• last year
Join Our WhatsApp Group:
https://linktr.ee/sujitnair

In this episode of the 'Dialogue' program, Mr. Sujit Nair engages in a conversation with Mr. K.P. Fabian, a highly experienced former Indian diplomat and former Indian Ambassador to Qatar. The main topic of their discussion revolves around the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas.

As a potential Israeli ground assault looms, thousands of Palestinians are evacuating the northern part of the Gaza Strip. Israel has announced that two routes will remain open for people to leave until 4:00 pm on Saturday. Israel had earlier set a deadline for the entire northern Gaza Strip population to relocate southward by Saturday morning. IDF spokesperson Avichay Adraee took to Twitter, urging residents to move for their safety and shared a map indicating the two available escape routes, one running along the coastline and the other through the central region of the Gaza Strip.

The Palestinian Health Ministry, in a report on Saturday, disclosed that Israeli attacks in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have resulted in a staggering toll: at least 2,269 Palestinians killed and 9,814 others wounded. Meanwhile, the Israeli military reported using a drone to eliminate militants allegedly attempting to infiltrate from Lebanon. The Israeli Air Force has also claimed responsibility for the killing of Merad Abu Merad, who served as the head of the Hamas Aerial System in Gaza.

In the midst of these developments, the Israeli military confirmed conducting ""localized raids"" within the Gaza Strip, as the death toll from Israeli strikes in Gaza climbs to 1,799, with over 6,000 people sustaining injuries, according to Reuters citing the Health Ministry. Palestinian United Nations envoy Riyad Mansour has called on UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to intensify efforts in order to prevent what he characterizes as a ""crime against humanity.""

#Israel #Palestine #Hamas #Jews #Muslims #arab #india #pakistan #middleeast #foreignpolicy #gaza #westbank #narendramodi #benjaminnetanyahu #HWNews
Transcript
00:00 Namaskar.
00:01 A lot has been spoken about the Israeli-Hamas conflict.
00:17 A lot has been spoken.
00:18 Mind you, a lot of information that are now floating around are fake.
00:23 They are not even true.
00:25 There are some people's imagination, there are some people's deduction, which may not
00:29 necessarily be true either.
00:32 Now what I have tried to do today is I have tried to get an expert, an expert in Middle
00:40 Eastern diplomacy, Mr. K.P.
00:43 Fabian, who has been an ambassador in the Middle East, who has been an ambassador in
00:47 a lot of Arabian countries, Middle East countries, and who has a fairly in-depth knowledge about
00:54 the Israeli-Palestinian issue.
00:59 So that's my dialogue today.
01:02 Let's get right into the dialogue and let's get right into the question.
01:06 Sir, thank you so much for joining us.
01:13 It's always such a pleasure to talk to you, sir.
01:18 I will get directly into the question, sir.
01:21 Sir, how big is this Hamas-Israel conflict going to get?
01:26 Well, let me put it this way.
01:28 There is a potential for it to spread to the region.
01:39 You heard that there have been some exchanges between Hezbollah with Hamas in Lebanon on
01:50 the one hand and Israeli Defense Forces on the other hand.
01:54 So if that works up and if the American task force in the Eastern Mediterranean gets active,
02:07 well, then we do not know what Iran might do.
02:14 And also then there is also the probability that the armed groups in Iraq, groups which
02:24 are hostile to the United States, you know, they might get active and come to the green
02:30 zone where the embassies are and they can do something to the American embassy, probably
02:36 or it was the largest US embassy in the world at one time.
02:42 So I'm afraid, you know, we are running a risk and Israel has been behaving in a manner
02:53 which is totally unjustifiable.
02:56 When you say Israel has been behaving in a manner which is totally unjustifiable, sir,
03:02 what exactly do you, would you mean, sir?
03:04 Can you elaborate?
03:06 Sir, you know, you cannot ask 1.1 million people to move from point A to point B.
03:13 It is not practical.
03:18 You cannot ask the United Nations to get out.
03:22 That means you want to do carpet bombing or something of that nature.
03:29 You see, President Biden said that, you know, only a few people, Hamas has no support from
03:35 the majority of Gazans.
03:41 But with his consent, with his support, Israel is bombing, carpet bombing the population
03:49 of Hamas.
03:50 OK, they are not bombing, just, you know, picking up the Hamas leaders.
03:57 So there is a contradiction in what President Biden is doing.
04:01 And as I have maintained, while we should all condemn what the Hamas did on this 7th
04:09 of October, you know, catching hold of the civilian population, dancing and either killing
04:16 them or taking them away, while we should all condemn that, we should look at the root
04:21 cause.
04:23 Why did Hamas do what it did?
04:27 And who is responsible for preventing progress towards peace and reconciliation in the holy
04:38 land, holy to the Jews, holy to Islam and holy to Christians?
04:46 Sir, but what Hamas did, wasn't that beyond basic human decency?
04:53 I mean, killing children, killing women?
04:57 Absolutely, it was atrocious.
05:00 But you may remember that recently BBC carried out a clarification, why the BBC is not calling
05:08 them terrorists.
05:09 Did you see that?
05:11 No, I would like to know from you, sir.
05:15 OK, BBC said that what Hamas did was atrocious.
05:20 But it is not calling them terrorists because the word terrorist has a loaded meaning.
05:27 OK, now I agree with you entirely that what Hamas did was atrocious, it was cruelty.
05:36 But a day before that, a young Muslim was shot dead in the West Bank.
05:48 And they have been, these extremist Jews, they have been violating the sanctity of the
05:54 Al-Aqsa Mosque, the holy of holies for Islam.
05:59 I am not, you know, a very religious person, but that's not the point.
06:05 If for the Muslims, it is a holy place, well, we have to recognize that and respect that.
06:13 You see, and you also know that recently these far-right Jews, you know, a Christian procession
06:23 was going on.
06:24 They were spitting on it.
06:27 Under Netanyahu, who lost the last election, meaning he did not get the majority, and who
06:34 could sort of covert together a coalition only with the support of the far-right, the
06:41 far-right have been, you know, running, you know, they are ruling the roost.
06:48 And therefore, and but basic thing is occupation.
06:53 I repeat, occupation.
06:55 If you go back into history, 1947, the United Nations wanted three entities, Israel, Palestine
07:08 and Jerusalem as an international city.
07:12 And what did Israel do, or rather, leaders of Israel do?
07:19 Count Bernadotte, the Swedish count, who had saved thousands of Jews from German concentration
07:29 camps, who was there to implement the UN resolution.
07:35 He was assassinated.
07:41 One of the leaders who assassinated him became the Prime Minister of Israel.
07:47 So the point I'm making is that Israel is a state which had its origins, A, in the United
07:56 Nations resolution, B, in acts of terrorism.
08:00 Not only the assassination of Bernadotte, also King David Hotel, where the British Mandate
08:09 Authority was functioning from.
08:11 How many people are killed?
08:14 You know, so there is much terrorism behind Israel.
08:19 And I'm sorry to say, Israel has continued with that policy.
08:23 In 1967, there was a war and United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, which stipulated
08:36 that Israel should withdraw from occupied territories.
08:39 There again, how London and Washington played a dirty trick, because the version in English
08:49 said from occupied territories, the French version said, "des territoires occupés",
08:56 that means from the occupied territories.
09:00 You know what I mean?
09:01 The definite article, which meant from the entire area of occupied territories.
09:10 But these two argued, no, the English version is the correct one, it should prevail, that
09:15 is how we negotiated.
09:18 In other words, they said Israel did not have to vacate the whole of the occupied territories.
09:27 And then Israel never did any vacation, you see, as far as West Bank and Gaza are concerned,
09:37 they didn't.
09:38 And then we had the 1973 war, which was brought to an end by the United States and USSR cooperating
09:46 together by Resolution 338, which reiterated the demand for vacation by Israel, as mentioned
09:58 in 242.
09:59 Israel didn't do anything.
10:03 Then came 1993, 1995, the Oslo Accords, specifying the creation of two states, Israel and Palestine.
10:14 Well, the fact of the matter is that the State of Israel has existed and it doesn't want
10:19 the second state to be born.
10:22 So that is what we have to understand and Israel has been able to get away with this
10:28 blue murder, that is, not implementing the UN resolutions or even the Accords, which
10:38 it has signed.
10:41 Why?
10:42 Because of the support of the United States.
10:45 And what is intriguing about is that normally, when a big state supports a small state, the
10:52 big state, the donor has some say in the foreign policy of the small state.
10:58 But contrary wise, in the case of Israel and the United States, it is a small state, the
11:06 recipient who controls the foreign policy of the big state as regards the region is
11:12 concerned.
11:13 We should all read Professor Meshmeir's book, The Israeli Lobby and US Foreign Policy.
11:23 See this war seems to be, this conflict seems to be engulfing the world.
11:28 I was thinking in terms of Arabic nations.
11:32 I was thinking in terms of Middle East.
11:34 Now it's almost, it's come to China.
11:36 Sir, how big is this going to get, sir?
11:39 To Israeli tourists being shot dead in Egypt, you know, these are all individual incidents
11:46 which we should certainly condemn.
11:48 But the answer to your question is that if Israel provokes Hezbollah and if American
12:00 task force gets active, then the fat is on fire and you can't say where it will end.
12:06 Because even Israel, let me tell you, cannot handle both Hamas and Hezbollah at the same
12:16 time.
12:17 So, are you hinting at some kind of a world event, some kind of a world war?
12:22 No, no, no.
12:23 A regional conflagration, not world war.
12:27 Because China and Russia are not going to get active on this.
12:30 We know where Russia and China are standing.
12:32 Their statements have been there.
12:34 And let us not put it this way that China is taking sides.
12:38 No.
12:39 What China has said is that the, you know, a sustainable peace can be there only when
12:45 there is a Palestinian state.
12:49 That's what China has said.
12:50 And China is right.
12:51 China is not there taking sides.
12:54 It is telling you what is to be done.
12:57 Okay.
12:58 Similarly, Russia said there should be only sustainable solution is a Palestinian state.
13:06 But then Russia added with East Jerusalem as its capital.
13:11 You know, a little more than what China said.
13:13 Again, if you go back to 242, that is a position.
13:19 The question is, are we living in a rule based world order, which, you know, Biden never
13:27 gets tired of telling us about.
13:31 He himself is violating the rule based world order he talks about.
13:38 So there you are.
13:39 There is a moral bankruptcy, you know, which you find among political leaders.
13:49 That is, they cannot look at what is right and what is wrong.
13:52 They have taken a side.
13:54 So their side, whatever it does is always right.
13:58 This is not homo sapiens sapiens.
14:02 You know, we call ourselves homo sapiens sapiens.
14:06 Sapienza in Latin or Italian means wisdom.
14:10 Is this wisdom?
14:11 Let's come to the Indian perspective.
14:14 India has been right in the middle.
14:17 And to a certain extent, I believe with my little understanding, right from 1948, India
14:22 has been supporting Palestine to a large extent.
14:25 And we only, I think, had our consulate in Tel Aviv in 1992, if I'm not mistaken.
14:34 Sir, what is India's stance and what exactly should be India's stance?
14:39 Okay, let's go back into history.
14:43 India voted against the United Nations Resolution 181 or 186, I think.
14:50 181, sorry.
14:51 Establishing Israel, Palestine and the international city of Jerusalem, because what India thought
15:00 was the best interest was one state where Jews and Muslims live together in peace.
15:09 Okay.
15:10 But you know that there has been an Israeli consulate general in Mumbai or Bombay since
15:19 1950, 51.
15:21 In other words, India had recognized the state of Israel in 1950 or 51.
15:28 50, sir.
15:29 1950.
15:30 50.
15:31 And the agreement in 1991, when Prime Minister Nazim Rao was in office, it was about establishing
15:44 resident diplomatic missions.
15:47 So then, I mean, India established an embassy in Tel Aviv and they established an embassy
15:54 in Delhi.
15:55 So that is establishing resident diplomatic relations.
15:58 You know what I mean.
16:00 So that was a position, but India had always supported the Palestinian cause.
16:07 That is, the Palestinians are entitled to their own independent state and Israel should
16:13 withdraw from occupied territories.
16:16 Now what has happened is that on the 7th of October, when Hamas sent those drones and
16:23 their men and committed those cruel acts, atrocious acts, then Prime Minister Modi put
16:32 out a tweet, you know, saying, showing solidarity with Israel and saying that India was against
16:41 all acts of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.
16:46 Now to my mind, this was an unbalanced statement because while we should condemn what Hamas
16:56 did, at the same time, India's policy is supporting the Palestinian cause.
17:04 So now let's see what happened.
17:06 Prime Minister came out with this tweet and for four days or so, there was silence from
17:12 MEA.
17:13 Finally, MEA has come out with a statement, reiterating India's support for the Palestinian
17:21 cause.
17:22 Now let me tell you that if I were a foreign diplomat in Delhi, I will tell my government,
17:30 listen, the Prime Minister's tweet that tells you the real position of government of India.
17:38 The MEA statement is only damage control.
17:41 We can take note of it, but we do not have to take it seriously.
17:46 In other words, under Prime Minister Modi, there has been a sea change in India's approach
17:53 to the whole question.
17:54 And I'm sorry to say, the moral bankruptcy I referred to earlier, which has afflicted
18:00 Biden, well, I'm afraid it is proliferating.
18:04 It is contagious and it has afflicted Prime Minister Modi also.
18:08 You see, 1962, Israel supported India.
18:12 1965, India-Pakistan war, while the entire Arab countries supported Pakistan, Israel
18:19 supported India.
18:20 1962, Arab countries stayed neutral.
18:23 They neither supported China nor supported…
18:26 Same is the case with 1999 during Kargil war.
18:31 Don't we owe something to Israel to that extent?
18:34 Wasn't Prime Minister Narendra Modi's statement made based on that?
18:39 Okay, good question.
18:41 Let me put it to you this way.
18:43 Let us see what happened.
18:45 He put out a tweet, his office.
18:48 Now I do not know how it happened.
18:50 I do not know whether MEA had any role in it.
18:54 But let me tell you what used to happen when I was in office.
18:58 In such situations, MEA would send a draft to the PMO, Prime Minister's office.
19:05 Either PMO will agree to it or suggest changes.
19:10 And it comes back to MEA and MEA could still go back to PMO saying that out of the two
19:16 changes which PMO wanted, well, the first one is okay, but the second one, there are
19:23 complications.
19:24 There was a proper conversation between the PMO and the MEA.
19:30 Now you can find out whether any such conversation took place in the current context.
19:38 And perhaps you may deduce since MEA kept silent for four days, well, there was no conversation.
19:45 So our style of functioning has changed and I personally think it's the wrong style of
19:51 functioning.
19:52 Secondly, we could have supported Israel, but you know, it is not beyond the competence
19:59 of Indian diplomacy to find words which on the one hand support Israel, but on the other
20:06 hand tells Israel in a nice way, look, war has to be conducted in a certain way, not
20:14 you know, sort of without any rules, not bombing civilians.
20:23 So I wouldn't have put it in plain English like that, but you know, you would have said
20:27 both sides or all sides should respect the Geneva Conventions and things like that.
20:34 So it was possible to come out with a balanced statement.
20:37 I repeat, a balanced statement supporting Israel, but at the same time taking care of
20:43 India's broad policy.
20:45 This sort of unadulterated support without any nuance, well, that is wrong.
20:52 Where should India stand?
20:54 No, this sort of geometry or geography doesn't always apply to diplomacy.
20:58 It's not a question of in the middle or siding with somebody.
21:02 It's a question of making clear your position, India's position in a manner which takes into
21:10 account India's interest and also India's anxiety to have a peaceful world, which is
21:20 again in India's interest.
21:22 You know, you can define your interest in a very narrow minded fashion, but you can
21:28 also define your interest with a little more of ethical maturity, you see.
21:35 So it's not a question of whether India supports Israel or not.
21:40 India should have condemned the attacks made by Hamas.
21:45 India should have said Israel has every right to defend itself, but we urge all parties
21:53 concerned to abide by the rules of war, international law.
21:58 Where does India's interest lie?
22:00 India's interest lies with being friends with Israel or India's interest lies being friends
22:05 with the Palestine and the Arab world.
22:09 Where does our interest lie?
22:10 I'm saying I know the answer is grey, it is not black and white, I understand that, but
22:14 just true, just for our understanding.
22:17 I think we are making by phrasing that question in that manner, you are making a disjunction
22:23 that is either or this.
22:25 No, that is not.
22:26 The world is grey, it's not always black and white.
22:30 So it is in his interest to maintain his close, deep, broadening relations with Israel, defense
22:38 and other ties, technological ties, that's one part of it.
22:42 It's in India's interest to see to it that the Palestinians get justice.
22:48 Otherwise, you will have again and again such outbreaks of violence.
22:53 Israel's idea that it can root out Hamas, no, that is wrong.
23:02 Then another thing, the oil prices can go up because of this.
23:08 And another thing, India's G20, we spoke so much about India, Middle East, Europe, economic
23:16 corridor, now that can get delayed.
23:21 You see, as you know, this was the baby of Biden.
23:28 You see, why?
23:29 He was not so much interested in the corridor.
23:32 He was interested in bringing Saudi Arabia and Israel together.
23:39 Now that project is, I'm not saying that it's dead, but it's going to take time.
23:47 You see, and therefore, our corridor also is going to take time.
23:51 So what I'm saying, let's get it right.
23:52 It's not always choosing between A and B. It is a question of studying the situation
24:00 and always remembering that world peace is good for India and for all other countries.
24:08 You know, and if Palestinians get killed, as Israel is doing, you know, well, I don't
24:18 think that's the end of the matter.
24:21 And Netanyahu's claim that he's going to eliminate them, that's a pipe dream.
24:30 You see, as I said, there has to be a Palestinian state.
24:37 You see, Israel alone cannot have security.
24:41 The security is indivisible.
24:44 If A and B are neighbors, you can't say A should be secure, B need not be.
24:49 Sir, I have two more questions to ask you.
24:52 I've got four minutes more.
24:55 Sir, as a diplomat yourself, how do you see this ending?
25:01 How do you see, what is the solution to this?
25:03 How will this end?
25:06 Okay, I believe that Hamas can do a couple of imaginative things to bring this to a speedy
25:14 end.
25:15 You know, the question of the hostages.
25:18 Now, Hamas said sometime back that it will start executing the hostages if Israel doesn't
25:25 stop bombing without warning.
25:29 Now, that's not the best way of looking at it.
25:33 I would have suggested one or two other options.
25:37 That is, first of all, above all, I do not believe it is correct on Hamas's part to harm
25:44 or kill the hostages.
25:46 No, hostages should not be touched.
25:49 But that doesn't mean Hamas can't come out with a public statement.
25:54 Well, we have 150 hostages.
25:58 We have distributed them at 150 sites, list enclosed.
26:04 Now we quote unquote, invite Israel to bomb these sites.
26:12 You know, then let us see what Israel would have done.
26:15 Second, Hamas can do another thing, as I said again, without even touching them.
26:21 It is possible to make videos showing that they are getting, you know, killed.
26:29 And when Hamas comes out with such videos, Biden or Netanyahu will not be able to say
26:36 clearly whether it is a made up video or a real video.
26:41 And then the families concerned will put pressure on them and say that, look, this madness,
26:46 this dance of death and destruction has to end and only Israel can end it by declaring
26:52 a ceasefire.
26:55 Concept of morality, concept of justice, concept of what is right and what is wrong.
27:00 Sir, how much of does all of this affect diplomacy, real time diplomacy, actual diplomacy?
27:07 I think we have to start with political science.
27:09 We all know that the state is an instrument made by human beings for their own good.
27:17 The state is not a superior being, as philosopher Hegel mistakenly thought.
27:25 You know, he said it was absolute walking on the earth.
27:30 Second point, the power of the state is always exercised by individual human beings.
27:37 Now, just because we are individual human beings, you may be a minister and somebody
27:44 may be only a diplomat or a chief secretary.
27:49 But the point is, the power is exercised by the human beings.
27:54 And I maintain no human being is above morality.
27:58 It's quite possible that there are occasions when the state has to use violence, you know,
28:03 the state has a monopoly of violence.
28:05 That's correct.
28:07 But it doesn't mean that the state is above morality.
28:10 That we have to agree upon.
28:11 And coming to your question between ethics and state policy, you know, let us imagine
28:19 that we discard ethics.
28:22 Then we go back to what in ancient India we call Malsya Nyaya, you know, the law of the
28:30 fishes.
28:31 The big fish eat the small fish.
28:34 And then the big fish will start fighting with each other.
28:38 So let us be, we need morality.
28:41 A human being can be moral, but no human being can be amoral.
28:47 No human being is beyond morality, you know.
28:51 So and all those people who tell you that what your interest decide foreign policy,
28:56 again, that is wrong.
28:58 Let me tell you, when Obama was president, the nuclear deal with Iran was in the interest
29:04 of the United States.
29:06 When Trump became president, it suddenly ceased to be in the interest of the United States.
29:11 So please understand, often, not always, the so-called national interest is decided by
29:16 the establishment, mostly in terms of its partisan interest.
29:22 For Trump, it was necessary to go at Iran.
29:25 So he said that.
29:26 So, you know, that is how foreign policy, unfortunately, is being shaped.
29:32 But that is wrong.
29:33 And let us recognize that.
29:35 Sir, thank you so much for talking to us.
29:37 Thank you.
29:38 Thank you.
29:39 Thank you.
29:41 Thank you.
29:42 Thank you.
29:43 Thank you.
29:44 Thank you.
29:45 Thank you.
29:46 Thank you.
29:47 Thank you.
29:48 Thank you.
29:49 Thank you.

Recommended