International Law: Applicability and Real Politik in the Middle East

taqat,

It would be naive on my part not to accept that there was a pro-Israeli tilt in India`s foreign policy during BJP regime (NDA, if you will). Part of the problem stems from the jaundiced view of Islam vs rest that some Sanghis share with Likudians. Even during illegitimate invasion of Iraq, there were voices that supported Indians troops going to Iraq and doing the American dirty work on our erstwhile ally Saddam. Thank God, they voice were drowned. I don`t think Congress would have entertained Sharon in India.

Having said that, there are other Indians who don`t share fanatical world-view of SOME Sanghis (some in CAPS to bring out the fact that not all Sanghis think alike), yet want India to align more closely with Israel rather then Palestinians. Reasons are more related to getting of the moral high horse and introducing more pragmatism in foreign policy, the same pragmatism that makes India get cosy with US.

Trust me pal, we don`t need to learn tackling of terrorism from Israelis. Despite their overwhelimg superiority, they have not had a good record. As for AWACS, I don`t think that can change India`s foreign policy. We are getting the weapons, they are getting the money. Since we`ve guaranteed that we`ll not share the technology with Iranians or Chinese, US and Israel are OK with the deal.

I`ve not read Edward Said, but I know he was a liberal (euphemism for leftist). These people are adept at spreading canards, but I`d like to read `Orientalism` whenever I can get my hands on it. Never heard of Massad...another Christian Arab??

`` i cannot recall incidents of hindus under muslim rule being treated as third rate citizens`` Buddy, you are right!! We were just treated as second-rate citizens not thrid-rate. Jizyah was imposed, temples were razed to the ground, women were raped, men beheaded and you know all the other things I`ll add, so I`ll not bother.

I read a funny comment on The Friday Times by Fatima Raja
``There is Babur...his memoirs reveal a genuinely nice person...and his attitude towards the idols of India to which he objected not on religious but on aesthetic grounds. `` Give me a break!! If I write history of Mody saying that he removed lousy looking Muslims in beards on aesthetic grounds, would you chew on that?

After reading this, tell me why I shouldn`t support Sharon`s boys who remove stinking homes of Pales on aesthetic grounds :-)

I know fools when I spot them, these Israeli blokes are no better than their enemies across the separation fence. Whenever someone says they`ve God`s original software, I know he is spamming.

#35 by taqat-e-parvaaz

[but that doesnt change the fact that under the BJP india`s foreign policy toward the israeli-palestinian conflict saw a complete reversal.]

Just why should India be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause? And what difference can India`s support make? When Israel routinely defies the world`s lone superpower and its biggest supporter, what chance does India stand? India, under the BJP took a most pragmatic decision to engage Israel and reap the benefits of some of the technological advances that country had made. India owes it more to its own people than to the Palestinians. Pakistan maybe wedded to the cause of `oppressed` Muslim peoples everywhere (Palestinians, Chechens, Kashmiris, etc.), but just why should India do the same?

And in case you don`t know, just the other day India voted against Israel at the UN.

[india completely sold out in exchange for a lousy AWACS system based on 1980`s technology and limited help during the kargil ass-kicking.]

If the AWACS were as lousy as you say they are, why did Pakistan make such a huge fuss when India announced its decision to purchase the system? I`ll let you in on a secret. It maybe lousy, but it is better than anything Pakistan has or will have in the near future. And that is what matters. It has also gained tremendously from Israel`s anti-terrorism capabilities. Also, the hand-held thermal imager that India procured helped it drastically cut down casualties among the security forces and brought the terrorists to their knees. And these are only a few examples of how India has benefited.

[i cannot recall incidents of hindus under muslim rule being treated as third rate citizens, as having their homes demolished because muslims believe that the land was given to them by God....]

We all remember what happened to the Hindus in Pakistan post-1947, and what is still happening to them in Bangladesh. And if you still have the gall to say this, you are either not from this planet or an outright liar.

taqat,

The last post was getting too big...here is the remainder

``Crusades were wars thrust upon the muslims`` I never said Muslims invited Franks, ``chal do-do haath ho jaaye``. This was in response to Wajahat`s claim that Jerusalem was peaceful before European Jews came there.


``musharraf has repeated that he will not negotiate with israel until it finds a just solution, one based on 242 and 338 no doubt`` Brother, this one is straight from Paki book of diplomatic conduct. First, you decide as to what is a just and peaceful solution, and then thrust the responsibility of achieving this on the other party. Isn`t that what your general says, ``peace blah blah as per the wishes of Kasmiri people..blah blah..LoC not acceptable``. This is called negotiating with closed minds.

``i would recommend you separate fact from fiction before you decide to post`` if you could separate facts and fiction in my earlier posts on this board, I`ll happily eat crow. I respect people with better knowledge even if they are my worst enemies. My knowledge of religion is based on Ramayana, where Ram asks Laxman to get knowledge from Ravana, if you know what I mean.

``your detachment from historical truths shows your knowledge to be that of a high schooler`` I don`t like to get personal when discussion is serious. But yes, you got the high-school part right :-) I didn`t study History as part of curriculum after X, but I read a lot. As I said earlier, point me to mistakes and I`ll apologize, indulge in rhetoric, I`ll post a rebuttal.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Taqat e Parvez:

``i cannot recall incidents of hindus under muslim rule being treated as third rate citizens``

Maybe you need to read about Aurangzeb. Maybe you need to read about the Governer of Sirhind who had the 6 and 9 year old sons of Guru Gobind Singh walled alive because they would not accept Iislam. I could go on and on but that is not the point.

very well, rahul. but that doesnt change the fact that under the BJP india`s foreign policy toward the israeli-palestinian conflict saw a complete reversal. india completely sold out in exchange for a lousy AWACS system based on 1980`s technology and limited help during the kargil ass-kicking. pakistan has maintained that it is willing to consider a change in ties. musharraf has repeated that he will not negotiate with israel until it finds a just solution, one based on 242 and 338 no doubt. and yes, the only time that jews lived peacefully alongside muslims was under muslim rule, as in the case of islamic spain and later the ottoman turks. we all see now what happens when those roles are reversed.
moreover, your comparison of muslim rule in south asia and israeli occupation of palestine is disturbing. perhaps you should read more edward said and joseph massad. i cannot recall incidents of hindus under muslim rule being treated as third rate citizens, as having their homes demolished because muslims believe that the land was given to them by God, or being caged into their villages at night (yes, a palestinian town, is actually locked from the outside by israeli defence forces at night). and please dont forget that the Crusades were wars thrust upon the muslims, not wars of aggression. your detachment from historical truths shows your knowledge to be that of a high schooler, at best. i would recommend you separate fact from fiction before you decide to post.

#32 by echoboom

Man, are you Afghan or is that the notorious pan-Islamic/Ummah thingy? Jeez....just when will the Pakis wake up?

wajahat,

Palestine being a peaceful land before 20th century is another of those myths, blatant lies that are as divorced from reality as lies can be. How about Crusades, how about Saladin? Were these wars fought in South-Asia?

Jews lived in harmony with Arabs like Paki Hindus live in harmony with Muslims in today`s Pakistan...as if there are a plethora of options.

I agree that coming of Ashkenazi Zionist Jews from Europe was bad, but not worse than coming of assortment of Turks, Persians and Arabs in India. Their progeny divided the nation, took their pound of flesh and now preach against dividing nations on the basis of religion. If clock shouldn`t be turned back by 2 millennia, what makes you think it can be turned back by 5 decades? The Hindus swallowed the bitter pill of Islamic exclusivism. That you choose not to recognize Israel founded on the same notion of exclusive right to land of a religious community reeks of double standards.

``The displacement of Millions of Muslims was a ethnic cleanising excercise``, just replace Muslims with Hindus and change the area from middle-east to Pakistan...I bet you won’t like the sentence unless you want to say that ethnic cleansing is a bad thing only when it happens to Muslims.

The demographic reality is a joke, a reminder of the mob mentality that appears a panacea to all problems until you are on the wrong side of the mob.

Mukhlis has posted some figures about Israeli army/militia in `48. So, 600,000 settlers were able to field an army twice the size of armies of 60 million Arabs...doesn`t show the Arabs in a very good light.

``But I am somehow always surprised by the Inhumanity of our Indian Neighbours on the Paletine issue`` This is a huge insinuation. What makes you think we are insensitive...who gave Arafat our highest civilian award...who admits Palestinian students in our universities, professional institutes and colleges...who votes in favour of all resolutions against Israel? As for diplomatic relations, Jordan ruled by Hashemites who claim descent from your Prophet Mohammed has full relations with Israel, same with Egypt and Morocco. Even your dear General salivates at the prospect of friendly ties with Israel.

That was 1841, This is 2004

Excerpts:

From a sensational report by Mohan-Laal about Kabul circa 1841 , then from a report by Christina Lamb, Of the Globe & Mail..july, 2004.

The difference: In 1841 it was the British Baboons, in 2004 it is the U.S Pachyderm-asses.

British were crushed, destroyed and humiliated like no other nation in human history,
and Christina Lamb observes that US might meet meet the same fate.

The U.S has no clue with which nation it has taken Pungaa.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

A correction in my Post # 27.

The sentence:

Palestinians –both Muslims & Jews- have been fighting for their right to live on the land which has been theirs for thousands of years.

should read:

Arabs –both Muslims & Christians- have been fighting for their right to live on the land which has been theirs for thousands of years.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#2 by solitude

“This is an Islamic Militant struggle to kill jews and take over Jerusalem for Islam. To pretend that this is some struggle of ``Palestenians`` is an insult to intelligence. It might work with the gullible westerners but don`t insult us Muslims with this drivel!”

Well, there are some Islamic extremist elements now within the Palestinians like Hizbollah & Hamas, but by & large the Palestinian struggle has been secular. Palestinians –both Muslims & Jews- have been fighting for their right to live on the land which has been theirs for thousands of years.

#10 by kaurasach on July 20, 2004 8:07am PT
``In history people get displaced all the time. Jews had to migrate and slave under foreigners. If they want to use history as the source of validation, Jews inhabited the land 2000 years before muslims.``


#17 by nikki7777 on July 20, 2004 4:38pm PT
``#8......wajahat......The jews have been there as long as the palestinians have and all`s fair in love and war, just like the palestinians won it a while ago and threw all the jews out resulting in the proliferation of jews in europe and other lands.``


..the history of the Jewish Palestine ended effectively in 137 CE. Until the middle of the twentieth century, there had not been a Jewish majority in Palestine since that time over 1800 years ago. In a kind of international aberration one of the most significant events of the twentieth century, involving the destruction & dispersal of a settled, indigenous population, has been based on a folk memory that, however vital to the cultural identity of the Jewish people, cannot possibly have entitled them to colonize an inhabited land at the very time when the rest of the world was turning against colonialism. Traditions & beliefs may have lingered on, the yearning to ‘return’ to a spiritual homeland may have remained through the centuries, but the hard reality of more than 1800 years remains. It is inconceivable that in any other sphere of human existence an attempt might be made to turn back the clock almost two millennia. (1)

#10 by kaurasach on July 20, 2004 8:07am PT
``One thing one must concede is the will power and bravery of Israel. A rag tag army of refugees and persecuted has bloomed into an ideal and exemplary state in middle of hostile land and neighbors. Bravo!``

Yes, Israel is a perfect example of a very determined group of people having survived, while surrounded by a hostile (or shall I see erstwhile hostile, as most of its major Arab neighbors have been living in peace with Israel for quite some time now) populace. But just because the Arab countries that invaded Israel in 1948 were more in numbers (and I mean the countries being more in numbers, not the number of soldiers), the Israeli Army even at that time was not a rag tag entity.

“The Arab forces that entered Palestine at this point (i.e 15 May, 1948), comprised 6000 Jordanians, 9000 Iraqis, 5000 Egyptians, 1000 Syrians, 3000 Saudis, & some 3000 volunteers from other Arab countries. On the borders were a further 4000 Jordanians, 1000 Iraqis, 8000 Egyptians, 1500 Syrians, 1800 Lebanese & 3500 volunteers from other Arab countries. The Arab armed forces amounted to some 46000 in total.
The Israeli forces in Palestine comprised 17000 mobile attack troops, 1800 semi-mobile attack troops, 50000 regular defence troops, 12000 members of the Irgun & somewhere between 400 & 1800 members of the Stern Gang, constituting a total Israeli fighting force of some 97,800.” (1)

(1) Taken from the book ``The Palestine-Israeli Conflict`` by Dan Cohn-Sherbok & Dawoud El-Alami

Good piece. Looking forward to more!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts