NaMo is set to change India's traditional stand on Israel-Palestine because it suffered from a fallacy that's no longer sustainable. For instance, how will India like if Tel Aviv were to give the same status to Kashmiri terrorists that New Delhi has been according to Palestinian terrorists funded by the UN and the EU? So MEA has been directed to fix a stand-alone bilateral visit by the Prime Minister to Israel and not to Palestine on the same trip. Surely, both NaMo and Netanyahu, who are like old separated brothers and who have the same temperament and world views, are going to have a good time to celebrate the occasion of a fundamental change in India's traditional foreign policy.
Earlier, External Affairs Ministers from both BJP and Congress have visited both Israel and Palestine on the same trip. This included Jaswant Singh in 2000, S M Krishna in 2012 and Sushma Swaraj in 2016 - all of them visited both Israel and Palestine. Even President Pranab Mukherjee, who visited Israel in October 2015 - in the first Presidential visit from India since 1992 - also visited both Israel and Palestine.
Despite growing technical, defense, agriculture, scientific, and industrial collaboration between the two ancient people of India and Judea, there has been growing to feel among the Israelis that the relationship isn't based on the principle of political reciprocity. While Tel Aviv has been consistently supporting India on almost all issues, New Delhi was seen playing footsie with Palestinian terrorists on the excuse of having a large domestic Muslim population.
Actually, if one looks at it objectively, India's Israel-Palestine policy has so far been marked by fallacy and carried a significant Jihadi signature that emboldened the hearts of Azadi gangs in Kashmir. Further, to most of the nationalist Muslims, the policy was an insult because it was based on the presumption that the loyalties of Indian Muslims rested not with their families and their homeland but with a distant land that was first stolen by Europeans and then by Arabs from the Jews.
(By M K Shukla and Rakesh Ranjan)
Readers' Choice
Rules for One, Relaxations for Others: HC Backs whistle-blower IAS officer Over Empanelment Anomaly
Succession race for Haryana Chief Secretary intensifies
PIL filed against GO granting promotion to seven IAS officers to CS grade
Kerala Govt revokes suspension of B Ashok & N Prasanth
G S Malik appointed as the new DGP of Gujarat
It was coming and it has come
By IndianMandarins - 2017-03-04 12:17:27
NaMo is set to change India's traditional stand on Israel-Palestine because it suffered from a fallacy that's no longer sustainable. For instance, how will India like if Tel Aviv were to give the same status to Kashmiri terrorists that New Delhi has been according to Palestinian terrorists funded by the UN and the EU? So MEA has been directed to fix a stand-alone bilateral visit by the Prime Minister to Israel and not to Palestine on the same trip. Surely, both NaMo and Netanyahu, who are like old separated brothers and who have the same temperament and world views, are going to have a good time to celebrate the occasion of a fundamental change in India's traditional foreign policy.
Earlier, External Affairs Ministers from both BJP and Congress have visited both Israel and Palestine on the same trip. This included Jaswant Singh in 2000, S M Krishna in 2012 and Sushma Swaraj in 2016 - all of them visited both Israel and Palestine. Even President Pranab Mukherjee, who visited Israel in October 2015 - in the first Presidential visit from India since 1992 - also visited both Israel and Palestine.
Despite growing technical, defense, agriculture, scientific, and industrial collaboration between the two ancient people of India and Judea, there has been growing to feel among the Israelis that the relationship isn't based on the principle of political reciprocity. While Tel Aviv has been consistently supporting India on almost all issues, New Delhi was seen playing footsie with Palestinian terrorists on the excuse of having a large domestic Muslim population.
Actually, if one looks at it objectively, India's Israel-Palestine policy has so far been marked by fallacy and carried a significant Jihadi signature that emboldened the hearts of Azadi gangs in Kashmir. Further, to most of the nationalist Muslims, the policy was an insult because it was based on the presumption that the loyalties of Indian Muslims rested not with their families and their homeland but with a distant land that was first stolen by Europeans and then by Arabs from the Jews.
(By M K Shukla and Rakesh Ranjan)
