RE: [world-vedic] israel a friend indeed

[Guest guest]

Dear Sanjeev,

 

dont get befooled: Israel ist just the long arm of USA. To try to be a friend of

Israel will be a unstable as the attempt to get USA as a friend.

 

Israel is not an independent country - without support of America they would

have collapsed long ago.

 

Sasha

 

 

 

There is 1 message in this issue.

 

Topics in this digest:

 

1. israel a friend indeed

sanjeev nayyar <exploreindia

 

 

Message: 1

Sat, 21 Jun 2003 19:55:17 +0530

sanjeev nayyar <exploreindia

israel a friend indeed

 

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jun/20rajeev.htm

 

Rajeev Srinivasan, Israel: A friend in need?, June 20, 2003

 

 

There are several reasons why this is the perfect time for India to

enter into a strong alliance with Israel:

 

Chanakyan theory of statecraft

Certain similarities that make them compatible in the 'clash of

civilisations'

A realisation by Indians that Israeli concerns are valid

The rabid opposition of India's Marxists

Let me emphasise, however, that it is not necessarily the case for

India to be forever wedded to Israel, or indeed, to anyone else: all

tactical alliances are fluid and based on expediency. Indians,

naïvely, go for lifetime commitments, when a light-hearted affaire de

coeur is the right answer. The BJP has learned this art of

compromise, but the Congress never did. But that's no surprise

considering their 'leaders' are selected more for their ability to

kiss Nehru dynasty ass than for any inherent competence.

 

Chanakya in his classic Arthashastra (translated and edited by L N

Rangarajan, Penguin India, 1992, 868 pp., Rs. 395) speaks about the

national interest. He has a dictum that by definition, a state's

immediate neighbours are enemies; in India's case this is amply borne

out by China, Pakistan and Bangladesh. As an illustration, China was

not India's enemy for 2,200 years as some Chinese strongman said

recently: that was because there was a country in between, the buffer

state of Tibet. As soon as they swallowed Tibet, they became India's

neighbour, and therefore, enemy.

 

Chanakya defines six methods of foreign policy that the nation could

pursue in order to advance its interests:

 

Samdhi, or making peace via a treaty, when one is relatively weak

Vigraha, or active hostilities, waging war, when one is stronger than

the enemy

Asana, or staying quiet, as in an armed truce, when the enemy is

equally strong

Yana, or preparing for war, building up one's capabilities, when one

has certain advantages

Samsraya, or seeking support from others, when one is depleted in

strength

Dvaidhibhava, or dual policy of making peace with one neighbour to

pursue, with his help, the policy of hostility towards another, when

this is necessary

Of these, Chanakya is clear that actively waging war is the last

resort, and that it is only when other means are exhausted that one

should pursue this direction. It may well be that India is

simultaneously pursuing yana by building up her military and economic

strength, and samsraya by seeking support, both sensible policies.

Israel is a good fit in both strategies, for it does have the

military technology India needs, and its support irritates only those

who are inimical to India anyway.

 

Chanakya would suggest war against Pakistan, and armed truce against

China. Chanakya also defines the 'Middle Power' (madhyama) and

the 'Neutral Power' (udasina), powerful states that may have an

interest in the nation's affairs. The US fits in with the definition

of 'Neutral Power', one that is more powerful than both us and our

immediate enemies. Israel is clearly an ally of the Neutral Power.

 

Theoretically, there is thus good reason for India to ally herself

with Israel. There is also an eminently practical reason: the stark

reality is that India and Israel are the only two states that are

actively resisting being overwhelmed in a giant Islamic crescent

ranging from West Africa to Indonesia. And we are the only two states

that have the fundamental religious foundations to resist dhimmitude.

 

There are a number of other similarities: for instance the issue

of 'holy sites' in Palestine and in Ayodhya. Furthermore, it is

amazing how the antediluvian Marxists around the world despise both

Hinduism and Judaism; but they are quite happy to be water-carriers

for Islamism in contrast. Little do the Marxists realise that they

will be the first to be liquidated in an Islamist State. This is much

like black Muslims in the US who do not appreciate the irony that

their ancestors were enslaved by Muslim slave traders who rounded

them up and frog-marched them in chains to board waiting European

ships.

 

The whole issue of the primal rights to the land in Palestine, in

particular in Jerusalem, is quite tortuous. The American scholar

Daniel Pipes suggests convincingly that Jerusalem in fact was not a

major holy site for Muslims. It is not mentioned even once in the

Koran, says Pipes. Muslims claim that the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem

(also the Temple Mount, Judaism's most sacred spot) is where their

Prophet descended to after going to heaven. However, that spot was

only referred to as the Far Mosque, and its alleged association with

Jerusalem is recent.

 

It is true that Judaism is very much in the fire-and-brimstone

tradition of the desert, and therefore philosophically the opposite

of the far more humane tradition of the forest, which suffuses all

the Indic faiths. However, it is also true that Hindus and Jews have

suffered most grievously from the excesses of Islamic and Christian

dogma and belligerence. Because of this, both also turned inwards:

thus the ossification of caste in Hinduism and the Orthodox Jews'

strict rules about how Jewishness is only inherited through the

mother.

 

Despite all this, there is one incredible fact that almost all Jews I

know recognise: that out of 148 nations in which Jews have lived,

they were oppressed in 147 of them, and the sole exception is India.

For instance, the Jews of Cochin landed in 72 CE at the great port of

Muziris (Kodungalloor) on the Malabar Coast. Joseph Rabban was

elevated to chieftain of the village of Anjuvannam achandrataram --

so long as the moon and stars exist -- by King Bhaskara Ravi Varman

around 1000 CE. I know a lady named Esther, a white woman with bright

red hair, who wears a sari and speaks immaculate Malayalam, as she

should: her ancestors have lived unmolested in Kerala for 2,000

years, since the destruction of their Second Temple!

 

Young Israelis come by the thousands to India after their compulsory

military service these days. Locals in Hampi and McLeodganj and

Dharamsala may complain about their 'raves', but it must be a

wonderful experience for these youngsters to know that there exists a

land where they are not hated just for being Jews.

 

Furthermore, there was an extremely interesting offer from Israel in

the early 1980s. Just after they bombed and destroyed Iraq's Osiraq

nuclear reactor on June 7, 1981, the Israelis contacted India and

asked for cooperation in likewise destroying Pakistan's reactors at

Kahuta. They only needed refueling facilities for their planes, and

permission to use Indian airspace. Of course, the Nehruvian

Stalinists in power in India at the time were horrified: whatever

would our Arab friends think! In hindsight, bombing Kahuta then would

have set back Pakistan's 'Islamic Bomb,' although their kind friend

China would still have given them the components for screwdriver

assembly.

 

As predatory and missionary desert faiths continue to impose

themselves on all the peoples of the world, it is important for the

Jews and Hindus, both victims, to stand by and support each other. It

is indeed a clash of civilisations.

 

There is also the growing realisation by many Indians that they have

been led up the garden path by all the rhetoric about Palestinians.

Nehruvian Stalinists justify the loud breast-beating they indulge in

about Palestinians on several grounds:

 

Compassion for 'suffering' peoples

The warmth Arabs will feel if India supports Palestinians

Opposition to colonialism/European imperialism

In point of fact, Palestinians do not deserve support from Indians on

any of these grounds.

 

 

Compassion: Palestinians swamp the media with their comparative

victimhood. Yet there are plenty of others more deserving of

compassion. After all, charity begins at home. Consider the

ethnically cleansed Kashmiri Pandits, rotting away in refugee camps.

Or consider the Hindus of Bangladesh: literally every day I hear

about yet another atrocity committed, most often gang rapes and

murders, or abductions and forcible conversions, of young Hindu

women. Why is it that all the champions of the Palestinian cause in

India have no tears for these people, our own? Why aren't they

assailing Pakistan and Bangladesh? Indians need to rally around the

slogan: 'Let my people live!'

Arab goodwill for India: This is laughable. What has India got to

show for its pains in supporting Palestine? Nothing, nada, zilch! As

Americans might ask, 'What have the Arabs done for us lately?' The

only Arabs who were even half-way decent to us were the Iraqis. All

the other Arabs despise Indians. In fact, most Arabs don't even have

much goodwill for Palestinians, else they would have helped them

rebuild their lives, instead of forcing them to live as refugees and

using them as jihadi cannon-fodder

Anti-imperialism: This is a throwback to the days of the despicable

NAM, when Nehru and company used to feel self-important as

the 'leaders' of a bunch of banana republics. But the time for all

this inane rhetoric is far gone. What is happening in Israel and

Palestine is not imperialism, but the struggles of a numerically

small civilisation to avoid being swamped by violent neighbours. And

these neighbours have the full support of the world's Leftist media:

remember the godawful fuss they made about 'Jeningrad', until it was

shown to be a fabrication, special delivery for the television

cameras of gullible networks?

I too at some point in my impressionable youth swallowed the Indian

media rhetoric about Palestinians. There were some Palestinians at

the IIT Madras, who had tales of teenage years spent cradling AK-47s

fighting against an implacable enemy, a coloniser, a continuation of

the colonial European assault on Asia. Later I met Israelis at

Stanford, and I used to harangue them about what terrible

imperialists they were.

 

But slowly it occurred to me that the Jews were more sinned against

than sinning, and I am sure I am not the only Indian who has come to

this conclusion. Their motto after millennia of oppression, 'Never

again!' holds resonance for Hindus. Today we are up against the same

enemy: one that views us both literally as untermenschen, sub-human

monsters, spawn of Satan, fit for nothing but slaughter; the moral

equivalent of vermin, as whites in American classified Native

Americans two centuries ago.

 

There are acts of barbarism that do take place in Israel's struggle

to exist. Thus Ariel Sharon is rightly condemned as the Butcher of

Sabra and Chattila refugee camps in Lebanon, when Israel's ally, the

Christian Phalangist militia, went on a rampage against Palestinians.

That is surely deplorable.

 

However, the very same people who condemn Sharon, the Marxists of

India, are full of eulogies for Mufti Mohammed Sayeed. Do you know,

gentle reader, that Sayeed is called the Butcher of Anantnag for his

role in terrorising Kashmiri Hindus? Here's verbatim email I got from

Kashmiri Pandits in response to my column The Perfect Con Job: The

Kashmiri Loot of the Nation.

 

'The irony of seeing the butcher of Anantnag (when in 1985-86 riots

in Anantnag Kashmiri Pandits suffered at the hands of Mufti's men)

rise to become the CM of the state today is heart-wrenching. Mufti

was at the helm of the KP massacre and lootings in Anantnag way

before his 'boys' came into action in the Valley.'

 

'In 1986 there were anti-Hindu riots in south Kashmir. We the Hindus

in Kashmir know that they were instigated by Mufti Sayeed. Reason:

Central Govt. under Rajiv wanted to overthrow the GM Shah government.

After the riots Central Rule was applied.'

 

'Mufti is the butcher of Anantnag. He orchestrated the Anantnag riots

in early 1986. This single incident triggered the start of our

exodus. And now, he is being rewarded with the CM-ship of the state.

Only in India!'

 

For more details on the Anantnag riots, try the URL

http://www.ikashmir.org/PastPresent/chapter16.html

 

So why are Indian Marxists so gung-ho about Mufti Mohammed Sayeed and

not about Ariel Sharon? Their Chinese handlers must have told them

that it is important to keep the Marxist-Islamist nexus going, and to

keep India and Israel away from each other.

 

And that is the final reason: the major hue and cry raised by

Marxists. Since by definition everything they want is anti-India and

pro-China, it is an excellent reason to proceed forthwith with an

Indo-Israeli tactical alliance. Clearly, that would be positive for

India and negative for China (for instance the Phalcon and the future

Arrow weapons deals).

 

Rajeev Srinivasan

 

 

 

_____________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!