English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Modi’s Israel Visit: Memories of a Journalist’s Visits To Jewish State

Published

on

Modi In Israel

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]By: Saeed Naqvi

Israel has been in the news in the context of the Prime Minister’s visit and I may be forgiven for a touch of nostalgia. I was the first Indian journalist to visit Israel after an Australian fanatic had set fire to the pulpit of the Al- Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem in August 1969. The Arab World was ablaze.

Indian passports in those days were not valid for South Africa, Israel and Southern Rhodesia. Under a special dispensation you could obtain a separate passport for travel to countries with which India did not have diplomatic ties. Israelis were more practical: they pinned a piece of paper for entry and exit which could be pulled out when travelling to other countries.

The reception I received at Ben Gurion airport was the stuff of fairytales for a reporter in his 20s. Never will Jerusalem Municipality have a public relations officer more beautiful than Bathsheba Herman.

Something that had not touched the Israelis then was arrogance. They came across as clever, wise, modest people, working diligently on their Kibbutz, the typically Jewish cooperatives, where inequalities were not discernable. It was possible to contemplate Fa Giladi, the exquisite Kibbutz in the shadow of Mt. Hermon, as the dream location for research on the Palestinian issue.

The simplicity of the people helped tone down shades of Zionism instilled in us and which was the bane of the Palestinian people. Ambassadors like John Kenneth Galbraith held Pandit Nehru in their thrall with their intellect. But during the Indira Gandhi years, changes were creeping across the diplomatic corps. There were various ways to gauge how well informed an Ambassador was. A simple test could be this: was the ambassador a regular fixture at the New Year eve party hosted by Indira Gandhi’s leftist adviser, editor of Seminar, Romesh Thapar. By this and several other criteria the trophy belonged to Clovis Maksoud, Arab League’s first ambassador, articulate, even bombastic, with an unerring eye for New Delhi’s well groomed ladies. His role in sensitizing the New Delhi elite to the intricacies of the Palestinian case must never be underestimated.

Nehru as leader of the Non-Aligned and Afro-Asian bloc obviously had a large constituency among left liberals and Muslims. His charm offensive even on the Arabs worked such magic that Raees Amrohvi, an Urdu poet from Pakistan, was moved to write a quatrain:

“Jup raha hai aaj mala ek Hindu ki Arab

Barhaman zaade mein shaane dilbari aisi to ho!

Hikmat e Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru ki qasam

Mar mitey Islam jispar, kafiri aisi to ho!”

(What a spell this Brahmin has cast on the Arabs

Who now chant his name on their beads.

Look at the magic of this kafir (non-believer);

Believers of the Arab world lie at his feet)

Until 1990s, it was anti intellectual to cast positive light on the Israeli case. When Rajiv Gandhi became Prime Minister in 1984, he was advised by Muslim Congressmen in his vicinity (but totally out touch with the community) not to upgrade relations with Israel because that would adversely affect the party’s Muslim support.

When I argued against this line in the Indian Express, Rajiv had it expanded into an official note. Muslim leaders, such as they were, and the Mullah had shackled the community with issues like Shah Bano, Salman Rushdie, Babri Masjid, Muslim character of Aligarh Muslim University and now relations with Israel. What any backward community needed was employment, education, entrepreneurial help, I wrote.

After Rajiv was assassinated, half way through the 1991 General Elections. P.V. Narasimha Rao upgraded relations with Israel in 1992. There was not a whimper from the community.

Initially, relations were more or less mechanically upgraded. Absence of any real content in the relationship invited Shimon Peres to quip in an interview with me:

“Indo-Israeli relations are like French perfume – to be smelt not drunk.”

The Israel Bathsheba Harman introduced me to soon after the 1967 war, had hardened by the 1993 Oslo accords. But even so one could salve one’s conscience with the thought that Oslo would atleast lead to a two-state solution.

 An episode firmed up my appraisal of the Israeli-Palestinian two-state process.

It was a Shabath lunch, at a friend’s house in Herzilia. Among this very small group happened to a person at one end of the lawn, wreathed in cigarette smoke, a glass of red wine in one hand, rapidly replenished, obviously reveling in the company of three well groomed ladies who had formed an admiring circle around him. It was Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, lighting one Kent after another, like Belmondo in a Godard film.

He came across at first a shy man but once he opened up, he was transparent and obviously trustworthy. His approach to Oslo was not at a variance from another loveable Israeli, Yossi Beilin, very much the author of the Oslo accords.

Obsession with survival and security had injected some iron in the Israeli soul, but the Jewish state became hard as nails after the 9/11 wars, Islamophobia, and Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister who visited India on the first anniversary of 9/11, just when the war-on-terror rhetoric was being amplified here too.

Sensitive defence deals with Israel begun under Atal Behari Vajpayee were boosted by Manmohan Singh. The Palestinian issue, which was highest priority upto Indira Gandhi, dipped in saliency.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit, however, is fired by an atavistic Hindutva adoration for a small country on top of its mischievous Muslim neighbors. Ramallah has been bypassed, of course. But it should not be lost on the insiders that during the September non aligned summit in Venezuela the Indian delegation received instructions from South Block, to drop the routine reference to the Palestinian issue altogether. It was a tradition from the earliest days of NAM.

No, Ramallah was not just bypassed; Palestine has been downgraded to the level of irrelevance.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Latest world news

Trump calls it a wonderful gesture as Machado presents him Nobel Peace Prize medal

Donald Trump described it as a “wonderful gesture” after Venezuela’s opposition leader Maria Corina Machado presented him with her Nobel Peace Prize medal during a White House meeting.

Published

on

donald-trump

US President Donald Trump has described it as a “wonderful gesture” after Venezuela’s opposition leader Maria Corina Machado presented him with her Nobel Peace Prize medal during a meeting at the White House.

Trump praised Machado publicly after the interaction, saying she had been through “so much” and that the act reflected “mutual respect.” He said the medal was given to him for the work he has done, according to his post on his social media platform.

The gesture, however, has drawn attention as the Nobel Institute has clarified that a Nobel Peace Prize cannot be transferred to another individual.

Nobel Institute rules out transfer of prize

The Nobel Institute has stated that Machado is not permitted to give her Nobel Peace Prize to Trump. Despite this, a White House official confirmed that Trump intends to keep the medal, even if the act remains symbolic.

Trump has long expressed interest in the Nobel Peace Prize, making the episode particularly notable despite the formal limitations placed on such honours.

Political context behind the meeting

Machado had been widely regarded as Venezuela’s democratic leader-in-waiting before Trump’s recent policy decisions regarding the country. Earlier this month, Trump declined to fully back her challenge to Venezuela’s ruling regime and instead signalled openness to engaging with leaders linked to the existing power structure.

Trump has publicly questioned Machado’s ability to lead, saying she lacks sufficient support and respect within Venezuela. Her political party is believed to have won the 2024 elections, results that were rejected by President Nicolas Maduro.

Trump has also indicated a willingness to work with acting President Delcy Rodriguez, who previously served as Maduro’s deputy.

What Machado said after the meeting

Speaking to reporters after leaving the White House and heading to Capitol Hill, Machado said she presented the medal to the US president as recognition of his “unique commitment” to Venezuela’s freedom.

She added that Trump did not provide detailed assurances during their closed-door discussion, including on the issue of elections in Venezuela. No further specifics of the meeting were disclosed.

Afterwards, Machado greeted supporters gathered near the White House gates, hugging several of them. Addressing the crowd, she said they could count on President Trump, prompting brief chants of appreciation from those present.

Machado’s recent public appearance

Before her visit to Washington, Machado had largely stayed out of public view since travelling to Norway last month, where her daughter accepted the Nobel Peace Prize on her behalf. She had spent nearly a year in hiding in Venezuela before appearing at the ceremony.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

US freezes immigrant visa processing for 75 countries, India not in list

The United States suspends immigrant visa processing for 75 countries, excluding temporary visas, as part of stricter immigration measures.

Published

on

The United States has indefinitely suspended immigrant visa processing for 75 countries, targeting individuals seeking permanent residency based on nationality. The move, set to take effect on January 21, excludes tourist and temporary work visas, but is expected to have a significant impact on family-based immigration.

Reasons behind the visa freeze

The US State Department said the suspension aims to prevent the entry of foreign nationals likely to require government welfare and public benefits. “The Trump administration is bringing an end to the abuse of America’s immigration system by those who would extract wealth from the American people,” said State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott.

While the administration cites the risk of immigrants draining government resources, studies by the Cato Institute and other research groups suggest immigrants generally use fewer benefits than US-born citizens.

Who will not be affected

Temporary visas for tourists, business travelers, and sports fans remain unaffected. Exceptions are also allowed for individuals with dual nationality, a valid passport from a country not on the list, or travel serving an “America First” national interest. Approved visas that have not yet been printed must be refused according to the State Department.

Countries affected

The visa freeze covers nations across Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe. Some of the most affected countries include Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia, Russia, Iran, Afghanistan, Brazil, Nigeria, and Thailand.

Other countries on the full list include Albania, Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Myanmar, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, North Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

Trump administration immigration record

The Trump administration has already imposed stricter vetting procedures over the past year, revoking over 100,000 visas and deporting more than 605,000 people, with 2.5 million others leaving voluntarily. Critics highlight that the policy disproportionately affects immigrants from non-European countries.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Anything less than US control of Greenland unacceptable, says Trump

Donald Trump has said American control of Greenland is vital for national security and missile defence, reigniting debate over the Arctic island’s strategic importance.

Published

on

donald-trump

US president Donald Trump has said that American control over Greenland is essential for the United States’ national security, describing it as “vital” for a planned air and missile defence system known as the Golden Dome.

In a social media post on Wednesday, Trump claimed the United States “needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security” and asserted that the Arctic island plays a key role in the proposed defence architecture. He further said that NATO would become “far more formidable and effective” if Greenland were under US control, adding that “anything less than that is unacceptable.”

Comments ahead of US-Denmark talks

Trump’s remarks came just hours before senior Danish and Greenlandic officials were scheduled to hold talks at the White House with US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The discussions are focused on Greenland and broader security issues in the Arctic region.

Responding to US concerns, Denmark’s defence minister Troels Lund Poulsen said the country was increasing its military presence in Greenland. He also noted that Copenhagen was in discussions with allies regarding a stronger NATO footprint in the Arctic.

NATO role and strategic concerns

Trump said NATO “should be leading the way” in building the proposed multi-layer missile defence system. He warned that if the alliance did not act, rival powers could step in, stating that Russia or China might otherwise take the lead.

The US president has repeatedly spoken about taking control of Greenland, a strategically located and sparsely populated island that is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. His renewed comments underline continued US interest in the Arctic’s strategic importance amid rising global security competition.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com