'The Secret Part Of Indo-Israel Defence Ties Will Remain A Secret'

India’sforeign policy in West Asia has undergone a sea change over the past decadefrom being adamantly pro-Arab to one that also engages Israel. India’sbalancing act, often difficult and messy, is a tight one and not alwayssuccessful. It is important to remember that Indian passports prohibited travelto Israel as late as 1992, a fact that rankles Israel’s newly arrivedambassador Mark Sofer. But Kargil changed perceptions when Israel helped Indiain its time of need. Sofer discusses Indo-Israeli relations, mostly conductedbelow the radar. 

What aspects of bilateral relations would you like tostress more during your tenure here?

Thereis no doubt, the way I view the burgeoning relations between Israel and India inthe 15 years since the establishment of relations, the most important iseconomic cooperation in different fields -- trade, joint ventures andagriculture. We are just about to sign a three-year agricultural action planwith the Indian government which will take place in Rajasthan. We choseRajasthan because the climate and terrain is similar to that of Israel. We willbe doing a lot of work on water management, waste water, usage of water. And inthe Pusa Institute where we have an Indo-Israeli farm which we initiated in1996. We will both get a lot out of it because there is an extremely high levelof agricultural expertise here in India. We feel Indians and Israelis really havegot their act together in these areas and are working together.

What role can India play in the peace process?

Thereare a number of actors in the Middle East but first and foremost -- and I thinkthis is what it really should be--it should be the actors themselves, that isIsrael, the Palestinians and the wider Arab world because we have to get ouract together bilaterally with the pragmatic Palestinian leadership andpragmatic Arab leaders. The second actively engaged partners would be theQuartet--the US, the UN, Russia and the EU. I think India with good relationswith both sides can certainly have a supportive role. It did take part inAnnapolis at a very high level, which we were happy about and that wascertainly a welcome contribution to peace. That is how I would look at it rightnow as the role of the international community in which India has a crucialrole in bringing the sides together.

Theparadox of the Middle East is that we know more or less what the solution wouldbe--there will be a Jewish state and a state of Palestine -- we will liveside-by-side with it and there will be some sort of Gaza-West Bank connection.Solution to the Palestinian refugees will not include their mass entryinto Israel because once the stateof Palestine is set up, it is unthinkable that the refugees wouldn’t go to Palestine but to Israel.There has to be an equitable solution, an economicsolution for the refugee problem. It is a humanitarian issue, which must beaddressed. The question of Jerusalem is a crucial one, which has to be solved.With the goodwill that exists and with hard and deep negotiations there aresolutions put on the table already.

Weknow in macro terms where we are going but we haven’t managed to get there yet.The train has left the station and we are convinced that with pragmaticleadership it will reach its destination. The trouble is the crisis we inIsrael, and the pragmatic Palestinians and the pragmatic Arab leaders arefacing, which is the threat from extremism. The threat has to be countered on a muchwider scale and to me Annapolis was that manifestation where you had on theside of peace 55 countries and those braying from the outside were those whowere a 100 percent against any movement. You take the extremists of the Hamas,the extremists of the Hezbollah and you take unfortunately their mentor,President Ahmedenijad, which is not to say that Iranian people are of his ilk.Absolutely not. The leadership, which is calling incessantly for thedestruction of the Jewish state, a member state of the UN, which is unheard of,should bring about revulsion.

ButI believe the civilized world will win out as it always has and we know wherewe are going.

India’s former foreign minister Jaswant Singh once said inIsrael that India’s policy towards Israel is "captive" to the internal politicsof India. Do you agree with the assessment?

Ithink it would be very strange in any democratic society if foreign policy wasnot affected in one way or another by internal politics. It is normal. Ibelieve it is true of Israel, it is true of many of the European states, as wellas of theUS. Internal considerations are important but no less important is cessation ofconflict. A greater proportion of the Israeli population is Muslim compared toIndia. We have about one million Muslims in a country of about 8 million. Wetoo have internal considerations. We have a relationship with much of theMuslim community in India. We don’t believe that Muslim community here wants toperpetuate conflict in West Asia. I don’t believe that in the least. I believethe Muslim world as a whole is not the one which wants to foster conflict andbloodshed. Unfortunately, Islam sometimes is abused and misused by the BinLadens of the world. This is not the Islam, which the vast, vast majority ofthe Muslims believe in, especially in India.

Doyou think the UPA govt. has backtracked on its support for Israel compared tothe NDA? Who is a better tightrope walker?

Itwould be wrong of me to make political statements on the internal politics ofIndia. It would be an abuse of the hospitality I am given here. I would say wehave a growing relationship with India. It is a new relationship, it is 15years old. It is a bipartisan relationship meaning it encompasses both types ofgovernments. If you look at our economic relationship we have trade worth over$3 billion, which was more or less zero 15 years ago. We have very closecooperation in agriculture, high-tech, defence and the list goes on. Onpolitical issues, yes, we have a very, very deep high level, middle leveldialogue on all the issues which are affecting us in West Asia. We respect thepoint of the view of the Indian government tremendously. We can talk on thesame wavelength. It augurs well for the future.

Israel sees Iran as an archenemy but India’s relationswith Teheran are more complex given New Delhi’s domestic politics and the needfor oil and gas. How does Israel view India’s participation in the pipeline?

Isee there are different points of view taken up by different segments ofsociety and I will not comment on how I view the pipeline. Of course, we haveproblems with Iranian leadership headed by this President (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad, just his most devilish useof language is unbearable. But I don’t think it is just an Israeli problem,for butthe western world as a whole--and it is not just the US either. The moststrident calls for Iran to desist from its nuclear enrichment programme arecoming from European countries.

Thepresent Iranian leadership is a threat not only to Israel. They have put us onthe pedestal which they shouldn’t have done. They are a threat to the civilizedworld as we know it. And that is why the international community as a whole has gotits act together. It wasn’t Israel that put sanctions on Iran on two separateoccasions in United Nations. It was the international community, which doesn’ttake its cue from us. It takes its cue from its own considerations, its owninterests.

Does it bother you when senior Indian leaders visit Iran?

Differentcountries have different interests. A number of leaders from differentcountries travel. I think, on the macro level, if the international community asa whole looks at the extremist threat the same way, the threat will beovercome. It is not a question of this visit or that meeting. The issue is: will the global threat be contained? Of course we have a problem with thecurrent Iranian leadership. We never have and we would never call for Iran’sdestruction.

Do you think India could help moderate Iran’s stand?

Ican ask you back that a president who has called for the eradication of anentire country (Israel), a president who has denied the Holocaust, who hasdecided that the massacre of the Jews by the Nazis didn’t exist--is this aperson who can go towards moderation? Has anyone tried to convince Bin Laden tobe moderate? There are certain personalities who will never be moderate. And itis not a question of dialogue. (Grows agitated) What am I going to discuss with him? That Israelshouldn’t be destroyed or only a little bit destroyed? My own death? Please don’tcall for my mass murder? Or that I would like if you kill only half of me? What arewe talking here? I am sure serious Iranians feel in their hearts that calls forthe massacre of Jews in Israel is despicable. Yet he continues to say it. Whatdo you discuss with him -- he knows or ought to know.

Last year Israel complicated the future of the Indo-USnuclear deal by asking the Nuclear Suppliers Group for similar treatment, whichwas very unhelpful. Israel’s position was the same as China’s, making Indianswonder about Israel’s real intentions. 

Israeldid not make its approach on that level. This was not done openly so I can’tsay what we said or didn’t say. As I said earlier, countries have interests. Wehave our interests, India has its. Under no circumstances, and it is crucial tostress, did Israel take an approach which might be untoward vis- a-vis India.That wasn’t at all the reasoning in our discussions with the IAEA or with the USor with other countries. We wanted to put forward how we view the situation. Weactually speak to the Indian government about it. We are not hiding anythingunder the table.

But it was kind of a surprise.

Idon’t think it was a surprise to the Indians.

But your position ended up being the same as China’s.

Ourposition is absolutely not that. We didn’t coordinate. We were not coming fromany type of collusion or discussion if that is the subtext here. Not at all. Wewere putting forward our point of view. That’s normal and I think countriesought to. It would be wrong to hide it. We have done nothing, and we will donothing, and taken no influential position in any forum on the nuclearagreement. It is not something we are involved in.

Does Israel hope to benefit from relaxation of rules?

Let’ssee if the Indian case goes through and we will see how to develop it forward.Very intense negotiations are going on right now and it is a matter of greatinternal debate here. It is also an international political issue so I am justreading the papers. It is too early to make any prognosis about what we will orwill not do if and when the agreement goes through.

How can Israel help India more to counter terrorism withtechnology, tactics and intelligence?

Thereare no two situations which are identical. We do have a defence relationshipwith India, which is no secret. On the other hand, what is a secret is what isthe defence relationship. And with all due respect the secret part of it willremain secret.

Do you think India’s neighbours are involved incross-border terrorism?

Thethreat the world is facing today is quite different. It is civilized nationsfighting groups, which is harder. It has made the world a more convoluted placeand we all have to change our tactics and strategic thinking. We don’t havediplomatic relations with Pakistan but we do have excellent diplomaticrelations with India and we do discuss these issues at very great length withIndian authorities. Cross border terrorism has to be dealt with on a number oflevels. No conflict in the world can be solved through military means.Conflicts, sadly, do have to have a military component yet it has to be muchmore holistic approach with incentives with clear-cut political horizons. Thisis our experience. Yes, there are outside influences.

With extremism spreading, do you think India is stillinsulated?

Youhave 150 million Muslims in India. If one person here or there is involved, itis wrong to cast aspersions on the whole community. For goodness sake, thereare still 149.9999 million who are not. We should not take one example andextrapolate. It’s wrong. But I don’t think anyone is insulated anymore. Withthe spread of the internet and television, and computers, there is no where inthe world which is not affected. There is no bubble. It doesn’t exist. Itdoesn’t exist in West Asia, not in Southeast Asia.

It is said that terrorism the last resort of the weak andthe dispossessed? Do you think India and Israel are handling that aspectadequately and addressing legitimate grievances?

Idon’t have a view on that because that is for the Indian government to decide.It would be patronizing and condescending for me to say India is doing enoughor not. I do think there has to be a basis for a political solution but we haveto resign ourselves to the fact that with certain groups there can’t be asolution. I don’t think there can be a negotiated solution with Bin Laden whohas taken upon himself to overthrow the existing order of the world as we knowit. We have the same problem with Hamas in Gaza whose ideological aim is thedestruction of Israel. This cannot be the basis for negotiations.

Whatdo you think of India’s voting pattern in the UN on the Arab-Israeli issueswhere New Delhi votes with the Palestinians?

Wehave ongoing discussions with our Indian colleagues on the whole issue of theUnited Nations. I don’t think voting pattern is the be-all and end-all ofrelationships. Bilateral relations have to be based on much more than onmathematical equations of 1-nill, 2-all. It is not a cricket game. It is theeasy way out. If we look at the relationship between Israel and India and lookat where we were for 40 of those 60 years and see what’s happened in the lastten years, we are in dynamic mode.

Butsurely, it is a talking point.

Ofcourse, it is a talking point and a sign of the maturity of our relationship.We put all issues on the table. India has issues with us. We don’t seeeye-to-eye on every Indian policy on West Asia. We don’t always see eye-to-eyewith the US, with European countries with whom we are very close. If you sweepeverything unpalatable under the carpet, we have an immature relationship. Do Isee eye-to-eye with my wife on everything, the answer is no. It doesn’t mean wedon’t have a close relationship.

Soit is not an irksome issue? 

TheUN General Assembly has not been helpful in bringing about peace in the MiddleEast. Voting patterns reflect the interest of the countries, which have nothing to dowith the Middle East. I am not talking of India. In Israel, we don’t place toomuch importance on General Assembly where countries tend to vote by blocs.Recently, there has been a change in Israel’s relationship with the UN.Recently, Israel put forth a resolution on fighting desertification andalleviating poverty, which passed and India was very supportive.

How do you react to Arun Gandhi’s statement that Israelpromotes a culture of violence and is too militaristic in its approach to theArabs?

Hesaid something which I would have preferred to not have been said. Reading his apology,I think he preferred not to have said it. I plan to initiate a dialoguewith him of my own volition. I believe in dialogue. I believe he should learnmore about Israel and the Jewish people. In the United States, there is a sortof dynamic …

Whatdo you think of the intense reaction in the US against Arun Gandhi, who wasforced to resign from his post?

I think there are people everywhere who have difficultytackling criticism. It is not just people connected with Israel. The Jewishcommunity in the United States is 5 million and is well known but it is not asingle monolithic bloc but a plethora of different views.

Wasthere political correctness involved here?

I don’t know what was involved because I am not privy todecision. I will discuss this with him. I will explain where I am coming from.

Movingto defence issues, the Israeli and Indian armies have kept their interactionsto a minimum but do you foresee the relationship growing to a point where thetwo sides would conduct joint exercises? If so you, do you have a timeline inmind?

Certain issues between countries do need to remain underwraps for whatever reason. I don’t think the Indian authorities would be happyif we were to discuss in public. We have a burgeoning relationship and thedefence relationship got a major boost during Kargil, when Israel came toIndia’s assistance when India was in great need and brought about theturnaround in the situation on the ground. I think we proved then to Indian governmentthat you can rely on us that we have the wherewithal. A friend in need is afriend indeed. I have been in India for four months and I hear a great deal ofrespect for Israel also on non-defence issues--agriculture, drip irrigation,high-tech. There is a groundswell of goodwill towards Israel among the Indianpeople.

Defence relationships between countries are generallysecret and they should be. Certain facts are on the table but we don’t make anoise about things.

TwoIndo-Israeli deals have come under a cloud for alleged payment of kickbacks--the Barak missile deal and the Phalcon early warning system deal. How can thisbe prevented?

I can’t say it is going on. We are assuming things here.First we have to see if somebody is being accused and found guilty then we cansay how we prevent it. In the open societies we have, corruption arouses greatrevulsion. Does that make everyone in the history of mankind scrupulous? Theanswer is: no. Must one make every effort to prevent any kind of corruptionshould it exist? I think that governments must, and we do. The Indian governmentdoes. We learn from experience. It would be wrong to cast aspersions now.

Indiaalways wants the defence relationship to go beyond just a buyer-sellertransaction.