On India’s stance in the UN on the Israel-Palestine Conflict – India’s vote on UN resolution marks a new realism in Middle East policy; No Error On Terror

Source: This post on India’s stance in the UN on the Israel-Palestine Conflict has been created based on the articles “India’s vote on UN resolution marks a new realism in Middle East policy” and “No Error On Terror” published in The Indian Express and The Times of India respectively on 30^th October 2023.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2 International Relations – Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests

News: This article discusses the implications of India’s vote at the United Nations General Assembly resolution on the war in Gaza in light of the complex geopolitics of the Middle East.

A detailed article on the Israel-Palestine Conflict can be read here.

What is the Israel-Palestine Conflict?

It is one of the world’s longest-running and most controversial conflicts. It is a conflict between two self-determination movements – the Jewish nationalist project and the Palestinian nationalist project, in the same territory.

Recently, on October 7^th, 2023, Palestinian militant organisation Hamas attacked Israel. The ongoing retaliatory attacks from Israel in the Gaza Strip have led to a huge loss of life and property.

What was India’s stance in the UN?

India abstained (chose not to vote) on the Arab resolution calling for a humanitarian truce in Gaza. Additionally, India supported a Canadian resolution condemning the Hamas attack on Israel.

What does India’s stance at the UN signify?

1) Departure from the earlier stance: In the past, India voted in favour of Arab resolutions against Israel as a matter of routine and avoided the question of terrorism emanating from the Arab world.

2) Condemning terrorism: With its latest vote, India has underlined its concerns on international terrorism. India was right in pointing out that the Arab resolution did not condemn the October 7 attack by Hamas on Israel.

3) Continuing support for a two-state solution: India also reiterated its support for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine.

4) Historical Context of Engagement: India’s stance is informed by past agreements like the Oslo Accords of 1993, which were significant steps toward the two-state solution. The Hebron Protocol in 1997 and the Wye River Memorandum in 1998 are examples of such efforts.

5) Commitment to International Humanitarian Law: India emphasizes the need for adherence to international humanitarian law in the conflict, particularly the protection of civilians.

This replaces the traditional defensive political correctness with a policy rooted in a hard-headed realistic assessment of the shifting regional dynamic.

Why is India’s stance right with respect to terrorism?

1) With respect to Israel: The world’s fight against terrorism cannot be successful if countries targeted by terrorism respond in a violent way (like Israel), which will birth another generation of terrorists.

2) With respect to Hamas: Terror groups often have transnational links and being selective serves no purpose.

However, the current government needs to carefully tackle the accusation of playing “vote bank” politics with a region that is of vital interest to India.

What diplomatic and political efforts can help India protect its geopolitical interests?

1) Diplomatic and political outreach to the Arab world: India should explain its commitment to Palestine’s full statehood, press Israel to respect the laws of war, and increase humanitarian assistance to Gaza.
PM’s recent telephone calls to moderate leaders of the Arab world was a good step.

2) Ensure all-party consensus: The government needs to invite Opposition leaders for a full briefing and explain the considerations shaping its regional policy.

3) Regulate fringe groups: India needs to crack down on the extremist groups that are spreading disinformation and undermining its strategy of interest-based realism in the Middle East.

Question for practice:

‘India needs to walk the diplomatic tight-rope carefully when it comes to defending its geopolitical interests in the Middle East’. Discuss with reference to India’s stance on the recent Israel-Palestine conflict.