Indo-Israel: News and Discussion

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Jan 2010 11:49

Dhiman wrote:
Sanku wrote: Its quite simple -- did the Jews have a right of return if they so chose or not? Every thing follows from there.'
Sir, what you are actually asking is whether Jews have the exclusive right to return to this area if they so please do to so. What you are ignoring here is: 1) Jewish interests were already represented in this region (just like Christian and Muslim interests) since there were Jews, Christian, and Muslims living in this area before large-scale migration of European Jews to the region. 2) the area is important for Christians and Muslims as well, so if Jews have the right to return to this area en-masse, so do Muslims and Christians - but we don't see that in practice do we?

Sir, one can't have the cake and eat it too at the same time.

No I am not asking for that and the Jews did not ask for exclusive rights when they first came, the issue started because the peaceful return of Jews was countered violently.

Also the statement that Jewish interests were represented is a LIE -- Jews were progressively chased out from a region which was their original home (Israel) and the remaining handful were living as Dhimmi's

Note that -- I have already provided evidence to the above -- violence against jews and their second class status as well as their being pushed out from their homeland.

As far as can Muslims and Christians also return to Levant, the idea is badly flawed because

1) Unlike Jews, for whom Israel was THE homeland, for Xians and Arabs this was NOT their home land initially and the only homeland even by settelers

2) Jews tried to buy their way in and settle peacefully on newly acquired land. The Arabs first sold them the land and after they had money had problems when Jews wanted to use their purchases to live their lives as they thought fit. This was arid desert land when Jews first came, uninhabited mostly, which they made livable by their hard work.

You are living in a total denial of history of Israel before 1948, the persecution of Jews, the perfidy of Arabs in that area and the attempts to scuttle their return.

The Jews tried to peacefully make their lives in their homeland, the existing conditions did not allow it so they made it happen through their valor and hard work.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 20 Jan 2010 12:30

Sir,

Sanku wrote: No I am not asking for that and the Jews did not ask for exclusive rights when they first came, the issue started because the peaceful return of Jews was countered violently.

Off course, the Arab aren't exactly Buddhist either. They had the power and they tried to use that power and the British who were in control mismanaged the situation. Now that the Jews are in control, they are returning the favor - trying to kick the Palestinian's out. The Jews here aren't Buddhists either.

And while we are at it, let's not forget the Christian grudge against the Jews either, i.e "who killed Jesus?" (A grudge that has often been cited as the root cause of Christian prosecution of Jews).

Also the statement that Jewish interests were represented is a LIE -- Jews were progressively chased out from a region which was their original home (Israel) and the remaining handful were living as Dhimmi's

At the time everybody's interest were represented. The area was under British control and no one was kicking out anyone. People were generally going about their daily business in relative peace.

As far as can Muslims and Christians also return to Levant, the idea is badly flawed because

Offcourse you would say that. How else would we have an exclusive Jewish religious state now that the Jews are in control.

1) Unlike Jews, for whom Israel was THE homeland, for Xians and Arabs this was NOT their home land initially and the only homeland even by settelers

It IS their homeland. The middle-eastern Palestinians are genetically the same as the middle-eastern Jews who are the genetically the same as middle-eastern Christians. i.e They all have the same rights to this land. Just because some converted from Judaism to Christianity and from both to Islam doesn't mean that they should lost the rights to their home. If European Jews have the right to return here, then anyone and everyone who can trace their ancestry to this region also has the right to return and/or stay here.

The Jews tried to peacefully make their lives in their homeland, the existing conditions did not allow it so they made it happen through their valor and hard work.

They didn't have the power then so they tried to wiggle their way in. Now they have the power so they try to get rid of the Palestinians and take away their lands while the Palestinians are wiggling. The roles and abuses now are exactly reversed.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Jan 2010 14:36

Look Dhiman; all this is pointless, you are avoiding the central question

Did Jews have the right to return peacefully or not -- that is the root cause.

And because Xian were anti Jews in xyz time period does not justify that Arabs be anti jews in 1800-2000 era.

And because Arabs are anti everybody in 1800-2000 era does not mean it justifies their anti Jew stand in the same period.

It quite simple -- the Jews tried to peacefully return to their homeland, which was violently opposed and they did what they had to do.

Talking about the British role etc is fine, but does not in any way remove the pre Mandate anti-Jewish behavior (scattering them and forcing the remaining to live like Dhimmi's) amongst the Arabs that was prevalent.

Let Palestinians drop their constant violent behavior towards Israel FIRST and then we can judge Israel later.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 20 Jan 2010 15:42

Sanku wrote:Look Dhiman; all this is pointless, you are avoiding the central question
Did Jews have the right to return peacefully or not -- that is the root cause.

Again sir, if the Jews have the right to return peacefully then everybody who can trace their origins to this region has the right to return and/or stay here peacefully irrespective of who did what to whom in the past. As for the rest, I agree its pointless and know where it is going (in a never ending loop), so I will take it as your personal opinion and respect that.

Having said that the only important thing to remember here, at least from my side is the pros and cons of various Indian interests involved while dealing with any party involved in this conflict and staying and being perceived as staying completely neutral and uninvolved There are billions of followers of Abrahamic religions, let them duke it out.

Best regards to you sir.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Jan 2010 15:48

Dhiman wrote:
Sanku wrote:Look Dhiman; all this is pointless, you are avoiding the central question
Did Jews have the right to return peacefully or not -- that is the root cause.
Again sir, if the Jews have the right to return peacefully then everybody who can trace their origins to this region has the right to return and/or stay here peacefully irrespective of who did what to whom in the past. As for the rest, I agree its pointless and know where it is going (in a never ending loop), so I will take it as your personal opinion and respect that.

Fine every one has a right to do things peacefully and those who dont accept this right are the root cause of violence.

Having said that the only important thing to remember here, at least from my side is the pros and cons of various Indian interests involved while dealing with any party involved in this conflict and staying and being perceived as staying completely neutral and uninvolved

Yet we were not neutral and uninvolved for the vast majority of our independent existence -- we were pro-PLO, wrongly -- now at least the penny is dropping and we realize that for many reasons -- which are not merely business oriented, a strong association with Israel is good and necessary.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 20 Jan 2010 15:52

Sanku wrote:a strong association with Israel is good and necessary.

Disagree

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Jan 2010 15:54

Dhiman wrote:
Sanku wrote:a strong association with Israel is good and necessary.
Disagree

Huh I thought you were going on about enlightened self interest? Where did this come from?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 20 Jan 2010 16:29

Folks, this is an Indo-Israel news discussion thread. Don't make it a circus with Jews and Palestenians. The Admins have a very short fuse. This is a warning to desist from irrelevant posting.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 20 Jan 2010 17:51

Bollywood soft diplomacy big hit in Israel

January 10, 2010
Rinku Ghosh | Tel Aviv

kidoman · Post by **kidoman** » 20 Jan 2010 20:48

shravan wrote:Bollywood soft diplomacy big hit in Israel

January 10, 2010
Rinku Ghosh | Tel Aviv

Nice...YYY Jindabad

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 22 Jan 2010 19:51

DNW:
Burgeoning Indian-Israeli Military Ties
There Comes a Point When Washington May Set a Limit

One of the world's biggest powers and one of its smallest countries have discovered enough in common to forge a thriving friendly relationship based largely on mutual defense interests.

This week, Israel's chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, spent three days in Delhi, less than a month after his opposite number, the Indian chief of staff Gen. Deepak Kapoor visited Israel.

It was the first time any Israeli chief of staff had ever visited New Delhi.

The frequency of these visits denotes the burgeoning relationship between the two armies on several levels.

First, Israel has become India's No. 1 supplier of arms and ammunition, overtaking Russia. India accounts for roughly half of Israel's exports of defense items and about one-third of India's import list.

Second, after purchasing the Israeli Arrow anti-missile missile's Green Pine radar, Gen. Kapoor has said his government also wants to buy the missile itself, though not the Arrow 2 which is in service with Israel's Defense Forces, but Arrow 3 and Arrow 4, the Super Arrow which is still in development.

The Indian army chief's purpose in visiting Israel in November was for a rundown on the joint US-Israeli Juniper Cobra 10 exercise for testing defenses against ballistic missiles. This war game was watched avidly by the world's generals and strategists as the most comprehensive and advanced maneuver ever conducted by any army on this subject.

Gen. Kapoor was tireless in his requests for briefings on the lessons drawn from the unique two-week exercise.

US components in an Israeli military item limit its sale

Some of India's most pressing requests pose Israel with dilemmas, DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military sources note. On the one hand, New Delhi appears to be winding down its military procurements from Russia and turning increasingly to Israel. On the other, Israel is bound by overriding commitments to its senior ally, the United States.

When Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh visited Moscow on Dec. 7, he ended a spat over India's purchase of a retired Soviet aircraft carrier, the Admiral Gorshkov - undelivered because of delays and cost overruns for its refurbishment. Even if Singh agreed to hand over the extra $1.2 billion demanded by Moscow to cover the costs, it was clear to both sides that this was India's last arms purchase from Moscow for the time being.

But although Israel's defense industry stands to gain from this cutoff, the more sophisticated the arms on India's shopping list, the more American components and technologies they contain. This means that their transfer to a third country is subject to Washington's veto and both Jerusalem and New Delhi will become increasingly dependent on US permission in the pursuit of their arms transactions.

The case of the Super Arrow is a good example. The United Sates has invested advanced technology in the development of the system as well as covering 60 percent of the costs of research, construction and operational testing of this advanced missile interceptor.

Israel has strong strategic ties with Singapore

Rather than approving an Israeli sale, Washington might decide to supply India with the Super Arrow itself, although thus far, the United States defense industry has never shown interest in entering the Indian arms market. So Israel might be given the go-ahead for Arrow 4 on certain conditions. The US and Israel too might ask India to carry part of the cost of development on behalf of one of the two parties or as an extra.

Furthermore, at some point, Israel and India will have to decide whether their expanding arms trade makes them strategic allies or merely trading partners.

In the past, Israel supplied highly sophisticated hardware in the Super Arrow class only to strategic partners. In recently years, a strategic partnership has been established between Israel and Singapore whereby Israel's military industries supply most of the island's electronic defense systems and are now developing a fleet of unmanned warships.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military sources report that a similar strategic alliance is evolving between Israel and South Korea. Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi has dropped in on Seoul in the course of his current Asian tour.

Washington may object to a specific transaction, but has no real trouble with Israel's military ties with Singapore and South Korea.

India's case is in a different category; its standing in Washington is still undecided. A decision on this by the Obama administration will determine the extent to which Israel-Indian defense ties can develop.

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 22 Jan 2010 23:53

Mithun is very popular in old soviet union and recent jews immigrated from Russia in Israel.

shravan wrote:Bollywood soft diplomacy big hit in Israel

January 10, 2010
Rinku Ghosh | Tel Aviv

Sadler · Post by **Sadler** » 23 Jan 2010 13:25

Dhiman wrote:
Sanku wrote: the change has to come from the GCC block, since they are the "root cause" of the problem.
Sir, in 1947, Jews, Christian, and Arabs were living in peace and tolerance in the region (and no one on any side of this conflict disputes this).

The current state of affairs started when Jews from Europe decided (at the encouragement of British and the Nazi's before them) to create a "Jewish religious state/homeland" in the middle-east - a Jewish homeland outside of Europe where Europe could dump its "Jewish problem"

So the attempt to establish an "intolerant religious state" at the expense of secular (and peaceful) state of affairs that existed in the region is the "root cause" of the problem. As the European Jews took the easy way out and started moving to middle-east (instead of campaigning for a homeland for European Jews in Europe), all hell broke loose in an otherwise peaceful area where Jews, Christians, and Arabs lived in peace (and off course Europe was quite successful in get rid of a large chunk of its "Jewish problem.").

Best regards to you.

The ignorance of affairs in the Levant that this post exhibits is truly shocking.

There was no peace. Unless living as dhimmis is peaceful.

Jews were the original inhabitants of the land. The real name of the West Bank is Judea and Samaria. We returned as we had the right to return. If that causes some moslems heartburn, not my problem.

The British did NOT support mass migration of jews into Israel. They wanted to establish this in Madagascar. Or in Africa. Strict numerical quotas were imposed. The Hagannah was created in part to coordinate the "smuggling" of jews into the levant. The Balfour declaration was not worth the paper it was written on.

And as to my comments below. I do hope that my fellow desi friends understand that these are tongue-firmly-in-cheek.

How about you return Allah-abad, Aurang-abad etc to moslem porkistan? While at it give the Kashmir as well. Moslesm were living in peace in India but then the british, the french, the germans, and the residents of the ivory coast along with the dastardly hindoos started infilitrating into moslem areas. The peaceful islamic religion and its followers had of course no choice but to create their own homeland to protect their womenfolk (along with assorted farm animals). India has inflicted a brutal denial of river waters to porkistan, blah blah blah..................

Now, back to reality. As one poster pointed out, this is the India-Israel News & Discussion thread. Lets keep it that way, shall we?
Shalom.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 23 Jan 2010 13:30

Sir, in 1947, Jews, Christian, and Arabs were living in peace and tolerance in the region (and no one on any side of this conflict disputes this).

with just a few handful of anti-jewish pogroms to disturb it, 'occasionally'. no sane person disputes this too.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 Jan 2010 19:45

Sadler wrote: The ignorance of affairs in the Levant that this post exhibits is truly shocking.

There was no peace. Unless living as dhimmis is peaceful.

Jews were the original inhabitants of the land. The real name of the West Bank is Judea and Samaria. We returned as we had the right to return. If that causes some moslems heartburn, not my problem.

So, if I built my house 5 years ago and sold it after living there for 3 years. I have a right to take it back from the rightful legal owner because I was the original inhabitant of that house? hey... I was the original owner, i built it. Sorry if it caused him/her heart burn.

The British did NOT support mass migration of jews into Israel. They wanted to establish this in Madagascar. Or in Africa. Strict numerical quotas were imposed. The Hagannah was created in part to coordinate the "smuggling" of jews into the levant. The Balfour declaration was not worth the paper it was written on.

The british gave the Haganah training and some were wearing British uniforms.

How about you return Allah-abad, Aurang-abad etc to moslem porkistan? While at it give the Kashmir as well. Moslesm were living in peace in India but then the british, the french, the germans, and the residents of the ivory coast along with the dastardly hindoos started infilitrating into moslem areas. The peaceful islamic religion and its followers had of course no choice but to create their own homeland to protect their womenfolk (along with assorted farm animals). India has inflicted a brutal denial of river waters to porkistan, blah blah blah..................

Wait a second...Palestinians can use the same analogy.

The problem is the way it was done, Jews need a homeland, its fine if Jewish Agency etc bought land rightfully(which they did to a certain extent). But palestinians were kicked out of their own land. It would be great to get an israeli perspective to things.

This is the Indo Israeli thread, maybe we can debate this elsewhere?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 24 Jan 2010 02:04

shyamd wrote: So, if I built my house 5 years ago and sold it after living there for 3 years. I have a right to take it back from the rightful legal owner because I was the original inhabitant of that house? hey... I was the original owner, i built it. Sorry if it caused him/her heart burn.

The operative word in your phrase is "sold".

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 24 Jan 2010 03:00

ravi_ku wrote:
shyamd wrote: So, if I built my house 5 years ago and sold it after living there for 3 years. I have a right to take it back from the rightful legal owner because I was the original inhabitant of that house? hey... I was the original owner, i built it. Sorry if it caused him/her heart burn.
The operative word in your phrase is "sold".

Yeah you are right. They didn't even own the land.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 24 Jan 2010 03:01

It has always puzzled me as to why so many are willing to act as if the
Palestinian cause is somehow a unique historical event. The partition of
India led to some 10 may be some 12 million people being moved, some
willingly and some by means of ethnic cleansing and I have as yet not
seen these same Indians ever canvas for their own brethren plight.

To the best of my knowledge they lost not only members of their families
but property, assets, livelihoods but also what they regarded as their
ancestral homes but I have as yet rarely met an Indian interested in
Palestinian affairs who would ever bring such a matter up for discussion.
The gentleman that I have coffee with every morning lost members of his
family, farms, businesses and all the money that was in the banks in
Sialkot. Would any one care to help him out as he did not SELL his
house, farms etc.

Sadly his story is not unique, we have some 7-9 million Germans that were
ethnically cleansed, virtually half the population of The Spanish Sahara
expelled, then a million plus ethnic Vietnamese thrown out by Cambodia
and only recently some 4.5 million on the move in Sudan. Why never any
discussion of these peoples?

P.S. It is my understanding that a great deal of the property acquired by
Jews in pre 47 Israel was bought from willing sellers, Sadler can correct
me.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 24 Jan 2010 03:33

[

quote="Lisa"]It has always puzzled me as to why so many are willing to act as if the
Palestinian cause is somehow a unique historical event. The partition of
India led to some 10 may be some 12 million people being moved, some
willingly and some by means of ethnic cleansing and I have as yet not
seen these same Indians ever canvas for their own brethren plight.

This strange phenomenon is exclusive to Indians , mainly who still carry the previlage of being Dhimmy. International relations among nations are based on Interests only and this basic lesson keep getting ingnored by many Indians. This is Indo Israeli therad and has nothing to do with Palestinians who BTW have still to make up their mind if they want to kill all the Jews or spare few in Israel. IMHO , its a matter of existence for Israel, they dont need or deserve lectures from indians who has lost both land and men in last few hundred years. Israle's help make us strong and help our defence , this all we should care.

Sadler · Post by **Sadler** » 24 Jan 2010 12:28

shyamd wrote:
Sadler wrote: The ignorance of affairs in the Levant that this post exhibits is truly shocking.

There was no peace. Unless living as dhimmis is peaceful.

Jews were the original inhabitants of the land. The real name of the West Bank is Judea and Samaria. We returned as we had the right to return. If that causes some moslems heartburn, not my problem.
So, if I built my house 5 years ago and sold it after living there for 3 years. I have a right to take it back from the rightful legal owner because I was the original inhabitant of that house? hey... I was the original owner, i built it. Sorry if it caused him/her heart burn.

The British did NOT support mass migration of jews into Israel. They wanted to establish this in Madagascar. Or in Africa. Strict numerical quotas were imposed. The Hagannah was created in part to coordinate the "smuggling" of jews into the levant. The Balfour declaration was not worth the paper it was written on.
The british gave the Haganah training and some were wearing British uniforms.

How about you return Allah-abad, Aurang-abad etc to moslem porkistan? While at it give the Kashmir as well. Moslesm were living in peace in India but then the british, the french, the germans, and the residents of the ivory coast along with the dastardly hindoos started infilitrating into moslem areas. The peaceful islamic religion and its followers had of course no choice but to create their own homeland to protect their womenfolk (along with assorted farm animals). India has inflicted a brutal denial of river waters to porkistan, blah blah blah..................
Wait a second...Palestinians can use the same analogy.

The problem is the way it was done, Jews need a homeland, its fine if Jewish Agency etc bought land rightfully(which they did to a certain extent). But palestinians were kicked out of their own land. It would be great to get an israeli perspective to things.

This is the Indo Israeli thread, maybe we can debate this elsewhere?

(1) On the house analogy. The jews sold nothing any more than hindus in Kashmer sold their land when they were faced a rapine genocide at the hands of indian moslems in Kashmir. Get your facts straight. It was the palis that sold the land, which they "want" back. Rather unwittingly i am sure while you are conducting this non-sensical arguement, you actually support Israel's position here.

In any event, GIVE UP KASHMIR, then we can talk.

(2) The British did not give the Hagannah training any more than the gave Indians any "training". Jews willingly served in the British armed forces during WWII, while your Pali friend and brothers were joining Hitler. The training they received was incidental as part of their training during WWII. A lot of veterans then formed the backbone of the Hagannah. The choice was stark: Do nothing which served the cause of the Nazis or serve the British. I believe more than a few indians probably did the same during WWII, and the training the conscripts received was no charity from the Brits.

(3) "Wait a second...Palestinians can use the same analogy. "
A complete non-answer, and that too incorrect. But then i dont blame you considering that you are peddling snake oil here.

Sadler · Post by **Sadler** » 24 Jan 2010 12:36

Lisa wrote:
P.S. It is my understanding that a great deal of the property acquired by
Jews in pre 47 Israel was bought from willing sellers, Sadler can correct
me.

The landowners were Turkish "effendis" or rich palis who lived in Damascus and vacationed in Europe with summer homes in Cairo. Yes, they were more than willing to sell the land that the palis farmed as virtually indentured labor for ASTRONOMICAL prices. Most of the money came from affluent jews (Rothschild and wealthy americans).

You are absolutely correct.

Then the UN voted to partition. The arab states (Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, the saudi barbarians) massed for an attack. Got their butts kicked by an undermanned, underarmed jewish force that fought to the death for each inch of land holding an assortment of kibbutzim. Apparently, a few indians here are sad that the jews emerged victorious in that fight. Perhaps he/she wishes that we were all slaughtered. NOT GONNA HAPPEN. So keep on ranting. It makes no difference.

Sadler · Post by **Sadler** » 24 Jan 2010 12:40

To my other fellow desis who have sought to bring out the truth here, I thank you.

Also please accept my sincerest apologies for dragging in Kashmer and the other cities like Allah-abad etc. That was just to drive home a point and to illustrate the absolute bankruptness of these so-called critics.

Special thanks to JEM, Johann and others.

Shalom

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 24 Jan 2010 16:22

Prem wrote: International relations among nations are based on Interests only and this basic lesson keep getting ingnored by many Indians.

Agreed.

Israle's help make us strong and help our defence , this all we should care.

Is that the "one and only" concern regarding India's relationship with Israel? or are there any others?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Jan 2010 17:27

Dhiman,

This thread is about Indo-Israeli relations. Not a place to discuss who is more moral in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is part of a wider Israeli-Arab, and still wider Muslim-Jew issue. There are plenty of fora I'm sure where the "who is right?" question can be discussed to anyone's satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

Palestinians are welcome on BR. Whether they are participating in one manner or other, neither we nor you certainly, know with any degree of assurance. That snide remark of yours - "safe to say...etc" - is obviously a judgemental one. Suggests that BR is not up to your standards of probity. You may be right.

In short, here we don't really look at the rights and wrongs of this clearly intractable conflict. (Try to convince a BRFite that our moral posture on Kashmir is wrong, or try to convince a Pakistani of the same. Waste of time. And ultimately it probably does not matter. All that matters is who prevails, and if you are on the side of the one that does).

On this thread, the focus of discussion is how our relationship with Israel is doing - i.e. the mutual benefits. And those are quite substantial. Meanwhile, if they bomb Gaza or Lebanon - well, I hope they don't do anything that will minimise our exchange of tangible and intangible goods. I'm sure the Israelis hope so too.

Finally, there is zero reason to be apologetic about our relationship with Israel to anybody. There may be no need to trumpet it, but no need to play it down either. We have a relationship with a country in this world that has every right to exist - AT LEAST as much as the rest of the countries which seek its destruction, most of whose boundaries were drawn by foreigners with wooden rulers.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Jan 2010 19:37

More posts on the issue were made after the administrative intervention. They were deleted. Discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian issue can be taken to any other forum more suitable for the subject. This thread is for Indo-Israeli relations. Advance thanks for understanding and co-operation.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 25 Jan 2010 00:28

JE Menon wrote: That snide remark of yours - "safe to say...etc" - is obviously a judgemental one. Suggests that BR is not up to your standards of probity. You may be right.

Sir, That remark was truly not meant to be against BRF, but in my haste to write up the post, it may certainly appear to be so. I have edited out the remark from the post (assuming its ok to do so) Best regards.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 25 Jan 2010 00:50

India, Israel to float fund for R&D collaboration
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blnus/14151010.htm

India needs to colloborate more positively in this area. Both nations need to develop a good relationship ofcourse they already have. Both have suffered at the hands of terrorism. Both are surrounded by threats. Both have democracy in common. Both have stronger ability to grow in areas of technology, areas of research and areas of business and colloboration. It is essential that both come together to enhance this further. Both can also share in terms of strategies to protect each other. Both can also share defence systems against terror attacks and information too.

India should work closely with Israel in defending against any nuclear attacks. This will be an area where both expertise can meet easily though Isralis depend much on the West for this.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 25 Jan 2010 00:53

Dhiman,
Beside Security , technology issues, Indians also have economic interests in relation with Israelis. Diamond businenss i one of them and they do have political clout as well deep integration with global economic system . The relations are good for both parties. We must take care of our own before wasting time to meddle in the affairs of others not related to us. Just National security issue alone ought to override any other concerns in our relation with them.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 25 Jan 2010 02:34

Prem wrote:Dhiman,
Beside Security , technology issues, Indians also have economic interests in relation with Israelis. Diamond businenss i one of them and they do have political clout as well deep integration with global economic system . The relations are good for both parties. We must take care of our own before wasting time to meddle in the affairs of others not related to us. Just National security issue alone ought to override any other concerns in our relation with them.

Yet we do vote against Israeli interests on issues that frequently seem to pop up in UN and continue the largely symbolic aid to civilian parties in the region that are let's just say "not so attuned" to Israeli interests. So surely, there are certainly other global and domestic interests involved here. Hopefully, in future, Israel will make it easier for us to pursue interests of mutual benefit with them.

With respect to global economic system (which pretty much is surviving on life support), I think the key to future global financial security will be how the global financial system can benefit from India and China rather than the other way around. And this will no doubt become more and more apparent in future.

National security: well they do have some bells and whistles, but I have more confidence in that area than all the other concerns put together. Procuring items from Israel is a matter of cost efficiency and time delays rather than anything else and they have certainly done a good job on both fronts so far as compared to traditional suppliers.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 25 Jan 2010 02:38

Dhiman wrote:Hopefully, in future, Israel will make it easier for us to pursue interests of mutual benefit with them.

I think this is exactly what JEM was talking about, when he used the word "snide".

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 25 Jan 2010 04:56

I would have relations with the Israelis if for nothing else than the fact that at a certain level they are like us.
Barring the orthodox nut jobs the rest of country is vibrant and has a zest for life.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Jan 2010 18:10

Dhiman, you have received a warning for continuing to troll in spite of the Admins making it clear that irrelevant posts *must* be avoided.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 27 Jan 2010 22:01

Israel plans to repatriate ‘lost Jewish tribe’ in India

Now the question is will the emigrating citizens of ours be bridges of friendship between india and israel or will they be co-opted in a us vs them apocalyptic world view mentioned in the end of the article.

Also can anyone throw light on the present fate of ties between the emigrant communities in Israel and their non-holocaust/pogrom subjected and non-Muslim countries of origin ?

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 13 Feb 2010 13:13

symontk wrote:While most of the Arab states supported / supports Pakistan, PLO continues to support India due to the September 1969 massacare done by Zia ul Haq. We cannot forget that PLO also gives great amount of Intelligence on the Islamic terrorists apart from Isreali intelligence which gives a very good picture of what is happening around in ME

Can anyone verify this?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 19 Feb 2010 06:06

India, Israel to negotiate free trade pact

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 Feb 2010 16:12

Interview of our Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh by Faheem Al-Hamid of Saudi Gazette:

Q: There is concern in the Mideast about growing Indo-Israeli defense cooperation in recent times, which many fear could be at the expense of India’s traditional support for Arab causes. How do you address this concern?

A: I would submit that this concern is misplaced. Our relationship with no single country is at the expense of our relations with any other country. Indeed, India’s relations with the countries in West Asia give us the opportunity to interact in diverse ways with this very important region.

As far as India’s support for Palestine is concerned, this is an article of faith for us. Our solidarity with the people of Palestine predates our independence. India supports a peaceful solution that would result in a sovereign, independent, viable and united State of Palestine living within secure and recognized borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, side by side at peace with Israel as endorsed in the Quartet Road Map and the relevant Security Council Resolutions. We also support the Arab Peace Plan.

I recently had the pleasure of hosting President Mahmoud Abbas and reiterating to him our steadfast support for Palestine and its people.

Saudi Gazette

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 03 Mar 2010 18:10

Hindutva terror probe haunts Pune investigation
Praveen Swami

Purohit’s plans to bring about a Hindutva state were often fantastical. He claimed, the prosecutors say, to have secured an appointment with Nepal’s King Gyanendra in 2006 and 2007 to press for his support for the planned Hindutva revolution. Nepal, he went on, was willing to train Abhinav Bharat’s cadre, and supply it with assault rifles. Israel’s government, he said, had agreed to grant members of the group military support and, if needed, political asylum.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Mar 2010 18:23

maharshtra police's political witch hunt continues, even 26/11 hasn't changed anything. praveen swami as usual obliges.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 03 Mar 2010 18:59

There doesnt seem to be one piece of hard evidence that links the Pune blasts with Abhinav Bharat. It is interesting that it does not stop a senior journalist such as Praveen Swami to insinuate to the contrary.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Mar 2010 20:43

just read the article ! it claims AB is a suspect because one of their leaders is still missing.

by that logic every free man in India is a suspect in the pune blasts, including Mr praveen swami. not to mention that the malegaon blast case investigation itself hangs by a non-existent thread.