rediff.com
Skip to content


Should Krishna go ahead with Israel visit?

There is much symbolism, without doubt, attached to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s decision that  India may begin its diplomatic calendar for 2012 with a historic visit by the External Affairs Minister S.M.Krishna to israel. The fact is that diplomatic calendar is set with care and circumspection by all serious countries and MS’s aides can’t claim this visit to be ‘routine’. 

I say this, because a foreign-minister level visit is never ‘routine’; it is a landmark. It will be after a gap of a decade that a visit at the level of EAM to Israel is being undertaken. PM’s aides should have introspected why such a 10-year gap was allowed in the first instance in the India-Isreal intercourse at the political level. More pertinently, why punctuate that gap next week? Why such timing? What has changed? 
Israel of course will be delighted. In its strong demarche to the United States to punish countries that trade in oil with Iran, Israel has reportedly pleaded for an exemption for India, which depends heavily on Iran’s ‘sweet oil’ for making its fertiliser. Israel also reportedly made an offer to India to sell LNG to India in the fulness of time when the massive natural gas reserves in the eastern Mediterranean bordering the Levant are finally tapped — perhaps, Indian corporate houses can also invest in Israel’s LNG venture. 
Krishna can indeed thank the Israelis for all this generosity — on behalf of the country. But it can be conveyed to the Israeli ambassador in Delhi. The incomprehensible thing about the timing of Krishna’s visit is that 2012 is the year that israel might choose to have a military conflict with Iran. The well-known investigative reporter Gareth Porter wrote an insightful report just this week that he sees an israeli attack on Iran in the first half of 2012. 
Of course, happily, the Uttar Pradesh state assembly elections may be over by the time Israel attacks Iran and Congress Party may not have to worry anymore about the so-called Muslim opinion in India. But that isn’t the point. What about the big message India is going to convey to the Middle East and the international community? Someone should bring Porter’s report to Krishna’s attention. 
Maybe, Krishna could have a last word with PM whether he should carry the stigma of undertaking this ‘historic’ visit. In all probability, PM who juggles many balls in the air, including American balls, might insist that his top diplomat should undertake this visit to israel. But it shouldn’t turn out to be that Krishna who is an old Congress leader didn’t try. 
At the very least, before emplaining for Israel on Monday, Krishna should insist on obtaining a categorical undertaking from Israel that it will not violate international law and the UN Charter and undertake aggression against a country with which India claims ‘civilisational ties’, after all. 
Too much blood has been spilt in the Muslim Middle East since 2003. India shouldn’t be seen wading into this river of blood, leave alone be seen with with the perpetrators of this horrendous happening in human history. The heart of the matter is that for ensuring ‘Israel’s security’, US massacred over a million Iraqis. A war with Iran is being contemplated for the very same purpose — ‘Israel’s security’. Gareth Porter’s report is here

Posted in Diplomacy.

Tagged with , , .


6 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. jaggu says

    Iran should be dealt with firmly. If they are having nukes i is not easy for rest of the world…

  2. navi_reyd says

    AR,
    The Jews are as much brothers of the Indians as the Arabs are. India should tell the Arabs that there will never ever be any peace in the Middle East till the Palestinians (in the West Bank as well as in Gaza) first accept Israel’s right to exist, and stop all acts of terrorism against Israel. Till then, the poor Palestinian civilians have to suffer without prosperity because of the belligerence of their leaders and the militants among them.

  3. Abdur Rahman says

    India should not have relations with Israel until Israel agrees to suspend illegal settlement activity and gives Palestinians a just acceptable peace settlement. Until then, we should stand side by side with our Arab and Persian brothers.

  4. herb glatter says

    Mr. Ambassador: before you quote someone you should consider doing a simple Google search as i have done here:
    Israel urged US to attack Iran – not Iraq
    By Gareth Porter
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IH30Ak04.html

    as an experienced diplomat do you really believe that a few (relatively speaking) Jews “control” the United States of America?
    as far as Israel’s security – remember that Israel destroyed Osirak nuclear facility in Iraq 1981 and Syrian nuclear site September 2007. Today’s Jews are capable of fighting their own battles as they have proved since May 1948.

  5. krupakaran says

    krupakaran says

    Bhadrakumarji, is there not a value in krishna going over to telaviv and directly telling Beebi that attack on Iran is unacceptable in view of the following risks to India:
    (a)US naval vessels are vulnerable to shore-launched iranian missiles and US public will not accept loss of life in a war that has not got their mandate. Can lead to uncontrolled escalation including attack on nuclear facilities in Iran
    (b) In case there is any radiation spewing out of Iran following military attack, the wind direction is from east to west and gujarat and rajasthan are vulnerable. We are a poor people mostly living in the open or on pavements and who can protect us?
    (c) Quiet diplomacy ius always there and can be very direct. I understand that even Brajesh Mishra had told condoleeca rice ten years back that she can say what she wants, but saddam hussain was a fairly secular leader in an area where hardly anyone was.
    (d)Navi Reyd should know that hamas and hizbollah have every right under article 51 of UN charter to defend themselves and Israel is cheeky in calling them terrorists.(Incidentally, Israel has no right of self-defence as it is an aggressor)
    (e) If war breaks out when there is no case against Iran, and there are horrendous consequences for india, we must hold Israel/US/West solely responsible

  6. navi_reyd says

    Why should India care for a dishonest irresponsible theocracy that supports and supplies arms to terrorists such as Hamas, Hezbollah, etc., and secretly trying to develop an atom bomb? Israel, on the other hand, is a trusted and dependable friend.of India.

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2014 Rediff.com India Limited. All rights Reserved.  
Terms of Use  |   Disclaimer  |   Feedback  |   Advertise with us