09-13-2003, 06:05 AM
[url="http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=31461"]Ink barely dry on Israel story, Delhi calls Arab envoys for little edit[/url]
Questions from Arabs: Trade with us $10 bn (with Israel $1.2 bn), what about your diaspora, your sense of history? what about it ?
Jyoti Malhotra
New Delhi, September 12: The sense of disquiet in the Arab world over the official bond of brotherhood forged on the banks of the Yamuna between India and Israel this week brought all 18 Arab ambassadors accredited to New Delhi for a briefing to the MEA early this morning.
After more than an hour, there were more questions revealed than answers. But the frank conversation between Indian officials and their Arab counterparts is said to have led to much soul-searching not only about the new friendliness with Israel but also the growing silences between New Delhi and the Arab world.
As one Arab ambassador remarked, ââThe overwhelming reception that India gave Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon makes us ask ourselves, âWhat happened to 50 years of Indo-Arab relations?â Perhaps it was never built on strong enough foundations,ââ he added.
Interestingly, the afternoon was taken up by another briefing on the Israeli prime ministerâs visitâthis time with all the European ambassadors or their charge dâaffaires accredited to India.
Still, there was one interesting difference. While the Europeans had requested for a briefing on Israel, it was the MEA which took the lead to invite the Arab diplomats and reassure them about Indiaâs support for the Palestinian cause.
By way of explanation, the Indian side is said to have pointed to the joint statement which clearly refers to New Delhiâs decision to abide by UN Security Council resolutions 242, 338 and 1397, essentially calling for an end to Israelâs occupation of Palestineâs territories.
Moreover, New Delhi continued to take a dim view of Israelâs restrictions on Palestine president Yasser Arafat, including those on his movements outside Ramallah. The possibility of Arafatâs expulsion by Israel, the Indian side said, would definitely have a âânegative effectââ on the collapsing Middle East process.
Arab diplomats admitted they were also quite keen on getting a sense of Indiaâs position on ââterrorismââ and how it impacted on their region. New Delhi is believed to have told them that it did not believe that the fight against terrorism should be taken ââto the roots.ââ
And that this view was clearly different from the Israeli position, which had no qualms about ââtargeted assassinationsââ or ââcollateral damage,ââ where large numbers of innocent civilians were injured alongside the target the Israelis intended to damage.
The 45-minute conversation with the Europeans, in contrast, was hardly leavened with the same undercurrent of emotion. The European diplomats seemed equally interested in the details of the ââstrategic defenceââ relationship with Israel.
It may be recalled that in the wake of news reports about the sale of the Israeli âPhalconâ early warning system to New Delhi, Pakistan publicly protested, saying that the sale would forever ââalterââ the balance of power in the region. Subsequently, some European nations had also gone on record to agree with Pakistan.
But it was the earlier briefing that seemed to have captured the tones of grey in Indiaâs relationship with the Arab world. Such as, what did the ââmeagreââ $1.2 billion trade relationship between India and Israel really mean, when India and the Arab world had topped $10 billion? What about the enormous Indian diaspora (about 4 million people) in the Gulf, which sent the largest remittances home, amounting to nearly $5 billion annually? And crucially, what about the whopping $17-18 billion that India spent on buying crude oil from this region?
Often, the conversation meandered beyond the immediacy of the Sharon visit, incorporating the Arab viewpoint on Indiaâs omission from the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) when it had the second largest Muslim population in the world, on Pakistan, as well as on the divisions within the region on Israel.
There was no ââzero sum gameââ between India, Israel and the Arab world, the envoys were reassured, that India would continue to hold dear its traditional ties with them even as it went ahead and forged new ones with Tel Aviv.
ââThat explanation seems to have really hit home,ââ one Arab ambassador remarked, adding, ââThere clearly seems to be a delinking between Israel and the Arab world in Indiaâs mind. And no matter what happens in Palestine, Israel-India relations will continue to grow.ââ the point here is that India is not going to be more catholic than the Pope. In the past India was in the ridiculous situation where Egypt had an ambassador to Jerusalem but India did not
Questions from Arabs: Trade with us $10 bn (with Israel $1.2 bn), what about your diaspora, your sense of history? what about it ?
Jyoti Malhotra
New Delhi, September 12: The sense of disquiet in the Arab world over the official bond of brotherhood forged on the banks of the Yamuna between India and Israel this week brought all 18 Arab ambassadors accredited to New Delhi for a briefing to the MEA early this morning.
After more than an hour, there were more questions revealed than answers. But the frank conversation between Indian officials and their Arab counterparts is said to have led to much soul-searching not only about the new friendliness with Israel but also the growing silences between New Delhi and the Arab world.
As one Arab ambassador remarked, ââThe overwhelming reception that India gave Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon makes us ask ourselves, âWhat happened to 50 years of Indo-Arab relations?â Perhaps it was never built on strong enough foundations,ââ he added.
Interestingly, the afternoon was taken up by another briefing on the Israeli prime ministerâs visitâthis time with all the European ambassadors or their charge dâaffaires accredited to India.
Still, there was one interesting difference. While the Europeans had requested for a briefing on Israel, it was the MEA which took the lead to invite the Arab diplomats and reassure them about Indiaâs support for the Palestinian cause.
By way of explanation, the Indian side is said to have pointed to the joint statement which clearly refers to New Delhiâs decision to abide by UN Security Council resolutions 242, 338 and 1397, essentially calling for an end to Israelâs occupation of Palestineâs territories.
Moreover, New Delhi continued to take a dim view of Israelâs restrictions on Palestine president Yasser Arafat, including those on his movements outside Ramallah. The possibility of Arafatâs expulsion by Israel, the Indian side said, would definitely have a âânegative effectââ on the collapsing Middle East process.
Arab diplomats admitted they were also quite keen on getting a sense of Indiaâs position on ââterrorismââ and how it impacted on their region. New Delhi is believed to have told them that it did not believe that the fight against terrorism should be taken ââto the roots.ââ
And that this view was clearly different from the Israeli position, which had no qualms about ââtargeted assassinationsââ or ââcollateral damage,ââ where large numbers of innocent civilians were injured alongside the target the Israelis intended to damage.
The 45-minute conversation with the Europeans, in contrast, was hardly leavened with the same undercurrent of emotion. The European diplomats seemed equally interested in the details of the ââstrategic defenceââ relationship with Israel.
It may be recalled that in the wake of news reports about the sale of the Israeli âPhalconâ early warning system to New Delhi, Pakistan publicly protested, saying that the sale would forever ââalterââ the balance of power in the region. Subsequently, some European nations had also gone on record to agree with Pakistan.
But it was the earlier briefing that seemed to have captured the tones of grey in Indiaâs relationship with the Arab world. Such as, what did the ââmeagreââ $1.2 billion trade relationship between India and Israel really mean, when India and the Arab world had topped $10 billion? What about the enormous Indian diaspora (about 4 million people) in the Gulf, which sent the largest remittances home, amounting to nearly $5 billion annually? And crucially, what about the whopping $17-18 billion that India spent on buying crude oil from this region?
Often, the conversation meandered beyond the immediacy of the Sharon visit, incorporating the Arab viewpoint on Indiaâs omission from the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) when it had the second largest Muslim population in the world, on Pakistan, as well as on the divisions within the region on Israel.
There was no ââzero sum gameââ between India, Israel and the Arab world, the envoys were reassured, that India would continue to hold dear its traditional ties with them even as it went ahead and forged new ones with Tel Aviv.
ââThat explanation seems to have really hit home,ââ one Arab ambassador remarked, adding, ââThere clearly seems to be a delinking between Israel and the Arab world in Indiaâs mind. And no matter what happens in Palestine, Israel-India relations will continue to grow.ââ the point here is that India is not going to be more catholic than the Pope. In the past India was in the ridiculous situation where Egypt had an ambassador to Jerusalem but India did not