|
The Human Rights Violators Club Gets Closer
By Omer bin Abdullah
21/08/2001
The Indian "romance" with socialist Arab states served India's interests alone as Egypt's Gamal Abdel Nasser and his fellow travelers were hoodwinked into believing that India was genuine in its intentions, thus allowing them to join with the Soviet Union in supporting the Indian occupation of Kashmir. Ironically however, perhaps unbeknownst to the Arabs, New Delhi maintained close, but covert, ties with Tel Aviv.
The disappearance of the Soviet Union, and the emergence of the U.S. as the world's only superpower, signaled that New Delhi could come out of the closet and declare its love for Tel Aviv - its fellow Islamophobe.
Since then, India's policy on the Middle East has seen a shift in focus away from Arab nations in favor of closer links with Tel Aviv. Indeed, the growth of strategic ties between the two nations is cause for grave concerns within the Arab world.
Throughout the current Intifada, and despite tremendous pressure from Arab states, New Delhi has maintained a position of neutrality, confining itself to urging both parties to show restraint and return to the negotiation table based on the Mitchell proposals. However, the Arabs found out about New Delhi's duplicity, realizing that India's automatic condemnations of Tel Aviv's violations were merely a façade designed to please the Soviets. In contrast, today, New Delhi's responses are posed in generalized terms respecting the sanctity of the "peace process". To add to the Palestinians' frustration, New Delhi has openly lauded Tel Aviv's "restraint".
Similarly, at the U.N., New Delhi and Tel Aviv are entering into a new era of cooperation. According to reports, New Delhi assured Tel Aviv during the millennium U.N. General Assembly session that it would lend its support to the Zionist entity in various international forums. A recent manifestation of the rising level of this understanding was Tel Aviv's restraint over the handling of the UNIFIL videotape issue, which involved bribery allegations made against Indian soldiers who caught the capture of Israeli troops in south Lebanon on film.
Instead, Israeli Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer told a visiting Indian delegation that Israel had no complaints against the Indians, that its qualms were strictly with the U.N., and that it was time to enhance and strengthen joint projects.
Since upgrading diplomatic ties in 1992, New Delhi and Tel Aviv have carried out sweeping reassessments of their long-term defense and security interests, and have built up extensive military collaboration involving arms sales, equipment upgrades, the transfer of technology and joint weapons development programs. The latest multi-billion dollar defense agreements are seen as another watershed in the Indo-Israeli strategic partnership.
The authoritative, London-based Jane's Intelligence Digest says, "In the last decade the two countries [India and Israel] have built up extensive military collaboration, involving arms sales, equipment upgrades, the transfer of technology and joint weapons development programs. The latest multi-billion dollar defense agreements are seen as another watershed in the Indo-Israeli strategic partnership" (Closer Ties for India and Israel,
JID, August 7, 2001).
The axis is also adding a financial face. In August, Tel Aviv raised $225 million from contributing foreign banks, among which were Indian banks and participating banks from Germany, France, Holland, the U.S., Switzerland, Japan, England, Austria, Taiwan, and Israel.
Security cooperation spans to other strategic areas as well; especially in the intelligence arena where the Shin Bet is now understood to be heavily involved in helping New Delhi combat the freedom movement in Indian-occupied Kashmir - which lies at the core of the conflict with Pakistan. According to reports, Tel Aviv has several teams in Kashmir training Indian counter-insurgency forces to fight freedom fighters in the Indian-controlled sector of the disputed territory.
Tel Aviv believes that in the world of diplomacy, timing is everything, and that now is a good time for a vigorous, but quiet, build-up of defense ties with India. In addition, the U.S., which for years supported Pakistan, has improved relations with New Delhi as well.
Tel Aviv's involvement in Kashmir is understandable, and the support being given to New Delhi inundates the Zionist lobby in Washington D.C. as well. Shin Bet's involvement in Kashmir also fits into Tel Aviv's increasing focus on events in Central Asia - which goes as far as Indonesia (the world's most populous Muslim state) in attempts to counteract the "Islamic revival" it perceives as a major threat.
Shimon Peres, Israel's foreign minister, publicly stated during a visit to New Delhi in January 2001 that Tel Aviv was prepared to cooperate with India to fight "terrorism" - the euphemism popular with anti-Muslim forces describing "Islamic revivalism". However, way before this public stance, Tel Aviv's counter- terrorism team, including military intelligence specialists and senior police commanders, had visited Indian-occupied Kashmir - and other regions of the country grappling with anti-government elements - in order to assess India's security needs.
The Tel Aviv-New Delhi axis fits in snugly with George W. Bush's security and foreign policy shift towards Asia, as there is increasing evidence that the Pentagon is preparing for a new cold war, with China as the new enemy. The policy shift that began under former president Bill Clinton ends decades of virtual neutrality in the ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan. The new strategy - that shares a bipartisan view in Washington - relies on courting India to help contain China.
Democrats have traditionally leaned toward India, and Republicans toward Pakistan. However, with Bush, the tilt towards India continues - apparently there is a mutual Democratic and Republican fear of China.
Bush, who hurtles toward building a cold war with China - to the applause of arms makers - needs to approach with caution; especially when India is ruled by a Hindu fundamentalist coalition whose "greater India" - like Israel - is borderless. To date, the U.S. is being used to flex allies such as Britain, or even France, over the issue.
It is not without significance that when Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee decided to sneak into the nuclear club, he did it with a bang, quickly setting off five nuclear blasts. The Indians say the devices were meant to deter China, not Pakistan, but decidedly, it was calculated to inform the world, most especially Pakistan, that India has arrived and must be counted. This message was clearly stated to the then Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott when he failed to push the nuclear genie back into the bottle as the Americans wanted. Instead, he became aware of India's deep-seated confidence and patience.
Both the Clinton and Bush administrations realize that in a transformed international order, India's assets and resources have become more relevant to a wide range of American interests than they have been for the past 50 years, especially in keeping Islam away from the resource rich former Soviet states.
On July 30th, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held talks in Australia aimed at possibly merging U.S. allies Japan, South Korea, and Australia into a new alliance. The only object of this alliance is China.
However, India, which considers itself a superpower - albeit a regional one, would like to complete the arc and contain China and protect America's allies.
The U.S. made such an intent public on April 9th, when then U.S. ambassador to India, Richard Celeste, preceded Clinton's visit to India by announcing that Washington supported New Delhi's bid for a permanent seat on the United States Security Council. "The U.S. has to be prepared and will be prepared to give India serious consideration for the permanent membership of the Security Council," he said.
Considering U.S. power on the Council, procedural matters will become irrelevant if the U.S. wants India to enter the Council, especially when each of the five permanent members are Islamophobic in their own right.
The Washington Post quoted U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage as stating that efforts to lift U.S. sanctions on India will move forward once Congress returns from its August recess. The newspaper says lifting U.S. sanctions would clear the way for greater military planning, joint operations, and the eventual sharing of weapons technology with India.
In this instance, U.S, interest is guided by India's huge foreign reserves, which can be channeled towards American defense contractors once the ban on military sales and the transfer of weapons technology to India is lifted. This scenario is already on track; the U.S. has already waived the sanctions to allow Indian officers to receive U.S. training as a way of maintaining relations between the two militaries, the official added. This year, the U.S. plans to spend $500,000 to bring Indians to the U.S. for military education and training - buzzwords for familiarization with American military technology.
During an April visit to Washington, Indian foreign and defense minister, Jaswant Singh, was given an unscheduled 45-minute audience with Bush for a discussion on missile defense. At the Pentagon, Rumsfeld welcomed Singh with a full military honor guard. India was later added to the number of allies and friends and was briefed in May by senior U.S. officials about the administration's thinking on missile defense, thus dispatching Armitage to New Delhi. The relationship becomes more meaningful when Bush rescinded on the insistence that India sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
Considering the U.S. insistence that an Indo-American alliance is not China-centric, this expanded alliance of Islamophobes presents new challenges to Muslim countries, which have yet to properly transform the OIC into a working alliance.
|
