On 17 September 2011 the UN General Assembly will most likely vote a Palestinian State into existence, with all indications being that India will as usual vote with the Arab bloc.

COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

Yet as this vote takes place, the actions of the Palestinian ambassador to India highlight the enormity of India’s impending mistake.

Ambassador Adli Sadeq’s op-ed dated August 19, 2011, in the Palestinian National Authority’s official daily Al-Hayat-al-Jadida praised the “martyrs” who carried out a terror attack on the Israeli city of Eilat killing six civilians, and injuring thirty the previous day. Note the jubilant tone: “May Allah have mercy upon the Martyrs who fell during Ramadan, those of them who went out to confront the occupation forces and did not return, and those of them who were bombed in the home of Khaled Shaath [commander of unit manufacturing rockets and bombs in the Popular Resistance Committees] and died a Shahid’s death.” He goes on specifically to praise this terror act and to regret its one-off nature, writing, “This was a quality operation that will be difficult to repeat”.

Curiously, in his latest blog post, he praises Anna Hazare and lauds Gandhian tactics, but evidently only thinks such tactics are good for India, while terrorism is an excellent solution against Israel. His hypocrisy though is not unique. Take for example the Government of India’s response to the Eilat attack, to the Palestinian ambassador’s op-ed, and to Pakistan. It is important to note here that India did not issue any statement condemning the Eilat attack. India which has been the target of precisely this kind of cross border attack (let’s not forget that 26/11 was just such an operation) allows an ambassador based on its soil, to get away with inciting violence against a friendly country. If Adli Sadeq can say such things, will the government countenance the Pakistani ambassador praising Hafez Saeed’s “quality operations” against India? Much of India’s anger against Pakistan has been directed either at the Pakistani state’s direct collusion with, or turning a blind eye to, terrorists operating out of Pakistani territory. Yet while condemning Pakistan for turning a blind eye, the government is turning a blind eye to Indian soil being used to incite and praise the very same kind of attacks in another country.

It’s high time the MEA did some introspection. There is no point getting worked up and screaming “double standards” when Tahawwur Hussain Rana gets convicted for something that did not happen in Denmark, but gets acquitted for something that did happen in Mumbai, or crying ourselves hoarse when America shows no inclination to arm-twist Pakistan into coughing up our most wanted, or when Pakistan gets away with every single attack it has launched thus far on Indian soil. With the government ignoring both the Eilat attack and the hateful incitement emanating from Indian soil, one wonders what exact “principle” is being referred to when India says it lends “principled support” to the Palestinian cause?

We are led to believe that in voting for the Palestinian state we are encouraging “moderate” Palestinian voices. Yet when these same “moderates” start applauding terrorism one wonders what exactly India’s definition of a “moderate” is? Should these same standards be extended to the Indian context, Shuja Pasha, the head of the ISI, could also be deemed a “moderate”. One doubts very much if the MEA would find it remotely amusing when any country might choose to extend similar definitions of “moderation” to Hafiz Saeed, or to route their “principled support” to the Kashmiris by means of silently acquiescing to LeT “quality operations”.

If we want our struggle against terrorism to be taken seriously, we need to take terrorism seriously. By associating our “principled” support of the Palestinian people with the unprincipled and immoral actions of the Palestinian government, we are neither doing the Palestinian people any favours, nor helping our own case with the international community.  If a foreign minister who fancies himself to be Portuguese and thinks Rajasthan is in Pakistan, hasn’t already made us the laughing stock of the international community, our stance on terrorism only serves to confirm that the impression is well deserved.  If we are indeed serious, as we claim we are about tackling the terror menace, then the Palestinian ambassador needs to have his credentials revoked and expelled — for the sake of the Indian people.