestinian Authority has consistently elected to appease rather than dismantle these terrorist groups. Israel has a right to defend itself, no less so than when the U.S. sent troops into Afghanistan in response to 9/11. And it has done so by targeting the leaders of these terrorist groups. Not surprisingly, these terrorists have not chosen to segregate themselves from the rest of the Palestinian population, so some collateral damage is unavailable. But that's a far cry from what the Palestinians are doing.

[Resistance]

20. quit making excuses for murder of innocents by Israel

[dolstein]

21. Quit making excuses for murder of innocents by Palestinian terrorists

Sorry, but I'd be more willing to take your arguments seriously if you were to acknowledge that Palestinian terrorists have been systematically targeting Israeli "innocents" for years.

The fact of the matter is that the Israelis aren't TARGETING innocents. Sadly, Palestinians terrorists do not turn themselves in to avoid exposing their fellow Palestinians to the risk of collateral damage. I suppose this shouldn't come as any surprise -- after all, they don't value the lives of innocent Israelis, why should they value the lives of innocent Palestinians?

The Israelis always face a difficult decision when it comes to retaliating against Palestinian terrorist attacks against innocent Israelis civilians. Any military response carries the risk of harm to innocent Palestinians. That's clearly not the aim of Israelis (unlike the Paltestinians, who deliberately set out to murder Israeli innocents), but it's frequently the unavoidable result. But that has always been the case in warfare. Did the risk of harm to innocent Germans stop us from bombing Germany? Nope. Did the risk of harm to innocent Japanese stop us from bombing Japan. Hell no. I don't see how anyone can expect the Israeli's to permit their own destruction in order to protect the lives of Palestinians. The first priority of the Israeli government has to be to protect the lives of its own citizens. And since the Palestinian Authority refuses to dismantle Hamas and other terrorist groups residing in the Paletinian territory, it is up to Israel to do the job.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Magistrate]

23. Well Said, Mr. Dolstein

You should look in down to the cellars sometime; it can be quite amusing in its way. Such ingenuity is used to avoid looking at the clear fact that the regular mode of operation of Hamas, etc., constitutes crimes of war, while still somehow hoping to preserve the ability to accuse the other side of war crimes. It is precisely the sort of thing that has convinced large portions of the people of our country that leftists are rather otherwordly when it comes to questions of foreign affairs and war and peace.

[rini]

37. well said

[Gimel]

42. At present

the Israeli strategy seems to be tightening the noose around the neck of Hamas and other terrorist groups. There was a year and a half ago a noose of terror around the neck of Israel.

At present, Abbas has lost ability to progress, and a new PM is appointed. So lets see if a deal can be made about stopping terror and both peoples living in peace. It could be a new opportunity, or it could be a repetition of the same old errors.

Palestinians are feeling the heat. Of course it affects the lives of the civilians. While Israelis are rather stoic, terror has made a deep mark on Israeli society. It the Palestinians want assassinated killings stopped, like Abu Ala (Qureia) is saying, then they have to behave more responsibly and act against Hamas. Israel won't bring about peace without a bit of force on the right pressure point.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mmm]

33. You are correct, Mr. Resistance

That is the progressive view, and I agree.

[The Magistrate]

41. No, Sir, It Is Not The Progressive View

It is a view held by some of more radical left opinions, and in the main a foolish and futile one.

[Violet_Crumble]

46. Uh, yes it is...

There's nothing foolish or futile in pointing out that Israel has and is engaged in ethnic cleansing and agression against the Palestinians. Also, it's a fact that Israel has terrorised the Palestinian population with the support of the US. Where's the foolishness or futility in any of that? It's not a view held solely by the radical left. Maybe the radical left in the US is different than here, where what I just pointed out is a belief shared by many of us garden variety, run of the mill leftists who trot out and vote Labor every election? What's foolish and futile is to claim that Hamas and groups like that are committing war crimes while ignoring or denying the fact that Israel is also committing war crimes and has been guilty of ignoring UN conventions and resolutions while it does so...

Violet...

[The Magistrate]

54. The Formula 'Israeli Terrorism", Ma'am

Is, in the United States at least, rather the property of the most radical only. It is not held by anything like all persons of left and progressive views that this is the sole problem in the matter, or even that it is an accurate description of the situation, and it certainly does not the embody the view of the great mass of voters who mark ballots for Democratic Party candidates. Indeed, it is a formulation that angers many of the latter, and operates more to depress Democratic Party totals than otherwise. In the organization of demonstrations against the war in Iraq, there were some serious splits introduced by the insistence of some on including such rhetoric routinely from the speaker's platform, and on the banners. Many would not willingly associate themselves with it, who would otherwise have joined the crowds, or contributed in some other manner.

[Darranar]

55. That's most certainly true...

sadly enough, in my opinion.

[BushHasGotToGo]

29. The anti-semitism here is sickening

Israel has a right to exist.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[drdon326]

40. Anti-semitism ??? Here ??

I find that hard to believe.

no it MUST be anti-zionism.

[Forkboy]

51. lol

someone who seems to hate palestinians bitching about someone who seems to hate Israelis.

[Darranar]

45. Right...

Now where is it that you find anti-Americanism?

Is it because most members of the forum are opposed to the Iraq war?

Is it because most members of the forum fail to excuse American foreign policy mistakes?

Is it because members of this forum speak out against American foreign policy?

Is it because members of this forum lack the traditional American arrogance?

[rini]

47. anti-Americanism

I find it in a posting that rejoiced at 9/11. I actually copied it and posted it on this forum in another thread. I find it on the constant insinuations that anthing any American President repub or democrat has done was wrong and venal. There is a tone that is anti-American and as I said before G-d knows we have made mistakes, but what country or people haven't. Except of course the "beloved terrorists" who are always in the right. I

[Darranar]

48. Uh...

no thread like that ever existed. Prove it.

There have been no inisnuations that every action an American president has done has been wrong and venal. "Many" is not "all."

"Beloved terrorists?" Give me a break.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

3. With 14% of India's population being Muslim, I'm surprised that they...

...would have any dealings with Israel.

Additionally, Iran and India have developed a relationship as can be seen in the link below:

<http://www.iht.com/articles/85731.html>

Interesting passage:

"On the economic side, the two countries need each other. Iran has the world's second largest natural gas reserves. India is one of the world's largest gas importers and values Iran's strategic location as a gateway to Middle East and Central Asian energy suppliers.

On the military side, both fear that Islamic fundamentalists might seize Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. India will get access to Iranian military bases in the event of war with Pakistan. Iran will get access to advanced Indian military technology."

[Muddleoftheroad]

6. India is a Hindu country at odds with a Muslim nation

It makes perfect sense, minority groups notwithstanding.

[varun]

8. if India is a "Hindu" country

then, USA is a Christian nation. with more than 17% of the nation belonging to non-Hindu religions, and with a secular constitution, India is as much 9if not more) secular than most "Western" nations.

[Muddleoftheroad]

10. Still

It IS a majority Hindu nation at odds with a Muslim nation. Israel is a majority Jewish nation at odds with numerous Muslim nations. It makes sense that they work together.

[Zhade]

32. FYI

India used to be a lot more than just 17% Muslim. However, the constant conflict between Hindu and Muslim hardliners led to Jinna helping create Pakistan in 1947, which is why the number of Muslims in India is a lot lower than it once was.

[varun]

36. FYI

United India (before partition) had approximately 30% Muslims. After partition, its muslim population was reduced to 10%. Now (after 56 years), the muslim population has increased to 14%

Pakistan after partition had a minority (Hindu, Christian, etc.) population of about 12%. Now, it has been reduced to 3%

Draw your own conclusions.

[noonwitch]

4. India is making real progress and emerging as a leader in Asia

I think it's good for us if Israel has some allies other than the US/UK.
My dad took part in a Rotary business exchange in the late 70s with India. He went there for 6 weeks and we later took in an indian businessman for a couple of weeks. It was really an interesting experience. Sid, they guy who stayed with us, was a fun guy to have around. He was young, engaged to a pretty girl who he was totally in love with, and the whole program was founded to help westernize India. I don't know how far they've come on women's rights in practice, though. His was an arranged marriage, but both families allowed them to back away if they didn't like each other. My dad stayed with a family that ate as a family, and the daughters were pretty western. Other families he stayed with were a whole different story.

[varun]

7. "Westernization"

why should someone "Westernize" India?

India has a long tradition of culture and history (both good and bad like any other nation). What good will westernization do? Why cant we accept another country as they are (unless they are at war with us)?

I think its a worthwhile endeavor to help the poor in India, and help them in Education, and Health...but I dont believe in changing another person (nation's) culture. It can give rise to more ill will, and we dont need anymore.

[robcon]

14. Not really, varun

Varun wrote: "I don't believe in changing another person (nation's) culture. It can give rise to more ill will, and we dont need anymore."

I think your post misses the very obvious fact that every nation's culture is in rapid change right now, including the U.S. Changing culture - new ideas mixed with older ones - is the mark of the late 20th/early 21st century. Arguing against cultural change is spitting into the wind.

[varun]

17. I think you missed my point

What I was saying was that each country should be free to change its culture as it sees fit, instead of some other country (or people) meddling into its affairs.

For example, Western nations would like to see Saudi Arabia give up the "Purdah or the Veil". In my opinion, this change should come from within the saudi society, and not from outside. All the outsiders should do is to freely disseminate ideas (and urge the Saudi society to open up to new ideas), but not force those ideas on Saudi Arabia.

[sujan]

34. love this quote

'Western civilization would be a good idea' - MK Gandhi

[varun]

9. India also has friendly relations with Paletine and many other Arab nation

and just because Sharon is visiting India, does not mean that they will end their historical and cultural relations with other muslim and non muslim countries in Asia.

We live in a multi-polar world, and the friend of an enemy is no longer an enemy. USA is Pakistan's (India's "Enemy") ally. Does that make USA India's enemy?

[drool_n_yank]

12. all is going according to plan .

Obvious choice since most of the population speaks english , and Murdochs Star is gaining ground and getting things in place plant the final seeds .

[amagusta]

16. Is Indian culture basically conservative?

Is it just my perception, or is it true that India produces an inordinant number of political conservatives? Caste system? How would you measure such a tendency as a sociologist?

[fujiyama]

24. I'm not so sure

if a majority of Indians are conservative, but many are in some ways.

It is true that caste divisions are prevelant in India but in many ways these are breaking down. Several years ago one of the PMs of India was from one of the lower castes. Still caste does play a part in society. In many parts it plays a part in whom you marry for example. Though, as might be expected there are more problems in rural areas than urban areas.

There is one thing that is definitely true and that is that Indians have a pretty conservative work ethic. If we look at the statistics, Indians in the US are doing extremely well in the US. The work ethic really is about a strong emphasis on education. The same can be said of most Jews and Asians as well...

All that said, it's hard to place India on what we would call the traditional left right scale. Since corruption is so rampant, they hav a lot of crappy choices. The congress party was so corrupt, it eventually went to the Hindu Nationalist BJP, which did do some good economically, by allowing some liberalisation in terms of trade (free trade can have positive results)...

Still, if you were to try to look at voting habbits in the US, a larger number would be found to vote democratic than republican, for the simple fact that the GOP is viewed as the party of old white guys. The GOP's cold war era policies are also not seen in a very great light. Not only that but Clinton was able to impress many in India (and in the Indian- American) community when he visited India. It really was a great diplomatic gesture/trip. Too bad it came so late in his term.

I can see how one might believe most Indians are very conservative though, considering the Indian voices in American media are that of Dinesh D'Souza and Ramesh Ponneru (editor of National review).

[BushHasGotToGo]

28. India and Israel are good models of how to fight terror

unlike BushCo.

[fujiyama]

35. Sad thing is

we could join this alliance and be a major part in it. Unfortunately we're dolling out $3B in unaccountable aid (mostly so they can buy Chinese and American military equipment) to a tin pot dictator that is handing crumbs to us (as in a few AlQ ops) but has done nothing to stop the flow of terror into Kashmir.

Ah the good 'ole republican way of doing business...military aid for tin pot dictators...

[StandWatie]

39. Yeah, they are doing a bang up job

[StandWatie]

43. countries that seem to be good at fighting "terror"

umm, Norway, Canada, Namibia, New Zealand, New Guinea, Luxemborg...

They are so good at it there isn't any. Of course they don't stomp around the world pissing people off either so maybe there is a correlation :shrug:

[fujiyama]

50. Please explain

how the terror eminating from Pakistan is about India "stomping on people and pissing people off". It's amazing how many people on this board will justify and rationalize terrorism committed by Islamic terrorists. But this isn't the first post I've seen by you apologizing for Islamic terrorists or blaming the nations that have to deal with, while failing to condemn the terror itself or those that sponser it.

Are you seriously going to tell me that it is ALL India's fault that thousands of civilians are being killed by Islamic terrorists? Try to explain how it's India's fault that women in Kashmir are having acid thrown on them for not wearing a Burka.

It is one thing to have differences with the way these nations are puruing terror or over their human rights records, but to simply think of it as always as "freedom fighters" vs. occupiers is foolish and dangerous. Please tell me what India should do to solve the Kashmir problem. Do you think the people should "vote" on it? Funny, but try telling that to all the Kashmiri pundits terrorized and forced to leave in the ongoing proxy war sponsered by Pakistan. Tell Pakistan to have a "vote" in their part of Kashmir (a part that was stolen). Also tell the Chinese to have a vote in the small part they were "gifted" by the Pakistanis. The fact is, India has been more than willing to give that part up and draw borders at the Line of Control. If you think any more land will be ceded by India, your dreaming. An independent Kashmir state would lead to absolute chaos in the region. Why wouldn't the Pakistanis play politics with it? India, with all its faults (and I'm willing to admit there are many), is the ONLY multiethnic democracy in that region.

As for Israel, I frequently hear it being attacked for being a Jewish state. Now, as I see it, there are what, 5, 10, 20? different Islamic states in the world? Now I'm no fan of religious states. Theocracies are inherintly anti-democratic, and unfree (and yes that means a theocracratical Christian, Hindu, Jewish, or Muslim state). Yet, why is Israel the one nation specifically attacked? Why not the number of other states with much worse HR records? Also, Israel, while having a Jewish character to it, is still secular. It has non Jews represented in its parliment. Name an Arab country that has Jews in its parliment. Why is there no outcry over the fact that we gave Pakistan the same amount of aid as Israel this year? Pakistan itself was created out of nothing but absolute paranoida and distrust of Hindus. It's supposed to be called "land of the pure". Pure of what? Hindus, Christians, and any other religious minority?

Have you noticed that Luxembourg, Norway, New Zealand, and Canada aren't neighbored by fanatical terror sponsering states?

[dudeness]

52. new zealand has been a victim once

from an unexpected source..remember the "rainbow warrior" ?..sunk in auckland harbour ..the french secret service I do believe..

strange days..

[somapala]

44. My Enemies enemy is my friend

The BJP and Likud both represent the triumph of narrow religious nationalism over the more socialist roots of their respective countries. An alliance between the present governments of India and Israel is thus naturally seen as anti-Muslim. Such an alliance is likely to harm, rather than benefit peace among religions and thus peace between nations.

[rini]

49. can you

please clarify why two countries who face a common enemy and conference about the best course of action harm peace? Don't you think maybe, just maybe, the terrorists contribute more then their fair share to war?

[varun]

53. For these Jews, Mumbai is the chosen land

http://us.rediff.com/news/2003/sep/11spec.htm

Samuel Israel has never been to Israel.

He is 83 years old, calls himself a 'Bandra boy' and is one of the 2,200 Jews living in Mumbai.

"I don't go around saying 'I'm proud to be a Jew'," he says, "but being Jewish is my identity."

It is not very difficult to understand what the genial Israel is trying to explain. Actually, it comes out quite upfront in the first few minutes of the meeting.

He and his wife Sarah, both liberal Jews, do not follow rituals in their home. His daughter-in-law is a Punjabi and they have accepted cremation as a desired option for conducting last rites...