 "A visit from Modi to Israel will be important: Daniel Carmon")
Daniel Carmon, ambassador of Israel to India, tells Aditi Phadnis relations between India and Israel are becoming "visibly visible".
Next year, we will celebrate the 25th anniversary of relations between India and Israel. What have we achieved and what remains to be done?
Twenty five years is not just a point of time in the important history of Israel and India. It is also an important journey that India and Israel embarked upon many years ago. Think about the strategy the two countries have chosen to forge, a relationship between two very different countries, which are situated in very different areas of the globe. On the other hand, they have similar values, challenges and some solutions also that are similar.
There is a strong defence relationship. But there are also problems.
If I talked before about a process, and strengthening the relationship, defence has certainly been one of the key relationships in all those years, but as we evolve we discover more areas of cooperation.
Although there are publications from time to time in the media about the nature of those relations, we need to maintain a degree of discretion about this aspect.
Usually what is publicised is the "buyer-seller" element in the relationship. But like the India-Israel relationship itself, defence relations are not based only on a "buyer-seller" equation. We learn from each other, we share our expertise, know-how and experience. We develop together. This gives depth to the relationship. I think we can be very proud of these characteristics in our defence relations.
At this point particularly, defence relations are especially important because of the problems India is facing on account of counterterrorism. Israel has battled and fought terrorism for decades. You have developed a special expertise. Can you offer India any suggestions on counterterrorism?
The nature of the relationship is quite unique because it has two sides. It is not that one side is giving and the other is receiving. We both cooperate; two years ago we signed a landmark agreement on homeland security and counterterrorism. Each of our countries knows exactly what terrorism is. We have been unfortunate victims of terrorism. We have immense experience in countering terrorism and I would not qualify or limit myself to one particular period of time in our cooperation as being more important. The fight against terrorism is a growing challenge to the world. India and Israel have taken a strategic decision to share and cooperate at all levels on homeland security, counterterrorism and defence.
Frankly, there is no time that is less relevant or more relevant. The national security of any country is one of the major targets for the government - to ensure its citizens are safe from threats. This is an obligation of any government and both the Indian and Israeli governments are respectively committed to this.
Recently, US Secretary of State John Kerry was in India and advised India to cut some of its red tape, shed some bureaucracy. Coming from the US, which has a pretty impressive bureaucracy of its own, this seemed a bit rich. But it is true that India has a healthy and sometimes intrusive bureaucracy. How has Israel fared in its hands?
There is no doubt the Indian bureaucracy is there; and you don't have to go as far as to quote the Secretary of State - you can listen to the Indians themselves. India has done a lot to ease the task of doing business in the country. If you talk about defence, there is the new Defence Procurement Procedure that the defence minister has been talking about recently. The administration knows and is challenging one of the important ingredients of doing business in India. I look at it, as do many of my colleagues here, with optimism.
But it is a factor. There is no doubt that it is a factor. I would like to add that there is more involvement of the private sector in India in defence and it has also been allocated defence-related activity. This also shows that India is very much aware of its challenges. But we are on the right track.
Israeli officials and commentators have said India tends to treat Israel like a "mistress": happy to engage intimately in private but hesitant to acknowledge the relationship in public. You have also said the relationship is only now visibly visible. Is this true?
As I said before, there was a time when the relations were there but they had to pay a price of visibility. Visibility is not something that is only ceremonial. It is not only good to have visibility, it is also the message to India - the establishment and the people of India - to Israel and the establishment and the people there, that being visible in the relations is OK. When we talk about visible relations, the fact that the relations are not under the carpet (maybe that's a nicer way of putting it) signals to ministers, to secretaries: let's find the joint interest instead of paying the price of hiding.
Yes, for many years, we had to pay this price. Those times are over. The different areas of cooperation between our two countries go far beyond defence: they include trade, agriculture, energy, the civilian aspects of homeland security… I would say they include areas that each country puts on the table for an alliance, for joint ventures. The best of each side works for the benefit of both sides. If we take agriculture, for example, or if we take the next big thing, water (in which we are already involved but so much more can be done), those are areas that are important to both sides.
And we can give quite a few success stories, not just in agriculture but in water and water management, too.
Israel has excelled in water management. The term "development laboratory" is more than just a phrase. We have tested this term in our country. We are sharing it with friends. Our friends know and appreciate the goodwill that exists on both sides - without hiding.
Nowadays, we are welcome everywhere. And nobody even thinks about the under-the-carpet policy or the price that has to be paid for this.
I think the government of India has declared but is also maintaining a very intelligent policy of not making conditional the relations with one side in this region and the relations with the other. They have said so more than once from every possible forum and are implementing it consistently.
But that said, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has visited around 150 countries but has not yet found time to visit Israel. At multilateral fora like the UN Human Rights Commission (UNHCR) and during debates on Gaza, the Modi government has taken a nuanced and not always consistent position. What do you make of this? Are you disappointed?
No, it is not disappointing at all. There have been a host of visits by Indian dignitaries to Israel: in fact, one of the characteristics of visibility in the last few years is the fact that more ministers have visited each other, the highlight of which was the presidential visit a year ago. In the past, we hardly saw any exchanges.
We are almost on the verge of saying that visits from ministers in Israel and India to each other's countries have become a matter of routine - not yet, but we are on the verge of getting there.
Of course, a visit from Modi will be very important and I have no doubt it will happen. But we do not have a date yet. We are hopeful that the President of Israel will make a reciprocal visit to New Delhi. It is under discussion. And other visits are on the way.
The issue of the way India has voted in multilateral fora....
We are again discussing with the Indian government, a vast area of diplomatic issues. The issue of votes has always been part of our joint discussion. I would urge you to look at the record of the way India has voted in the last two years. It is not as bad as you describe it. While voting is an important matter, and it is definitely on our common diplomatic agenda, sometimes it is exaggerated.
The two countries are negotiating a free trade agreement (FTA). What does Israel like about it and what does it not like?
We have had eight rounds of negotiations and we are still discussing it so it would be premature to say anything. Just as the relations between our two countries are unique, so is the FTA. We are hearing India's overall policy on FTAs. We are a relatively small economy. Each side is doing its homework and pretty soon, we will have an agreement. Industry, which is part of the puzzle in both India and Israel, supports the FTA. Negotiators are talking so we should leave it to them.
Next year, we will celebrate the 25th anniversary of relations between India and Israel. What have we achieved and what remains to be done?
Twenty five years is not just a point of time in the important history of Israel and India. It is also an important journey that India and Israel embarked upon many years ago. Think about the strategy the two countries have chosen to forge, a relationship between two very different countries, which are situated in very different areas of the globe. On the other hand, they have similar values, challenges and some solutions also that are similar.
More From This Section
We are in a process that started even before diplomatic relations, a process that saw many ups and downs for different reasons, and I can say with a lot of satisfaction that those relations have evolved, become mature, very relevant to both sides and visibly more visible.
There is a strong defence relationship. But there are also problems.
If I talked before about a process, and strengthening the relationship, defence has certainly been one of the key relationships in all those years, but as we evolve we discover more areas of cooperation.
Although there are publications from time to time in the media about the nature of those relations, we need to maintain a degree of discretion about this aspect.
Usually what is publicised is the "buyer-seller" element in the relationship. But like the India-Israel relationship itself, defence relations are not based only on a "buyer-seller" equation. We learn from each other, we share our expertise, know-how and experience. We develop together. This gives depth to the relationship. I think we can be very proud of these characteristics in our defence relations.
At this point particularly, defence relations are especially important because of the problems India is facing on account of counterterrorism. Israel has battled and fought terrorism for decades. You have developed a special expertise. Can you offer India any suggestions on counterterrorism?
The nature of the relationship is quite unique because it has two sides. It is not that one side is giving and the other is receiving. We both cooperate; two years ago we signed a landmark agreement on homeland security and counterterrorism. Each of our countries knows exactly what terrorism is. We have been unfortunate victims of terrorism. We have immense experience in countering terrorism and I would not qualify or limit myself to one particular period of time in our cooperation as being more important. The fight against terrorism is a growing challenge to the world. India and Israel have taken a strategic decision to share and cooperate at all levels on homeland security, counterterrorism and defence.
Frankly, there is no time that is less relevant or more relevant. The national security of any country is one of the major targets for the government - to ensure its citizens are safe from threats. This is an obligation of any government and both the Indian and Israeli governments are respectively committed to this.
Recently, US Secretary of State John Kerry was in India and advised India to cut some of its red tape, shed some bureaucracy. Coming from the US, which has a pretty impressive bureaucracy of its own, this seemed a bit rich. But it is true that India has a healthy and sometimes intrusive bureaucracy. How has Israel fared in its hands?
There is no doubt the Indian bureaucracy is there; and you don't have to go as far as to quote the Secretary of State - you can listen to the Indians themselves. India has done a lot to ease the task of doing business in the country. If you talk about defence, there is the new Defence Procurement Procedure that the defence minister has been talking about recently. The administration knows and is challenging one of the important ingredients of doing business in India. I look at it, as do many of my colleagues here, with optimism.
But it is a factor. There is no doubt that it is a factor. I would like to add that there is more involvement of the private sector in India in defence and it has also been allocated defence-related activity. This also shows that India is very much aware of its challenges. But we are on the right track.
Israeli officials and commentators have said India tends to treat Israel like a "mistress": happy to engage intimately in private but hesitant to acknowledge the relationship in public. You have also said the relationship is only now visibly visible. Is this true?
As I said before, there was a time when the relations were there but they had to pay a price of visibility. Visibility is not something that is only ceremonial. It is not only good to have visibility, it is also the message to India - the establishment and the people of India - to Israel and the establishment and the people there, that being visible in the relations is OK. When we talk about visible relations, the fact that the relations are not under the carpet (maybe that's a nicer way of putting it) signals to ministers, to secretaries: let's find the joint interest instead of paying the price of hiding.
Yes, for many years, we had to pay this price. Those times are over. The different areas of cooperation between our two countries go far beyond defence: they include trade, agriculture, energy, the civilian aspects of homeland security… I would say they include areas that each country puts on the table for an alliance, for joint ventures. The best of each side works for the benefit of both sides. If we take agriculture, for example, or if we take the next big thing, water (in which we are already involved but so much more can be done), those are areas that are important to both sides.
And we can give quite a few success stories, not just in agriculture but in water and water management, too.
Israel has excelled in water management. The term "development laboratory" is more than just a phrase. We have tested this term in our country. We are sharing it with friends. Our friends know and appreciate the goodwill that exists on both sides - without hiding.
Nowadays, we are welcome everywhere. And nobody even thinks about the under-the-carpet policy or the price that has to be paid for this.
I think the government of India has declared but is also maintaining a very intelligent policy of not making conditional the relations with one side in this region and the relations with the other. They have said so more than once from every possible forum and are implementing it consistently.
But that said, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has visited around 150 countries but has not yet found time to visit Israel. At multilateral fora like the UN Human Rights Commission (UNHCR) and during debates on Gaza, the Modi government has taken a nuanced and not always consistent position. What do you make of this? Are you disappointed?
No, it is not disappointing at all. There have been a host of visits by Indian dignitaries to Israel: in fact, one of the characteristics of visibility in the last few years is the fact that more ministers have visited each other, the highlight of which was the presidential visit a year ago. In the past, we hardly saw any exchanges.
We are almost on the verge of saying that visits from ministers in Israel and India to each other's countries have become a matter of routine - not yet, but we are on the verge of getting there.
Of course, a visit from Modi will be very important and I have no doubt it will happen. But we do not have a date yet. We are hopeful that the President of Israel will make a reciprocal visit to New Delhi. It is under discussion. And other visits are on the way.
The issue of the way India has voted in multilateral fora....
We are again discussing with the Indian government, a vast area of diplomatic issues. The issue of votes has always been part of our joint discussion. I would urge you to look at the record of the way India has voted in the last two years. It is not as bad as you describe it. While voting is an important matter, and it is definitely on our common diplomatic agenda, sometimes it is exaggerated.
The two countries are negotiating a free trade agreement (FTA). What does Israel like about it and what does it not like?
We have had eight rounds of negotiations and we are still discussing it so it would be premature to say anything. Just as the relations between our two countries are unique, so is the FTA. We are hearing India's overall policy on FTAs. We are a relatively small economy. Each side is doing its homework and pretty soon, we will have an agreement. Industry, which is part of the puzzle in both India and Israel, supports the FTA. Negotiators are talking so we should leave it to them.