Martyred CRPF Commandant Pramod Kumar’s wife Neha Tripathi and six-year-old daughter Arna Kumar paying tribute to him, after unfurling the Tricolour during 71st Independence Day celebration at CRPF camp in Srinagar on Tuesday. PTI

Srinagar, August 15

The six-year-old daughter of slain CRPF Commandant Pramod Kumar and his wife on Tuesday unfurled the Tricolour at the same battalion camp here, where exactly a year ago he hoisted the flag and was killed minutes later in an encounter with militants.Kumar’s wife Neha Tripathy and daughter Aarna performed the ceremonial unfurling and saluting the flag at the 49th battalion camp in the Karan Nagar area.Tripathy then performed the traditional drill of distributing sweets to the men of the battalion, once commanded by her husband. She also placed a wreath at the martyr’s memorial built at the camp.Kumar (44) was on Monday decorated by the government with the Kirti Chakra (posthumously), the third highest peacetime gallantry medal, for his daredevil action where he picked up his AK-47 rifle and rushed to the Nowhatta Chowk area after he was told his patrol party was under attack, during the last Independence Day.He suffered a fatal bullet shot in his head during the encounter at Nowhatta Chowk area and succumbed soon after.Kumar’s wife had on Monday told PTI that she wanted her daughter to know what her father did for the country and hence decided to mark his first death anniversary at the same camp where he took his last salute.“I want my daughter to know what her father stood for and what he did. She should know that what is the importance of earning a Kirti Chakra. Hence, I made it a point to be on the same soil where my husband lost his life, to mark his first death anniversary.“As he unfurled the Tricolour at the 49th battalion camp exactly a year before, we will be doing it on Tuesday,” she had said.On the last Independence Day, the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) CO had hoisted the flag between 8.30 am and 8.40 am and in his speech remarked that with India clocking 70 years of its freedom, the responsibility on security forces had “increased” and they had to effectively tackle militants and incidents of stone-pelting in Jammu and Kashmir.Just before he ended his speech, Kumar, in a recorded video of the event, is seen looking at his watch and saying “it is an important day”, unaware of the fate that awaited him.Minutes later he was killed at the Nowhatta Chowk fighting militants.While Kumar and his men eliminated the two armed foreign militants, nine other personnel, including a state police official, were injured in the attack.The CO was posted to Srinagar in April 2014 and was promoted as a Commandant only days before the fateful day, on July 12.He hailed from Patna in Bihar but lived in neighbouring Jharkhand’s Jamtara district.The officer had been thrice decorated with the CRPF Director General’s commendation in 2015, 2014 and in 2011.He had also served in the Special Protection Group (SPG) for three years.The officer joined the force in 1998. PTI

India’s UN envoy Paulomi Tripathi, holds a picture at UNGA. PTI

United Nations, September 25

India hit out at Pakistan saying it callously exploited the picture of an injured Palestinian girl to spread falsehoods about India and to divert attention from Islamabad’s role as a global terror hub.Paulomi Tripathi, a First Secretary in India’s UN Mission, on Monday held up  the fake picture used by Pakistani Permanent Representative Maleeha Lodhi and the photograph of Lt Umar Faiyaz, a young soldier from Kashmir who was kidnapped, tortured and killed by terrorists.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)Poinitng to Faiyaz’s picture, Tripathi said: “This is Lt Umar Faiyaz’s real picture, not fake. The officer from Jammu and Kashmir was brutally tortured and killed by Pakistan-supported terrorists in May 2017.” “This is a true picture. It portrays a harsh reality. A picture of terror emanating from across our borders that the people of India, especially in J&K, have to struggle with daily,” Tripathi said. — IANS

Soldiers rescue people from flood-affected Debasatra village in Nagaon district of Assam on Sunday. PTI

Bijay Sankar Bora

Tribune News Service

Guwahati, August 13

The Army has been called out to help in rescue operations in western Assam areas and in Karbi Anglong district of central Assam that has been hit by a fresh wave of floods.All branches of the Armed Forces, including the Indian Air Force, in the region are in a state of full readiness to launch flood rescue operations when required to provide speedy relief and succor to those affected.Meanwhile, Prime Minister Narendra Modi today called up Assam Chief Minister Sarbananda Sonowal to enquire about the scale of devastation caused by the floods as the situation has remained grim and more deaths have been reported from different corners.Sonowal apprised the PM of the measures taken by the government to provide relief to the flood-affected people and that the administrations of all 19 flood-hit districts have been directed to ensure speedy relief distribution to the victims, a source in the CM’s office said. The PM assured all cooperation from the Centre in overcoming the havoc caused by floods.Nripendra Mishra, Principal Secretary of the PMO, on Sunday directed Chief Secretary of the state VK Pipersenia to submit a report to the PMO detailing the damage and devastation caused by the floods.The CM has directed the district deputy commissioners to provide ex gratia to the next of kin of those killed in floods within 48 hours of every such death.Meanwhile, the Red Horns Division of the Army moved swiftly to the aid of flood-hit western Assam and in Karbi Anglong in Central Assam. In response to a call for help from the civil administration, the Army sent out multiple teams in areas of Bodoland Territorial Autonomous Districts (BTAD) and Karbi Anglong district of Assam.Nearly 3,000 people trapped in villages were rescued amidst strong water currents and taken to relief camps. The Army has deployed its boats to reach the marooned people and made a number of trips against the swift current to rescue them.Sonowal today visited flood relief camps at Bhismak LP School at Panchmile, Sadiya, and took stock of the arrangements for the inmates. He also visited Kundil riverside over Kundil Bridge and directed the Water Resource Department to take immediate measures to stop erosion.The continuous erosion by the Kundil has been causing serious threat to Panchmile, Lakhimi Gaon, Bogoribari apart from threatening Kundil Bridge. Sonowal said dredging of the Kundil would be taken up in winter so that the change in the course of river can be tackled.

In Nepal, 200 Indians stranded 

• Nearly 600 tourists, including 200 Indians, have been stranded in central Nepal’s Chitwan due to flooding triggered by heavy rains that have claimed 55 lives, officials said on Sunday
• Heavy rains have lashed Nepal for the past three days, causing flooding and landslides at several places
• The swollen Rapti river flooded several hotels in the Chitwan Valley, where the country’s first national park is located PTI

320 NDRF personnel rushed to Bihar

• Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh on Sunday discussed with CM Nitish Kumar the flood situation in Bihar where nearly 320 NDRF personnel have been rushed
• Movement of 17 trains was affected due to heavy rain in Seemanchal region, while several trains were cancelled due to inundated Kishanganj railway station
• Nitish sought 10 additional companies of NDRF and IAF personnel and helicopters for rescue and relief operations TNS

India-born UK economist and politician Meghnad Desai predicted this week that India and China, currently engaged a high-stakes military standoff on the Doklam plateau near the Sikkim border, could soon come to a full-scale war.

Desai, a member of the British House of Lords (UK’s equivalent of the Rajya Sabha) and a known commentator on south Asian affairs, linked the Doklam standoff to events in the South China Sea and predicted that the war would be fought in multiple theatres and would involve the United States, which, Desai said, would be on India’s side.

Desai’s comments came in an interview that he gave to news agency IANS’s Saket Sharma. “Even today, nobody is contemplating that the whole Doklam thing could break anytime. We could be in a full scale war with China within a month. At that stage it will not be controllable. It may come as a surprise, but that is when the defence co-operation of India (with various countries) will bear fruit,” Desai says in the interview.

Saying that he cannot exactly predict when and where a full-scale military conflict may break out, Desai pictured a war that would be fought on multiple fronts – from the mountains of the Himalayas to the waters of South China Sea.

“I am not a jyotisi (astrologer). I cannot say what day or date but I think at this time it is very likely that we will be in a state of full-scale war with China very soon. And mind you, on several fronts, not just Doklam. It is just one frontier, they will start from all places, across the northern Himalayas,” Desai said.

THE AMERICA ANGLE

Desai, notably, said that the current standoff in Doklam should not be viewed merely as a Indo-Sino face off. He went on to say that how the Doklam standoff would ultimately get resolved depends not just on negotiations between New Delhi and Beijing but on “what happens in the South China Sea”.

“All things that follow now will have a lot to do with what happens in the South China Sea. The US has sent out enough signals. If there is war, it will be a US-China war, with India on the US side, in the South China Sea and in the Himalayas. This trio (India, China and the US) is a very combustible mixture right now,” Desai told IANS.

Desai was also asked separately and directly whether the United States would stand with India in case a war does break out between the two nuclear-armed Asian countries. “Absolutely,” the Padma Bhushan recipient said. “Ultimately, you have to understand that India cannot stand up to China without American help and support. America cannot stand up to China without Indian help. That is the symmetry in this relationship.”

‘BE WARY OF CHINA’

Expounding his assertion that India and China would soon go to war, Desai cautioned New Delhi against being complacent with judging Beijing’s military capabilities, warning that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is not the Pakistani Army.

“I think, from past experience, we always assume that we are well prepared but you will be fighting one of the finest armies in the world. It is a very powerful army and I think they also have (much) training in mountain warfare,” Desai said.

“So, according to me, it will be a very tough fight for India. Don’t be mistaken that this will be easy. It is not Pakistan. The Pakistani Army is the same set of people. They come from the same army traditions and they have the same thinking but the Chinese are very different.”

Noting that China has been unusually “nationalistic, militaristic and aggressive” over the Doklam standoff, the noted economist went on to add, “I am sure we are not told everything that is going on. But my worry is even though India will not openly become militaristic but have we got the preparedness for it? We may have things in place. I just wish and hope that we are prepared for a very tough war which may last for a long time.”

DOKLAM STANDOFF

For nearly 50 days now, soldiers from the Indian Army and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army have been positioned on the Doklam plateau, reportedly just 150 feet away from each other.

The standoff began in mid-June when Bhutanese soldiers, objecting to the PLA construction a metal road near the India-China-Bhutan trijuntion point, sought India’s help to keep the Chinese at bay.

Indian soldiers responded by physically blocking the Chinese troops from proceeding with their construction. Since then, soldiers from the two armies have stayed put near the trijunction point, engaged a high-stakes but non-violent face off.

Beijing has responded belligerently to the issue, accusing India of entering Chinese territory (the area where the standoff is taking place is in fact disputed between China and Bhutan) and demanding a non-conditional withdrawal of Indian troops.

Chinese media, particularly the hawkish Global Times, have been even more hostile, sometimes bringing up India’s 1962 loss to China and at other times, saying that the PLA can ‘annihilate’ the Indian Army.

New Delhi, on the other hand, has largely been silent except to issue firm, carefully worded statements on the issue and there is no indication of how and when the unusual standoff might end.

ALSO READ | Doklam border standoff: Will there be an India-China war?

ALSO READ | Doklam: What China stands to lose if it goes to war with India

ALSO WATCH | Doklam standoff: Will conflict with India be disastrous for China?

In the standoff between India and China at Doklam, little has been said about north Sikkim. India is extremely vulnerable there because of geography and defunct infrastructure, especially roads. China has excellent roads and airlift capability and our Army is at a disadvantage.

ROCKY ROAD TO PEACE: The highway in north Sikkim needs upkeep. Photo by the writer

Pravin Sawhney

THE crucial meeting between the National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and the Chinese leadership has not resolved the Doklam crisis. The two sides discussed “bilateral and major problems”, suggesting that diplomatic channels are functioning. While neither side wants war, it is certain that China will not accept a reciprocal withdrawal of forces.Will this lead to a long haul of armies’ face-off? Probably not. Unlike any of his predecessors, Xi Jinping dons four hats — President, Communist Party General Secretary, Chairman of the Central Military Commission and the Commander-in-Chief Joint Operations Command. He has positioned military power as the anchor of his aggressive China dream and will not wait for long before adopting detrimental measures towards India. Hence, a valid question: What next? A senior Chinese diplomat had told me on July 5 in his embassy that China had informed the Indian side about their intentions on June 1, two weeks before their road construction party started work in Donglang (Doklam for us) area. Yet, instead of diplomatic outreach, the Indian side chose military. “On June 16, Indian troops entered 183 metres inside Chinese territory (in Donglang) to block our road-building party. India has opened a pandora’s box. For the first time since the formation of the People’s Republic of China, foreign troops have entered Chinese territory… the foundation of the 19 rounds of border talks (held since 2003) would no longer be there,” he said, adding that, “While we want diplomatic channels to solve problems, we will not wait for very long.” This is a serious issue. Border talks by the Special Representatives are not capable of yielding tangible results because the five Sino-India border agreements have given Beijing enormous political, legal and military advantage with little incentive left to resolve the dispute. Yet, they have helped in upholding the pretence of normalcy allowing the two sides to continue with “development partnership,” while chanting the mantra of peace. In the 1993 agreement, the traditional border was renamed as the Line of Actual Control (LAC) — a military line which can be pushed by either side since the border is neither agreed on maps nor on the ground. This allowed the Chinese to transgress the disputed border at will since 1998 when India cited China as the reason for its nuclear tests. Prime Minister Modi had sought to correct this foreign policy blunder by publicly asking President Xi Jinping during his September 2014 visit to mutually define the LAC, which was ignored. Similarly, the 1996 agreement has laid down the bare minimum troops and equipment that each side can bring to the LAC without mutual consent. Since China has excellent roads and airlift capability, this agreement has placed the Indian Army at a grave disadvantage. Likewise, in the 2003 joint declaration, India formally accepted the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) as a part of China. By doing so, it diluted the Dalai Lama’s definition of Tibetan autonomy within China (to include the three provinces of Amdo, Kham and U-Tsang along with TAR). China, in return, refused to endorse Sikkim as a part of India in the joint declaration. It merely changed a few of its maps to accommodate the Indian requirement; these, going by the Chinese diplomat’s threat, can be changed again. Meanwhile, the 2013 Border Defence Cooperation Agreement (BDCA) has downgraded the Army’s border-guarding role to border policing during peacetime. Since the BDCA prohibits “tailing or following” of the other sides’ patrol which cross the LAC without being noticed, the Indian Army has been compelled to physically hold the 3,488-km border entailing huge manpower. This is not all. Unlike India which says it has 3,488-km border with China, Beijing has truncated it to a mere 2,000 km by excluding Ladakh. So, if China calls off the border talks, all confidence-building measures available to local commanders and senior diplomats in case of transgressions and intrusions too will become defunct. The consequences are all too evident. Let’s look at Sikkim, which is militarily divided into north and east Sikkim. While much noise has been made about the Indian Army holding favourable defensive positions in north-east and east Sikkim, which faces the Chumbi Valley funnel, little has been said about north Sikkim, where India is extremely vulnerable because of geography and defunct infrastructure, especially roads. Given the difficult terrain in north Sikkim, it has limited Dropping Zones (DZs), and the single road that connects it to Gangtok has weak military bridges (class 12), and the track itself (class 30 road) is non-existent in parts because of innumerable water-falls, seasonal rivers, and a longish monsoon. Despite the Army’s best efforts, the state government has not cleared the building of an alternate highway, citing environmental issues and economic viability as the reasons. Standing at the northern-most part of the Kerang plateau, one can see the flat expanse of the Tibetan plateau with excellent motorable roads on the other side. Chinese troops will have little difficulty in moving mobile forces, equipment and land-based firepower in north Sikkim. They can justify this as the quid pro quo  —if India can move troops into Donglang/ Doklam, why can’t they do the same in north Sikkim? Hopefully, China will not use the military option in Sikkim. Unlike India, they are not focussed on a battle but the war — to address their “major problem”, perhaps, of Tibet, by diplomacy, failing which by using military power to their advantage.Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been unrestrained while talking about China which is economically, politically, technologically and militarily more powerful. He was the first senior political leader to caution China to desist from its “expansionist tendencies” in his election speeches in 2014. It was the first time, Sikyong (Prime Minister of the “Tibetan government-in-exile”) Lobsang Sangay attended an Indian Prime Minister’s swearing-in ceremony. The next year, Modi became the first Prime Minister to visit Arunachal Pradesh to mark statehood celebrations. It was the first time in seven visits to Arunachal Pradesh that the Dalai Lama was accompanied by a Union Minister. The Modi government ignored Chinese displeasure on each occasion. If the previous government opted for appeasement, this government has swung to the other extreme. To quote the Chinese diplomat once again: “You (India) are not a super-power which you regard yourself to be.” The writer is the Editor FORCE newsmagazine.

Pakistan’s superior courts have often commented on difficulties in legally applying ideals of conduct to concrete cases. The qualities of leadership are rooted in the Islamic concept of righteous rulers, so no politcal party has amended these. Nawaz Sharif’s case proves vagaries of litigation but is there a whiff of politics too?

DOWN BUT NOT OUT: Ousted Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif addresses members of PML-N, in Islamabad. AFP

Vivek Katju

AS Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif resigned on July 28 after the Supreme Court decision in the Panama Papers case, memories, two decades old, of his success in hounding out Sajjad Ali Shah from the office of Chief Justice of Pakistan would have come back. He may well have wondered what the world had come to when he had no alternative but bow to a decision based on one technical ground taken through a controversial judicial procedure. Back in 1997, Nawaz Sharif exercised such control over the country that for the “insult” of the Chief Justice summoning him in person to answer charges of contempt of court he had allowed zealous supporters to storm its premises, split the Bench, which by majority declared that Shah’s appointment, by then three years old, as illegal ab initio and sent their Chief packing.  All through, the army Chief Ge. Jehangir Karamat had not stirred. But that was then. This time the bisaat was totally different, except in one aspect: if Sajjad Ali Shah was a “political” judge, the whiff of politics comes from the present judgment too. The Panama Papers became public in April 2016. They revealed that Nawaz Sharif’s children — daughter Maryam who is being groomed for politics and businessmen sons Hussain and Hassan who live outside Pakistan — owned off- shore companies and lucrative properties abroad. These included four apartments in London’s posh Park Lane. For many in Pakistan, these revelations only established what was suspected all along, that Nawaz Sharif had sent abroad his ill-gotten wealth acquired from business and misuse of office. The Panama Papers provided the opposition, especially Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan, an opportunity to corner Nawaz Sharif. Between April and August 2016, Nawaz Sharif’s attempts to appoint commissions to investigate these charges failed. The government and the opposition could not agree on the terms of reference of a commission and Pakistan’s Chief Justice also refused to nominate judges to any commission which in law would be “toothless”. Finally, Imran Khan filed a case seeking  the Supreme Court to declare Nawaz Sharif unfit to be a Member of the National Assembly ( hence, Prime Minister) as he did not meet the tests prescribed in Articles 62 and 63 of the constitution. Most constitutions and peoples’ representation laws prescribe conditions relating to nationality, age, residence, health, absence of criminal convictions by courts, and in some cases that a person should not be in debt. Seldom do they venture into the domain of character. This was also the case with the Pakistan constitution till General Zia-ul-Haq amended Article 62 and introduced a character test. Art. 62 (1) (f) now requires Members of Parliament to be, “sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and ameen”. Pakistan’s superior courts have commented many times on the difficulties in legally applying these ideals of conduct to concrete cases. However, as these qualities of leadership are rooted in the Islamic concept of righteous rulers no political party has taken the initiative to amend it. Gradually case law seems to be developing to apply them narrowly such as in cases of wrong declaration on nomination forms for elections. The courts refrain from entering into an MP’s personal conduct.Imran Khan asserted that the Panama Papers revealed that Nawaz Sharif owned properties abroad, including the Park Lane flats, and been dishonest to not disclose them in his nomination form. He further alleged that in his speeches to the nation and parliament after the Panama Leaks, he had prevaricated and contradicted himself, thus falling short of the qualities mentioned in Art. 62. The Court heard the matter for over two months. It decided, as noted by Justice Khosa who led the five-judge bench, “to focus mainly, but not exclusively, on the properties relevant to Respondent No.1 (Nawaz Sharif) and his children which were revealed in the Panama Papers”. By a majority of 3-2, it decided that the Panama Papers did not conclusively establish that Nawaz Sharif was the owner of these properties and therefore a Supreme Court monitored probe was required through a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) to establish facts. Surprisingly, the JIT included ISI and MI officers thereby involving the army which assured the nation that it will fulfil the mandate conferred by the Court. Though the majority and the dissenting judges agreed that Nawaz Sharif and his children’s claims were contradictory and deliberately confusing and incomplete,the two dissenting judges found these sufficient to disqualify him the majority three did not reach this conclusion. Strangely, the minority two inferred that while a person could  be sent to jail after establishing his guilt through a regular trial, disqualification in terms of Art 62 could be done through a lower standard. The Supreme Court Chief Justice appointed a bench of three judges who had given the majority judgement to monitor the JIT probe. The JIT gave its report on July 10 and the three-judge bench heard arguments about its tenability for a week. In violation of procedural norms, the original five-judge bench met to pronounce the judgment. The dissenting two thus had no opportunity to hear arguments on the report and yet they considered it fit as obviously did the Chief Justice that in a matter relating to the Prime Minister standard procedure could be short-circuited. Now comes the strangest part. On the issues in the Panama Papers on which the JIT extensively reported, the majority three did not obviously concur with the dissenting two and did not find the report sufficient to disqualify Nawaz Sharif.  However, as the JIT found the family guilty of misrepresentation and fabricating documents, the five unanimously ordered the National Accountability Bureau to launch corruption cases against all. In a move which can only be called dubious, the five took note of Nawaz Sharif’s chairmanship of FZE Capital, his son’s company in Dubai (which did not figure in the Panama Papers)  and held that while he did not draw any emoluments they were nevertheless his assets. This may be technically so. They held that as he had not declared them in his nomination form in the 2013 election, he was dishonest and fell short of the requirements of Art 62. No real opportunity was given to him to defend himself. The judges clearly forgot that justice has to be manifestly done. It brings no credit to the Supreme Court and can only spread speculation of bias and the unseen hand of the Generals. The writer is a former Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs.

The GOC, Dah Division, at the Bakloh Cantt on Sunday. Photo: Ravinder Sood

Our Correspondent

Palampur, July 16

A fortnight Indo-Thailand joint training exercise “Matree” concluded at the Bakloh Cantt, 90 km from here, this morning.The major thrust of the joint training was to understand the operational methodology, interoperability and conduct tactical operations by joint command post. The exercise finally concluded based on counter-terrorism setting.The General Officer Commanding, Dah Division, while presiding over the event appreciated both the armies. He said the professionability, conduct and confidence of both units had resulted in successful completion of the exercise.The GOC said the military exercise would strengthen friendly relations between India and Thailand and build up the understanding between rank and files of both armies. This exercise had benefited both the armies. In future such training would continue to strengthen the relations of both the countries.

The operation is under way. PTI file

Tribune News Service

Srinagar, July 10

The Army on Monday foiled an infiltration bid along the Line of Control (LoC) in Naugam sector of north Kashmir, killing three militants.

(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)

“Suspicious movement was noticed along the LoC in Naugam sector last night and the terrorists were tracked till dawn, when they were challenged by troops,” an Army official said.

He said in the ensuing gunfight, three militants have been killed so far as the operation was in progress. With PTI

The optics from the scenes at the Ben Gurion airport, bear hugs, gestures and words all displayed the final arrival of a strategic partnership in the making for last many years. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Israel had been waiting for this moment, of a visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Israel, for the last seventy years; it finally happened and that too symbolically on the anniversary of Israel’s famous intervention operations at Entebbe in 1976 in which Netanyahu lost his elder brother. The visit needs to be viewed beyond the expressed emotions for its true worth in an increasingly dangerous world in which India and Israel find themselves with many common threats.

Driving into Israel from Jordan over the famous King Hussain Bridge some years ago what struck me were the vast plantations in the Jordan Valley, all brought to life through drip irrigation, the agro technology which Israel mastered and which enabled water deficient countries to make use of their arid lands. I start with this observation because mention Israel and every one jumps to only issues related to military technology. The latter will find much reference in this piece but it’s the ability to innovate for survival in diverse fields and take those innovations well beyond which has been the major strength of the Israeli state from which India needs to learn.

While understanding that this is one of Prime Minister Modi’s most important foreign visits it is also relevant to understand what prevented the development of the relationship to this level in the last 25 years after establishment of diplomatic relations. The beginning was shackled by the legacy of Cold War ideas and relationships although the desire for closer defense, economic and people to people ties existed for almost seventy years. What held India back even after 1992 were the compulsions of the management of our ties with the Arab world and in turn with the Islamic world. As a nation with a large Islamic population, the handling of ties with the Islamic world was important. India was extremely concerned because of its ongoing spat with Pakistan who would have exploited any relationship perceived inimical to interests of the large comity of Arab nations and turned them against India. In addition India with its huge dependence on the Arab world for its energy needs could have ill afforded not maintaining strong political ties with them.

Prime Minister Modi’s foreign policy involved almost three years of managing, cultivating and strategizing for this big event; it could not have been possible without that. Sensitive to the presence of an eight million Indian diaspora in the Gulf region and considering all the angles of the implications on India’s energy security and trade relations he first tied up the ends, visited important Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Iran and received delegations from them. He thus ensured that a substantive move towards Israel would not come in the way of relationships in a fast changing strategic environment of the Middle East. The relationship with Israel could not be taken to the next level with the shadow of the Arab world looming in the background and any mention of Israel could not be simply hyphenated with the long standing problems of Palestine. Nations ultimately seek their interests independent of their concern for other nations although this need not substantially change the way they do business with those nations. By not visiting Ramallah on the West Bank Mr Modi is not necessarily shunning a relationship with Palestine but rather giving it a status separated from Israel. In many ways, that should work positively for the Palestinian Authority too.

While there are many issues on the agenda of the visit the dominant part of the relationship remains the security domain. There will be talks on agriculture, water and disaster management, startups, university adoption, student exchange programs and technical education but there is no denying that the domain which drives Israel’s virtual existence is security. Netanyahu’s call for taking ‘Make in India’ to ‘Make with India’ is a relevant one as no other technically advanced nation will share technology with India the way Israel does. Fully aware of the limitations of its own markets Israel would definitely be seeking to enhance its share of 7.9 percent of the Indian arms and equipment market to something much higher. With India it gets to partner a nation both with a security environment with almost similar threats and one which is hungry for technology.

Leading the pack in military equipment is the recent agreement for the Indian purchase of ten Heron advanced armed drones at a cost of almost 450 million USD. Capable of substantially changing the offensive capability across the LoC in a No War No Peace environment the drones can undertake surgical strikes much deeper in adversary territory than can be executed by foot borne Special Forces. The other equipment keenly awaited is the Barak 8 surface to air missile system to boost Indian air defence systems which have been largely deficient in capability. In the field of cyber security, intelligence acquisition and intervention in counter terror operations there can be a no match to the Israeli expertise. The Spike anti-tank guided missile launchers and missiles for Indian infantry units will be a boon in view of the repeated failure in the development of the Nag anti-tank missile. My last important take away from this domain is the creation of an electronic wall for border management. With India’s intent of upgrading border management substantially the Israeli deployment and response system along the Lebanese border is one of the best models to look at.

There will be many nations watching with keen interest the emergence of India’s de-hyphenated foreign policy in the making and it is good that display of complete strategic independence is going to be a part of Indian policy for the future.  Two more days of high profile events beamed live from Israel and discussed threadbare by Indian TV channels are  surely not going to go waste.