Thanks for this post. This is a problem that I certainly never pondered and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Oh my gosh this is really heartbreaking. My bigger concern is that this is a group of people with no disposable income and very little to no savings. What happens once all these people including the Americans who are evacuated land in Cyprus?

The saddest part is that about half the Sri Lankans in Lebanon cannot be moved because they don't have papers (BBC reported this today) - most likely because of the practice of confiscating passports mentioned in the MERIP article.

I've been wondering all week what the Indian government's response has been to the situation itself, and Siddhartha's post has provoked me to search for it. MEA's statement from July 1 re: Gaza:

We regret that Israel should have chosen to give a military response to the capture of an Israeli soldier last week, rather than afford time and opportunity for diplomatic action to resolve the matter. The actions of the Israeli Defence Forces, such as the bombing of a power plant and several bridges in Gaza, have affected the lives of ordinary citizens. This will only contribute to a deterioration of the already existing humanitarian crisis there. Our grave concern over these developments has already been conveyed to the Israeli Ambassador yesterday by Shri Rajiv Sikri, Secretary (East) in the Ministry of External Affairs.

MEA press release on Lebanon from July 13:

We are seriously concerned about the escalating tension in West Asia as a result of developments on the Israel-Lebanese border since yesterday which have the potential to inflame the region further and widen the conflict. India condemns the abduction of two Israeli soldiers on 12 July 2006 by Lebanese militants and calls for their immediate release. We equally strongly condemn the excessive and disproportionate military retaliation by Israel which has targeted civilian infrastructure, including Beirut airport. We are particularly concerned that the actions of the Israeli Defence Forces have resulted in the killing and suffering of innocent civilians, including women and children, that is likely to exacerbate an already tense situation.

India calls upon all parties concerned to eschew violence, de-escalate the situation, and return to the path of negotiations. It is our firm conviction that lasting peace and security in the region, which is in the interest of not only the countries of the region but of the whole world, can be achieved only through peaceful dialogue and not through use of force.

Remarkably, The Prime Minister's statement after the G-8 summit makes no mention of Lebanon at all -- as if didn't even bring it up with Bush. This all seems remarkably tepid, but maybe my search skills aren't quite as good as others' -- has anyone seen other public statements by senior Indian officials?

If not, I'm invariably led to the following ironic (and highly tentative) observation. Once upon a time, the government of India exercised global leadership, and at least arguably influence, on a range of issues through the Non-Aligned Movement and G-77 -- whether one agrees or disagrees with what it espoused then substantively, I think it's fair to say that India was regarded as a leader in the developing world at that time, and its leadership to some extent involved being critical of the then-New World Order that was emerging. Now, has India become so fixated upon its goal of gaining a permanent Security Council seat -- and so economically interdependent with the United States and other countries in the global North -- that it is sitting on its hands?

I present that as a question because I sincerely mean it as a question -- I don't as yet have a fixed view on the subject. But as we witness the dismemberment and destruction of a country that one might have regard as a model for post-conflict transition for any number of countries in the world, perhaps including Afghanistan and Iraq, I would have hoped for a more assertive and independent response from South Block and the PMO.

On a tangentially related note, Time Out Beirut has suspended publication and provided a poignant message to its readers.

Diplomatic resolutions? That's so mid to late 90's.

Seriously though, I'm just surprised the UN has been "obsoleted" to this level, I was under the assumption it was created to prevent these large scale military ops. Reminds me of Chapelle's black bush. "And I ain't tryin to dis the UN because they have no army... just go sell some medicine, bitches"

Add this to the growing list of untold, ignored stories. That's a staggering number of ex-pat workers in a small country not particularly known for having expat workers (like Dubai or Qatar). The Americans and Europeanes flee a war zone by cruise ship (my great grandparents, Americans on a grand European tour after a medical conference in Germany, fled England by cruise ship with blackened windows and radio silence in August, 1914). The Indian Navy will take care of the Indians. Everyone else has to fend for themselves? You'd think that the cruise industry--with multi-billion dollar profits and a hazy sense of nationality--could spare a few more ships.

If not, I'm invariably led to the following ironic (and highly tentative) observation. Once upon a time, the government of India exercised global leadership, and at least arguably influence, on a range of issues through the Non-Aligned Movement and G-77 -- whether one agrees or disagrees with what it espoused then substantively, I think it's fair to say that India was regarded as a leader in the developing world at that time,

Good q, my thoughts

1. India and Israel have had much closer relations in recent times, which has lead to Israel supplying India with some vital millitary equipment (the deals being blessed by America of course)

2. There is a perception that support for Arab regimes in the past have not borne any fruit

3. The coalition of the people of color The Non-aligned Movement is dead, and started dying after the 1960 war with China, though it has a few geriatric advocates left in Delhi. The nuclear deal and snubbing of Iran engendered only a little opposition...

But who cares what India thinks? The only country that can influence Israel has already made its views quite clear...

According to Hindu newspaper, there is talk of India helping stranded Sri Lankans.

Oh damn, I had no idea. Who knew?

The pictures of blown up children have pretty much numbed my ability to blog about politics.

NEWSFLASH: Indian navy to the rescue, and yes, we're carrying Sri Lankans and Nepalese too:

Governments of Sri Lanka and Nepal have requested India to evacuate their nationals and this will be done depending on the space available on the ships, the MEA spokesman said.

Navy officials about 500 nationals from Sri Lanka and Nepal could be evacuated in the first ferry by the Indian ships.

In comparison, the US was planning to charge its citizens for the priviledge of being rescued by their own Navy.

AK (#4): I don't know if this answers your question, but we have a contingent in that UN peacekeeping force in south Lebanon.
--
[*] - Yeah yeah, I know some of you guys here consider yourself as Amrus and Canucks, but bear with me this one time pleease? Not often that I get to ra-ra India for totally bonafide, non-jingoistic reasons.

I'm glad India is willing to help the Sri Lankans and Nepalese, but it looks like those four Warships onlyhave 1000 seats abord. . .they can ferry people back and forth to Damascus but a) how long before the war spreads there and b) the longer it takes (remember, they have to be let in by the Israeli blockade, in turns) the more opportunities for stranded foreigners to get hit by a bomb like this poor Sri Lankan woman.

Chocolate Brownie:

We have a hallowed tradition of rescuing our[*] citizens from the Middle East, of course; must point out that the largest civilian air-lift ever in history was conducted by India, when we flew Indian nationals from Kuwait during Gulf War I.
In comparison, the US was planning to charge its citizens for the priviledge of being rescued by their own Navy.

i am not defending any non-jingoist take here, but to be fair, your statement is not entirely true... during gulf war 1, the people rescued by the initial flights were close friends of the indian ambassador in kuwait and the more 'elite'/ financially well-off families... there weren't more than 7 flights out, i am pretty sure (my family and i were there). the maids and the labour workers weren't the first priority there at all. they only got to leave with their sponsored families if they left and there were many cases of maids that were abandonned by their sponsors. the indian embassy did do a fantastic job however, of organizing trails across iraq and jordan where people were stationed in refugee camps and before they could catch a flight to bombay. people that could pay their way got first picks, the maids & labour workers got to leave later, but everyone was given a chance to get out. anyhow, it wasn't a free of cost affair. furthermore, the indian embassy in kuwait is quite 'rich' because there is a great population of indians there that do very well. so they had the money to put into the arrangements to begin with, if they didn't, they would have been heavily criticized later for not using it well in a time of need.

AK:

Now, has India become so fixated upon its goal of gaining a permanent Security Council seat -- and so economically interdependent with the United States and other countries in the global North -- that it is sitting on its hands?

i have been having similar thoughts too... i can't help but wonder if there are any 'deals' are going on between india and US right now... india was taking on a fairly independant role in its global responsibilities... it has been standing well and strong on its own for the last 3-5 years. since the G8 meeting in st petersburg, the attitude and statements re the israel issue seem to be complacent and detached. who knows what's going on, i can't help having an uneasy feeling about it...

It is estimated that 20 percent of the 80,000 Sri Lankan migrant workers living in Lebanon experience some form of maltreatment, ranging from non-payment of wages to verbal, physical and sexual abuse.

this is absolutely true, not just in lebanon but many middle-eastern countries! this also goes for indian, bangladeshi and filipino workers. there are HUGE human rights violations going on in several middle-eastern countries. there have also been some cases of 'mysterious disappearings'. i have often wondered why there has been no action taken by the UN or other agencies. i know that in kuwait the relative incidence has reduced since the gulf war, probably because the cases were being publicized, documented and received a lot more attention, and so people got a little more cautious of their actions. but the attitude that expatriot workers are dispensible and less-than human is VERY prominent and will be hard to break.

this is something that is discussed and criticized a fair bit among 'expat' circles in kuwait (which are incidentally the brain and task force that keep the country going): "the media in the west picks up on all the maltreatment of the people in iraq caused by saddam hussein, but conveniently ignores the human rights violations in neighbouring 'ally' countries and the passiveness of their governments re such issues". and trust me, these issues are very well known to locals and the US army there. do you really think a true 'democracy' exists in these countries? then why not forcefully enter every such country and 'fix' them also as was done in iraq.

It pains me that the government of a country of 1 Billion people where so much of FDI comes directly from or is fueled by Indians abroad, is too f*cking incompetent and weak to even protest against mistreatment of its citizens across the world - especially in the middle east. Do we have no leverage over countries that we imported 20 Billion dollars worth of oil from in 2004-05?

Sumiti:

Thank you for your insight. I stand corrected in that case; I'm a quasi-Gulf-ie myself, but haven't, as you might imagine, been there in Kuwait, so I had no idea about the ground realities then (or the fact that this wasn't per-gratis, as I had assumed). I, however, still stand by my earlier assertion of this being the largest civilian airlift ever; it's all there in the Limca Book of Records, and if I'm not wrong, Air India did get a citation much later.

Exploitation... just to say this; additionally, what pisses me off even more is a few 'middle-class' ex-pats' frigging class consciousness. Out here in Singapore, I've seen tech guys who have refused to sit next to workers from Bangladesh and India because Singaporeans would think that they were also workers. What is really interesting is that I doubt they would be so class-concious in India; I mean, surely, if you take a bus or a local train, you'll have to sit next to just about everyone?

This is a great post. Just wanted to point out that it might make more sense if your title said "Lankan Maids" instead of Lanka Maids (Lanka Maids = America Maids, Lankan Maids = American Maids). Minor thing, but it makes a diff to Lankan diaspora chicks like me. thanks. keep up the great writing. :)

SP, could you point me towards the 'MERIP article' you referenced? thanks!

SP, could you point me towards the 'MERIP article' you referenced? thanks!

sorry, nm. got it. (its late.)

I spent significant time in Beirut last year and the year before. The Ski Lanka and Filipino maids are ubiquitous in the Christian areas of Beirut and in the mountain villages that surround the capital.

Thank you for bringing their situation to our attention.

Now I wonder who will tell the story of the tens of thousands of Russian, Romanian and Ethiopian prostitutes that can also be found in some of those same Christian neighbourhoods.

BBC did a bit about this a few years ago (2003) in which they interviewed the Sri Lankan Minister of Labour, Mahinda Samarasinghe about the abuse of these migrant workers:

"We are not in a position to say, 'Look here, ensure that all of these things are in place otherwise we will not send our people'," says Minister Samarasinghe about the need for better insurance and health cover if something does go wrong (BBC).

That's weak. Damn weak.

Does anyone know how the demographics of these Sri Lankan women breaks down? Tamil? Muslim? Sinhala? I can't find anything that doesn't refer to them all as Sri Lankan.

Does anyone know how the demographics of these Sri Lankan women breaks down? Tamil? Muslim? Sinhala? I can't find anything that doesn't refer to them all as Sri Lankan.

From what I know its all a mix. What they do have in common though is that they are almost all from rural/village backgrounds.

Female domestic labourers is a big weird industry. Most women must go through an agency, so they have to cough up money just to get into the whole process.

The 'In Focus' section ofCenwor's webpage has some good info/articles.

Partially answering my own question, a couple more statements by MEA and the Congress Party. Still seems somewhat weak -- a stronger move would be to recall the Indian ambassador to Israel and/or some sort of economic shot across the bow.

So even the Lebanese use South Asian maids! Lebanon is a country which Blackwater staff could take over in less than a week.

Lebanon seems to have a pretty high Asian population. The CIA factbook estimates 3,874,050 people in to be currently living in Lebanon. Using data from this post and from Yahoo, if there are approximately 10,000 Bangladeshis, 40,000 Filipinos, 12,000 Indians, and 93,000 Sri Lankans in Lebanon, then approximately 155,000 people living in Lebanon are from Asian countries. Not bad for a country of only 3.8 million. (I couldn't find a figure on other Asian diasporas so I'll conveniently ignore those countries.)

93,000 is a staggering number of expatriots Preston, but that number pales in comparison to the 402,582 registered Palestinian refugees in the country. I'd like to to see their government try to evacuate them from Lebanon.

I'd like to to see their government try to evacuate them from Lebanon.

Who would that be? Israel?

Just wanted to point out that it might make more sense if your title said "Lankan Maids" instead of Lanka Maids (Lanka Maids = America Maids, Lankan Maids = American Maids). Minor thing, but it makes a diff to Lankan diaspora chicks like me.

fixed. :)

The CIA factbook estimates 3,874,050 people in to be currently living in Lebanon.

And dropping by the minute. We're already fairly close, if not even with, the number of displaced persons in Kosovo in 1999.

I heard the figure of 500,000 displaced but that refers to IDPs. I don't have a good fix on how many are leaving the country beyond the western evacuations.

I heard the figure of 500,000 displaced but that refers to IDPs.

Yes, it's unclear. But in terms of the scale of the humanitarian crisis, it probably doesn't matter whether they are IDPs or formally refugees (and in this case, most probably wouldn't be formally refugees even if they made it to another country). In fact, depending on where in Lebanon people are fleeing to, it could be harder to ensure protection for IDPs than for people who make it to some other country.

I've heard that India has officially condemned Israel's actions. For a country renowed for its intellectuals, its foreign policy just does not make sense to me. India has repeatedly let its allies down so as to go with common world opinion. During the Kargil crisis it was Israel that came to India's aid or has India's technocrats already forgotten that small detail ? India's actions are motivated by its need to join the OIC, an organisation that has done nothing of value for four decades and one that wastes no breath bemoaning India's actions in Kashmir; while Israel has always supported India's counter-terror measures. Hell the Palestinians have hailed Pakistan's nuclear weapon as the 'Islamic bomb'.

I hope that next time India is in dire need of Arms and ammunition, Israel plays hard to get so that India, for once, will have the cajones to stand up for its allies and not revert to its traditional 'non-aligned' approach

"Now I wonder who will tell the story of the tens of thousands of Russian, Romanian and Ethiopian prostitutes that can also be found in some of those same Christian neighbourhoods."

yesterday cnn showed an ethiopian woman, i assumed she was a maid or nanny or something like that. she was cowering in a garage and crying. as the reporter said, while other countries are sending ships or planes, it's unlikely there will be any ethiopian ship being sent for her or other ethiopians. it was very sad. what's going to happen to them?

i'm sure the indians formed an orderly single file line to get on the boat.

Kesh -- Are these the values that should form the basis for Indian foreign policy? Even from a purely self-interested perspective, radicalizing thousands of people throughout West Asia and elsewhere cannot be in India's long-term strategic interest.

Israel has always supported India's counter-terror measures. Hell the Palestinians have hailed Pakistan's nuclear weapon as the 'Islamic bomb'.

I hope that next time India is in dire need of Arms and ammunition, Israel plays hard to get so that India, for once, will have the cajones to stand up for its allies and not revert to its traditional 'non-aligned' approach

India used to take a stand on issues in Palestine because of its former understanding of the Israel situation as one of Western colonialism in the Third World. This recent condemnation of Israel's outrageous actions falls more in line with principle than it does with India's conflicted attempt to suck up to America vis-a-vis Israel. India is clearly confused on what it wants.

I've heard that India has officially condemned Israel's actions. For a country renowed for its intellectuals, its foreign policy just does not make sense to me. India has repeatedly let its allies down so as to go with common world opinion. During the Kargil crisis it was Israel that came to India's aid or has India's technocrats already forgotten that small detail ? India's actions are motivated by its need to join the OIC, an organisation that has done nothing of value for four decades and one that wastes no breath bemoaning India's actions in Kashmir; while Israel has always supported India's counter-terror measures. Hell the Palestinians have hailed Pakistan's nuclear weapon as the 'Islamic bomb'.

I hope that next time India is in dire need of Arms and ammunition, Israel plays hard to get so that India, for once, will have the cajones to stand up for its allies and not revert to its traditional 'non-aligned' approach

I agree with you totally. However India's official pronouncements on Israel-Palestine are held hostage by its Muslim minority which rails against Isarel as a monolith. India condemning the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers in itself shows it has come a long way from invariably blaming the Israelis for every conflict. India should grow some balls and finally recognize the real victim. But that might lead to many more train bombs. It's complex.

AK, of course not ...... but i can also show pictures of young Syrian,Lebanese and Egyptian children vowing to fight to wipe Israel off the map.

Israel is just a small strip of land that resembles Kerala, Almost every country has persecuted its Jewish diaspora........... why can't the Israeli's have a home to themselves ?

And what was the reason for this conflict ?? Olmert had pledged to withdraw from Gaza, he has been criticised by his own people because he planned to move settlers further back to make more space for the Palestinians, peace was at hand. WHY did Hamas and Hezbollah act the way they did if what they truly wanted was peace for the Palestinians.

Israel is surrounded by enemies, each nation has attacked the country or has plotted to, you know that saying about being backed into a corner, Which one of Israeli's actions are not a result of it being attacked in some form. However, Israel is powerful and any attack invites a crushing response. Its probably the only way the state can exist, which nation does not have the right to defend itself ?

India can learn a lot from Israel as far as protecting its people go and standing up for a set of beliefs, which is why India gets played around by countries in the middle east and its citizens treated as sub-human.

i can also show pictures of young Syrian,Lebanese and Egyptian children vowing to fight to wipe Israel off the map.

well, i guess that israelis have now succeeded in map wiping where these others have failed.

collective punishment is a violation of international humanitarian and human rights law. that's exactly what's going on here now, on a massive and blatant scale -- i don't think many israelis would actually deny that. and as yeti notes, even if one recognizes israel, there remain anticolonial principles at stake here that one would hope that India would still champion.

However India's official pronouncements on Israel-Palestine are held hostage by its Muslim minority which rails against Isarel as a monolith

But that might lead to many more train bombs

Maybe I should have elaborated a chain of events between the two statements. Didn't mean to cast aspersions on India's Muslims. But I do believe that most Indian Muslims will not take nicely to an out and out pro Israel policy, even if it's morally correct.

collective punishment is a violation of international humanitarian and human rights law. that's exactly what's going on here now, on a massive and blatant scale

So is aiding terrorists and admitting them into governments.

I don't see Hezbollah dropping leaflets warning Israeli's civilians about an attack. Hezbollah is not just a terrorist cell, it is intergrated into the very fabric of society in Lebanon. Why is America backing Israel ? Because America remembers how Hezbollah murdered 63 people during the 1983 embassy bombings and the torture/death of William Buckley at the behest of the Iranian Padsaran. Israel is doing what America wishes they had done.

Hezbollah has never answered for many of its crimes, Israel targets Hezbollah infrastructure and Hezbollah makes sure that it thrives in civilian area.

This is Israel's afghanistan, Hezbollah doesn't give a hoot about Lebanon, if they did they would never have used Lebanon to fight their battles.

How else would you battle Hezbollah, any other nation that would have to fight them would have to go through the same motions that Israel has. What does Israel have to gain by killing innocent Lebanese ? You cannot do dialogue with terrorists, the only way you can defeat them is exterminate them.

Why is America backing Israel ? Because America remembers how Hezbollah murdered 63 people during the 1983 embassy bombings and the torture/death of William Buckley at the behest of the Iranian Padsaran.

You forgot the big one ; the suicide bombing of 240 US marines in the 80s.

But I do believe that most Indian Muslims will not take nicely to an out and out pro Israel policy, even if it's morally correct

Too bad for them then, What has Israel done to Indian Muslims ? Israel has muslims who are Israeli citizens, a fact that arab countries chose to ignore sometimes. Muslims in India that are anti-Israeli are radicalised by our own "Sharia law in India is a must" clerics. India's hesitation about Israel also comes from the fear that the Arab world would also draw parallels between India and Israel, parallels which no doubt exist. Hence India's condemnation of Israel. The BJP had it right when it forged closed ties with Israel and Congress is throwing all that down the drain. Israel has never harmed India in anyway (except for its penetration of RAW). India should stand by for what it deems right and cultivate its true allies. Consider that America is destroyed and Israel is destroyed, guess who's in the crosshairs ?

You forgot the big one ; the suicide bombing of 240 US marines in the 80s.

Israel is just a small strip of land that resembles Kerala, Almost every country has persecuted its Jewish diaspora........... why can't the Israeli's have a home to themselves ?

And what was the reason for this conflict ?? Olmert had pledged to withdraw from Gaza, he has been criticised by his own people because he planned to move settlers further back to make more space for the Palestinians, peace was at hand. WHY did Hamas and Hezbollah act the way they did if what they truly wanted was peace for the Palestinians.

Israel is surrounded by enemies, each nation has attacked the country or has plotted to, you know that saying about being backed into a corner, Which one of Israeli's actions are not a result of it being attacked in some form. However, Israel is powerful and any attack invites a crushing response. Its probably the only way the state can exist, which nation does not have the right to defend itself?

Why was Israel "attacked" in the first place? Who initiated the 1967 war? Menachem Begin himself stated that there was no proof that Egypt was about to attack Israel. It was a blatantly expansionist move by an explicitly colonizing agent.

India can learn a lot from Israel as far as protecting its people go and standing up for a set of beliefs, which is why India gets played around by countries in the middle east and its citizens treated as sub-human.

Explain. Yes, desi workers are exploited in the Middle East, but is that a good reason to justify the occupation of Palestine? I don't see Palestinians abusing South Asians. Stop equating all Middle Easterners with one another, these are all different nations with different political and social circumstances at play.

You forgot the big one ; the suicide bombing of 240 US marines in the 80s.

Their response has not always been picture-pretty for Western eyes but it was been just that - a self-defensive response.

First, Israel and the US and Europe had cut off a vast proportion of the aid to Palestine once Hamas was elected to office (under the auspices of denouncing Hamas as a terrorist organization, a problematic idea in itself).

Who initiated the 1967 war? Menachem Begin himself stated that there was no proof that Egypt was about to attack Israel. It was a blatantly expansionist move by an explicitly colonizing agent

I don't see Palestinians abusing South Asians

Israel has muslims who are Israeli citizens, a fact that arab countries chose to ignore sometimes.

You mean, second-class citizens, perhaps at best. And therein lies a fundamental and perhaps intractable problem.

Israel has muslims who are Israeli citizens, a fact that arab countries chose to ignore sometimes.

You mean, second-class citizens, perhaps at best. And therein lies a fundamental and perhaps intractable problem.

If slaughter and pogorms of jews can be classified as self defense then yes i agree with you.

"Pogroms"? What justifies your suggestion of equivalence with the what took place in Central and Eastern Europe? Both the context and power dynamics are fundamentally different.

Pogroms"? What justifies your suggestion of equivalence with the what took place in Central and Eastern Europe? Both the context and power dynamics are fundamentally different

That is how i chose to describe the Hebron riots in the 1920's.

Kesh you'd fare better by saving your debating skills for better informed adversaries. Besides this issue is out of this blog's scope.

But before I quit: Israel is but a dot in the Muslim Middle East. The only Jewish state in the entire world. And yes Jews have historical claim to this land. Read the Bible, Koran whatever the hell you may. Let's say that the Palestinians have been uprooted from their ancestral land. Can't they settle down in peace just a few miles away? Remember Arafat wallking away after being offered 95% of what he wanted? Remember Sharon forcefully evicting Jewish settlers to make way for jew hating Palestinians? Throughout history many people have been wrongfully driven away from their lands, have moved on, worked hard, prospered and then peacefully brought the world's attention to their plight. Not the Palestinians. They have to butcher jews and then have a celebratorymela in their streets. Not too long ago some of these oppressed Palestinians lured an Israeli teenager to their side of the border. He was just a friendly kid. They then bludgeoned him to death. They always start it , then Israel retaliates by pin pointed strikes, sometimes civilians get killed, Isarel apologizes and then most of the world rushes to condemn Israel. It's the Arab propaganda that makes beasts out of otherwise nice and sane human beings.Read their books, editorials, watch their TV.

As for Muslims' being second class citizens in Israel. They are, for a fact financially better off than their Arab brethren in countries like Egypt and Jordan ( the ones without the oil ). Arabs in Israel are as much second class as are Blacks in America or Muslims in India. For God's sake Isarel is a Jewsish state. Let's not even talk about what happened to the Jews in Arab/Muslim lands. Oh yes there are exceptions like parts of Ottoman rule or that of earlier Islamic Spain. They are however few and far between.

Here's an excerpt from the link you cited:

In early October, Palestinians inside Israel protested very vocally in solidarity with the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories.

Arabs in Israel went out to the streets to protest because of the Palestinian issue, and not their own daily issues.

The victory of Hizballah in Lebanon changed the balance for a lot of Arabs, especially for young people

The second class citizens of Israel are allowed all of the above. Some would call that treacherous. But Isareli society belives in freedom of speech and expression. In oppressed Palstine however, they murder and then drag the bodies of fellow Palestinians convicted ( not in a court of law ) of collusion with the enemy.

National Democratic Assembly (NDA), a party advocating cultural autonomy and civil rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel, in the Knesset.

The second class citizens even have a party in the Knesset!

Crossing the border to kidnap and kill Israel's soldiers? That's war. They want an exchange of prisoners. Prisoners who will then be sent back as suicide bombers to kill women children and the elderly on Isarel's buses. At least Israel is humane enough to feed and clothe these murderers. You'll throw up when you read what the Arabs did to Jewish prisoners caught in the various wars.

But we shouldn't be judging Israel by the standards of Arab countries. Right? That's the point. Israel is being held to a much higher standard and deservedly so. Meantime its critics have such low expectations of Palestinians and Arabs. Makes me wonder who is the racist here.

Arabs in Israel are as much second class as are Blacks in America or Muslims in India.

Congratulations, you just defeated your own argument.

Congratulations, you just defeated your own argument

Did I? Or once again you just didn't get it? Very self-congratulatory indeed!

Please describe for all of us how European Jews have "historical claim" to the land, instead of bludgeoning us with sensationalistic tales and fact-less racist conjecture.

Throughout history many people have been wrongfully driven away from their lands, have moved on, worked hard, prospered and then peacefully brought the world's attention to their plight.

They always start it , then Israel retaliates by pin pointed strikes, sometimes civilians get killed, Isarel apologizes and then most of the world rushes to condemn Israel.

I can't really address your ridiculous argument about Israeli Arabs not being second-class citizens. To make a statement like "Arabs in Israel are as much second class as are Blacks in America or Muslims in India" shows how little you actually know about the world. Examine, if you will, the number of Blacks and Palestinians in American and Israeli prisons, and learn about the ways in which incarceration is unfairly meted out to both populations. Unless you continue your racist characterization of Palestinians as savage terrorists, your argument doesn't hold much water.

The fact that the Israeli Arabs have an illusion of democratic representation does not change the fact that they are second-class citizens. You seem to have ignored the actual article and instead focused on the petty and ineffective rights that they have been so graciously granted by the Israeli government. Instead of arguing with anecdotes please cite for me systematic proof of the following: 1) European Jewish claim to the land; 2) Historical roots of why there is violence in the region (did the Palestinians really "start it"?); 3) How, aside from superficial representation and nominally "better" economic status than the rest of the Arab world (by which rationale you could also argue that African Americans have better economic status than Africans in Africa - it's relative), are Israeli Arabs not second class citizens?; 4) How anyone in their right mind should morally leave quietly and "work hard" when their land and livelihood is stolen? Is that what you would do? Is that what we did prior to 1947?; and 5) How varying levels of oppression experienced by Jews in non-Palestinian empires and nations justifys Palestinians "giving up" their land?

Israeli actions in Lebanon are a clear violation of settled International Law.
Hizbullah ambushed Israeli SOLDIERS on Lebanese side of the border. Israel is still occupying Sheebaa farms and has also detained over a THOUSAND Hizbullah members in Israeli jails for years now with no recourse or chance of getting out.
So Hizbullah attacks soldiers to do a prisoner swap. Whats so outrageous about that?

And how does Israel respond to the attack on its SOLDIERS on Lebanese side for exchange of Hizbullah members in ISRAELI jails? Its response is to lauch a massive war on Lebanese civilians. In the first 5 days of war, Israelis killed 245 civilians and 5 members of Hizbullah.

I think its laughable that the Democrats are now siding with Israel and collectively bowing before the IDF and rallying/cheering the assault on Lebanese civilians.

Imagine if the US military were to bomb entire residential buildings, bomb supply trucks carrying food and water, bomb bridges, roads, power plants, water supplies in the Sunni triangle to avenge the regular kidnapping and mutilation of US soldiers at the hands of Sunni insurgents.
The democrats would lose their minds shouting for the impeachment of Bush. Imagine if Bush then says that this collective punishment is to turn the Sunni population against the Sunni insurgents or to force the powerful Sunni tribal leaders to rein in the Sunni insurgents. Imagine if Rumsfeld says that no place in Iraq is safe or that he going to turn back the clock by 20 years in the Sunni triangle.
Imagine if the US gives 24 hours to the Sunnis to leave the Sunni triangle.
Does anybody seriously believe that the Democrats and the American Left will put up with that?
Then why is Israel being given a pass? Why is Nancy Pelosi supporting House resolutions lauding Israel?
Of course the most contemptous liberals are the liberal Jews like Dershowitz . The man is so vile that if he held similar views on any country but Israel, he would be lucky to teach at Cooley Law.

Of course the American Right is excited about a wider war. At least the right is consistent in its wantonness and general moral depravity.

Remember Arafat wallking away after being offered 95% of what he wanted?

And you believe everything Dennis Ross tells us? Why dont you wake up and stop talking in 7 second Fox News sound bites.
Arafat was being offered:
(1) 95% of 55% of West Bank. Israel then would have incorporated all big Israeli settlements connected through highways controlled by Israel which would have snaked around Palestinian territory. Even the 55% of West Bank minus the settlements was not contiguous. So Palestinians would have got around 52% of the current West Bank and the land would be split up into dozens of enclaves.
(2) Giving up East Jerusalem completely which is considered occupied territory by the UN and the US State Department and most people in the World except for unhinged Zionists and Evangelicans waiting for baby Jesus to come back.
(3) The right to return would be completely given up and no compensation would have been given to the refugees living around the world with the UN issued travel documents as sole evidence of their existence and humanity.
(4) The Israelis would have retained control over the Palestinian airspace, borders, military and foreign trade.

If you actually read up on your facts, you would realize that there has never been any point in history where there was a perfectly peaceful and servile process of resisting dispossession from land

You almost made a good point there but that's not how a smart person would interpret my argument. I'd have indulged myself in this debate a little longer had I not come across these gems:

economic and military upper hand has belonged to the Zionists.One-third of US foreign aid goes to Israel,

Yes the economic and military upper hand has belonged to the Zionists who have earned every damn bit of it. Just as they have bought every damn bit of influence in US Congress. Just as Indian Americans have lately begun to emulate them successfully. No apologies for any of that. You have a problem with that? Yes one third of US aid goes to Israel. Jews disproportionately contribute to the GDP of USA. Israel is the only reliable and democratic ally of the US in all of Middle East.

Just look at the death tolls, for God's sake! & the number of Blacks in American prison

Now you are talking. If Israel had wantonly killed the Palestinians the death tolls would have been waaaaaaay higher and if the Arabs had Israel's weapons, there simply wouldn't have been an Israel anymore. Blacks commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers. There is injustice but it's the exception rather than the rule as you make it out to be.

So what's coming next? Bush planned Katrina as well as the Shia-Sunni rift. But why did you not spit the above logic before? It'd have saved me a lot of time.

Yes one third of US aid goes to Israel. Jews disproportionately contribute to the GDP of USA.

Is this a serious argument? The Catholics contribute way more to the GDP of the US. So should the Vatican get more aid than Israel? Your logic would actually be offensive to most patriotic Jews.

Kesh you'd fare better by saving your debating skills for better informed adversaries. Besides this issue is out of this blog's scope.

Well, THAT'S a classy debating move -- ridicule your adversaries rather than actually engaging what they have to say. I could easily do the same with you, given how ill-informed some of your statements are. And the issue is not outside of the blog's scope insofar as AK's initial query concerned Indian foreign policy in West Asia -- a part of the world with which India historically has been reasonably engaged over the years.

As for Muslims' being second class citizens in Israel. They are, for a fact financially better off than their Arab brethren in countries like Egypt and Jordan ( the ones without the oil ). Arabs in Israel are as much second class as are Blacks in America or Muslims in India.

Um, quite apart from Yeti's correct observation that you undermine your own point with the second half of this comment, second class citizenship involves a comparison between citizens within the same society, not between individuals who are citizens of different societies altogether. Would you have argued -- whether now or at the height of Jim Crow segregation -- that African Americans are not second class citizens because they are better off than poor blacks in Burkina Faso or Liberia? As framed, the claim you assert doesn't really make any sense.

For God's sake Isarel is a Jewsish state.

Yes, that kind of is the crux of the dilemma -- it's for God's sake, not humanity's. If you can't extend full and complete equality to all citizens without regard to religion, it becomes rather difficult to avoid rendering large sections of your population second-class citizens. There's no "right of return" for non-Jews, for example, regardless of their ties to the Israel or the occupied territories. And there are many other deep inequalities between Jewish Israelis and Palestinian Israelis.

The second class citizens even have a party in the Knesset!

Yeah, that would be a second-class party with second-class status in the Knesset. The Israeli government has systematically sought to undermine that party's ability to function, most notably by indicting its leader, Azmi Bishara, for purely speech and associational activities, and then banning the party from participating in the 2003 elections. Yes, the Israeli Supreme Court eventually stepped in, but in a context of full equality and inclusion, it never would have gotten to that point in the first place.

Crossing the border to kidnap and kill Israel's soldiers? That's war.

Even if it's "war," there's certainly no justification for targeting civilians at all -- much less on this scale. Much of what Israel is doing violates international humanitarian and human rights law -- and that's not holding Israel to a standard any higher than that to which we held Slobodan Milosevic. (Or at least to which we eventually held him.) It's not even holding Israel to a higher standard than that to which we should hold Hezbollah or anyone else when they target civilians.

It is, concededly, a higher standard than that to which Ariel Sharon was held to account when they massacred civilians and refugees in Lebanon during the 1980s.

Incidentally, I don't know how widely noted this has been, but the casualty rate in Iraq has skyrocketed in the last week or so as the number of attacks has increased. There is a strategic dimension which nobody seems to be paying attention to here -- disproportionate responses and gross violations of human rights will only inflame people who wish to do harm and only serves to give groups like Hezbollah greater credibility and support. That's decidedly not in the long-term security interest of either India or the United States, and if we don't wake up to that fact we may eventually all pay for it.

(and Jilted_Manhood, with your last comment about GDP contributions, I think you've finally lost it. might want to call it a night and start again tomorrow.)

Is this a serious argument? The Catholics contribute way more to the GDP of the US. So should the Vatican get more aid than Israel? Your logic would actually be offensive to most patriotic Jews

Al, does the Vatican share Israel's predicament in any small way? The tenuous existence of Israel surrounded by predator regimes necessitates the most aid. And yes America is a capitalist society and that's how it works. What's so offensive?Besides Israel is a responsible, democratic country with a freedom of press and rule of law. It doesn't abuse its American largess.

Please describe for all of us how European Jews have "historical claim" to the land, instead of bludgeoning us with sensationalistic tales and fact-less racist conjecture.

Do Americans have a historical claim to this land? And its not just the Native Americans. I read that over 50% of Mexicans think that the Southwestern United States belongs to them. Slipperry slope there...

Kesh's wonderful example of Hebron '29 ignores scores of massacres of Palestinians at Zionist hands throughout the colonization of Palestine. Deir Yassin springs to mind as do countless other examples of Zionist terrorism.

Deir Yassin is a black spot on Israel's history, but who started this war ? Palestinian clerics who were afraid of the growing Jewish influence in the region.

Zionist terrorism ? Don't make me laugh, Like i stated before Israel's actions are in self defense, to quote jilted_manhood, Israel is but just a dot in the middle east, European jews escape Hitler's spree to be confronted with Izz ad-Din al-Qassam's rhetoric. Unfortunately the Palestinians were brought under this animal's infulence when so many of them existed peacefully with the jews.

Did the world even bat an eyelid when the Israeli atheletes were murdered in Munich ? Requests to fly the Olympic flag at half mast were met with hostility by the arab nations, Many of them supported the killing of civilans by Black September. Pulling out Israeli troops from Gaza was in Olmert's agenda, who would not regard this as a step towards peace ? and of course Hamas had to go and spoil things and Hezbollah joined the club.

Peace is like a disease to Hamas and Hezbollah, they do not want Israel to exist. If Israel wasn't strong and if Mossad wasn't feared you think Israel would have even existed ? Of course not, You can only push a nation and its people so much, before they resort to tactics like the ones they employed in Operations Wrath of God, Spring of Youth and Entebbe. Carlos the Jackal worked for the PLO and Idi Amin sheltered and supported them. These exemplary men of character wanted the Jewish state gone even though they had no connections to the conflict, the only thing they had in common was they did not mind killing innocent civilians.

Hasn't Israel warned civilians of imminent bombardment ? Regardless of what you think, Israel is a nation with a responsibility towards its citizens and its commited to achieving that by any means necessary. Saudi Arabia condemned Hezbollah, and this is a nation whose former ruler never smiled again when it learned that Israel won the six-day war. Hezbollah has destroyed peace in the region.

Looks like Bashir Assad will never learn from his Father's mistakes. His Father followed the same path only to be turned against by the same terrorists he supported which led him to conduct operations which earned him the nickname the 'Butcher of Hama' and Anwar Sadat learned the mistake of supporting terrorists also.

Hezbollah,Hamas,Al-Qaeda, Lakshar-E-Toiba, Abu Sayaf are a plague upon Humanity that must be exterminated by the nations that are threatened by them. Once these groups and their members are vainly knocking on the pearly gates to meet their promised virgins will the world ever make some steps to achieving peace.

Jilted_Manhood,

You've made some good arguements.

Jilted_Manhood:

Yes the economic and military upper hand has belonged to the Zionists who have earned every damn bit of it. Just as they have bought every damn bit of influence in US Congress. Just as Indian Americans have lately begun to emulate them successfully. No apologies for any of that. You have a problem with that? Yes one third of US aid goes to Israel. Jews disproportionately contribute to the GDP of USA. Israel is the only reliable and democratic ally of the US in all of Middle East.

So you're saying that Zionist Jews have bought off the US Congress? You're not actually making an argument here! Yes "I have a problem with that", last time I checked you're not supposed to buy influence in a democracy, and if you are, it's considered non-democratic. Of course, this is what makes Israel and the US hypocritical - it's all about the bottom line of land and loot, nothing else.

You have a problem with that, huh tough guy? Let's go then punk!!! What up!?!?!!
^^^ that's not an argument FYI. And it's not just because Jews have purchased control of the US; there has been strong Western support for the establishment of Israel since its inception as a colonizing ideology in the 1800s. Theodor Herzl himself envisioned Israel as a beacon of European civilization amid the Arab savages.

Now you are talking. If Israel had wantonly killed the Palestinians the death tolls would have been waaaaaaay higher and if the Arabs had Israel's weapons, there simply wouldn't have been an Israel anymore. Blacks commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers. There is injustice but it's the exception rather than the rule as you make it out to be.

Based on what? Pure speculation -- and I'm slingin' facts at you left and right. By the way, Blacks don't commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers, they get convicted out of proportion to the crimes they commit. Injustice is the rule, not the exception. You should stop reading Dinesh D'Souza.

Anyway, your "assertion" that "if the Arab's had Israel's weapons, there wouldn't have been an Israel" really avoids every point of this argument. If India had British military power and economic power, we wouldn't have been colonized. So what's your point? Who has the weapons? Israel. What have they done with the weapons? Brutally slaughtered thousands, far more then the Palestinians can with their pitiful Qassams and sensationalized "terrorism". Where is the hype for the bulldozings, the missile strikes, the assassinations, the torture, etc? You have nothing to say about that except that the savagery of the Palestinians justifies it. And yet you have no argument even in that regard aside from propagandistic anecdotes.

The death and imprisonment tolls are ridiculously high already, I'm not really sure what you consider "wanton" aside from actually gassing Palestinians in concentration camps.

Kesh:

You can only push a nation and its people so much, before they resort to tactics like the ones they employed in...

By the way, this thread is an example of how bitter enemies can love and support each other. Just a few moments ago, I was foaming at the mouth, ready to curse Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery's soul for all eternity. Now I find us arguing for the same cause. Sepia Mutiny zindabad! Love you Al.

By the way - I pray that the domestic workers make it out. I've often seen descriptions of how Asian, particularly Sri Lankan, domestic workers are systematically disenfranchised and oppressed in Lebanon. I've heard Arabs comment critically on the particular racism present with regards to the domestic workers in Lebanon. I hope they do not become another casualty of this war.

I am drowsy and Number six has declared my defeat. Backed in a corner, let me use crutches.

Over the last five months, some 800 Kassam rockets were fired at towns and villages in southwestern Israel.Israel occupied not an inch of Gaza at that time.Israel responded not by invading Gaza but by airstrikes against militants and launchers. For those of you who think an air assualt is deadlier for civilians it's actually quite the opposite. Then came the kidnappings and killings first by Hamas and then by Hizbollah.Both assaults breached a fully legitimate international border in the aftermath of a full Israeli withdrawal.

" A proportional response would please the Europeans no end, but would scarcely move a hair in the beard of a Hamas or Hezbollah leader.They are not set to be gently pushed into moderation, or to hammer out an exquisite compromise with the Jewish state, but to wipe it out as soon as they can. If we shoot a little, they will shoot back all the way into Islamic eternity. If we negotiate, cave in to blackmail and release Hamas and Hezbollah militants held in Israeli prisons, they will send them back to bomb schools and buses and pizza parlors in no time at all."

I probably couldn't have said the above better myself. These words are excerpted from a recent Op Ed in WSJ by a moderate professor at Haifa University which is an Arab Israeli University.

disproportionate responses and gross violations of human rights will only inflame people who wish to do harm and only serves to give groups like Hezbollah greater credibility and support. That's decidedly not in the long-term security interest of either India or the United States, and if we don't wake up to that fact we may eventually all pay for it.

Number Six I am glad you brought this up. You speak for many Islamic terror apologists. Let me give you my two cents: You should instead be more concerned about the radicalization of the American right and hardening of the Western moderate towards the Muslim world.

Yeti

A.N.S.W.E.R needs people like you. Please join them.

i>Brutally slaughtered thousands

When and where? That was straight out of the Arab rantbook. Lies, damn lies. A dozen becomes a hundred and before you know a hundred becomes a thousand.

Where is the hype for the bulldozings

Arab slips into free Israel, gets on a school bus and then detonates himself blowing up Israeli kids. Israelis respond by going into Gaza, give the bomber's family time to vacate and then bulldoze their family home. You have a problem with that disproportionate response?

the assassinations

Done precisely to target the high up masterminds of terror who would never send their own kids into Israel with explosive belts wrapped around their waists. Results in the least collateral damage.

torture,

Your friends from Hamas and Hezbollah will be able to show you what torture really is.

Oh for god's sakes , it's perfectly possible to believe that the State of Israel has a fundamental right to exist, and even to defend itself, to even be a Zionist, and to still not be down with the bombing of Lebanese civilians all over Lebanon because of what Hezbollah---not Lebanon--is doing from territory in Southern Lebanon that Lebanon has a hard time controlling in great measure because of the past actions of Israel, and which the fairly recently democratically elected government has had very little chance and very little practical help in reorganizing in a sustainable way. Just ask all the Israelis who are against this campaign. I can't believe it's so hard to distinguish between a country's right to exist and moral and pragmatic analysis of its actions on a standalone basis. Newsflash: Patriots can be dissidents! You don't have to lockstep support your government's actions! Governments can fuck up!
And being critical of a country's foreign policy and military action is not the same thing as saying the country has no right to exist!

Jilted_Manhood said:

You speak for many Islamic terror apologists.

Your friends from Hamas and Hezbollah

Once again, more winning debate tactics from the right -- when you don't agree with someone, call them names and tell them they are terrorist sympathizers. You're slipping a bit, however -- you forgot to call me anti-Semitic.

Saheli, god bless her, took the words right out of my mouth: would you say the same thing about the many Israelis who oppose their own government?

You should instead be more concerned about the radicalization of the American right and hardening of the Western moderate towards the Muslim world.

I certainly don't need you, of all people, to tell me what I should and shouldn't be concerned about. But since you've brought it up, I am concerned about those developments. And news flash: they're hardly unrelated to what's going on in Israel and Lebanon right now.

~~

As usual, Jon Stewart offers good insights, placing Israel's "measured response" in historical context.

. Just ask all the Israelis who are against this campaign. I can't believe it's so hard to distinguish between a country's right to exist and moral and pragmatic analysis of its actions on a standalone basis. Newsflash: Patriots can be dissidents!

They are a small minority of people. The great majority of the country is behind it. Hizbollah is deeply entrenched in Lebanon's society, and there is an evident coordinated effort with Iran and Syria. War is terrible, but in this case, very necessary. There is no time or scope for politically correct "measured responses."

They [Israelis who are against this campaign] are a small minority of people.

Well, right now they apparently number approximately 20-30 percent -- which is a solid minority. But not quite a "small minority" -- it is, after all, one in every four or five people. And as we've seen in our own country, at the outset of an armed conflict, many people "rally 'round" their leaders even if they have misgivings that manifest later.

But risible, your comment is not at all responsive to Saheli's point, which has nothing to do with the actual numbers of Israelis who oppose their government. Rather, I take her point to be that the 20-30 percent of the Israeli pubilc who oppose what their government is doing right now are not, as the right wing would have it, anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic, or pro-terrorist -- and that further undermines the same claims being made about non-Israelis. It's a classic right-wing move, as Number Six points out, to tar anyone who might disagree with them as being "anti-Israeli" or "pro-terrorist" -- that not only is a ridiculous claim, but also represents a troubling and dangerous move in its potential to undermine democratic discourse and civil society. I am not claiming that this necessarily has reached an extreme point in either Israel or the United States. But the move certainly is the first rhetorical step in justifying political oppression of the highest order, the recharacterization of one's political opponents as political enemies. Paging Carl Schmitt....

Israel's actions are motivated by a need to defend itself. By adopting violence and supporting organisations like Hamas and Hezbollah, the Palestinians will never get to live peacefully. The Palestinians have made extremely bad choices when it came to their freedom struggle, Look at what Israel had to deal with..... exemplary characters like Illich Ramirez Sanchez a.k.a Carlos the Jackal, Idi Amin , Ali Hassan Salameh ....................

Because of the failure of the world bodies to adequately condemn the murder of its citizens. Israel considers itself alone. After Munich, the olympic commitee's decision to fly the flag at half mast was met with hostility by the entire arab world. If more attention had been given to dispelling terrorism pre 9-11, Israel would not have to resort to such brutal tactics.

Israel knows the sluggishness of the world body when it comes to defending it, why else would it undertake Operations such as Wrath of God, SPring of youth and Entebbe. Do any of you disagree with any of these operations ? When Israel pulled out of Gaza, Hamas used it to rain rockets on Israel. Any concessions given to the militants are turned against Israel, Israel knows its two soldiers now, but it does not negotiate with terrorists. How else is it supposed to get its soldiers back.

Saudi Arabia--A kingdom whose former leader was said to never have smiled again when Israel won the six-day war has condemned Hezbollah, And don't start with the "US hand in Saudi foreign policy" argument King Abdullah is as conservative as they come, by condemning Hezbollah he has put himself in quite a situation with the country's religious establishment.

Once the Palestinians give up violence as a means to get to Israel will the middle east ever make steps to achieving peace.

Once again, more winning debate tactics from the right -- when you don't agree with someone, call them names and tell them they are terrorist sympathizers.

I didn't call you a leftist. I didn't question your loyalty to the western country where you live and suggest you leave for the Middle East. That would have been name calling from the right.

Saheli: There are actually more Israelis than you cite who oppose the bombing of Lebanon and many more who sincerely feel for Lebanese civilians. That's to Israel's credit. It's a mature society where citizens have a diversity of opinion. Unlike some societies which are monolithic in their hatred for Israel and Jews.

For several years Lebanon failed to disarm Hezbollah which has been long due as mandated by UN Resolution 1559. Israel is doing what they failed to do because its Israel's survival that's threatened. Israel has painstakingly asked civilians to leave before any strike. Instead of targeting civilians it is hurting Lebanon during its peak tourism season. Lebanon's Sunnis, Druze, Christians dislike Hezbollah anyways. Israel has shown them how Hezbollah has held the entire nation hostage.I have already tried to explain why a proportional response won't work. It'll only be a quick fix. Israel has a mandatory draft and takes the safety of its soldiers very seriously. Let me play the therapist on certain Indians ( disapora and otherwise ): the frustration that their beloved India can't grow some balls and fight terror like Israel actually translates into anger at Israel.

If you see the debate above none of my critics have counter argued well. No substance at all.All they have done is pick a couple of sentences at random and dissected their way.

Kesh, unlike your jilted colleague, you seem to want to engage in good faith dialogue on this set of issues, which I do appreciate quite sincerely. Since we could debate the underlying conflict forever without changing each other's minds -- people have been doing so, alas, for decades -- let me ask you a slightly different question, for I am genuinely interested in your response (and it is somewhat less of a threadjack).

Why and how do you regard the shift in India's traditional position with respect to Israel-Palestine to be either in its strategic interest or in line with its anticolonial values? I'm not now talking about the nitty-gritty of any particular conflict, much less the current war in Lebanon, but rather at a more conceptual level. Returning, in other words, to my original question and the point made by Yeti.

That's to Israel's credit. It's a mature society where citizens have a diversity of opinion. Unlike some societies which are monolithic in their hatred for Israel and Jews.

Care to name some names when you make an accusation that sweeping? And perhaps even to try to back it up? It is indeed to Israel's credit that there is that kind of diversity of opinion, but it is not to yours to make "arguments" like this one.

If you see the debate above none of my critics have counter argued well. No substance at all.

In contrast to you, who relies on the following dazzling bit of substance:

Let me play the therapist on certain Indians ( disapora and otherwise ): the frustration that their beloved India can't grow some balls and fight terror like Israel actually translates into anger at Israel.

Riiiight. And on what basis, exactly, is it that you make this sweeping psychological conclusion? (Are you yourself Indian? And if so, are you in the diaspora or are you "otherwise"?) You obviously haven't been paying any attention to SpoorLam -- saffron balls are alive and well.

Unlike some societies which are monolithic in their hatred for Israel and Jews.

Care to name some names when you make an accusation that sweeping? And perhaps even to try to back it up?

What have you been smoking that you don't know the answer to that? If you are that ignorant of the sweeping hatred for Israel that most Arab and many Muslim countries and their people share, I would just have to excuse myself from arguing with you anymore. But now maybe you'll ask me to go figure the root cause of this hatred. Right?

If you see the debate above none of my critics have counter argued well. No substance at all.

In contrast to you, who relies on the following dazzling bit of substance:

Let me play the therapist on certain Indians ( disapora and otherwise ): the frustration that their beloved India can't grow some balls and fight terror like Israel actually translates into anger at Israel.

That's called the art of hyperbole! And your rant proves my following point once again:

All they have done is pick a couple of sentences at random and dissected it their way.

My rant? Only one person ranting in this thread on either side of the issue, and it's not Kesh.

AK,

In strategic terms.... Allies.

India is surrounded by countries that wish it harm or has harmed it at one time or another. India's only concrete ally ever was the Soviet Union, after its disintegration India is badly in need of allies. The arab world is still largely influenced by Pakistan, USA is being cultivated, Russia still has some ties and many of Israel's enemies have the potential to become India's. Many of the jihadi elements participating in the 'jihad' can literally become Rebels without a cause if Israel ceased to exist, the battle ground can shift to Chechenya or Kashmir. It was the RAW-Mossad link that was the first step to establishing diplomatic ties.

Anti-Colonialism, i feel is being used kind of broadly here. Eurpean jews did not come with big war machines and evict Palestinians. The history i know was as typical of jewish history they hampered many arab landlords profits by threatening rent prices living outside city walls. When jewish influence became larger in the area, many Islamists wanted them out fearing a business and religious threat in the holy land. Israeli's did not arrive here with weapons, infact the