Page 1 of
2 India straddles Middle East
divide By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - Even as the Indian government
courts Israel, its soldiers - part of a United
Nations peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon -
are winning the hearts of Hezbollah and of the
Lebanese people.
Hezbollah spokesperson
Ali Fayyad praised India's peacekeeping in
southern Lebanon at a conference on "War,
Imperialism and Resistance" in New Delhi two weeks
ago. "The role of the Indian Army deployed as part
of UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon
is
very positive and it has no problem with the
people of Lebanon and Hezbollah," he said.
India, which has provided soldiers to the
United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)
for the past nine years, has about 850 soldiers
currently deployed in the eastern sector of the
13-mile buffer zone north of the Israeli border.
What makes Hezbollah's praise of the
Indian soldiers noteworthy is that it is otherwise
critical of UNIFIL, especially since the ceasefire
last year. Under UN Security Council Resolution
1701, which brought to an end Israel-Hezbollah
hostilities, UNIFIL was tasked with enforcing the
ceasefire in the buffer zone and preventing any
militia groups, including Hezbollah, carrying
weapons south of the Litani River.
Hezbollah leaders have criticized the UN
resolution as being biased in favor of Israel and
have accused UNIFIL of coming to southern Lebanon
- traditionally Hezbollah's stronghold - to
protect Israeli interests, not those of Lebanon.
Unlike the French and Spanish contingents
of UNIFIL, which have encountered some problems
with the local population, the Indian contingent
is reported to have built up a good rapport with
the people. The Indian contingent runs
multi-specialty medical clinics and provides
artificial limbs to victims of mines and cluster
bombs. It is teaching Lebanese youngsters yoga and
English. The humanitarian work that the Indian
soldiers provide is appreciated by the locals. And
by Hezbollah, too.
While India's role in
the peacekeeping force has been widely lauded, it
has not been without controversies. In 2000 for
instance Israel accused Indian soldiers of
collaborating in the abduction of three Israeli
soldiers by Hezbollah guerrillas. Israeli military
officials claimed that some Indian soldiers had
been aware of Hezbollah's preparations for the
abduction but had turned a blind eye.
The
allegations were not substantiated, and Israeli
officials subsequently told India quietly that
their allegations had to do with their objection
to UNIFIL's role, rather than to that of the
Indian soldiers. India had simply gotten caught in
the Israel-Hezbollah crossfire.
Fayyad's
public vote of confidence in India's peacekeeping
role in Lebanon came even as senior Israeli
officials were in Delhi for the third round of
dialogue on disarmament and non-proliferation and
the sixth meeting of an India-Israel joint working
group on terrorism.
A media report pointed
out that the Israelis would no doubt have been
annoyed with Fayyad's presence in India and the
decidedly anti-Israel views put forward by
participants at the conference. The Indian
government, it is said, made no effort to restrict
Fayyad's remarks as the event was a private one.
Besides, Hezbollah is not banned in India. This
tricky situation is typical of the difficult
balancing act that New Delhi has to do in the
Middle East.
For several decades, India's
foreign policy put the country on the side of the
Arabs in the Arab-Israeli conflict. It
consistently voted with the Arabs on the
Palestinian question. While Afro-Asian solidarity
on anti-colonialism determined India's foreign
policy in the early post-independence years, it
was its preoccupation with winning allies on the
Kashmir issue and neutralizing Pakistan's
influence in the Muslim world that shaped New
Delhi's policy toward Israel.
Besides, its
dependence on Persian Gulf oil and the remittances
of a large expatriate population in the Arab
countries pushed India to adopt a pro-Arab policy.
Although India recognized Israel in 1950,
full diplomatic relations were established only in
1992. In the intervening four decades, India's
policy toward Israel "ranged from unfriendly to
outright hostility", according to P R Kumaraswamy,
an expert on India-Israel relations at the
Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi.
However, India's equations in the Middle
East have changed dramatically over the past
decade. Its relations with Israel have warmed
considerably, especially in the aftermath of the
Indian nuclear tests when India came under
international sanctions. Not only did Israel not
condemn India's tests but it was willing to supply
India with military equipment.
Today,
India and Israel are working closely on
counterterrorism issues. They share intelligence
and undertake joint defense-related research.
Israel has emerged as India's second-largest
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
