Cooperation, sans politics

BS OPINION

Ariel Sharon's visit to India marks a milestone in the bid to broaden what has so far been a security-oriented relationship, covering mostly defence deals and cooperation in intelligence, into a broader and deeper one that envisages political accommodation, working together in agriculture and technological development, trade expansion and perhaps joint ventures in third countries.

All this is to the good, and should be seen separately from the Palestine issue, on which the government has done well to not buy the Israeli line. For while both countries are victims of sustained terrorism and should cooperate on ways to tackle the menace, the political context and underlying legalities are quite different and not comparable.

Unlike India, Israel has been sitting for decades on occupied land. Worse, it has consistently grabbed land from Palestinians and given it to illegal settlers. It has equally consistently flouted UN Security Council resolutions.

It has forced Palestinians to lose their sources of livelihood, broken up communities, and since Mr Sharon's ascension to office and the introduction of an even more aggressive policy, provoked heightened violence and loss of lives on both sides. It is not without reason, therefore, that India has consistently supported the Palestinian cause. This is not an Islamic but a plain human rights issue.

Israel would argue that the Palestinians have only themselves and their leadership to blame for past missed opportunities for peace, and there is some truth in this. But the short point in the Indo-Israel context is that these differences in perception will probably continue, and need not come in the way of developing a mutually beneficial bilateral relationship.

Just as India objects to other countries having a hyphenated relationship with India and Pakistan, India in turn should find it possible to sympathise with the Palestinian cause while working productively with Israel.

Most of the bilateral trade between the two countries has focused so far on diamonds, in which the two countries have prosperous industries that focus on different ends of the value spectrum. Indeed, the traditional view has been that the Indian and Israeli economies have similar strengths in diamond cutting, software services and agriculture, so that the scope for trade is limited.

To some degree this explains why the trade numbers are so small. The other constraint is the small size of Israel's market, while Israel's largest industries are all defence-related.

However, Israel also has civilian industries with advanced technologies, which the Israeli businessmen accompanying Mr Sharon were eager to showcase. And India has had a long-standing desire to learn from Israel's outstanding water-harvesting techniques. So there is plenty of scope for more trade and perhaps even some investment.

Meanwhile, the defence relationship remains very important and has got a boost with the new deals that have been struck. This has been an evolving relationship, not always publicised but now more in the open.

This diversification of supply is welcome from India's point of view, while Israel now has as an important customer in perhaps the largest buyer of arms among all developing countries.