Israel is the only democracy and nuclear power in the Middle East. It is surrounded by a block of Muslim countries — some of them itching for nuclear status themselves. But is Israel's position really that unique? As it turns out, India — the world's largest democracy and recent addition to the world's nuclear family — is in a very similar predicament.  Prior to September 11, it looked as if India and fellow new nuclear power Pakistan were about to elevate their third-world cold war into a much hotter conflict...

  Israel is the only democracy and nuclear power in the Middle East. It is surrounded by a block of Muslim countries — some of them itching for nuclear status themselves. But is Israel's position really that unique? As it turns out, India — the world's largest democracy and recent addition to the world's nuclear family — is in a very similar predicament. 

Prior to September 11, it looked as if India and fellow new nuclear power Pakistan were about to elevate their third-world cold war into a much hotter conflict. 

But now Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf stands with the United States in the war against terrorism. He is also curbing Islamic extremism in his own country. As a consequence, the prospects for an easing of tensions between India and Pakistan have become better. 

The terrorist attacks on the United States have had a similar effect on Israel's relationship with its potentially nuclear neighbors. The United States is stepping up its rhetoric about Iraq's possible acquisition of nuclear weapons. And a peace plan proposed by Saudi Arabia has put the future of Arab-Israeli relations in a more positive light. 

Brothers in Arms

In fact, what has these two countries in such a tight spot these days is a phenomenon far more local than nuclear dread. Their real predicaments are rooted in religious and ethnic conflict which they carry with them to farthest of lands. An Indian columnist, Anita Pratap describes some Indian Hindus predicament very nicely when she highlights that, 'without doubt, Indian expatriates, like their Jewish counterparts, are a most successful lot. They also have strong attachments to their roots and religion, nourished as it is by the nectar of nostalgia. Over time and distance, this has invariably deepened into xenophobia. Almost all minority expatriate communities are susceptible to this. You see it amongst the Jews, Sikhs and even the Sri Lankan Tamils living in the US, Britain and Canada. They are more patriotic than their unfortunate brethren living in the homelands. With their funds and propaganda, these expats have fanned conflicts back home, long after their exhausted people yearn for a settlement'. Money and systematic propaganda hardens sentiments, fosters us-versus-them prejudices and precipitates paranoia—all of which aggravate the dangerous fault lines that snake through multicultural societies of both India and Israel.

One can argue that the thorn in the sides of both Israel and India is the lingering effects of the globalization of the past. It's a process which has had a profound effect on the countries' domestic affairs — long before these democracies were ever created. Both countries' recent violent clashes with their minority Muslim populations share amazing similarities. The sparks that started both the current Israeli-Palestinian fighting and the Hindu-Muslim riots in India came from holy temples — neither of which currently exist. Back in 1992, Hindu nationalist groups tore down a 16th-century mosque to clear the way for building a temple to Ram — an incarnation of the Hindu god Vishnu. According to Hindus, Ram was born on the very spot on which the mosque had been built. Not surprisingly, Hindu-Muslim riots broke out, leaving over 1,000 people dead. A few years later, renewed efforts to build a temple to Ram have again sparked clashes between Muslims and Hindus resulting in the deaths of over 600 more people in 2002. 

This sort of intense ethnic and religious conflict certainly sounds familiar to anyone tracing the history of the current Palestinian uprising, or intifada. 

Jerusalem's Temple Mount is best viewed as the proverbial Gordian Knot of holy sites. The Temple Mount itself was the foundation for Judaism's first and second temples — built to house the Ark of the Covenant. The first temple was destroyed by the Babylonians in the sixth century BCE (Before Common Era) — and the second by the Romans in the first century CE (Common Era). According to present day Jews, directly on top of the Temple Mount — where the first and second temples previously stood — lies Islam's Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque. These shrines — collectively known as the Haram al-Sharif — commemorate the spot where the Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven. 

In September 2000, Ariel Sharon — escorted by hundreds of Israeli riot police — entered the Haram al-Sharif to demonstrate Israeli control over the site. Palestinians erupted in violence and anger, turning Israeli public opinion against the peace process — and helping Mr. Sharon to become Prime Minister. 

Parallels in power

In similar fashion, India's Prime Minister Atal Vajpayee and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) consolidated Hindu support on local levels by supporting the Ram temple movement. But to gain power on the national level, the BJP has had to adopt a more secular approach. The recent outbursts of violence have eroded the party's political clout. 


Israel's Prime Minister has had similar problems since assuming office. After 17 months of violence, both Israel and the United States are beginning to question whether Mr. Sharon's hawkish policies towards the Palestinian territories can ever lead to a real peace. 

Separated at birth

Amazingly, there is another intriguing argument to be made about the parallels between India and Israel. It goes way beyond the two temples. Come to think of it, both countries big problems go back to the days of empire — namely the British Empire.  When that once-powerful world juggernaut withdrew from both countries just over 50 years ago, Israel and India had to decide how to deal with large Muslim populations. However, each took an opposite approach.  Some of India's territories with significant Muslim populations broke off to form Pakistan and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). It was the act of allowing Pakistan's separation that provoked a Hindu extremist to assassinate Mahatma Gandhi.  In mirror contrast, Israel extended its borders with a pre-emptive war against its Arab neighbors — occupying the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Syria's Golan Heights. But again, when Yitzak Rabin signed the Oslo accords that would return the occupied territories to the Palestinian's, he was assassinated by a Jewish extremist.  Neither approach has been successful. In their efforts to build democratic societies on the foundation of Jewish and Hindu cultures, both countries have had trouble satisfying the needs of their Muslim minorities. 

Israel's rapidly growing Muslim population constitutes 15% of its population (excluding the West Bank and Gaza), while India's 100 million plus Muslims are roughly 12% of the country's one billion citizens. 

So what can Israel and India do to shore up domestic problems that started on holy ground? In both conflicts, violence has lead to retaliation. Perhaps Mahatma Gandhi's non-violent approach — which freed India from British rule in the first place — is the answer. 

For Israel, this means aggressively pursuing a peace process that will lead to Palestinian statehood. It is better to resolve tensions peacefully when Palestinian children are throwing rocks in the West Bank, than to wait until their older brothers are blowing themselves up in Tel Aviv. 

India has to protect the religious rights of its Muslim minority just as it does those of Hindus. It must react favorably to Muslim discontent when it is civil — and abandon support for provocative Hindu agendas. The country must listen to and address Muslim issues before India's Muslims begin their own intifada. It has taken two decades of money and military and countless innocent lives to contain separatist forces of a small state like Kashmir...the thought of over 150million Muslim uprising all over India should send shivers down the spine of some hate mongering Indian Right wing politicians. When societies are polarised, there are no winners. The majority community is misled into believing they will score an economic, moral and psychological victory over a vanquished, traumatised minority. The reality is they'll all be losers. Victory and prosperity can come only if there is peace and harmony because Hindus in India and Jews in Israel are economically interdependent upon Muslims even though majority of Muslims forms the bulk of labor and underpaid working class at both the places but they still supplement each other with their specific strengths and skills. India and Israel's only hope lies in living peacefully together. Sense dawns inevitably, but it often dawns late, invariably after a self-defeating, debilitating churning process.

View Also: History of present structures