Huge protests fan Egypt unrest But Indian DIPLOMACY Stranded in wildness!India to take up dubious university issue with US!
Armed forces chief seen as Mubarak successor!
| "We will be taking it up with the educational authorities in the US as how it allowed the university to function, how it was allowed to dupe gullible Indian students," said External Affairs Minister SM Krishna while terming the Tri-Valley university as "dubious." more by SM Krishna - 12 minutes ago - Hindustan Times (14 occurrences) |
2010 – Scripting a landmark year in Indian diplomacy | Awaz-e-Dost
6 Jan 2011 ... 2010 was an eventful year for Indian diplomacy, which witnessed a qualitative expansion of strategic relations with key partner countries ...
www.awazedost.com/.../2010-scripting-a-landmark-year-in-indian-diplomacy/ - Cached2010 an eventful year for Indian diplomacy
5 Jan 2011 ... New Delhi, Jan 5 (ANI): 2010 was an eventful year for Indian diplomacy, which witnessed a qualitative expansion of strategic relations with ...
www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/198916 - CachedA blockbuster year in Indian diplomacy (2010 in Retrospect)
1 post - 1 author - Last post: 28 Dec 2010From Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed, who visited India in January, to Russian President Dmitry Medvedevs trip in December, ...
www.thaindian.com/.../a-blockbuster-year-in-indian-diplomacy-2010-in-retrospect_100480212.html - United States - Cached2010 an eventful year for Indian diplomacy - 1 post - 5 Jan 2011
24 leaders visited India in 'landmark' 2010 diplomacy year - 1 post - 31 Dec 2010
Indian diplomacy wants to reinvent itself, virtually - 1 post - 12 Dec 2010
An action-packed January for Indian diplomacy - 1 post - 31 Dec 2009
Get more discussion results
2010 an eventful year for Indian diplomacy
5 Jan 2011 ... 2010 was an eventful year for Indian diplomacy, which witnessed a qualitative expansion of strategic relations with key partner countries ...
www.andhranews.net/India/.../2010-eventful-year-Indian-diplomacy-diplomacy-139.htm - CachedIndian diplomacy highlights in 2010 @ www.punjabnewsline.com
28 Dec 2010 ... Indian diplomacy highlights in 2010 ... July 25-29 - In the face of Western criticism, India welcomes Myanmar's Gen Than Shwe. ...
punjabnewsline.com/content/indian-diplomacy...2010/27339 - CachedIndian diplomacy highlights in 2010 - World News, 114057
28 Dec 2010 ... Indian diplomacy highlights in 2010 - New Delhi, Dec 28 : From Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed, who visited India in January, ...
www.newkerala.com/news/world/fullnews-114057.html - Cached2010 an eventful year for Indian diplomacy - Oneindia News
5 Jan 2011 ... New Delhi, Jan 5 (ANI): 2010 was an eventful year for Indian diplomacy, which witnessed a qualitative expansion of strategic relations with ...
news.oneindia.in/.../2010an-eventful-year-for-indiandiplomacy.html - CachedIndian diplomacy highlights in 2010
Indian diplomacy highlights in 2010. Wednesday, 29 December 2010 12:36. prime1 New Delhi ,28 Dec... From Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed, who ...
www.newsnetindia.com/.../63275-indian-diplomacy-highlights-in-2010- - CachedMEA :: Indian Public Diplomacy :: Newsmakers
Conference on Public Diplomacy in the Information Age Friday December 10th, 2010 from 09:30 am to 6:30 pm IST at Le Meridien New Delhi, INDIA (Download) ...
www.indiandiplomacy.in/NewsMaker.aspx - CachedIndian diplomacy 2010: A Year to Remember | CalcuttaTube
Barack Obama Jan 2011 (Calcutta Tube): Barack Obama, Nicolas Sarkozy, Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev, Wen Jiabao, you name it, they have it. In the.
calcuttatube.com/indian-diplomacy-2010-a.../136567/ - United States - Cached
Indian Holocaust My Father`s Life and Time -FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY NINE
Palash Biswas
http://indianholocaustmyfatherslifeandtime.blogspot.com/
http://basantipurtimes.blogspot.com/
A senior Congress leader from Telangana, G Venkataswamy, today lashed out at the style of functioning of party President Sonia Gandhi and demanded that she step down from her post and make way for an Indian.
India to take up dubious university issue with US!
Armed forces chief seen as Mubarak successor!
U.S.-Arab Policy Conference in Washington DC | Human Rights ...
27 Oct 2008 ... 17th Annual Arab-U.S. Policymakers Conference October 30 - 31, 2008 "Transitioning the White House: Challenges and Opportunities for ...
humanrights.change.org/.../us-arab_policy_conference_in_washington_dc - CachedU.S. Policy and the Arab and Muslim World: The Need for Public ...
Brookings Review article by Shibley Telhami (Summer 2002)
www.brookings.edu/.../summer_middleeast_telhami.aspx - Cached - Similar- [PDF]
Israeli-Arab Negotiations: Background, Conflicts, and U.S. Policy
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by C Migdalovitz - 2010 - Cited by 6 - Related articles
Israeli-Arab Negotiations: Background, Conflicts, and U.S. Policy. Congressional Research Service. Summary. After the first Gulf war, in 1991, a new peace ...
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33530.pdf - Similar The Arab American News - U.S. foreign policy morass outlined
1 Aug 2008 ... It is an in-depth analysis of U.S. foreign policy since 1945, ... the real complaints of the Arab and Muslim world against American policy. ...
www.arabamericannews.com › Art & Culture › Book Reviews - Cached - SimilarSpotlight on Geopolitics » Blog Archive » America's Arab policy ...
31 Jan 2011 ... It is, unfortunately, in the Arab world that the United States has made its biggest foreign policy errors and blunders outside of Latin ...
florianpantazi.blogactiv.eu/2011/01/americas-arab-policy-quagmire/ - CachedPrivacy Policy - US Arab Chamber of Commerce
US Arab Chamber of Commerce is intended to assist with the certification of commercial documents only.
www.usarab.org/privacy-policy.html - CachedArab Democracy and American Policy :: MEF Policy Forum
25 Feb 2009 ... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Obama Administration apparently does not share its predecessor's determination to promote democracy in Arab countries.
www.meforum.org/.../arab-democracy-and-american-policy - Cached - SimilarArab lobby and U.S. foreign policy - Google Books Result
Khalil Marrar - 2008 - History - 269 pages
This volume assesses why the US stance has evolved in the way that it has, concluding that while international factors cannot be overlooked, developments within ...
books.google.co.in/books?isbn=0415776813...Arab lobby in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Arab Americans and the Middle East Policy in the 2008 U.S. Elections", Dr. James Zogby, President of the Arab American Institute Foreign Press Center ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_lobby_in_the_United_States - Cached - SimilarPt 4 Israel Lobby Aipac Influence On Us Arab Policies Iran, Iraq ...
Pt 4 Israel Lobby Aipac Influence On Us Arab Policies Iran, Iraq, Palestine - from WN Network. WorldNews delivers latest Breaking news including World News, ...
wn.com/pt_4_israel_lobby_aipac_influence_on_us_arab_policies_iran,_iraq,_palestine - Cached
Huge protests fan Egypt unrest But Indian DIPLOMACY Stranded in wildness!Since Nehru Era Non aligned age, India and Egypt are very GOOD Friends! Apart from Friendship and bialiteral relations, EGYPT is the Epicentre of Developing World Geopolitics, specilly West Asia, Middle East and Arab World.Citing internal Matter, India may not be detached with events of Global Revolution as it is projected involving Muslim Sentiments worldwide!
Hundreds of thousands of people have flooded into central Cairo, where protesters have called for a "million-strong" march to press their demand that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak cede power.
THE turmoil in Egypt spread to Jordan last night as King Abdullah sacked his government and appointed a new prime minister, Maruf Bakhit, with orders to carry out "true political reforms". Jordan's King Abdullah Tuesday accepted the resignation of Prime Minister Samir Rifai's government and asked ex-premier Marouf Bakhit to form a new government, according to a royal court statement.
India ONGC to give up Egypt exploration assets-source
- Share this
- Link this
- 0diggsdigg
Factboxes
- FACTBOX-Potential energy risks of Egypt protests
- Mon, Jan 31 2011
- FACTBOX-Governments, firms fly people out of Egypt
- Mon, Jan 31 2011
- FACTBOX-Major foreign companies operating in Egypt
- Mon, Jan 31 2011
Related News
- PRESS DIGEST-Indian Business News - Feb 1
- Mon, Jan 31 2011
- Governments, firms evacuate citizens from Egypt
- Mon, Jan 31 2011
Stocks
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED
ONGC.BO
Rs1,176.15
-1.40-0.12%
2:59pm GMT+0530
ROYAL DUTCH SHELL PLC
RDSa.L
2,263.50p
+65.00+2.96%
8:47pm GMT+0530
NEW DELHI | Tue Feb 1, 2011 8:10am EST
NEW DELHI Feb 1 (Reuters) - India's state-run explorer Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC.BO) will give up its exploration assets in Egypt, a source with direct knowledge of the matter said on Tuesday, as the discoveries are not commercially viable.
"ONGC has informed Egypt authorities that it wants to relinquish North Ramadan concession, while it would shortly do so for NEMED block," the source, who did not wish to be identified, told Reuters.
ONGC Videsh Ltd, the overseas investment arm of ONGC, has a 70-percent stake in Egypt's North Ramadan Concession while U.S.-owned IPR Energy Red Sea Inc. holds the remainder.
ONGC Videsh also owns a 33 percent stake in the North East Mediterranean Deepwater Concession (NEMED), in the Mediterranean sea offshore Egypt.
The other partners in that block are Royal Dutch Shell (RDSa.L) with 51 percent as operator and Malaysia's Petronas [PETR.UL] with a 16 percent stake.
(Reporting by Nidhi Verma; editing by Jo Winterbottom)
Fuel prices in India to rise as Brent tops $100NDTV Correspondent & Agencies, February 01, 2011
India seems insulated from the crisis in Middle East where a popular uprising for democracy in Egypt continues unabated. However, Indian consumers are likely to bear the brunt of the unrest as international crude prices start inching upwards to break previous records.
On Monday, Brent crude oil price crossed $100 per barrel for the first time since 2008. Brent crude is the accepted world benchmark crude oil which is used to price two-third of the world's internationally traded crude oil supplies including that in Asia and Europe.
The sharp rise in Brent crude will affect India because Brent has 32 per cent weightage in the Indian crude basket. The Indian crude basket is hovering at a much lower $94 per barrel currently. But that is 5 per cent more than the price in December when the average price of the Indian basket was $89.78 per barrel.
The situation would get even worse if the Egyptian unrest spills over to more important oil producing regions like Saudi Arabia. India's largest crude imports come from Saudi Arabia.
While Egypt is not a major oil-producing country, each day about two million barrels of oil pass through the Suez Canal and an adjacent pipeline, both of which are controlled by Egypt. The Suez remains open and shipping has not been interrupted.
On Monday, PSU oil firms hiked jet fuel prices by a massive 4.5 per cent, the biggest hike in almost a year, on the back of spiraling international oil prices. This is the eighth straight increase in jet fuel prices since October 2010, when international crude oil prices started soaring.
Petrol prices, that have been deregulated, are also likely to rise soon . The last revision in petrol prices came on December 14 when oil major Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) hiked prices by Rs. 2.95 per litre. This was the fourth hike after government's decision to deregulate petrol prices.
Oil marketing companies (OMCs) in India are already facing huge under-recoveries as they give a subsidy of Rs. 8 per litre on diesel, Rs. 19 per litre subsidy on Kerosene and a massive Rs. 360 per cylinder subsidy on LPG. The cumulative losses to OMCs are pegged at about Rs. 300 crore per day.
On Monday, the government approved Rs. 8,000 crore in cash subsidy to state-owned fuel retailers to make up for half of the revenues they lost on selling diesel, domestic LPG and kerosene below cost in the October-December quarter.
Related Stories
- Oil prices rise on Egypt unrest; Brent tops $100
- Petrol price hike should have been even bigger: IOC
- IOC Sept quarter net jumps 17 folds
- IOC to hike petrol prices from Tuesday
- Govt won't dictate price of natural gas: Oil Secy
Read more at: http://profit.ndtv.com/news/show/fuel-prices-in-india-to-rise-as-brent-tops-100-138836?trendingnow&cp
Trade with Egypt hit; Dabur, Marico suspend operations
Daily News & Analysis - 11 minutes ago
Place: New Delhi | Agency: PTI India's trade with Egypt stands disrupted and companies such as Dabur and Marico have suspended their operations in the ...
Egypt crisis: How will it impact FMCG cos?
Moneycontrol.com - 2 hours ago
Several Indian FMCG companies have operations in Egypt. With the turmoil continuing in the Arab republic, CNBC-TV18's Tanvi Shukla analyses what impact this ...
Dabur shuts Egypt plant, Emami cagey over unrest
Times of India - 3 hours ago
NEW DELHI: Leading Indian FMCG firms, including Dabur and Emami, today said their businesses in Egypt might get an impact due to the ongoing political ...
Indian companies calm as Egypt boils, but 'cautious'
Daily News & Analysis - Shailaja Sharma, Suparna Goswami - 20 hours ago
By Shailaja Sharma & Suparna Goswami | Place: Mumbai | Agency: DNA A restive Egypt has emerged as a cause for concern for Indian companies which have ...
Dabur net rises 11%
Business Standard - 20 hours ago
India's fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) major Dabur reported a 10.9 per cent increase in consolidated net profit for the quarter ended December 31 to Rs ...
See 10-12% volume growth ahead: Dabur India
Moneycontrol.com - Jan 31, 2011
India's fourth largest FMCG company Dabur India has reported consolidated net profit of Rs 154 crore in quarter ended December 2010 as against Rs 139 crore ...
Indian firms in Egypt down shutters, watch and wait
domain-B - 1 hour ago
While putting up a brave front, Indian firms with branches in Egypt are certainly jittery over the political turmoil there. These include fast-moving ...
It's not business as usual for Indian cos in Egypt
NDTV.com - 2 hours ago
Indian companies operating in Egypt are jittery over the mounting political protests and tensions across the region as they fear it could have an adverse ...
All 8 related articles »
02/02/2011Mass protests reflect aspirations of Egyptian people: India
New Delhi, Feb 1 (IANS) Marking a shift in its stand on the popular uprising in Egypt, India Tuesday described mass protests in the north African country as 'an articulation of aspirations of Egyptian people' for reform and hoped that the current situation will be resolved in a peaceful manner.
'India continues to closely follow the mass protests in Egypt which are an articulation of the aspirations of the Egyptian people for reform,' India's external affairs ministry said in a statement.
'It is hoped that the current situation will be resolved in a peaceful manner, in the best interests of the people of Egypt,' said the ministry.
'India wishes that Egypt, a fellow developing country with which she enjoys close and traditional ties, will continue to be a strong and stable nation, contributing to peace and prosperity in the region,' it added.
India's stand on Tuesday marks an important shift from its circumspect stance of the current agitation being an internal affair of Egypt.
On Monday, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna described the unrest in Egypt as 'an internal affair of that country' and hoped for a peaceful resolution of the standoff.
New Delhi's reaction came as tens of thousands of protesters gathered in Cairo's Tahrir Square Tuesday and many more were streaming in to participate in the march of a million as the movement to end President Hosni Mubarak's 30-year rule gained momentum across Egypt.
Some 100,000 protesters thronged Cairo's downtown Tahrir Square for a march to the Presidential Palace, a day after the army said that it won't be using force.
With the upheaval showing no sign of abating, around 600 Indians returned to India in special flights arranged by Air India over the last two days.
©Indo-Asian News Service
The king's edict followed days of escalating protests on the streets as Jordanians echoed protests in Egypt for change.
"Bakhit's mission is to take practical, quick and tangible steps to launch true political reforms, enhance Jordan's democratic drive and ensure safe and decent living for all Jordanians," a palace statement said last night.
Jordan's powerful Islamist opposition said it had started a dialogue with the state, saying that unlike the situation in Egypt, it did not seek regime change.
Despite recent government measures to pump about $US500 million into the economy in a bid to help improve living conditions, protests have been held in Amman and other cities over the past three weeks to demand political and economic reform.
Egypt's armed forces chief of staff Sami Enan could be an acceptable successor to Hosni Mubarak because he is perceived as incorruptible, a member of the banned Muslim Brotherhood said on Tuesday.
Kamel Al Helbawi, a prominent overseas cleric from Egypt's main opposition movement, told Reuters that Enan, who has good ties with Washington, was a liberal who could be seen as suitable by an opposition coalition taking shape on the streets of Egypt.
"He can be the future man of Egypt," Helbawi said in a telephone interview.
"I think he will be acceptable ... because he has enjoyed some good reputation. He is not involved in corruption. The people do not know him (as corrupt)."
Helbawi said Enan was not an Islamist but "a good, liberal man".
Little is known internationally about Enan, believed to be in his early 60s, other than he appears to have spent much of his career in air defence.
A profile on Silobreaker, the news and information monitoring service, gives his date and place of birth as 1948, in Cairo, and says he was trained in both Russia and France as well at a military academy in Egypt.
He held senior roles in air defence before being appointed to his current job in 2005, the website indicates.
US orders non-essential personnel to leave Egypt
The State Department on Tuesday ordered non-essential US government personnel and their families to leave Egypt amid growing anti-government protests and uncertainty over the security situation.
It said it had taken the step "in light of recent events."
The move is an indication of Washington's deepening concern about developments in Egypt and replaces the department's initial decision last week to allow non-essential workers who wanted to leave the country to do so at government expense. In a statement, the department said it would continue to evacuate private US citizens from the country aboard government-chartered planes.
On Monday, the US evacuated more than 1,200 Americans from Cairo on such flights and said it expected to fly out roughly 1,400 more in the coming days. Monday's flights ferried Americans from Cairo to Larnaca, Cyprus" Athens, Greece" and Istanbul, Turkey. On Tuesday, the department expects to add Frankfurt, Germany as a destination.
It also hopes to arrange evacuation flights from the Egyptian cities of Aswan and Luxor.
The Cairo airport is open and operating but the department warned that flights may be disrupted due to protests against the Egyptian government.
More than a million gather in and around Cairo's Tahrir square, as Muslim Brotherhood said they would not negotiate with President Hosni Mubarak's government.
Arab League Secretary-General Amr Mousa said he is willing to assume any role of leadership if asked by fellow Egyptians.
Protesters in Egypt show no signs of abating their call for President Hosni Mubarak to step down after 30 years in power. Late on Monday, Egypt's Vice President Omar Suleiman said he is authorized to open a dialogue with the opposition.
The U.S. has shared strong ties with Egypt since the end of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, and, many analysts say, Egypt under Mr. Mubarak has promoted US interests in the Middle East, especially by maintaining the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty.
So far the U.S. has proceeded with caution in commenting on whether President Mubarak should step aside. But Egyptian voices inside the country and out say a revolution is under way, and the United States, no matter what position it takes, can do little to direct it.
Tunisia's popular revolt, which ousted veteran strongman Zine El Abedine Ben Ali, has inspired dissidents across the Arab world, with the eyes of the world on the extraordinary demonstrations in Egypt, where a "day of anger" was called last night.
The thunderous roar of hundreds of thousands of Egyptians calling for democracy filled central Cairo early today as protesters set off on a "million-strong march" to bring down President Hosni Mubarak. As the UN High Commissioner for Refugees announced that at least 300 people had died in the eight days of protests, the Australian government said it would send as many aircraft as it took to pull Australians out of strife-torn Egypt.
A Qantas jumbo jet chartered by the government and capable of carrying 400 passengers was due in Cairo today and another was urgently put on last night for tomorrow . The government vowed to provide a "jumbo a day" until demand was met.
The hundreds of thousands who began massing after dawn yesterday in Cairo's Tahrir Square did so with the assurance that the military would not fire on them.
The army's declaration yesterday that the protesters' claims were "legitimate" came after days of speculation about whether the army was prepared to put down the protests.
"To the great people of Egypt, your armed forces, acknowledging the legitimate rights of the people," stress that they "will not use force against the Egyptian people," the military said in a statement.
It appeared to be a major break with Mr Mubarak, who is commander-in-chief and has branded the protests illegal. A bloody confrontation could, however, occur if the protesters march on the presidential palace and attempt to take it over.
Fifty Egyptian human rights groups called on Mr Mubarak to step down to "avoid bloodshed" yesterday, while pro-democracy leader Mohamed ElBaradei gave the President a deadline of Friday to stand down and asked for a "safe exit" for him.
While army helicopters circled overhead in Cairo early today, the roar from the protesters could be heard several kilometres away.
As the push to oust Mr Mubarak reached a crescendo, Australians seeking to flee Egypt were yesterday advised to reach assembly points in the city from where they could be taken by bus to a point near the airport to be flown to Germany.
More DFAT staff would be waiting in Frankfurt to help the evacuees.
As concerns grew that today's Qantas jumbo would not be able to take all the Australians seeking to flee Egypt out of the country, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade head Dennis Richardson said the government would organise as many flights as necessary. "If there are too many for this flight we will have one the next day," said Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade head Dennis Richardson. "We will put on a jumbo a day for as long as it's needed."
Yesterday, 31 Australians left Egypt on flights organised by Canadian authorities. While the Canadians had to pay for the flights, the Australian government will pay for the Australians on those aircraft.
By last night well over 400 Australians had indicated that they wanted to fly out on the government charter, more than enough to fill the first Qantas jumbo.
DFAT officials were working their way through a list of those who "expressed interest" in getting on the government charter flight to avoid duplications and to delete those who'd got out already on commercial flights.
Families and work colleagues trying to find out who was booked on the Qantas jumbo said it had been hard to get information from government officials.
Andrea Connell, headmistress of Sydney Girls High School, said she could not get any information from DFAT about maths teacher Nader Maker who was visiting family in Cairo.
In Cairo, Mr Maker said he had initially not been able to get help from DFAT.
"I contacted the embassy (in Cairo) and they transferred me to Canberra and said we can't do anything," he said. "Canberra said get in contact with the airline, but I can't get in contact with the airline. What can I do?"
After trying the embassy in Cairo again, Mr Maker was able to register for the evacuation flight today. He has been staying in an area that has been heavily attacked by gangs who burnt down a police station. "I saw hell," he said.
He was afraid to even carry his suitcase into the street. "If they see my bag they will take it -- gangs control the area," he said.
Many Australian travellers in Egypt are caught up in a nightmare situation, with no way to get cash at Cairo airport while they are being charged as much as $30 for a bottle of water. Most credit cards do not work.
Mr Richardson said he could understand the frustrations people were feeling.
| Egypt crisis: Will Barack Obama trust 80 million Egyptians? Jan 30, 2011 - Telegraph.co.uk | |
| Be careful what you wish for in Egypt Jan 30, 2011 - ABC Online | |
| US, Israel and Turkey evacuate citizens from Egypt Jan 30, 2011 - The Guardian | |
| Dubai Index Falls Most Since May, Leads Mideast Drop Jan 30, 2011 - BusinessWeek | |
| In the streets of Cairo, proof Bush was right Jan 29, 2011 - Washington Post | |
| With Egypt, Diplomatic Words Often Fail Jan 29, 2011 - New York Times | |
| Israelis fear unwinding of political stability Jan 28, 2011 - Financial Times |
. ...
Why fear the Arab revolutionary spirit?
The Guardian - 7 hours ago
What cannot but strike the eye in the revolts in Tunisia and Egypt is the conspicuous absence of Muslim fundamentalism. In the best secular democratic tradition, people simply revolted against an oppressive regime, its corruption and poverty, ...
With Egypt, Diplomatic Words Often Fail
New York Times - Helene Cooper - Jan 29, 2011
In June 2005, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stood before an audience of 600 at the American University in Cairo, assailed the Egyptian government for intimidating and locking up protesters and called for President Hosni Mubarak ...
Arab Elite Say Monarchies Are Safe From Unrest
New York Times - Liz Alderman - Jan 30, 2011
DAVOS, SWITZERLAND — The unrest engulfing Egypt caught business and political leaders at the World Economic Forum off guard, but it became the hottest topic among the Arab elite here. Most of those leaders tuned in to the dramatic ...
ANALYSIS - U.S. warily seeks to shape Mideast outcome
Reuters - Lee Jae-Won - 14 hours ago
Egyptians living in South Korea hold up a poster Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak as they attend a rally demanding the end of his 30-year rule near the Egypt embassy in Seoul January 31, 2011. By Matt Spetalnick WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The big test for ...
All 2,816 related articles »
With the radio tagging of Indian students duped by a fake university in San Francisco triggering outrage in India, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna Tuesday said New Delhi will ask Washington how such a 'dubious' institute was allowed to function.'
Tri-Valley fiasco: AP parties want Minister to go to US
Economic Times - 12 minutes ago
HYDERABAD: An all-party meeting in Andhra Pradesh today demanded that the State Government bring pressure on the Centre to address issues related to ...
Fake varsity issue to figure prominently during talks
Hindustan Times - 12 minutes ago
With the radio tagging of Indian students duped by a fake university in US triggering outrage in India, India on Tuesday said it will ask Washington how ...
Tri Valley: Parents look for support
Business Standard - Krishna Mohan - 41 minutes ago
We don't want to speak anything. It will only make matters worse for the children,'' says a parent. Watching her words carefully, she consciously avoids ...
"We will be taking it up with the educational authorities in the US as how it allowed the university to function, how it was allowed to dupe gullible Indian students," said External Affairs Minister SM Krishna while terming the Tri-Valley university as "dubious."more by SM Krishna - 12 minutes ago - Hindustan Times (14 occurrences) |
'Govt probe if students were duped'
Indian Express - 3 hours ago
Overseas Affairs Minister Vayalar Ravi on Sunday criticized the US authorities for their inhuman treatment of radio tagging of duped Indian students ...
Tri Valley University blames Indian-origin staffer for immigration fraud
Economic Times - 4 hours ago
WASHINGTON: As radio-tagging of scores of Indian students duped by a "sham" US university continues to cause anger back home, the controversial institute ...
India will ask how dubious university was allowed to function
Economic Times - 4 hours ago
NEW DELHI: Apparently seeking to cool tempers here over Indians being tagged in the US, External Affairs Minister SM Krishna today said the issue should be ...
Duped Indian students in US face uncertain future
Economic Times - 7 hours ago
HYDERABAD: The Indian students duped by a fake university in the US face an uncertain future as their appeal is not likely to be heard in a court there ...
US to investigate Tri-Valley Varsity scam
Sify - 8 hours ago
The United States is taking very seriously a civilian case filed against Tri-Valley University of Pleasanton, California. In a court filing, the university, ...
India raises concern over radio tagged students
IBNLive.com - 9 hours ago
New Delhi: The parents of students who have been radio-tagged by US authorities have expressed anger against the management of the Tri-Valley University. ...
Look for bad apples, not just the Big Apple
Daily News & Analysis - Vidya Iyengar - 9 hours ago
The craze to go abroad makes students choose any university regardless of its accreditations. ...
All 149 related articles »
| Tri-Valley fiasco: AP parties want Minister to go to US 12 minutes ago - Economic Times | |
| India raises concern over radio tagged students 9 hours ago - IBNLive.com | |
| Duped Indian students ignored red flags Jan 30, 2011 - Times of India | |
| Hard times ahead for 'sham' US varsity students Jan 30, 2011 - Hindustan Times | |
| India lodges strong protest against radio tagging of students Jan 29, 2011 - Hindustan Times | |
| India protests radio-tagging of duped Indian students in US Jan 29, 2011 - Economic Times | |
| 'Students facing deportation have options' Jan 27, 2011 - The Hindu |
'We will be taking it up with the educational authorities in the US as how it allowed the university to function, how it was allowed to dupe gullible Indian students,' Krishna said, terming the Tri-Valley University as 'dubious'.
Krishna, however, sought to cool the tempers in India, saying the matter related to only '12 to 18 students' out of 108,000 Indian students studying in the US.
'Well, let us understand one thing. There are about 1.8 lakh Indian students in the United States of America. And we are now talking about these 12 or 18 students who have been subjected to this treatment,' Krishna said when asked about the tagging of Indian students.
'I would appeal to the people of the country, and to the media in particular, that we should look at it in the larger perspective of these one lakh and odd Indian students who are pursuing their studies in various universities,' he said.
Some 1,555 students of Tri-Valley University, 90 percent of them from India and mostly from Andhra Pradesh, face the prospect of deportation following the closure of the Pleasanton-based university on charges of selling student visas.'
Earlier, Krishna strongly condemned the radio tagging of Indian students. The practice was 'inhuman', he said and demanded that the US government 'initiate severe action against those officials responsible for this inhuman act'.
'Indian students are not criminals. The radio collars should immediately be removed,' Krishna said in Bangalore Sunday.
The US has, however, vigorously defended the radio tagging of Indian students, saying the practice was a 'standard procedure' for a variety of investigations.
'Use of ankle monitors is widespread across the United States and standard procedure for a variety of investigations, and does not necessarily imply guilt or suspicion of criminal activity,' the US embassy here said in a statement Monday.
Peaceful protesters carried signs saying "Bye, bye Mubarak" and chanted "Take him with you" as helicopters flew overhead. Effigies of Mr. Mubarak hung from traffic lights.
Military forces are stationed throughout the capital, but were not interfering with the rally crowds. The army announced earlier it recognizes the "legitimate demands" of the Egyptian people, and pledged not to fire on protesters.
Opposition activist Mohamed ElBaradei told Al Arabiya television that Mr. Mubarak should leave in order for Egyptians to start a "new phase."
Egypt's powerful Muslim Brotherhood and the secular opposition have chosen ElBaradei to represent their side in possible negotiations with the army over Mr. Mubarak's departure.
Thousands gathered for other massive protests in Suez and the northern port city of Alexandria.
National train services were cancelled for a second day and streets leading into Cairo were blocked, continuing what some consider an attempt by authorities to prevent rural residents from joining the urban protests.
An unprecedented Internet cutoff remains in place in Egypt Tuesday. But Google announced it has created a way for Twitter users to post to the micro-blogging site by dialing a phone number and leaving a voicemail.
Egypt's newly appointed vice president said Mr. Mubarak has asked him to begin immediate discussions with all "political forces" on constitutional and legislative reforms. Omar Suleiman, a longtime intelligence chief and confidant of Mr. Mubarak, did not say what the changes will entail or which groups the government will contact.
The Muslim Brotherhood says it will not negotiate as long as Mr. Mubarak remains in office.
A crisis committee from Egypt's newly formed opposition coalition met Monday to discuss strategy in anticipation of Mr. Mubarak's ouster. The gathering issued a call for Tuesday's escalated protests but did not reach a final agreement on a list of demands.
At least 140 people died during protest violence in the past week. Mr. Mubarak on Monday replaced the widely reviled interior minister Habib Adly, who was in charge of the police and plainclothes domestic security forces.
The military's central command has been meeting frequently during the past week to review intelligence on the political situation as well as what many see as a growing economic crisis from the continued unrest. Banks and the stock market remained closed for a second day Tuesday.
Are We Witnessing the Start of a Global Revolution? North Africa and the Global Political Awakening, Part 1 by Andrew Gavin Marshall | |
 | |
Global Research, January 27, 2011 | |
- 2011-01-26 | |
| For the first time in human history almost all of humanity is politically activated, politically conscious and politically interactive... The resulting global political activism is generating a surge in the quest for personal dignity, cultural respect and economic opportunity in a world painfully scarred by memories of centuries-long alien colonial or imperial domination... The worldwide yearning for human dignity is the central challenge inherent in the phenomenon of global political awakening... That awakening is socially massive and politically radicalizing... The nearly universal access to radio, television and increasingly the Internet is creating a community of shared perceptions and envy that can be galvanized and channeled by demagogic political or religious passions. These energies transcend sovereign borders and pose a challenge both to existing states as well as to the existing global hierarchy, on top of which America still perches...
The youth of the Third World are particularly restless and resentful. The demographic revolution they embody is thus a political time-bomb, as well... Their potential revolutionary spearhead is likely to emerge from among the scores of millions of students concentrated in the often intellectually dubious "tertiary level" educational institutions of developing countries. Depending on the definition of the tertiary educational level, there are currently worldwide between 80 and 130 million "college" students. Typically originating from the socially insecure lower middle class and inflamed by a sense of social outrage, these millions of students are revolutionaries-in-waiting, already semi-mobilized in large congregations, connected by the Internet and pre-positioned for a replay on a larger scale of what transpired years earlier in Mexico City or in Tiananmen Square. Their physical energy and emotional frustration is just waiting to be triggered by a cause, or a faith, or a hatred...
[The] major world powers, new and old, also face a novel reality: while the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low. To put it bluntly: in earlier times, it was easier to control one million people than to physically kill one million people; today, it is infinitely easier to kill one million people than to control one million people.[1]
- Zbigniew Brzezinski Former U.S. National Security Advisor Co-Founder of the Trilateral Commission Member, Board of Trustees, Center for Strategic and International Studies
An uprising in Tunisia led to the overthrow of the country's 23-year long dictatorship of President Ben Ali. A new 'transitional' government was formed, but the protests continued demanding a totally new government without the relics of the previous tyranny. Protests in Algeria have continued for weeks, as rage mounts against rising food prices, corruption and state oppression. Protests in Jordan forced the King to call on the military to surround cities with tanks and set up checkpoints. Tens of thousands of protesters marched on Cairo demanding an end to the 30-year dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak. Thousands of activists, opposition leaders and students rallied in the capitol of Yemen against the corrupt dictatorship of President Saleh, in power since 1978. Saleh has been, with U.S. military assistance, attempting to crush a rebel movement in the north and a massive secessionist movement growing in the south, called the "Southern Movement." Protests in Bolivia against rising food prices forced the populist government of Evo Morales to backtrack on plans to cut subsidies. Chile erupted in protests as demonstrators railed against rising fuel prices. Anti-government demonstrations broke out in Albania, resulting in the deaths of several protesters.
It seems as if the world is entering the beginnings of a new revolutionary era: the era of the 'Global Political Awakening.' While this 'awakening' is materializing in different regions, different nations and under different circumstances, it is being largely influenced by global conditions. The global domination by the major Western powers, principally the United States, over the past 65 years, and more broadly, centuries, is reaching a turning point. The people of the world are restless, resentful, and enraged. Change, it seems, is in the air. As the above quotes from Brzezinski indicate, this development on the world scene is the most radical and potentially dangerous threat to global power structures and empire. It is not a threat simply to the nations in which the protests arise or seek change, but perhaps to a greater degree, it is a threat to the imperial Western powers, international institutions, multinational corporations and banks that prop up, arm, support and profit from these oppressive regimes around the world. Thus, America and the West are faced with a monumental strategic challenge: what can be done to stem the Global Political Awakening? Zbigniew Brzezinski is one of the chief architects of American foreign policy, and arguably one of the intellectual pioneers of the system of globalization. Thus, his warnings about the 'Global Political Awakening' are directly in reference to its nature as a threat to the prevailing global hierarchy. As such, we must view the 'Awakening' as the greatest hope for humanity. Certainly, there will be mainy failures, problems, and regressions; but the 'Awakening' has begun, it is underway, and it cannot be so easily co-opted or controlled as many might assume.
The Tunisian Spark
A July 2009 diplomatic cable from America's Embassy in Tunisia reported that, "many Tunisians are frustrated by the lack of political freedom and angered by First Family corruption, high unemployment and regional inequities. Extremism poses a continuing threat," and that, "the risks to the regime's long-term stability are increasing."[2]
On Friday, 14 January 2011, the U.S.-supported 23-year long dictatorship of Tunisian president Ben Ali ended. For several weeks prior to this, the Tunisian people had risen in protest against rising food prices, stoked on by an immense and growing dissatisfaction with the political repression, and prodded by the WikiLeaks cables confirming the popular Tunisian perception of gross corruption on the part of the ruling family. The spark, it seems, was when a 26-year old unemployed youth set himself on fire in protest on December 17.
With the wave of protests sparked by the death of the 26-year old who set himself on fire on December 17, the government of Tunisia responded by cracking down on the protesters. Estimates vary, but roughly 100 people were killed in the clashes. Half of Tunisia's 10 million people are under the age of 25, meaning that they have never known a life in Tunisia outside of living under this one dictator. Since Independence from the French empire in 1956, Tunisia has had only two leaders: Habib Bourguiba and Ben Ali.[3] The Tunisian people were rising up against a great many things: an oppressive dictatorship which has employed extensive information and internet censorship, rising food prices and inflation, a corrupt ruling family, lack of jobs for the educated youth, and a general sense and experience of exploitation, subjugation and disrespect for human dignity.
Following the ouster of Ben Ali, Prime Minister Mohamed Ghannouchi assumed presidential power and declared a "transitional government." Yet, this just spurred more protests demanding his resignation and the resignation of the entire government. Significantly, the trade union movement had a large mobilizing role in the protests, with a lawyers union being particularly active during the initial protests.[4]
France's President Sarkozy has even had to admit that, "he had underestimated the anger of the Tunisian people and the protest movement that ousted President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali." During the first few weeks of protests in Tunisia, several French government officials were publicly supporting the dictatorship, with the French Foreign Minister saying that France would lend its police "knowhow" to help Ben Ali in maintaining order.[8]
Days before the ouster of Ben Ali, Hillary Clinton gave an interview in which she explained how America was worried "about the unrest and the instability," and that, "we are not taking sides, but we are saying we hope that there can be a peaceful resolution. And I hope that the Tunisian Government can bring that about." Clinton further lamented, "One of my biggest concerns in this entire region are the many young people without economic opportunities in their home countries."[9] Her concern, of course, does not spur from any humanitarian considerations, but rather from inherent imperial considerations: it is simply harder to control a region of the world erupting in activism, uprisings and revolution.
The Spark Lights a Flame
Tunisia has raised the bar for the people across the Arab world to demand justice, democracy, accountability, economic stability, and freedom. Just as Tunisia's protests were in full-swing, Algeria was experiencing mass protests, rising up largely as a result of the increasing international food prices, but also in reaction to many of the concerns of the Tunisian protesters, such as democratic accountability, corruption and freedom. A former Algerian diplomat told Al-Jazeera in early January that, "It is a revolt, and probably a revolution, of an oppressed people who have, for 50 years, been waiting for housing, employment, and a proper and decent life in a very rich country."[10]
In mid-January, similar protests erupted in Jordan, as thousands took to the streets to protest against rising food prices and unemployment, chanting anti-government slogans. Jordan's King Abdullah II had "set up a special task force in his palace that included military and intelligence officials to try to prevent the unrest from escalating further," which had tanks surrounding major cities, with barriers and checkpoints established.[11]
In Yemen, the poorest nation in the Arab world, engulfed in a U.S. sponsored war against its own people, ruled by a dictator who has been in power since 1978, thousands of people protested against the government, demanding the dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh to step down. In the capitol city of Sanaa, thousands of students, activists and opposition groups chanted slogans such as, "Get out get out, Ali. Join your friend Ben Ali."[12] Yemen has been experiencing much turmoil in recent years, with a rebel movement in the North fighting against the government, formed in 2004; as well as a massive secessionist movement in the south, called the "Southern Movement," fighting for liberation since 2007. As the Financial Times explained:
Many Yemen observers consider the anger and secessionist sentiment now erupting in the south to be a greater threat to the country's stability than its better publicised struggle with al-Qaeda, and the deteriorating economy is making the tension worse.
Unemployment, particularly among the young, is soaring. Even the government statistics office in Aden puts it at nearly 40 per cent among men aged 20 to 24.[13]
Israeli Vice Prime Minister Silvan Shalom stressed concern over the revolutionary sentiments within the Arab world, saying that, "I fear that we now stand before a new and very critical phase in the Arab world." He fears Tunisia would "set a precedent that could be repeated in other countries, possibly affecting directly the stability of our system."[15] Israel's leadership fears democracy in the Arab world, as they have a security alliance with the major Arab nations, who, along with Israel itself, are American proxy states in the region. Israel maintains civil – if not quiet – relationships with the Arab monarchs and dictators. While the Arab states publicly criticize Israel, behind closed doors they are forced to quietly accept Israel's militarism and war-mongering, lest they stand up against the superpower, America. Yet, public opinion in the Arab world is extremely anti-Israel, anti-American and pro-Iran.
In July of 2010, the results of a major international poll were released regarding public opinion in the Arab world, polling from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan, Lebanon and the United Arab Emirates. Among some of the notable findings: while Obama was well received upon entering the Presidency, with 51% expressing optimism about U.S. policy in the region in the Spring of 2009, by Summer 2010, 16% were expressing optimism. In 2009, 29% of those polled said a nuclear-armed Iran would be positive for the region; in 2010, that spiked to 57%, reflecting a very different stance from that of their governments.[16]
While America, Israel and the leaders of the Arab nations claim that Iran is the greatest threat to peace and stability in the Middle East, the Arab people do not agree. In an open question asking which two countries pose the greatest threat to the region, 88% responded with Israel, 77% with America, and 10% with Iran.[17]
At the Arab economic summit shortly following the ousting of Ben Ali in Tunisia, who was for the first time absent from the meetings, the Tunisian uprising hung heavy in the air. Arab League leader Amr Moussa said in his opening remarks at the summit, "The Tunisian revolution is not far from us," and that, "the Arab citizen entered an unprecedented state of anger and frustration," noting that "the Arab soul is broken by poverty, unemployment and general recession." The significance of this 'threat' to the Arab leaders cannot be understated. Out of roughly 352 million Arabs, 190 million are under the age of 24, with nearly three-quarters of them unemployed. Often, "the education these young people receive doesn't do them any good because there are no jobs in the fields they trained for."[18]
There was even an article in the Israeli intellectual newspaper, Ha'aretz, which posited that, "Israel may be on the eve of revolution." Explaining, the author wrote that:
Israeli civil society organizations have amassed considerable power over the years; not only the so-called leftist organizations, but ones dealing with issues like poverty, workers' rights and violence against women and children. All of them were created in order to fill the gaps left by the state, which for its part was all too happy to continue walking away from problems that someone else was there to take on. The neglect is so great that Israel's third sector - NGOs, charities and volunteer organizations - is among the biggest in the world. As such, it has quite a bit of power.[19]
Now the Israeli Knesset and cabinet want that power back; yet, posits the author, they "have chosen to ignore the reasons these groups became powerful," namely:
The source of their power is the vacuum, the criminal policies of Israel's governments over the last 40 years. The source of their power is a government that is evading its duties to care for all of its citizens and to end the occupation, and a Knesset that supports the government instead of putting it in its place.[20]
The Israeli Knesset opened investigations into the funding of Israeli human rights organizations in a political maneuver against them. However, as one article in Ha'aretz by an Israeli professor explained, these groups actually – inadvertently – play a role in "entrenching the occupation." As the author explained:
Even if the leftist groups' intention is to ensure upholding Palestinian rights, though, the unintentional result of their activity is preserving the occupation. Moderating and restraining the army's activity gives it a more human and legal facade. Reducing the pressure of international organizations, alongside moderating the Palestinian population's resistance potential, enable the army to continue to maintain this control model over a prolonged period of time.[21]
Thus, if the Israeli Knesset succeeds in getting rid of these powerful NGOs, they sow the seeds for the pressure valve in the occupied territories to be removed. The potential for massive internal protests within Israel from the left, as well as the possibility of another Intifada – uprising – in the occupied territories themselves would seem dramatically increased. Israel and the West have expressed how much distaste they hold for democracy in the region. When Gaza held a democratic election in 2006 and elected Hamas, which was viewed as the 'wrong' choice by Israel and America, Israel imposed a ruthless blockade of Gaza. Richard Falk, the former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Inquiry Commission for the Palestinian territories, wrote an article for Al Jazeera in which he explained that the blockade:
unlawfully restricted to subsistence levels, or below, the flow of food, medicine, and fuel. This blockade continues to this day, leaving the entire Gazan population locked within the world's largest open-air prison, and victimized by one of the cruelest forms of belligerent occupation in the history of warfare.[22]
The situation in the occupied territories is made increasingly tense with the recent leaking of the "Palestinian Papers," which consist of two decades of secret Israeli-Palestinian accords, revealing the weak negotiating position of the Palestinian Authority. The documents consist largely of major concessions the Palestinian Authority was willing to make "on the issues of the right of return of Palestinian refugees, territorial concessions, and the recognition of Israel." Among the leaks, Palestinian negotiators secretly agreed to concede nearly all of East Jerusalem to Israel. Further, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (favoured by Israel and America over Hamas), was personally informed by a senior Israeli official the night before Operation Cast Lead, the December 2008 and January 2009 Israeli assault on Gaza, resulting in the deaths of over 1,000 Palestinians: "Israeli and Palestinian officials reportedly discussed targeted assassinations of Hamas and Islamic Jihad activists in Gaza."[23]
Hamas has subsequently called on Palestinian refugees to protest over the concessions regarding the 'right of return' for refugees, of which the negotiators conceded to allowing only 100,000 of 5 million to return to Israel.[24] A former U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Egypt lamented that, "The concern will be that this might cause further problems in moving forward."[25] However, while being blamed for possibly preventing the "peace process" from moving forward, what the papers reveal is that the "peace process" itself is a joke. The Palestinian Authority's power is derivative of the power Israel allows it to have, and was propped up as a method of dealing with an internal Palestinian elite, thus doing what all colonial powers have done. The papers, then, reveal how the so-called Palestinian 'Authority' does not truly speak or work for the interests of the Palestinian people. And while this certainly will divide the PA from Hamas, they were already deeply divided as it was. Certainly, this will pose problems for the "peace process," but that's assuming it is a 'peaceful' process in the first part.
Is Egypt on the Edge of Revolution?
Unrest is even spreading to Egypt, personal playground of U.S.-supported and armed dictator, Hosni Mubarak, in power since 1981. Egypt is the main U.S. ally in North Africa, and has for centuries been one of the most important imperial jewels first for the Ottomans, then the British, and later for the Americans. With a population of 80 million, 60% of which are under the age of 30, who make up 90% of Egypt's unemployed, the conditions are ripe for a repeat in Egypt of what happened in Tunisia.[26]
On January 25, 2011, Egypt experienced its "day of wrath," in which tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets to protest against rising food prices, corruption, and the oppression of living under a 30-year dictatorship. The demonstrations were organized through the use of social media such as Twitter and Facebook. When the protests emerged, the government closed access to these social media sites, just as the Tunisian government did in the early days of the protests that led to the collapse of the dictatorship. As one commentator wrote in the Guardian:
Egypt is not Tunisia. It's much bigger. Eighty million people, compared with 10 million. Geographically, politically, strategically, it's in a different league – the Arab world's natural leader and its most populous nation. But many of the grievances on the street are the same. Tunis and Cairo differ only in size. If Egypt explodes, the explosion will be much bigger, too.[27]
In Egypt, "an ad hoc coalition of students, unemployed youths, industrial workers, intellectuals, football fans and women, connected by social media such as Twitter and Facebook, instigated a series of fast-moving, rapidly shifting demos across half a dozen or more Egyptian cities." The police responded with violence, and three protesters were killed. With tens of thousands of protesters taking to the streets, Egypt saw the largest protests in decades, if not under the entire 30-year reign of President Mubarak. Is Egypt on the verge of revolution? It seems too soon to tell. Egypt, it must be remembered, is the second major recipient of U.S. military assistance in the world (following Israel), and thus, its police state and military apparatus are far more advanced and secure than Tunisia's. Clearly, however, something is stirring. As Hilary Clinton said on the night of the protests, "Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people."[28] In other words: "We continue to support tyranny and dictatorship over democracy and liberation." So what else is new?
Egyptian Protest, 25 January 2011
Are We Headed for a Global Revolution?
During the first phase of the global economic crisis in December of 2008, the IMF warned governments of the prospect of "violent unrest on the streets." The head of the IMF warned that, "violent protests could break out in countries worldwide if the financial system was not restructured to benefit everyone rather than a small elite."[32]
In January of 2009, Obama's then-Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair, told the Senate Intelligence Committee that the greatest threat to the National Security of the U.S. was not terrorism, but the global economic crisis:
I'd like to begin with the global economic crisis, because it already looms as the most serious one in decades, if not in centuries ... Economic crises increase the risk of regime-threatening instability if they are prolonged for a one- or two-year period... And instability can loosen the fragile hold that many developing countries have on law and order, which can spill out in dangerous ways into the international community.[33]
In 2007, a British Defence Ministry report was released assessing global trends in the world over the next 30 years. In assessing "Global Inequality", the report stated that over the next 30 years:
[T]he gap between rich and poor will probably increase and absolute poverty will remain a global challenge... Disparities in wealth and advantage will therefore become more obvious, with their associated grievances and resentments, even among the growing numbers of people who are likely to be materially more prosperous than their parents and grandparents. Absolute poverty and comparative disadvantage will fuel perceptions of injustice among those whose expectations are not met, increasing tension and instability, both within and between societies and resulting in expressions of violence such as disorder, criminality, terrorism and insurgency. They may also lead to the resurgence of not only anti-capitalist ideologies, possibly linked to religious, anarchist or nihilist movements, but also to populism and the revival of Marxism.[34]
Further, the report warned of the dangers to the established powers of a revolution emerging from the disgruntled middle classes:
The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples' attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world's middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.[35]
We have now reached the point where the global economic crisis has continued beyond the two-year mark. The social repercussions are starting to be felt – globally – as a result of the crisis and the coordinated responses to it. Since the global economic crisis hit the 'Third World' the hardest, the social and political ramifications will be felt there first. In the context of the current record-breaking hikes in the cost of food, food riots will spread around the world as they did in 2007 and 2008, just prior to the outbreak of the economic crisis. This time, however, things are much worse economically, much more desperate socially, and much more oppressive politically.
This rising discontent will spread from the developing world to the comfort of our own homes in the West. Once the harsh realization sets in that the economy is not in 'recovery,' but rather in a Depression, and once our governments in the West continue on their path of closing down the democratic façade and continue dismantling rights and freedoms, increasing surveillance and 'control,' while pushing increasingly militaristic and war-mongering foreign policies around the world (mostly in an effort to quell or crush the global awakening being experienced around the world), we in the West will come to realize that 'We are all Tunisians.'
In 1967, Martin Luther King, Jr., said in his famous speech "Beyond Vietnam":
I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a "person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.[36]
This was Part 1 of "North Africa and the Global Political Awakening," focusing on the emergence of the protest movements primarily in North Africa and the Arab world, but placing it in the context of a wider 'Global Awakening.' Andrew Gavin Marshall is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is co-editor, with Michel Chossudovsky, of the recent book, "The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century," available to order at Globalresearch.ca. He is currently working on a forthcoming book on 'Global Government'.
[1] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Global Political Awakening. The New York Times: December 16, 2008: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/opinion/16iht-YEbrzezinski.1.18730411.html; "Major Foreign Policy Challenges for the Next US President," International Affairs, 85: 1, (2009); The Dilemma of the Last Sovereign. The American Interest Magazine, Autumn 2005: http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=56; The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership. Speech at the Carnegie Council: March 25, 2004: http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts/4424.html; America's Geopolitical Dilemmas. Speech at the Canadian International Council and Montreal Council on Foreign Relations: April 23, 2010: http://www.onlinecic.org/resourcece/multimedia/americasgeopoliticaldilemmas [2] Embassy Tunis, TROUBLED TUNISIA: WHAT SHOULD WE DO?, WikiLeaks Cables, 17 July 2009: http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/07/09TUNIS492.html [3] Mona Eltahawy, Tunisia's Jasmine Revolution, The Washington Post, 15 January 2011: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/14/AR2011011405084.html [4] Eileen Byrne, Protesters make the case for peaceful change, The Financial Times, 15 January 2011: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/82293e38-20ae-11e0-a877-00144feab49a.html#axzz1C08RDtxu [5] Marc Lynch, Tunisia and the New Arab Media Space, Foreign Policy, 15 January 2011: http://lynch.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/15/tunisia_and_the_new_arab_media_space [6] Jillian York, Activist crackdown: Tunisia vs Iran, Al-Jazeera, 9 January 2011: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/01/20111981222719974.html [7] Steven Cook, The Last Days of Ben Ali? The Council on Foreign Relations, 6 January 2011: http://blogs.cfr.org/cook/2011/01/06/the-last-days-of-ben-ali/ [8] Angelique Chrisafis, Sarkozy admits France made mistakes over Tunisia, The Guardian, 24 January 2011: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/24/nicolas-sarkozy-tunisia-protests [9] Hillary Rodham Clinton, Interview With Taher Barake of Al Arabiya, U.S. Department of State, 11 January 2011: http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2011/01/154295.htm [10] Algeria set for crisis talks, Al-Jazeera, 8 January 2011: http://aljazeera.co.uk/news/africa/2011/01/2011187476735721.html [11] Alexandra Sandels, JORDAN: Thousands of demonstrators protest food prices, denounce government, Los Angeles Times Blog, 15 January 2011: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2011/01/jordan-protests-food-prices-muslim-brotherhood-tunisia-strike-thousands-government.html [12] AP, Thousands demand ouster of Yemen's president, Associated Press, 22 January 2011: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g3b2emEy39Bn52Z_haypKxNPGMSw?docId=d324160638a74e84b874baeada16bb4c [13] Abigail Fielding-Smith, North-south divide strains Yemen union, The Financial Times, 12 January 2011: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c7c59322-1e80-11e0-87d2-00144feab49a.html#axzz1C08RDtxu [14] EurActiv, 'Jasmine' revolt wave reaches Albania, 24 January 2011: http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargement/jasmine-revolt-wave-reaches-albania-news-501529 [15] Clemens Höges, Bernhard Zand and Helene Zuber, Arab Rulers Fear Spread of Democracy Fever, Der Spiegel, 25 January 2011: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,741545,00.html [16] Shibley Telhami, Results of Arab Opinion Survey Conducted June 29-July 20, 2010, 5 August 2010: http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2010/0805_arab_opinion_poll_telhami.aspx [17] Shibley Telhami, A shift in Arab views of Iran, Los Angeles Times, 14 August 2010: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/14/opinion/la-oe-telhami-arab-opinions-20100814 [18] Clemens Höges, Bernhard Zand and Helene Zuber, Arab Rulers Fear Spread of Democracy Fever, Der Spiegel, 25 January 2011: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,741545,00.html [19] Merav Michaeli, Israel may be on the eve of revolution, Ha'aretz, 17 January 2011: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israel-may-be-on-the-eve-of-revolution-1.337445 [20] Ibid. [21] Yagil Levy, Israeli NGOs are entrenching the occupation, Ha'aretz, 11 January 2011: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israeli-ngos-are-entrenching-the-occupation-1.336331?localLinksEnabled=false [22] Richard Falk, Ben Ali Tunisia was model US client, Al-Jazeera, 25 January 2011: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/01/201112314530411972.html [23] Jack Khoury and Haaretz Service, Two decades of secret Israeli-Palestinian accords leaked to media worldwide, Ha'arets, 23 January 2011: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/two-decades-of-secret-israeli-palestinian-accords-leaked-to-media-worldwide-1.338768 [24] Haaretz Service and The Associated Press, Hamas urges Palestinian refugees to protest over concessions on right of return, Ha'aretz, 25 January 2011: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-urges-palestinian-refugees-to-protest-over-concessions-on-right-of-return-1.339120 [25] Alan Greenblatt, Palestinian Papers May Be Blow To Peace Process, NPR, 24 January 2011: http://www.npr.org/2011/01/24/133181412/palestinian-papers-may-cause-blow-to-peace-process?ps=cprs [26] Johannes Stern, Egyptian regime fears mass protests, World Socialist Web Site, 15 January 2011: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/jan2011/egyp-j15.shtml [27] Simon Tisdall, Egypt protests are breaking new ground, The Guardian, 25 January 2011: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/25/egypt-protests [28] Ibid. [29] MATT BRADLEY, Rioters Jolt Egyptian Regime, The Wall Street Journal, 26 January 2011: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704698004576104112320465414.html [30] Catrina Stewart, Violence on the streets of Cairo as unrest grows, The Independent, 26 January 2011: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/violence-on-the-streets-of-cairo-as-unrest-grows-2194484.html [31] IBT, Suzanne Mubarak of Egypt has fled to Heathrow airport in London: unconfirmed reports, International Business Times, 25 January 2011: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/104960/20110125/suzanne-mubarak-of-egypt-has-fled-to-heathrow-airport-in-london-unconfirmed-reports.htm [32] Angela Balakrishnan, IMF chief issues stark warning on economic crisis. The Guardian: December 18, 2008: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/dec/16/imf-financial-crisis [33] Stephen C. Webster, US intel chief: Economic crisis a greater threat than terrorism. Raw Story: February 13, 2009: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/US_intel_chief_Economic_crisis_greater_0213.html [34] DCDC, The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme, 2007-2036, 3rd ed. The Ministry of Defence, January 2007: page 3 [35] Ibid, page 81. [36] Rev. Martin Luther King, Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence. Speech delivered by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on April 4, 1967, at a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned at Riverside Church in New York City: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/058.html
| |||
Andrew Gavin Marshall is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Andrew Gavin Marshall | |||
| http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?aid=22963&context=va About 10,100,000 results (0.20 seconds) Search Results
| |||
Egypt revolt is 'step towards Islamic Middle East'
(AFP) – 9 hours ago
TEHRAN — Iran said on Tuesday the uprising in Egypt will help create an Islamic Middle East but accused US officials of interfering in the "freedom seeking" movement which has rocked the Arab nation.
"With the knowledge that I have of the great revolutionary and history making people of Egypt, I am sure they will play their role in creating an Islamic Middle East for all freedom, justice and independence seekers," Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi was quoted as saying on state television's website.
Salehi, who was officially endorsed by the Iranian parliament on Sunday as foreign minister, said the uprising in Egypt "showed the need for a change in the region and the end of unpopular regimes."
"The people of Tunisia and Egypt prove that the time of controlling regimes by world arrogance (the West) has ended and people are trying to have their own self-determination," said Salehi, who also currently oversees Iran's controversial nuclear programme.
"Unfortunately we are witnessing the direct interference .... of some American officials in the developments in Egypt," he said, and added the Egyptians were showing "they are no longer ready to stand idle in face of crimes by the Zionist regime."
In the initial days of the Tunisian uprising, Iran had said it was "worried" about the events in that country.
"We are worried about the situation in Tunisia...We hope the Muslim Tunisian nation's demands are fulfilled through peaceful and non-violent means," the foreign ministry had said on January 16.
On Tuesday, Salehi said Iran will offer its support to the protesters in Egypt.
"On our part we are going along with the freedom seekers of the world and support the uprising of the great nation of Egypt. We sympathise with those injured and killed" in the protests, he said.
Egypt has been rocked by deadly protests for more than a week and on Tuesday Egyptians planned more mass marches in their campaign to oust the embattled President Hosni Mubarak.
The USA, a key ally of Cairo, has urged Mubarak to do more to defuse the crisis, with President Barack Obama calling for "an orderly transition to a government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people."
Iran itself was rocked by similar protests against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after he was re-elected in June 2009.
Dozens of Iranian protesters who took to Tehran streets were killed in clashes with security forces and militiamen who cracked down on them in a bid to quell what was one of the worst crises in the Islamic republic since the 1979 revolution which toppled the US-backed shah.
Copyright © 2011 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
Related articles
- Arab Revolutions: From Tunisia To Egypt, Is This The Beginning Of A Trend?
- Huffington Post - 2 hours ago
- The US should back the right side for once
- Ottawa Citizen - 4 hours ago
- Unrest Rattles US Approach in Region
- Wall Street Journal - 1 day ago
- More coverage (1) »
Add News to your Google Homepage
*
*
Egyptians have planned fresh marches on Tuesday against embattled President Hosni Mubarak
Map
Non-Aligned Movement
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNon-Aligned MovementCoordinating Bureau New York City, United States Membership 118 members
18 observer countriesLeaders - Secretary-General Hosni Mubarak Establishment 1961 in Belgrade Website
www.namegypt.orgThe Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is an intergovernmental organization of states considering themselves not aligned formally with or against any major power bloc. As of 2010, the organization has 118 members and 18 observer countries.[1] Generally speaking (as of 2010), the Non-Aligned Movement members can be described as all of those countries which belong to the Group of 77 (along with Belarus and Uzbekistan), but which are not observers in Non-Aligned Movement and are not Oceanian (with the exception of Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu).
The organization was founded in Belgrade in 1961, and was largely the brainchild of Yugoslavia's first President, Josip Broz Tito, India's first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, Egypt's second President, Gamal Abdel Nasser, and Indonesia's first President, Sukarno. All four leaders were prominent advocates of a middle course for states in the Developing World between the Western and Eastern blocs in the Cold War.
The purpose of the organisation as stated in the Havana Declaration of 1979 is to ensure "the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries" in their "struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics."[2] They represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations's members and 55% of the world population, particularly countries considered to be developing or part of the Third World.[3]
Members have, at various times, included: Yugoslavia, Argentina, SWAPO, Cyprus, and Malta. Brazil has never been a formal member of the movement, but shares many of the aims of Non-Aligned Movement and frequently sends observers to the Non-Aligned Movement's summits. While the organization was intended to be as close an alliance as NATO (1949) or the Warsaw Pact (1955), it had little cohesion and many of its members were actually quite closely aligned with one or another of the super powers. Additionally, some members were involved in serious conflicts with other members (e.g., India and Pakistan, Iran and Iraq). The movement fractured from its own internal contradictions when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979. While the Soviet allies supported the invasion, other members of the movement (particularly predominantly Muslim states) condemned it.
Because the Non-Aligned Movement was formed as an attempt to thwart the Cold War,[4] it has struggled to find relevance since the Cold War ended. After the breakup of Yugoslavia, a founding member, its membership was suspended[5] in 1992 at the regular Ministerial Meeting of the Movement, held in New York during the regular yearly session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. At the Summit of the Movement in Jakarta, Indonesia (September 1, 1992 – September 6, 1992) Yugoslavia was suspended or expelled from the Movement.[6] The successor states of the SFR Yugoslavia have expressed little interest in membership, though some have observer status. In 2004, Malta and Cyprus ceased to be members and joined the European Union. Belarus remains the sole member of the Movement in Europe. Turkmenistan, Belarus and Dominican Republic are the most recent entrants. The application of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Costa Rica were rejected in 1995 and 1998. Serbia has been suspended since 1992 due to the Serbian Government's involvement in the Bosnian War (officially as the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at the time).[7]
Contents
[hide][edit] Origins
Principal founders: Yugoslav President Marshal Josip Broz Tito, first Secretary-General of the Non-Aligned Movement, with President Nasser of Egypt, and Prime Minister Nehru of India, at a summit on Brioni Islands in 1956.Independent countries, who chose not to join any of the Cold War blocs, were also known as non aligned nations.
The term "non-alignment" itself was coined by Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru during his speech in 1954 in Colombo, Sri Lanka. In this speech, Nehru described the five pillars to be used as a guide for Sino-Indian relations, which were first put forth by Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai. Called Panchsheel (five restraints), these principles would later serve as the basis of the Non-Aligned Movement. The five principles were:
- Mutual respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty
- Mutual non-aggression
- Mutual non-interference in domestic affairs
- Equality and mutual benefit
- Peaceful co-existence
A significant milestone in the development of the Non-Aligned Movement was the 1955 Bandung Conference, a conference of Asian and African states hosted by Indonesian president Sukarno, who gave a significant contribution to promote this movement. The attending nations declared their desire not to become involved in the Cold War and adopted a "declaration on promotion of world peace and cooperation", which included Nehru's five principles. Six years after Bandung, an initiative of Yugoslav president Josip Broz Tito led to the first official Non-Aligned Movement Summit, which was held in September 1961 in Belgrade.
At the Lusaka Conference in September 1970, the member nations added as aims of the movement the peaceful resolution of disputes and the abstention from the big power military alliances and pacts. Another added aim was opposition to stationing of military bases in foreign countries.[4]
The founding fathers of the Non-aligned movement were: Sukarno of Indonesia, Jawaharlal Nehru of India, and Josip Broz Tito of Yugoslavia, Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt and Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana. Their actions were known as 'The Initiative of Five'.
[edit] Organizational structure and membership
The organizational structure and membership are complementary aspects of the group.[8]
Requirements of the Non-Aligned Movement with the key beliefs of the United Nations. The latest requirements are now that the candidate country has displayed practices in accordance with:
- Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
- Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations.
- Recognition of the movements for national independence.
- Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations, large and small.
- Abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of another country.
- Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself singly or collectively, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.
- Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country.
- Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.
- Promotion of mutual interests and co-operation.
- Respect for justice and international obligations.
[edit] Policies and ideology
Secretaries General of the NAM had included such diverse figures as Suharto, an authoritarian anti-communist, and Nelson Mandela, a democratic socialist and famous anti-apartheid activist. Consisting of many governments with vastly different ideologies, the Non-Aligned Movement is unified by its commitment in world peace and security. At the seventh summit held in New Delhi in March 1983, the movement described itself as "history's biggest peace movement".[9] The movement places equal emphasis on disarmament. NAM's commitment to peace pre-dates its formal institutionalisation in 1961. The Brioni meeting between heads of governments of India, Egypt and Yugoslavia in 1956 recognized that there exists a vital link between struggle for peace and endeavours for disarmament.[9]
The Non-Aligned Movement espouses policies and practices of cooperation, especially those that are multilateral and provide mutual benefit to all those involved. Many of the members of the Non-Aligned Movement are also members of the United Nations and both organisations have a stated policy of peaceful cooperation, yet successes that the NAM has had in multilateral agreements tends to be ignored by the larger, western and developed nation dominated UN.[10] African concerns about apartheid were linked with Arab-Asian concerns about Palestine[10] and success of multilateral cooperation in these areas has been a stamp of moderate success. The Non-Aligned Movement has played a major role in various ideological conflicts throughout its existence, including extreme opposition to apartheid regimes and support of liberation movements in various locations including Zimbabwe and South Africa. The support of these sorts of movements stems from a belief that every state has the right to base policies and practices with national interests in mind and not as a result of relations to a particular power bloc.[3] The Non-Aligned Movement has become a voice of support for issues facing developing nations and is still contains ideals that are legitimate within this context.
[edit] Contemporary relevance
Since the end of the Cold War and the formal end of colonialism, the Non-Aligned Movement has been forced to redefine itself and reinvent its purpose in the current world system. A major question has been whether many of its foundational ideologies, principally national independence, territorial integrity, and the struggle against colonialism and imperialism, can be applied to contemporary issues. The movement has emphasised its principles of multilateralism, equality, and mutual non-aggression in attempting to become a stronger voice for the global South, and an instrument that can be utilised to promote the needs of member nations at the international level and strengthen their political leverage when negotiating with developed nations. In its efforts to advance Southern interests, the movement has stressed the importance of cooperation and unity amongst member states,[11] but as in the past, cohesion remains a problem since the size of the organisation and the divergence of agendas and allegiances present the ongoing potential for fragmentation. While agreement on basic principles has been smooth, taking definitive action vis-à-vis particular international issues has been rare, with the movement preferring to assert its criticism or support rather than pass hard-line resolutions.[12] The movement continues to see a role for itself, as in its view, the world's poorest nations remain exploited and marginalised, no longer by opposing superpowers, but rather in a uni-polar world,[13] and it is Western hegemony and neo-colonialism that the movement has really re-aligned itself against. It opposes foreign occupation, interference in internal affairs, and aggressive unilateral measures, but it has also shifted to focus on the socio-economic challenges facing member states, especially the inequalities manifested by globalisation and the implications of neo-liberal policies. The Non-Aligned Movement has identified economic underdevelopment, poverty, and social injustices as growing threats to peace and security.[14]
[edit] Current activities and positions
- Criticism of US policy
In recent years the US has become a target of the organisation. The US invasion of Iraq and the War on Terrorism, its attempts to stifle Iran and North Korea's nuclear plans, and its other actions have been denounced as human rights violations and attempts to run roughshod over the sovereignty of smaller nations.[15] The movement's leaders have also criticised the American control over the United Nations and other international structures.
- Self-determination of Puerto Rico
Since 1961, the group have supported the discussion of the case of Puerto Rico's self-determination before the United Nations. A resolution on the matter will be proposed on the XV Summit by the Hostosian National Independence Movement.[16]
- Self-determination of Western Sahara
Since 1973, the group have supported the discussion of the case of Western Sahara's self-determination before the United Nations.[17] The Non-Aligned Movement reaffirmed in its last meeting (Sharm El Sheikh 2009) the support to the Self-determination of the Sahrawi people by choosing between any valid option, welcomed the direct conversations between the parts, and remembered the responsibility of the United Nations on the Sahrawi issue.[18]
- Sustainable development
The movement is publicly committed to the tenets of sustainable development and the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals, but it believes that the international community has not created conditions conducive to development and has infringed upon the right to sovereign development by each member state. Issues such as globalisation, the debt burden, unfair trade practices, the decline in foreign aid, donor conditionalities, and the lack of democracy in international financial decision-making are cited as factors inhibiting development.[19]
- Reforms of the UN
The Non-Aligned Movement has been quite outspoken in its criticism of current UN structures and power dynamics, mostly in how the organisation has been utilised by powerful states in ways that violate the movement's principles. It has made a number of recommendations that would strengthen the representation and power of 'non-aligned' states. The proposed reforms are also aimed at improving the transparency and democracy of UN decision-making. The UN Security Council is the element considered the most distorted, undemocratic, and in need of reshaping.[20]
- South-south cooperation
Lately the Non-Aligned Movement has collaborated with other organisations of the developing world, primarily the Group of 77, forming a number of joint committees and releasing statements and document representing the shared interests of both groups. This dialogue and cooperation can be taken as an effort to increase the global awareness about the organisation and bolster its political clout.
- Cultural diversity and human rights
The movement accepts the universality of human rights and social justice, but fiercely resists cultural homogenisation. In line with its views on sovereignty, the organisation appeals for the protection of cultural diversity, and the tolerance of the religious, socio-cultural, and historical particularities that define human rights in a specific region.[21]
- Working groups, task forces, committees[22]
- High-Level Working Group for the Restructuring of the United Nations
- Working Group on Human Rights
- Working Group on Peace-Keeping Operations
- Working Group on Disarmament
- Committee on Palestine
- Task Force on Somalia
- Non-Aligned Security Caucus
- Standing Ministerial Committee for Economic Cooperation
- Joint Coordinating Committee (chaired by Chairman of G-77 and Chairman of NAM)
[edit] Summits
Belgrade, September 1–6, 1961
Cairo, October 5–10, 1964
Lusaka, September 8–10, 1970
Algiers, September 5–9, 1973
Colombo, August 16–19, 1976
Havana, September 3–9, 1979
New Delhi (originally planned for Baghdad), March 7–12, 1983
Harare, September 1–6, 1986
Jakarta, September 1–6, 1992
Cartagena de Indias, October 18–20, 1995
Durban, September 2–3, 1998
Kuala Lumpur, February 20–25, 2003
Sharm El Sheikh, July 11–16, 2009
Belgrade, first week in September 2011
Kish Island, 2012
[edit] Secretaries-General
Between summits, the Non-Aligned Movement is run by the secretary-general elected at last summit meeting. As a considerable part of the movement's work is undertaken at the United Nations in New York, the chair country's ambassador to the UN is expected to devote time and effort to matters concerning the Non-Aligned Movement. The Co-ordinating Bureau, also based at the UN, is the main instrument for directing the work of the movement's task forces, committees and working groups.
[edit] Members
Afghanistan
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bolivia
Botswana
Burma (Myanmar)
Brunei
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
Comoros
Congo
Côte d'Ivoire
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Gambia
Ghana
Grenada
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Iraq
Jamaica
Jordan
Kenya
Kuwait
Laos
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Maldives
Mali
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Namibia
Nepal
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Oman
Pakistan
Palestine
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Peru
Philippines
Qatar
Rwanda
Saint Lucia
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
São Tomé and Príncipe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Somalia
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Syria
Tanzania
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkmenistan
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Venezuela
Vietnam
Yemen
[edit] Former members
Argentina[citation needed]
North Yemen[citation needed]
South Yemen[citation needed]
Cyprus[citation needed]
Malta[citation needed]
[edit] Observers
The following countries and organizations have observer status:[24]
[edit] Countries
[edit] Organisations
[edit] Guests
There is no permanent guest status,[25] but often several non-member countries are represented as guests at conferences. In addition, a large number of organisations, both from within the UN system and from outside, are always invited as guests.
[edit] See also
- G-77
- Role of India in Non-aligned movement
- South-South Cooperation
- Third World
- New World Information and Communication Order
[edit] Further reading
- Hans Köchler (ed.), The Principles of Non-Alignment. The Non-aligned Countries in the Eighties—Results and Perspectives. London: Third World Centre, 1982. ISBN 0-86199-015-3 (Google Print)
[edit] References
- ^ http://www.namegypt.org/en/AboutName/MembersObserversAndGuests/Pages/default.aspx
- ^ Fidel Castro speech to the UN in his position as chairman of the non-aligned countries movement 12 October 1979; Pakistan & Non-Aligned Movement, Board of Investment - Government of Pakistan, 2003
- ^ a b Grant, Cedric. "Equity in Third World Relations: a third world perspective." International Affairs 71, 3 (1995), 567-587.
- ^ a b Suvedi, Suryaprasada (1996). Land and Maritime Zones of Peace in International Law. Oxford University Press. pp. 169–170. ISBN 0198260962.
- ^ http://www.nam.gov.za/background/members.htm
- ^ Lai Kwon Kin (September 2, 1992). "Yugoslavia casts shadow over non-aligned summit". The Independent @ Independent.co.uk. Independent News and Media Limited. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/yugoslavia-casts-shadow-over-nonaligned-summit-1548802.html. Retrieved 2009-09-26. "Iran and several other Muslim nations want the rump state of Yugoslavia kicked out, saying it no longer represents the country which helped to found the movement."
- ^ Najam, Adil (2003). "Chapter 9: The Collective South in Multinational Environmental Politics". In Nagel, Stuard. Policymaking and prosperity: a multinational anthology. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books. p. 233. ISBN 0-7391-0460-8. http://books.google.com/books?id=eCVZ5Vir2e0C&pg=PA233&f=false#v=onepage&q=&f=false. Retrieved 2009-11-10. "Turkmenistan, Belarus and Dominican Republic are the most recent entrants. The application of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Costa Rica were rejected in 1995 and 1998. Yugoslavia has been suspended since 1992."
- ^ NAM Background Information
- ^ a b Ohlson, Thomas; Stockholm (1988). Arms Transfer Limitations and Third World Security. Oxford University Press. pp. 198. ISBN 0198291248.
- ^ a b Morphet, Sally. "Multilateralism and the Non-Aligned Movement: What Is the Global South Doing and Where Is It Going?" Global Governance 10 (2004), 517–537
- ^ http://www.ipsterraviva.net/TV/Noal/en/default.asp. See "Putting Differences Aside," Daria Acosta, September 18, 2006.
- ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2798187.stm#facts. BBC Profile, BBC News, January 30, 2008.
- ^ http://www.nam.gov.za/xiisummit/chap1.htm. See no. 10-11 in Durban Summit 'Final Document.'
- ^ http://www.nam.gov.za/xiisummit/chap1.htm. See no.16-22 in Durban Summit 'Final Document.'
- ^ http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/09/16/nonalign.html. "Non-aligned nations slam U.S.," CBC News, September 16, 2006.
- ^ [1]
- ^ 3162 (XXVIII) Question of Spanish Sahara. U.N. General assembly 28th session, 1973.
- ^ XV Summit of heads of state and government of the Non Aligned Movement - Final Document. Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt.16-04-2009. See points 237, 238 & 239.
- ^ http://espana.cubanoal.cu/ingles/index.html. See "Statement on the implementation of the Right to Development," January 7, 2008.
- ^ http://www.nam.gov.za/xiisummit/chap1.htm. See no.55 in Durban Summit 'Final Document.'
- ^ http://espana.cubanoal.cu/ingles/index.html. See "Declaration on the occasion of celebrating Human Rights Day."
- ^ http://www.nam.gov.za/background/background.htm#2.4. NAM background information.
- ^ Fidel Castro, having recently undergone gastric surgery, was unable to attend the conference and was represented by his younger brother, Cuba's acting president Raúl Castro. See "Castro elected President of Non-Aligned Movement Nations", People's Daily, 16-09-2006.
- ^ Member and Observer Countries, Non-Aligned Movement
- ^ NAM Background Information
[edit] External links
- Official Site: 15th Summit — Fifteenth Non Aligned Movement Summit, (Sharm el Sheikh July 11–16, 2009)
- Official Site: 14th Summit — Fourteenth Non Aligned Movement Summit, (Havana, September 11–16, 2006)
- Non-Aligned Movement — Resource site
- International Institute for Non-Aligned Studies — Think Tank for Non-Aligned Movement
- Statement of UN Secretary General to NAM, September 28, 2007.
- Meeting of NAM at the 58 General Assembly of UN, November 26, 2003.
- The Cold War International History Project's Document Collection on the NAM
| ||
Foreign relations of India
 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
|
 This article is part of the series: |
| Other countries · Politics Portal |
| India |
This article is part of the series: |
| |
|
|
The Republic of India is the second most populous country and the world's most-populous democracy and recently has one of the fastest economic growth rates in the world.[1] With the world's tenth largest military expenditures,[2] and eleventh largest economy by nominal rates or fourth largest by purchasing power parity, India is considered to be a regional power,[3] and a potential global power.[4] It is India's growing international influence that increasingly gives it a more prominent voice in global affairs.[5][6][7][8]
India has a long history of collaboration with several countries and is considered a leader of the developing world.[9][10] India was one of the founding members of several international organizations, most notably the United Nations, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Asian Development Bank and the G20 industrial nations. India has also played an important and influential role in other international organizations like East Asia Summit,[11] World Trade Organization,[12] International Monetary Fund (IMF),[13] G8+5[14] and IBSA Dialogue Forum.[15] Regional organizations India is a part of include SAARC and BIMSTEC. India has taken part in several UN peacekeeping missions and in 2007, it was the second-largest troop contributor to the United Nations.[16] India is currently seeking a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, along with the G4 nations.[17]
[edit] History
Even before independence, the Government of British India maintained semi-autonomous diplomatic relations. It had colonies (such as the Aden Settlement), sent and received full diplomatic missions,[18] and was a founder member of both the League of Nations[19] and the United Nations.[20] After India gained independence from the United Kingdom in 1947, it soon joined the Commonwealth of Nations and strongly supported independence movements in other colonies, like the Indonesian National Revolution.[21] The partition and various territorial disputes, particularly that over Kashmir, would strain its relations with Pakistan for years to come. During the Cold War, India adopted a foreign policy of not aligning itself with any major power bloc. However, India developed close ties with the Soviet Union and received extensive military support from it.
The end of the Cold War significantly affected India's foreign policy, as it did for much of the world. The country now seeks to strengthen its diplomatic and economic ties with the United States,[22] the People's Republic of China,[23] the European Union,[24] Japan,[25] Israel,[26] Mexico,[27] and Brazil.[28] India has also forged close ties with the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations,[29] the African Union,[30] the Arab League[31] and Iran.[32]
Though India continues to have a military relationship with Russia,[33] Israel has emerged as India's second largest military partner[30] while India has built a strong strategic partnership with the United States.[22][34] The Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement, signed and implemented in 2008, highlighted the growing sophistication of the Indo-American relations.[35]
[edit] Policy
India's foreign policy has always regarded the concept of neighborhood as one of widening concentric circles, around a central axis of historical and cultural commonalities.[36]
The guiding principles of India's Foreign Policy have been founded on Panchsheel, pragmatism and pursuit of national interest. In a period of rapid and continuing change, foreign policy must be capable of responding optimally to new challenges and opportunities. It has to be an integral part of the larger effort of building the nation's capabilities through economic development, strengthening social fabric and well-being of the people and protecting India's sovereignty and territorial integrity. India's foreign policy is a forward-looking engagement with the rest of the world, based on a rigorous, realistic and contemporary assessment of the bilateral, regional and global geo-political and economic milieu.
As many as 20 million people of Indian origin live and work abroad and constitute an important link with the mother country. An important role of India's foreign policy has been to ensure their welfare and well being within the framework of the laws of the country where they live.[37]
[edit] Role of the Prime Minister
Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister, promoted a strong personal role for the Prime Minister but a weak institutional structure. Nehru served concurrently as Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs; he made all major foreign policy decisions himself after consulting with his advisers and then entrusted the conduct of international affairs to senior members of the Indian Foreign Service. His successors continued to exercise considerable control over India's international dealings, although they generally appointed separate ministers of external affairs.[38][39][40]
India's second prime minister, Lal Bahadur Shastri (1964–66), expanded the Office of Prime Minister (sometimes called the Prime Minister's Secretariat) and enlarged its powers. By the 1970s, the Office of the Prime Minister had become the de facto coordinator and supraministry of the Indian government. The enhanced role of the office strengthened the prime minister's control over foreign policy making at the expense of the Ministry of External Affairs. Advisers in the office provided channels of information and policy recommendations in addition to those offered by the Ministry of External Affairs. A subordinate part of the office—the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW)--functioned in ways that significantly expanded the information available to the prime minister and his advisers. The RAW gathered intelligence, provided intelligence analysis to the Office of the Prime Minister, and conducted covert operations abroad.
The prime minister's control and reliance on personal advisers in the Office of the Prime Minister was particularly strong under the tenures of Indira Gandhi (1966–77 and 1980–84) and her son, Rajiv (1984–89), who succeeded her, and weaker during the periods of coalition governments. Observers find it difficult to determine whether the locus of decision-making authority on any particular issue lies with the Ministry of External Affairs, the Council of Ministers, the Office of the Prime Minister, or the prime minister himself.[41]
The Prime Minister is however free to appoint advisers and special committees to examine various foreign policy options and areas of interest.[42] In a recent instance, Manmohan Singh appointed K. Subrahmanyam in 2005 to head a special government task force to study 'Global Strategic Developments' over the next decade.[43] The Task Force submitted its conclusions to the Prime Minister in 2006.[44][45] The report has not yet been released in the public domain.
[edit] Ministry of External Affairs
The Ministry of External Affairs is the Indian government's agency responsible for the foreign relations of India. The Minister of External Affairs holds cabinet rank as a member of the Council of Ministers.
S. M. Krishna is current Minister of External Affairs. The Ministry has a Ministers of State in Preneet Kaur. Indian Foreign Secretary is the head of Indian Foreign Service (IFS) and therefore, serves as the head of all Indian ambassadors and high commissioners.[46] Nirupama Rao is the current Foreign Secretary of India.
[edit] Overview
India's relations with the world have evolved since the British Raj (1857–1947), when the British Empire monopolized external and defense relations. When India gained independence in 1947, few Indians had experience in making or conducting foreign policy. However, the country's oldest political party, the Indian National Congress, had established a small foreign department in 1925 to make overseas contacts and to publicize its freedom struggle. From the late 1920s on, Jawaharlal Nehru, who had a long-standing interest in world affairs among independence leaders, formulated the Congress stance on international issues. As a member of the interim government in 1946, Nehru articulated India's approach to the world.[47]
play.[48]
India's international influence varied over the years after independence. Indian prestige and moral authority were high in the 1950s and facilitated the acquisition of developmental assistance from both East and West. Although the prestige stemmed from India's nonaligned stance, the nation was unable to prevent Cold War politics from becoming intertwined with interstate relations in South Asia. In the 1960s and 1970s, India's international position among developed and developing countries faded in the course of wars with China and Pakistan, disputes with other countries in South Asia, and India's attempt to balance Pakistan's support from the United States and China by signing the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation in August 1971. Although India obtained substantial Soviet military and economic aid, which helped to strengthen the nation, India's influence was undercut regionally and internationally by the perception that its friendship with the Soviet Union prevented a more forthright condemnation of the Soviet presence in Afghanistan. In the late 1980s, India improved relations with the United States, other developed countries, and China while continuing close ties with the Soviet Union. Relations with its South Asian neighbors, especially Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Nepal, occupied much of the energies of the Ministry of External Affairs.[49]
In the 1990s, India's economic problems and the demise of the bipolar world political system forced India to reassess its foreign policy and adjust its foreign relations. Previous policies proved inadequate to cope with the serious domestic and international problems facing India. The end of the Cold War gutted the core meaning of nonalignment and left Indian foreign policy without significant direction. The hard, pragmatic considerations of the early 1990s were still viewed within the nonaligned framework of the past, but the disintegration of the Soviet Union removed much of India's international leverage, for which relations with Russia and the other post-Soviet states could not compensate. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, India improved its relations with the United States, Canada, France, Japan and Germany. In 1992, India established formal diplomatic relations with Israel and this relationship grew during the tenures of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government and the subsequent UPA(United Progressive Alliance) governments.[50]
In the mid-1990s, India attracted the world attention towards the alleged Pakistan-backed terrorism in Kashmir. The Kargil War resulted in a major diplomatic victory for India. The United States and European Union recognized the fact that Pakistani military had illegally infiltrated into Indian territory and pressurized Pakistan to withdraw from Kargil. Several anti-India militant groups based in Pakistan were labeled as terrorist groups by the United States and European Union.
In 1998, India tested nuclear weapons for the second time (see Pokhran-II) which resulted in several U.S., Japanese and European sanctions on India. India's then defense minister, George Fernandes, said that India's nuclear program was necessary as it provided a deterrence to potential Chinese nuclear threat. Most of the sanctions imposed on India were removed by 2001.[51]
After the September 11 attacks in 2001, Indian intelligence agencies provided the U.S. with significant information on Al-Qaeda and related groups' activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan. India's extensive contribution to the War on Terrorism, coupled with a surge in its economy, has helped India's diplomatic relations with several countries. Over the past three years, India has held numerous joint military exercises with U.S. and European nations that have resulted in a strengthened U.S.-India and E.U.-India bilateral relationship. India's bilateral trade with Europe and U.S. has more than doubled in the last five years.[52]
India has been pushing for reforms in the UN and WTO with mixed results. India's candidature for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council is currently backed by several countries including France, Russia,[53] the United Kingdom,[54] Germany, Japan, Brazil[55] and Australia.[56] In 2004, the United States signed a nuclear co-operation agreement with India even though the latter is not a part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The US argued that India's strong nuclear non-proliferation record made it an exception, however this has not persuaded other Nuclear Suppliers Group members to sign similar deals with India. During a state visit to India in November 2010, US president Barack Obama announced US support for India's bid for permanent membership to UN Security Council[57] as well as India's entry to Nuclear Suppliers Group, Wassenaar Arrangement, Australia Group and Missile Technology Control Regime.[58][59]
[edit] Strategic partners
India's growing economy, strategic location, friendly foreign policy and large and vibrant diaspora has won it more allies than enemies.[60] India has friendly relations with several countries in the developing world. Though India is not a part of any major military alliance, it has close strategic and military relationship with most of the major powers.
Countries considered India's closest include the Russian Federation,[61] Israel,[62] Afghanistan,[63] France, Nepal,[64] Bhutan [65] and Bangladesh.[66] Russia is the largest supplier of military equipment to India, followed by Israel and France.[67] According to some analysts, Israel is set to overtake Russia as India's largest military and strategic partner.[68] The two countries also collaborate extensively in the sphere of counter-terrorism and space technology.[69] India also enjoys strong military relations with several other countries, including the United Kingdom, the United States,[70] Japan,[71] Singapore, Brazil, South Africa and Italy.[72] In addition, India operates an airbase in Tajikistan[73] and signed a landmark defense accord with Qatar in 2008.[74]
India has also forged relationships with developing countries, especially South Africa, Brazil,[75] and Mexico.[76] These countries often represent the interests of the developing countries through economic forums such as the G8+5, IBSA and WTO. India was seen as one of the standard bearers of the developing world and claimed to speak for a collection of more than 30 other developing nations at the Doha Development Round.[77][78] India's "Look East" Policy has helped it develop greater economic and strategic partnership with Southeast Asian countries, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. India also enjoys friendly relations with the Persian Gulf countries and most members of the African Union.
[edit] Bilateral and regional relations
[edit] Neighbours
[edit] Afghanistan
Bilateral relations between India and Afghanistan have been traditionally strong and friendly. While India was the only South Asian country to recognize the Soviet-backed Democratic Republic of Afghanistan in the 1980s, its relations were diminished during the Afghan civil wars and the rule of the Islamist Taliban in the 1990s.[79] India aided the overthrow of the Taliban and became the largest regional provider of humanitarian and reconstruction aid.[63][80]
The new democratically-elected Afghan government strengthened its ties with India in wake of persisting tensions and problems with Pakistan, which was suspected of continuing to shelter and support the Taliban.[63][80] India pursues a policy of close cooperation to bolster its standing as a regional power and contain its rival Pakistan, which it maintains is supporting Islamic militants in Kashmir and other parts of India.[63] India is the largest regional investor in Afghanistan, having committed more than US$2.2 billion for reconstruction purposes.[81]
[edit] Bangladesh
Both states are part of the Indian subcontinent and have had a long common cultural, economic and political history. India played a crucial part in Bangladesh's independence from Pakistan. In recent years India provides co-operation and assistance during annual natural calamities. India is largest exporter to Bangladesh. Most of differences are of sharing water resources between the two countries such as Ganges , where India diverse Ganges water to Calcutta through Farakka Barrage.
[edit] Bhutan
Historically,there have been close ties with India. Both countries signed a Friendship treaty in 1949, where India would assist Bhutan in foreign relations. On February 8, 2007, the Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty was substantially revised under the Bhutanese King, Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck. Whereas in the Treaty of 1949 Article 2 read as "The Government of India undertakes to exercise no interference in the internal administration of Bhutan. On its part the Government of Bhutan agrees to be guided by the advice of the Government of India in regard to its external relations."
In the revised treaty it now reads as, "In keeping with the abiding ties of close friendship and cooperation between Bhutan and India, the Government of the Kingdom of Bhutan and the Government of the Republic of India shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests. Neither government shall allow the use of its territory for activities harmful to the national security and interest of the other." The revised treaty also includes in it the preamble "Reaffirming their respect for each other's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity", an element that was absent in the earlier version. The Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty of 2007 strengthens Bhutan's status as an independent and sovereign nation.
Tata Power is building a hydro-electric dam. This dam will greatly develop the Bhutanese economy by providing employment, and by selling electricity to India and fulfilling India's burgeoning energy needs. Due to this dam Bhutan's economy grew 20%, the second highest growth rate in the world.
[edit] Myanmar
India was one of the leading supporters of Burmese independence and established diplomatic relations after Burma's independence from Great Britain in 1948. For many years, Indo-Burmese relations were strong due to cultural links, flourishing commerce, common interests in regional affairs and the presence of a significant Indian community in Burma.[82] India provided considerable support when Burma struggled with regional insurgencies. However, the overthrow of the democratic government by the Military of Burma led to strains in ties. Along with much of the world, India condemned the suppression of democracy and Burma ordered the expulsion of the Burmese Indian community, increasing its own isolation from the world.[82][83] Only China maintained close links with Burma while India supported the pro-democracy movement.[82][84][85]
However, due to geo-political concerns, India revived its relations and recognised the new name of Myanmar in 1993 overcoming strains over drug trafficking, the suppression of democracy and the rule of the military junta in Burma. Burma is situated to the south of the states of Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh in Northeast India. and the proximity of the People's Republic of China gives strategic importance to Indo-Burmese relations. The Indo-Burmese border stretches over 1,600 miles and some insurgents in North-east India seek refuge in Myanmar. Consequently, India has been keen on increasing military cooperation with Myanmar in its counter-insurgency activities. In 2001, the Indian Army completed the construction of a major road along its border with Myanmar. India has also been building major roads, highways, ports and pipelines within Myanmar in an attempt to increase its strategic influence in the region and also to counter China's growing strides in the Indochina peninsula. Indian companies have also sought active participation in oil and natural gas exploration in Myanmar.In February 2007, India announced a plan to develop the Sittwe port, which would enable ocean access from Indian Northeastern states like Mizoram, via the Kaladan River.
India is a major customer of Myanmarese oil and gas. In 2007, Indian exports to Myanmar totaled US$185 million, while its imports from Myanmar were valued at around US$810 million, consisting mostly of oil and gas.[86] India has granted US$100 million credit to fund highway infrastructure projects in Myanmar, while US$ 57 million has been offered to upgrade Myanmarese railways. A further US$27 million in grants has been pledged for road and rail projects.[87] India is one of the few countries that has provided military assistance to the Myanmarese junta.[88] However, there has been increasing pressure on India to cut some of its military supplies to Myanmar.[89] Relations between the two remain close which was evident in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis, when India was one of the few countries whose relief and rescue aid proposals were accepted by Myanmar's ruling junta.[90]
[edit] China
Despite lingering suspicions remaining from the 1962 Sino-Indian War and continuing boundary disputes over Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh, Sino-Indian relations have improved gradually since 1988. Both countries have sought to reduce tensions along the frontier, expand trade and cultural ties, and normalize relations.
A series of high-level visits between the two nations have helped improve relations. In December 1996, PRC President Jiang Zemin visited India during a tour of South Asia. While in New Delhi, he signed with the Indian Prime Minister a series of confidence-building measures for the disputed borders. Sino-Indian relations suffered a brief setback in May 1998 when the Indian Defence minister justified the country's nuclear tests by citing potential threats from the PRC. However, in June 1999, during the Kargil crisis, then-External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh visited Beijing and stated that India did not consider China a threat. By 2001, relations between India and the PRC were on the mend, and the two sides handled the move from Tibet to India of the 17th Karmapa in January 2000 with delicacy and tact. In 2003, India formally recognized Tibet as a part of China, and China recognized Sikkim as a formal part of India in 2004.
Since 2004, the economic rise of both China and India has also helped forge closer relations between the two. Sino-Indian trade reached US$36 billion in 2007, making China the single largest trading partner of India.[92] The increasing economic reliance between India and China has also bought the two nations closer politically, with both India and China eager to resolve their boundary dispute.[93] They have also collaborated on several issues ranging from WTO's Doha round in 2008[94] to regional free trade agreement.[95] Similar to Indo-US nuclear deal, India and China have also agreed to cooperate in the field of civilian nuclear energy.[96] However, China's economic interests have clashed with those of India. Both the countries are the largest Asian investors in Africa[97] and have competed for control over its large natural resources.[98] India and China agreed to take bilateral trade up to US$100 billion on a recent visit by Wen Jiabao to India.
[edit] Maldives
India enjoys a considerable influence over Maldives' foreign policy and provides extensive security co-operation especially after the Operation Cactus in 1988 during which India repelled Tamil mercenaries who invaded the country. As founder member in 1985 of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, SAARC, which brings together Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, the country plays a very active role in SAARC. The Maldives has taken the lead in calling for a South Asian Free Trade Agreement, the formulation of a Social Charter, the initiation of informal political consultations in SAARC forums, the lobbying for greater action on environmental issues, the proposal of numerous human rights measures such as the regional convention on child rights and for setting up a SAARC Human Rights Resource Centre. The Maldives is also an advocate of greater international profile for SAARC such as through formulating common positions at the UN. But the Maldives claims the Indian-administered territory of Minicoy as part of its country, that is inhabited by Muslims.
India is starting the process to bring the island country into India's security grid. The move comes after the moderate Islamic nation approached New Delhi earlier this year over fears that one of its island resorts could be taken over by terrorists given its lack of military assets and surveillance capabilities.[99] India is also signing an agreement later this year which includes following things.
- India will permanently base two helicopters in the country to enhance its surveillance capabilities and ability to respond swiftly to threats. One helicopter from the Coast Guard is likely to be handed over during Antony's visit while another from the Navy will be cleared for transfer shortly.
- Maldives has coastal radars on only two of its 26 atolls. India will help set up radars on all 26 for seamless coverage of approaching vessels and aircraft.
- The coastal radar chain in Maldives will be networked with the Indian coastal radar system. India has already undertaken a project to install radars along its entire coastline. The radar chains of the two countries will be interlinked and a central control room in India's Coastal Command will get a seamless radar picture.
- The Indian Coast Guard (ICG) will carry out regular Dornier sorties over the island nation to look out for suspicious movements or vessels. The Southern Naval Command will overlook the inclusion of Maldives into the Indian security grid.
- Military teams from Maldives will visit the tri-services Andaman Nicobar Command (ANC) to observe how India manages security and surveillance of the critical island chain.
[edit] Nepal
Relations between India and Nepal are close yet fraught with difficulties stemming from geography, economics, the problems inherent in big power-small power relations, and common ethnic and linguistic identities that overlap the two countries' borders. In 1950 New Delhi and Kathmandu initiated their intertwined relationship with the Treaty of Peace and Friendship and accompanying letters that defined security relations between the two countries, and an agreement governing both bilateral trade and trade transiting Indian soil. The 1950 treaty and letters stated that "neither government shall tolerate any threat to the security of the other by a foreign aggressor" and obligated both sides "to inform each other of any serious friction or misunderstanding with any neighboring state likely to cause any breach in the friendly relations subsisting between the two governments." These accords cemented a "special relationship" between India and Nepal that granted Nepal preferential economic treatment and provided Nepalese in India the same economic and educational opportunities as Indian citizens.
[edit] Pakistan
Despite historical, cultural and ethnic links between them, relations between India and Pakistan have been plagued by years of mistrust and suspicion ever since the partition of India in 1947. The principal source of contention between India and its western neighbour has been the Kashmir conflict. After an invasion by Pashtun tribesmen and Pakistani paramilitary forces, the Hindu Maharaja of the Dogra Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir, Hari Singh, and its Muslim Prime Minister, Sheikh Abdullah, signed an Instrument of Accession with New Delhi. The First Kashmir War started after the Indian Army entered Srinagar, the capital of the state, to secure the area from the invading forces. The war ended in December 1948 with the Line of Control dividing the erstwhile princely state into territories administered by Pakistan (northern and western areas) and India (southern, central and northeastern areas). Pakistan contested the legality of the Instrument of Accession since the Dogra Kingdom has signed a standstill agreement with it. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 started following the failure of Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, which was designed to infiltrate forces into Jammu and Kashmir to precipitate an insurgency against rule by India. The five-week war caused thousands of casualties on both sides. It ended in a United Nations (UN) mandated ceasefire and the subsequent issuance of the Tashkent Declaration. India and Pakistan went to war again in 1971, however this time the conflict was over East Pakistan rather than Kashmir. Due to the large-scale atrocities committed by the Pakistan army, millions of Bengali refugees poured over into India. India, along with Mukti Bahini, defeated Pakistan and the Pakistani forces surrendered on the eastern front. The war resulted in the creation of Bangladesh.
In 1998, India carried out the Pokhran-II nuclear tests which was followed by Pakistan's Chagai-I tests. Following the Lahore Declaration in February 1999, relations briefly improved. However, few months later, Kashmiri insurgents and Pakistani paramilitary forces, backed by Pakistani Army, infiltrated in large numbers into the Kargil district of Indian Kashmir. This initiated the Kargil conflict after India moved in thousands of troops to successfully flush out the infiltrators. Though the conflict did not result in a full-scale war between India and Pakistan, relations between the two reached all-time low which worsened even further following Pakistan's alleged involvement in the hijacking of the Indian Airlines IC814 plane in December 1999. Attempts to normalize relations, such as the Agra summit held in July 2001, failed. Following the attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001, which was blamed on Pakistan, a country which had condemned the attack.[100] There was a military standoff between the two countries which lasted for nearly a year raising fears of a nuclear conflict. However, a peace process, initiated in 2003, led to improved relations in the following years.
Since the initiation of peace process, several confidence-building-measures (CBMs) between India and Pakistan have taken shape. The Samjhauta Express and Delhi–Lahore Bus service are one of these successful measures which have played a crucial role in expanding people to people contact between the two countries.[101] The initiation of Srinagar–Muzaffarabad Bus service in 2005 and opening of a historic trade route across the Line of Control in 2008 further reflects increasing eagerness among the two sides to improve relations. Though bilateral trade between India and Pakistan was a modest US$1.7 billion in March 2007, it is expected to cross US$10 billion by 2010. In the Kashmir earthquake in 2005, India sent aid to affected areas in Pakistani Kashmir & Punjab as well as Indian Kashmir.[102]
The recent terror attacks in Mumbai, however, have seriously undermined the relations between the two countries. India is alleging Pakistan of harboring militants on their soil, while Pakistan vehemently denies such claims. Relations are currently hampered since India has sent a list of 40 alleged fugitive in various terror strikes to Pakistan, expecting the handover of the said 40 people to the Indian Government. Pakistan, on the other hand, has openly declared to be having no intentions whatsoever of doing the above said extradition.
[edit] Sri Lanka
Bilateral relations between Sri Lanka and India have been generally friendly, but were controversially affected by the on-going Sri Lankan civil war and by the failure of Indian intervention during the Sri Lankan civil war. India is the only neighbor of Sri Lanka, separated by the Palk Strait; both nations occupy a strategic position in South Asia and have sought to build a common security umbrella in the Indian Ocean.[103]
India-Sri Lanka relations have undergone a qualitative and quantitative transformation in the recent past. Political relations are close, trade and investments have increased dramatically, infrastructural linkages are constantly being augmented, defence collaboration has increased and there is a general, broad-based improvement across all sectors of bilateral cooperation. India was the first country to respond to Sri Lanka's request for assistance after the tsunami in December 2004. In July 2006, India evacuated 430 Sri Lankan nationals from Lebanon, first to Cyprus by Indian Navy ships and then to Delhi & Colombo by special Air India flights.
There exists a broad consensus within the Sri Lankan polity on the primacy of India in Sri Lanka's external relations matrix. Both the major political parties in Sri Lanka, viz., the Sri Lanka Freedom Party and the United Nationalist Party have contributed to the rapid development of bilateral relations in the last ten years. Sri Lanka has supported India's candidature to the permanent membership of the UN Security Council.[104]
[edit] Asia–Pacific
[edit] Australia
The strongest ties between these two states is the commonwealth connection. Cricketing and Bollywood ties also help foster relations as in the frequent travel for games, and, more importantly, the presence of Australian cricketers in India for commercial gain. This was further enhanced with the IPL, and, to a lesser degree, the ICL. Bollywood has also improved ties as with John Howard's visit to Mumbai to increase tourism to Australia.[105] Furthermore, there is a going strategic connection to forming an "Asian NATO" with India, Japan, the US and Australia.[106] The bilateral agreements have worked out for all but the Indo-Australian angle, though this has been hurt by India's refusal to sign the NPT and Australia's consequent refusal to provide India with uranium until the latter do so. The Australian and Indian militaries have already worked well together. Of late the relations between the two countries were jolted, with attacks on Indian Community students in Melbourne, Australia. Indian Government lodged strong protests with the Australian Government. Australian Prime Minister Mr. Kevin Rudd said that "Australia valued its education system and International Students are valued more here in Australia." Mr. Rudd though said that his Govt. has ordered a thorough probe into the attacks and also condemned it in strongest possible terms no significant break through has been achieved.[107][108]
[edit] Fiji
Fijis relationship with the Republic of India is often seen by observers against the backdrop of the sometimes tense relations between its indigenous people and the 44 percent of the population who are of Indian descent. India has used its influence in international forums such as the Commonwealth of Nations and United Nations on behalf of ethnic Indians in Fiji, lobbying for sanctions against Fiji in the wake of the 1987 coups and the 2000 coup, both of which removed governments, one dominated and one led, by Indo-Fijians.
[edit] Japan
India-Japan relations have always been strong. India has culturally influenced Japan through Buddhism. During the Indian Independence Movement, the Japanese Imperial Army helped Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian National Army. Relations have remained warm since India's independence. Japanese companies, like Sony, Toyota, and Honda, have manufacturing facilities in India, and with the growth of the Indian economy, India is a big market for Japanese firms. The most prominent Japanese company to have a big investment in India is automobiles giant Suzuki which is in partnership with Indian automobiles company Maruti Suzuki, the largest car manufacturer in India. Honda is also a partner in "Hero Honda", one of the largest motor cycle sellers in the world. In December 2006, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Japan culminated in the signing of the "Joint Statement Towards Japan-India Strategic and Global Partnership". Japan has funded some major infrastructure projects in India, most notably the Delhi Metro subway system. Indian applicants were welcomed in 2006 to the JET Program, starting with just one slot available in 2006 and 41 in 2007. Also, in 2007, the Japanese Self Defense Forces took part in a naval exercise in the Indian Ocean, known as Malabar 2007, which also involved the naval forces of India, Australia, Singapore and the United States.
In October 2008, Japan signed an agreement with India under which it would grant the latter a low-interest loan worth US$4.5 billion to construct a high-speed rail line between Delhi and Mumbai. This is the single largest overseas project being financed by Japan and reflects growing economic partnership between the two.[109] India is also one of three countries with whom Japan has security pact, the other being Australia and the United States.[110]
[edit] Laos
In recent years, India has endeavoured to build relations, with this small Southeast Asian nation. They have strong military relations, and India shall be building an Airforce Academy in Laos.[111]
[edit] Indonesia
A long history of common links connect both nations from ancient times. In 1950, the first President of Indonesia – Sukarno called upon the peoples of Indonesia and India to "intensify the cordial relations" that had existed between the two countries "for more than 1000 years" before they had been "disrupted" by colonial powers.[112] Fifteen years later in Djakarta, government-inspired mobs were shouting: "Down with India, the servant of imperialists" and "Crush India, our enemy. "[113] Yet in the spring of 1966, the foreign ministers of both countries began speaking again of an era of friendly relations. India had supported Indonesian independence and Nehru had raised the Indonesian question in the United Nations Security Council. Today, India has an embassy in Jakarta [114] and Indonesia operates an embassy in Delhi.[115]
[edit] Malaysia
India has a high commission in Kuala Lumpur, and Malaysia has a high commission in New Delhi. Both countries are full members of the Commonwealth of Nations, and the Asian Union. India and Malaysia are also connected by various cultural and historical ties that date back to antiquity. The two countries are on excellently friendly terms with each other seeing as Malaysia is home to a strong concentration of Indian immigrants.Mahathir bin Mohamad the fourth and longest serving Prime Minister of Malayasia is of Indian origin, his father Mohamad Iskandar, was a Malayalee Muslim (who migrated from Kerala) and his mother Wan Tampawan, was Malay.[116]
[edit] Philippines
Through the Sri Vijaya and Madjapahit empires, Hindu influence has been visible in Philippine history from the 10th to 14th century A.D. During the 18th century, there was robust trade between Manila and the Coromandel Coast of Bengal, involving Philippine exports of tobacco, silk, cotton, indigo, sugar cane and coffee. The Philippines established diplomatic relations with India on 16 November 1949. The first Philippine envoy to India was the late Foreign Secretary Narciso Ramos. Seven years after India's independence in 1947, the Philippines and India signed a Treaty of Friendship on 11 July 1952 in Manila to strengthen the friendly relations existing between the two countries. Soon after, the Philippine Legation in New Delhi was established and then elevated to an Embassy.[117] However, due to foreign policy differences as a result of the bipolar alliance structure of the Cold War, the development of bilateral relations was stunted. It was only in 1976 that relations started to normalize when Mr. Aditya Birla, one of India's successful industrialists, met with then President Ferdinand E. Marcos to explore possibilities of setting up joint ventures in the Philippines. Today, like India, the Philippines is the leading voice-operated business process outsourcing (BPO) source in terms of revenue (US$ 5.7) and number of people (500,000) employed in the sector. In partnership with the Philippines, India has 20 IT/BPO companies in the Philippines. Philippines-India bilateral trade stood at US$ 986.60 million dollars in 2009. In 2004 it was US$ 600 million. Both countries aim to reach US$1 billion by 2010. There are 60,000 Indians living in the Philippines. The Philippines and India signed in October 2007 the Framework for Bilateral Cooperation which created the PH-India JCBC. It has working groups in trade, agriculture, tourism, health, renewable energy and a regular policy consultation mechanism and security dialogue.
[edit] Singapore
India and Singapore share long-standing cultural, commercial and strategic relations, with Singapore being a part of the "Greater India" cultural and commercial region. More than 300,000 people of Indian origin live in Singapore. Following its independence in 1965, Singapore was concerned with China-backed communist threats as well as domination from Malaysia and Indonesia and sought a close strategic relationship with India, which it saw as a counter-balance to Chinese influence and a partner in achieving regional security.[118] Singapore had always been an important strategic trading post, giving India trade access to Maritime Southeast Asia and the Far East. Although the rival positions of both nations over the Vietnam War and the Cold War caused consternation between India and Singapore, their relationship expanded significantly in the 1990s;[118] Singapore was one of the first to respond to India's "Look East" Policy of expanding its economic, cultural and strategic ties in Southeast Asia to strengthen its standing as a regional power.[118] Singapore, and especially, the Singaporean Foreign Minister, George Yeo, have taken an interest, in re-establishing the ancient Indian university, Nalanda University.
Singapore is the 8th largest source of investment in India and the largest amongst ASEAN member nations.[118][119] It is also India's 9th biggest trading partner as of 2005–06.[118] Its cumulative investment in India totals USD 3 billion as of 2006 and is expected to rise to US 5 billion by 2010 and US 10 billion by 2015.[118][120][121] India's economic liberalisation and its "Look East" policy have led to a major expansion in bilateral trade, which grew from USD 2.2 billion in 2001 to US 9–10 billion in 2006 – a 400% growth in span of five years – and to USD 50 billion by 2010.[118][120][121] Singapore accounts for 38% of India's trade with ASEAN member nations and 3.4% of its total foreign trade.[118] India's main exports to Singapore in 2005 included petroleum, gemstones, jewellery, machinery and its imports from Singapore included electronic goods, organic chemicals and metals. More than half of Singapore's exports to India are basically "re-exports" – items that had been imported from India.[118][119]
[edit] South Korea
The cordial relationship between the two countries extends back to 48AD, when Queen Suro, or Princess Heo, travelled from the kingdom of Ayodhya to Korea.[122] According to the Samguk Yusa, the princess had a dream about a heavenly king who was awaiting heaven's anointed ride. After Princess Heo had the dream, she asked her parents, the king and queen, for permission to set out and seek the man, which the king and queen urged with the belief that god orchestrated the whole fate.[123] Upon approval, she set out on a boat, carrying gold, silver, a tea plant, and a stone which calmed the waters.[122] Archeologists discovered a stone with two fish kissing each other, a symbol of the Gaya kingdom that is unique to the Mishra royal family in Ayodhya, India. This royal link provides further evidence that there was an active commercial engagements between India and Korea since the queen's arrival to Korea.[122] Current descendants live in the city of Kimhae as well as abroad in America's state of New Jersey and Kentucky. Many of them became prominent and well-known around the world like President Kim Dae Jung, Prime Minister Jong Pil Kim.
The relations between the countries have been relatively limited, although much progress arose during the three decades. Since the formal establishment of the diplomatic ties between two countries in 1973, several trade agreements have been reached. Trade between the two nations has increased exponentially, exemplified by the $530 million during the fiscal year of 1992–1993, and the $10 billion during 2006–2007.[124] During the 1997 Asian financial crisis, South Korean businesses sought to increase access to the global markets, and began trade investments with India.[124] The last two presidential visits from South Korea to India were in 1996 and 2006,[125] and the embassy works between the two countries are seen as needing improvements.[126] Recently, there have been acknowledgements in the Korean public and political spheres that expanding relations with India should be a major economical and political priority for South Korea. Much of the economic investments of South Korea have been drained into China;[127] however, South Korea is currently the fifth largest source of investment in India.[128] To the Times of India, President Roh voiced his opinion that cooperation between India's software and Korea's IT industries would bring very efficient and successful outcomes.[125] The two countries agreed to shift their focus to the revision of the visa policies between the two countries, expansion of trade, and establishment of free trade agreement to encourage further investment between the two countries. Korean companies such as LG and Samsung have established manufacturing and service facilities in India, and several Korean construction companies won grants for a portion of the many infrastructural building plans in India, such as the "National Highway Development Project".[128] Tata Motor's purchase of Daewoo Commercial Vehicles at the cost of $102 million highlights the India's investments in Korea, which consist mostly of subcontracting.[128]
[edit] Taiwan
The bilateral relations between India and Taiwan (officially Republic of China) have improved since the 1990s despite both nations not maintaining official diplomatic relations,[85][128] India recognizes only the People's Republic of China and not the Republic of China's contention of being the legitimate government of territorial China – a conflict that emerged after the Chinese Civil War (1945–49). However, India's economic & Commercial links as well as people-to-people contacts with Taiwan have expanded in recent years.[128]
[edit] Thailand
India's Look East policy, saw India grow relations with ASEAN countries including Thailand, and Thailand's Look West policy, also saw it grow its relations with India. Both countries are members of BIMSTEC. Indian Prime Ministers Rajiv Gandhi, P.V. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and Manmohan Singh, have visited Thailand as have, Chatichai Choonhavan, Thaksin Shinawatra, and Surayud Chulanont, visited India. In 2003, a Free trade agreement was signed between the two countries. India, is the 13th largest investor in Thailand. The spheres of trade are in chemicals, pharmaceuticals, textiles, nylon, tyre cord, real estate, rayon fibres, paper grade pulps, steel wires, and rods. However, IT Services, and manufacturing, are the main spheres. Through Buddhism, India, has culturally influenced Thailand. The Indian epics, Mahabharata, and Ramayana, are popular and are widely taught in schools as part of the curriculum in Thailand. The example can also be seen in temples around Thailand, where the story of Ramayana and renowned Indian folk stories are depicted on the temple wall. Thailand, has become a big tourist destination for Indians.
[edit] Vietnam
India supported Vietnam's independence from France, opposed U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War and supported unification of Vietnam. India established official diplomatic relations in 1972 and maintained friendly relations, especially in wake of Vietnam's hostile relations with the People's Republic of China, which had become India's strategic rival.[129]
India granted the "Most Favoured Nation" status to Vietnam in 1975[129] and both nations signed a bilateral trade agreement in 1978 and the Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPPA) on March 8, 1997.[130] In 2007, a fresh joint declaration was issued during the state visit of the Prime Minister of Vietnam Nguyen Tan Dung.[131] Bilateral trade has increased rapidly since the liberalisation of the economies of both Vietnam and India.[129] India is the 13th-largest exporter to Vietnam, with exports have grown steadily from USD 11.5 million in 1985–86 to USD 395.68 million by 2003.[130] Vietnam's exports to India rose to USD 180 million, including agricultural products, handicrafts, textiles, electronics and other goods.[132] Between 2001 and 2006, the volume of bilateral trade expanded at 20–30% per annum to reach USD 1 billion by 2006.[133][134] Continuing the rapid pace of growth, bilateral trade is expected to rise to USD 2 billion by 2008, 2 years ahead of the official target.[134][135] India and Vietnam have also expanded cooperation in information technology, education and collaboration of the respective national space programmes.[131] Direct air links and lax visa regulations have been established to bolster tourism.[136]
India and Vietnam are members of the Mekong-Ganga Cooperation, created to develop to enhance close ties between India and nations of Southeast Asia. Vietnam has supported India's bid to become a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council and join the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC).[137] In the 2003 joint declaration, India and Vietnam envisaged creating an "Arc of Advantage and Prosperity" in Southeast Asia;[131] to this end, Vietnam has backed a more important relationship and role between India and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its negotiation of an Indo-ASEAN free trade agreement.[129][131] India and Vietnam have also built strategic partnerships, including extensive cooperation on developing nuclear power, enhancing regional security and fighting terrorism, transnational crime and drug trafficking.[85][131][132]
[edit] Americas
India's commonalities with developing nations in Latin America, especially Brazil and Mexico have continued to grow. India and Brazil continue to work together on the reform of Security Council through the G4 nations while have also increased strategic and economic cooperation through the IBSA Dialogue Forum. The process of finalizing Preferential Trade Agreement (PTA) with MERCOSUR (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay) is on the itinerary and negotiations are being held with Chile.[138] Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was the guest of honour at the 2004 Republic Day celebrations in New Delhi.[139]
[edit] Argentina
Formal relations between both the countries were first established in 1949. India has an embassy in Buenos Aires and Argentina has an embassy in New Delhi. The current Indian Ambassador to Argentina (concurrently acreditted to Uruguay and Paraguay) is Mr. R Viswanathan.
- List of Treaties ruling relations Argentina and India (Argentine Foreign Ministry, in Spanish)
- Indian embassy in Buenos Aires
[edit] Brazil
A group called the Filhos de Gandhi (Sons of Gandhi) participates regularly in the carnival in Salvador. Private Brazilian organizations occasionally invite Indian cultural troupes.
In recent years,[when?] relations between Brazil and India have grown considerably and co-operation between the two countries has been extended to such diverse areas as science and technology, pharmaceuticals and space. The two-way trade in 2007 nearly tripled to US$ 3.12 billion from US$ 1.2 billion in 2004. India attaches tremendous importance to its relationship with this Latin American giant and hopes to see the areas of co-operation expand in the coming years.
Both countries want the participation of developing countries in the UNSC permanent membership since the underlying philosophy for both of them are: UNSC should be more democratic, legitimate and representative – the G4 is a novel grouping for this realization. Brazil and India are deeply committed to IBSA (South-South cooperation) initiatives and attach utmost importance to this trilateral cooperation between the three large, multi-ethnic, multi-racial and multi-religious developing countries, which are bound by the common principle of pluralism and democracy.
[edit] Canada
Indo-Canadian relations, are the longstanding bilateral relations between India and Canada, which are built upon a "mutual commitment to democracy", "pluralism", and "people-to-people links," according to the government of Canada. In 2004, bilateral trade between India and Canada was at about C$2.45 billion. However, the botched handling of the Air India investigation and the case in general suffered a setback to Indo-Canadian relations. India's Smiling Buddha nuclear test led to connections between the two countries being frozen, with allegations that India broke the terms of the Colombo Plan. Although Jean Chrétien and Roméo LeBlanc both visited India in the late 1990s, relations were again halted after the Pokhran-II tests.
[edit] Colombia
Both countries established diplomatic ties on January 19, 1959. Since then the relationship between the two countries has been gradually increasing with more frequent diplomatic visits to promote political, commercial cultural and academic exchanges. Colombia is currently the commercial point of entry into Latin America for Indian companies.[141]
[edit] Mexico
Mexico is a very important and major economic partner of India. Mexico and India, both have embassies in the other country. Octavio Paz worked as a diplomat in India. His book In Light of India is an analysis of Indian history and culture.[142]
See also Hinduism in Mexico
[edit] Paraguay
India and Paraguay established diplomatic relations on September 13, 1961.[citation needed] India is represented in Paraguay through its embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina and an honorary consulate in Asuncion. Since 2005, Paraguay has had an embassy in New Delhi.[citation needed]
[edit] United States of America
Historically, relations between India and the United States were lukewarm following Indian independence, as India took a leading position in the Non-Aligned Movement, and attempted to pursue even-handed economic and military relations with the Soviet Union, although US provided support to India in 1962 during its war with China. For most of the Cold War, the USA tended to have warmer relations with Pakistan, primarily as a way to contain Soviet-friendly India and to use Pakistan to back the Afghan Mujahideen against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. An Indo-Soviet twenty year friendship treaty, signed in 1971, also positioned India against the USA.
[edit] Cold War era
India played a key role in establishing the Non-Aligned Movement in 1961. Though India pursued close relations with both USA and USSR, it decided not to join any major power bloc and refrained from joining military alliances. India, however began establishing close military relationship with the Soviet Union.
After the Sino-Indian War and the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, India made considerable changes to its foreign policy. It developed a close relationship with the Soviet Union and started receiving massive military equipment and financial assistance from the USSR. This had an adverse effect on the Indo-USA relationship. The United States saw Pakistan as a counter-weight to pro-Soviet India and started giving the former military assistance. This created an atmosphere of suspicion between India and USA. The USA-India relationship suffered a considerable setback during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan when India openly supported the Soviet Union.
Relations between India and the United States came to an all-time low during the early 1970s. Despite reports of atrocities in East Pakistan, and being told, most notably in the Blood telegram, of genocidal activities being perpetrated by Pakistani forces, U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and U.S. President Richard Nixon did nothing to discourage then Pakistani President Yahya Khan and the Pakistan Army. Kissinger was particularly concerned about Soviet expansion into South Asia as a result of a treaty of friendship that had recently been signed between India and the Soviet Union, and sought to demonstrate to the People's Republic of China the value of a tacit alliance with the United States.[143] During the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Indian Armed Forces, along with the Mukti Bahini, succeeded in liberating East Pakistan which soon declared independence. Richard Nixon, then USA President, feared that an Indian invasion of West Pakistan would mean total Soviet domination of the region, and that it would seriously undermine the global position of the United States and the regional position of America's new tacit ally, China. In order to demonstrate to China the bona fides of the United States as an ally, and in direct violation of the USA Congress-imposed sanctions on Pakistan, Nixon sent military supplies to Pakistan, routing them through Jordan and Iran,[144] while also encouraging China to increase its arms supplies to Pakistan.
When Pakistan's defeat in the eastern sector seemed certain, Nixon sent the USS Enterprise to the Bay of Bengal, a move deemed by the Indians as a nuclear threat. The Enterprise arrived on station on December 11, 1971. On 6 December and 13 December, the Soviet Navy dispatched two groups of ships, armed with nuclear missiles, from Vladivostok; they trailed U.S. Task Force 74 into the Indian Ocean from 18 December 1971 until 7 January 1972. The Soviets also sent a nuclear submarine to ward off the threat posed by USS Enterprise in the Indian Ocean.[145]
Though American efforts had no effect in turning the tide of the war, the incident involving USS Enterprise is viewed as the trigger for India's subsequent nuclear program.[146] American policy towards the end of the war was dictated primarily by a need to restrict the escalation of war on the western sector to prevent the 'dismemberment' of West Pakistan.[147] Years after the war, many American writers criticized the White House policies during the war as being badly flawed and ill-serving the interests of the United States.[148] India carried out nuclear tests a few years later resulting in sanctions being imposed by United States, further drifting the two countries apart. In recent years, Kissinger came under fire for comments made during the Indo-Pakistan War in which he described Indians as "bastards."[149] Kissinger has since expressed his regret over the comments.[150]
[edit] Post Cold War era
Since the end of the Cold War, India-USA relations have improved dramatically. This has largely been fostered by the fact that the USA and India are both democracies and have a large and growing trade relationship. During the Gulf War, the economy of India went through an extremely difficult phase. The Government of India liberalized the Indian economy. After the break up of the Soviet Union, India started looking for new allies and tried improving diplomatic relations with the members of the NATO particularly the United States, Canada, France and Germany. In 1992, India established formal diplomatic relations with Israel.
[edit] Pokhran tests
In 1998, India tested nuclear weapons which resulted in several U.S., Japanese and European sanctions on India. India's then defence minister, George Fernandes, said that India's nuclear program was necessary as it provided a deterrence to some potential nuclear threat. Most of the sanctions imposed on India were removed by 2001. India has categorically stated that it will never use weapons first but will defend if attacked. In fact Pakistan is the first country that India informs if any nuclear tests are on the agenda.
The economic sanctions imposed by the United States in response to India's nuclear tests in May 1998 appeared, at least initially, to seriously damage Indo-American relations. President Bill Clinton imposed wide-ranging sanctions pursuant to the 1994 Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Act. U.S. sanctions on Indian entities involved in the nuclear industry and opposition to international financial institution loans for non-humanitarian assistance projects in India. The United States encouraged India to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) immediately and without condition. The U.S. also called for restraint in missile and nuclear testing and deployment by both India and Pakistan. The non-proliferation dialogue initiated after the 1998 nuclear tests has bridged many of the gaps in understanding between the countries.
[edit] Post-September 11 attacks
After the September 11 attacks in 2001, Indian intelligence agencies provided the U.S. with significant information on Al-Qaeda and related groups' activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan. India's extensive contribution to the War on Terrorism has helped India's diplomatic relations with several countries. Over the past few years, India has held numerous joint military exercises with U.S. and European nations that have resulted in a strengthened U.S.-India and E.U.-India bilateral relationship. India's bilateral trade with Europe and U.S. has more than doubled in the last five years.
However, India has not signed the CTBT, or the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, claiming the discriminatory nature of the treaty that allows the five declared nuclear countries of the world to keep their nuclear arsenal and develop it using computer simulation testing. Prior to its nuclear testing, India had pressed for a comprehensive destruction of nuclear weapons by all countries of the world in a time-bound frame. This was not acceptable to the USA and other countries. Presently, India has declared its policy of "no-first use of nuclear weapons" and the maintenance of a "credible nuclear deterrence". The USA, under President George W. Bush has also lifted most of its sanctions on India and has resumed military co-operation. Relations with USA have considerably improved in the recent years, with the two countries taking part in joint naval exercises off the coast of India and joint air exercises both in India as well as in the United States.[151][152][153]
India has been pushing for reforms in the UN and WTO with mixed results. India's candidature for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council is currently backed by several countries including United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Brazil, African Union nations, USA and recently People's Republic of China. In 2005, the United States signed a nuclear co-operation agreement with India even though the latter is not a part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The US argued that India's strong nuclear non-proliferation record made it an exception and persuaded other Nuclear Suppliers Group members to sign similar deals with India.
On March 2, 2006 India and the USA signed the Indo-U.S. Nuclear Pact on co-operation in civilian nuclear field. This was signed during the four days state visit of USA President George Bush in India. On its part, India would separate its civilian and military nuclear programs, and the civilian programs would be brought under the safeguards of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The United States would sell India the reactor technologies and the nuclear fuel for setting up and upgrading its civilian nuclear program. The U.S. Congress needs to ratify this pact since U.S. federal law prohibits the trading of nuclear technologies and materials outside the framework of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
[edit] Indo-USA strategic partnership
Indo-USA relations got strategic content in the early 1960s. The rise of China worried the policymakers in Washington. Chinese assertion in Tibet, its role in Korean war and other such acts concerned Washington. As the relations between India and China deteriorated during late fifties, the Americans found a golden opportunity to take advantage of this situation to promote India as a counterweight to China.[154] But any unidimensional alliance is bound to be short-lived and this alliance was no exception to this general rule. As China ceased to be a headache for the American policymakers by the late sixties, this unidimensional alliance disappeared into thin air.
The end of the Cold War necessitated as well as facilitated the infusion of strategic content to Indo-USA relations–this time multidimensional. In the post Cold War era, the strategic objectives of India and the USA converges on a number of issues and not just one–as well as the case earlier. These issues include, inter alia, containment of terrorism, promotion of democracy, counter proliferation, freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean, Asian balance of power, etc.[34]
One of the very interesting feature of Indo-USA relations of recent times is the changes on the terms of engagement between the two countries on the issue of nuclear proliferation. While earlier, in the USA strategic thinking on nuclear proliferation, India figured mainly because of American concern about latter's nuclear and missile programmes, in the twenty-first century, however, American strategic thinking on the issue of nuclear proliferation has undergone radical reorientation. Now, the Americans are increasingly realising the futility of insisting on a rollback of India's nuclear programme. They, rather, want to leverage India's growing power and influence in favour of their broader nonproliferation and counter proliferation objectives.[155]
As promotion of democracy around the world is one of the most important foreign policy objective of the USA, India – as the largest democracy of the world-can hardly be ignored by the USA. This is the reason, cooperation in promotion of democracy in the world has become one of the most important facets of Indo-USA relations in recent times. India is a founding member of the 'Community of Democracies' – a prominent endeavour of the USA on promotion of democracy. However, India rejected the suggestion of the USA about setting up a Centre for Asian Democracy.[156]
Agriculture is another important area of cooperation between India and the USA in present times. Considering the fact that both the nations at present have a vast pool of human resources adept at knowledge economy, it is only natural that the most optimal course such partnership can aim at is harnessing these human resources by concentrating on development and dissemination of agricultural knowledge through research, education and training etc. An initiative to forge such a partnership is the 'India-USA Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture' (KIA).[157]
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was the guest of honor at the first state dinner, which took place on November 24, 2009, of the administration of US President Barack Obama. Obama later visited India from November 6–9, 2010, signing numerous trade and defence agreements with India. He addressed the joint session of the Indian parliament in New Delhi, becoming only the second US President to do so, and announced that the United States would lend it's support to India's bid for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, signifying the growing strategic dimension of the relationship between the world's two largest democracies.[158]
[edit] Europe
[edit] European Union
India was one of the first countries to develop relations with the Union, signing bilateral agreements in 1973, when the United Kingdom joined. The most recent cooperation agreement was signed in 1994 and an action plan was signed in 2005. As of April 2007 the Commission is pursuing a free trade agreement with India.[159]
The Union is India's largest trading partner, accounting for 20% of Indian trade. However, India accounts for only 1.8% of the EU's trade and attracts only 0.3% of European Foreign Direct Investment, although still provides India's largest source. During 2005 EU-India trade grew by 20.3%.[160]
There was controversy in 2006 when the Indian Mittal Steel Company sought to take-over the Luxembourg based steel company, Arcelor. The approach met with opposition from France and Luxembourg but was passed by the Commission who stated that were judging it on competition grounds only.[161]
The European Union (EU) and India agreed on September 29, 2008 at the EU-India summit in Marseille, France's largest commercial port, to expand their cooperation in the fields of nuclear energy and environmental protection and deepen their strategic partnership. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the EU's rotating president, said at a joint press conference at the summit that "EU welcomes India, as a large country, to engage in developing nuclear energy, adding that this clean energy will be helpful for the world to deal with the global climate change." Sarkozy also said the EU and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan pledged to accelerate talks on a free trade deal and expected to finish the deal by 2009. The Indian prime minister was also cautiously optimistic about cooperation on nuclear energy. "Tomorrow we have a bilateral summit with France. This matter will come up and I hope some good results will emerge out of that meeting," Singh said when asked about the issue. Singh said that he was "very satisfied" with the results of the summit. He added that EU and India have "common values" and the two economies are complementary to each other.
European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, also speaking at Monday's press conference, expounded the joint action plan on adjustments of EU's strategic partnership with India, saying the two sides will strengthen cooperation on world peace and safety, sustainable development, cooperation in science and technology and cultural exchanges.
Reviewing the two sides' efforts in developing the bilateral strategic partnership, the joint action plan reckoned that in politics, dialogue and cooperation have enhanced through regular summits and exchanges of visits and that in economy, mutual investments have increased dramatically in recent years, dialogue in macro economic policies and financial services has established and cooperation in energy, science and technology and environment has been launched. Under the joint action plan, EU and Indian would enhance consultation and dialogue on human rights within the UN framework, strengthen cooperation in world peacekeeping mission, fight against terror and non-proliferation of arms, promote cooperation and exchange in developing civil nuclear energy and strike a free trade deal as soon as possible. France, which relies heavily on nuclear power and is a major exporter of nuclear technology, is expected to sign a deal that would allow it to provide nuclear fuel to India.
Trade between India and the 27-nation EU has more than doubled from 25.6 billion euros ($36.7 billion) in 2000 to 55.6 billion euros last year, with further expansion to be seen. "We have agreed to achieve an annual bilateral trade turnover of 100 billion euros within the next five years," Singh told reporters. A joint statement issued at the end of the summit said the EU and India would work to reach an agreement on climate change by the end of 2009.[162]
[edit] United Kingdom
Since 1947, India's relations with the United Kingdom have been through bilateral, as well as through the Commonwealth of Nations framework. Although the Sterling Area no longer exists and the Commonwealth is much more an informal forum, India and the UK still have many enduring links. This is in part due to the significant number of people of Indian origin living in the UK. The large South Asian population in the UK results in steady travel and communication between the two countries. The British Raj allowed for both cultures to imbibe tremendously from the other. The English language and cricket are perhaps the two most evident British exports, whilst in the UK food from the indian subcontinent are very popular.[163] The United Kingdom's favourite food is often reported to be Indian Cuisine, although no official study reports this.[163]
Economically the relationship between Britain and India is also strong. India is the second largest investor in Britain after the US.[164][165] Britain is also one of the largest investors in India.[166]
The Queen's visits to India have been enormously successful along with those by other members of the Royal Family. Britain has also supported India's rise to prominence on the international stage, including advocating a permanent seat on the Security Council.[167][dead link] The UK recently gave India a £825 million aid package to help India develop its health and education systems.[162][168]
[edit] France
France and India established diplomatic relationships soon after India achieved independence in 1947. India's strong diplomatic ties with France resulted in the peaceful cession of Pondicherry to India on November 1, 1954 without any military opposition from France.
France, Russia and Israel were the only countries that did not condemn India's decision to go nuclear in 1998.[169] In 2003, France became the largest supplier of nuclear fuel and technology to India and remains a large military and economic trade partner. India's permanent member aspirations in the UN Security Council have found very strong support from former French President Chirac and more recently by the current French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The recent decision by the Indian government to purchase French Scorpène class submarines worth $3 billion USD and 43 Airbus aircraft for Air India worth $2.5 billion USD has further cemented the strategic, military and economic co-operation between India and France.
Nicolas Sarkozy visited India in January 2008 and was the Chief Guest of the Republic Day parade in New Delhi. France was the first country to sign a nuclear energy co-operation agreement with India; this was done during Prime Minister Singh's visit, following the waiver by the Nuclear Suppliers Group. During the Bastille Day celebrations on July 14, 2009, a detachment of 400 Indian troops marched along with the French troops as well as the Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh was the guest of honour.[170]
[edit] Italy
Despite racial and religious disconnections, India and Italy have enjoyed overall pleasurable and strong relations throughout history. Italy and India are also close economic partners and is home to a large population of Indian immigrants. The chief of India's leading political party, the Indian National Congress, Sonia Gandhi, arguably the most powerful Indian woman, is of Italian descent.
Unfortunately at diplomatic level the relations seem not to be always good, an example is the terrible visa situation between the two countries for the past few years, visas of any kind (tourist, business, employment and others) are issued for very short term and after a lot of hurdles for both Indian and Italian nationals. This situation has reduced noticeably the possibility of tourism and business development between the two countries. It is not officially known the reason for the current diplomatic situation. India has an embassy in Rome, a general consulate in Milan. Italy has an embassy in New Delhi, two general consulates (in Mumbai and Calcutta).
There are around 100,000 people of Indian Origin living in Italy, meanwhile there are only around 300 Italian citizens residing in India mostly working on behalf of Italian industrial groups.
- See also Embassy of India in Rome, Indo Italian
- Indian embassy in Rome
- Italian embassy in New Delhi
- Italian general consulate in Mumbai
- Italian general consulate in Calcutta
[edit] Germany
During the Cold War India maintained diplomatic relations with West Germany and East Germany. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the reunification of Germany, relations have further improved. The German ambassador to India, Bernd Mutzelburg, once said that India and Germany, are not just 'natural partners', but important countries in a globalised world. Germany is India's largest trade partner in Europe. German Chancellor Angela Merkel visited India recently, as did the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visit Germany. Both countries have been working towards gaining permanent seats in the United Nations Security Council. As both countries are strong liberal democracies, they have similar objectives. UN reforms, fighting terrorism and climate change, and promotion of science, education, technology, and human rights, are some areas of shared interests, and collaboration between these two countries. Culturally too, Indian and German writers and philosophers, have influenced each other.[171] Recently, Germany has invested in developing education and skills amongst rural Indians. Also of note, during World War 2 an Indian division known as the Tiger Legion was attached to the German Wehrmacht.
[edit] Greece
The first contact between both civilization dates back from Alexander the Great's visit to India and eventual retreat. Alexander's seemingly un-stoppable eastward expansion was halted at the Kingdoms of North-Western of India. 3000 BC and earlier, the Mahabharata talks of Indian warrior Kings' conquest of Greece and the cultural exchange resulting therefrom.
In modern time, diplomatic relations between Greece and India were established in May 1950. The new Greek Embassy building in New Delhi was inaugurated on February 6, 2001.
[edit] Turkey
Due to controversial issues such as Turkey's close relationship with Pakistan and India's strong relations with Greece and Armenia, relations between the two countries have often been blistered at certain times, but better at others. India and Turkey's relationship alters from unsureness to collaboration when the two nations work together to combat terrorism in Central and South Asia, and the Middle East. India and Turkey are also connected by history, seeing as they have known each other since the days of the Ottoman Empire, and seeing as India was one of the countries to send aid to Turkey following its war of independence. The Indian real estate firm GMR, has invested in and is working towards the modernization of Istanbul's Sabiha Gökçen International Airport.
[edit] Other European countries
Country | Formal Relations Began | Notes |
|---|---|---|
 Armenia | 1992-08-31 | See Armenia–India relations The first contacts between both civilizations date back from 2,500 years ago, during the 5th century BC. In modern times, India recognized Armenia on December 26, 1991. |
| Belarus | See Foreign relations of Belarus | |
 Bulgaria | 1954 | See Bulgaria–India relations |
 Croatia | See Foreign relations of Croatia | |
| Cyprus | See Foreign relations of Cyprus | |
 Denmark | See Denmark-India relations | |
 Estonia | 1991-09-09 | See Estonia–India relations India's first recognition of Estonia came on 22 September 1921 when the former had just acquired membership in the League of Nations. India re-recognised Estonia on September 9, 1991 and diplomatic relations were established on December 2 of the same year in Helsinki. Neither country has a resident ambassador. Estonia is represented in India by two honorary consulates (in Mumbai and New Delhi). India is represented in Estonia through its embassy in Helsinki (Finland) and through an honorary consulate in Tallinn. |
 Finland | See Foreign relations of Finland | |
 Georgia | See Foreign relations of Georgia | |
 Holy See | See Foreign relations of the Holy See | |
 Iceland | See Iceland–India relations Iceland and India established diplomatic relations in 1972. The Embassy of Iceland in London was accredited to India and the Embassy of India in Oslo, Norway, was accredited to Iceland. However, it was only after 2003 that the two countries have began close diplomatic and economic relationships.[174] In 2003, President of Iceland Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson visited India on diplomatic mission. This was the first visit by an Icelandic President to India. During the visit, Iceland pledged support to New Delhi's candidature for a permanent seat in the United Nation Security Council thus becoming the first Nordic country to do so. This was followed by an official visit of President of India A. P. J. Abdul Kalam to Iceland in May 2005.[175] Following this a new embassy of Iceland was opened in New Delhi on 26 February 2006.[174] Soon, an Indian Navy team visited Iceland on friendly mission.[176] Gunnar Pálsson is the ambassador of Iceland to India. The Embassy's area of accreditation, apart from India includes Bangladesh, Indonesia, the Seychelles, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritius and Nepal.[177] India appointed S. Swaminathan as the first resident ambassador to Iceland in March 2008.[178] | |
 Ireland | See India – Ireland relations Indo-Irish relations picked up steam during the freedom struggles of the respective countries against a common imperial empire in the United Kingdom. Political relations between the two states have largely been based on socio-cultural ties, although political and economic ties have also helped build relations. Indo-Irish relations were greatly strengthened by the such luminaries as the likes of Pandit Nehru, Éamon de Valera, Rabindranath Tagore, W. B. Yeats, James Joyce, and, above all, Annie Besant. Politically relations have not been cold nor warm. Mutual benefit has led to economic ties that are fruitful for both states.[citation needed] Visits by government leaders have kept relations cordial at regular intervals. | |
| Malta | See India–Malta relations Malta opened a High Commission in New Delhi in 2007. Malta also has an honorary consulate in Mumbai. India is represented in Malta through its embassy in Tripoli, Libya and an honorary consulate in Valletta. | |
 Poland | See India–Poland relations Historically, relations have generally been close and friendly, characterized by understanding and cooperation on international front.[179] | |
 Romania | ||
 Russia | See India–Russia relations During the Cold War, India and the Soviet Union enjoyed a strong strategic, military, economic and diplomatic relationship. After the collapse of the USSR, India improved its relations with the West but it continued its close relations with Russia. India is the second largest market for Russian arms industry. In 2004, more than 70% on Indian Military's hardware came from Russia, making Russia the chief supplier of arms.[182] India has an embassy in Moscow and two Consulates-General (in Saint Petersburg and Vladivostok). Russia has an embassy in New Delhi and three Consulates-General (in Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai). Since 2000 and the visit of Vladimir Putin in India there have been an Indo-Russian Strategic Partnership. | |
| Serbia |
| |
 Slovenia |
| |
 Spain | 1956 | |
 Ukraine | See India–Ukraine relations Diplomatic relations between India and Ukraine were established in January 1992. Indian Embassy in Kiev was opened in May 1992 and Ukraine opened its mission in New Delhi in February 1993. The Consulate General of India in Odessa functioned from 1962 till its closure in March 1999. |
[edit] West Asia
[edit] Arab states of the Persian Gulf
India and the Arab states of the Persian Gulf enjoy strong cultural and economic ties. This is reflected in the fact that more than 50% of the oil consumed by India comes from the Persian Gulf countries[186] and Indian nationals form the largest expatriate community in the Arabian peninsula.[187] The annual remittance by Indian expatriates in the region amounted to US$20 billion in 2007.[188] India is one of the largest trading partners of the CCASG with non-oil trade between India and Dubai alone amounting to US$19 billion in 2007.[189] The Persian Gulf countries have also played an important role in addressing India's energy security concerns, with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait regularly increasing their oil supply to India to meet the country's rising energy demand. In 2005, Kuwait increased its oil exports to India by 10% increasing the net oil trade between the two to US$4.5 billion.[190] In 2008, Qatar decided to invest US$5 billion in India's energy sector.[191]
India has maritime security arrangement in place with Oman and Qatar.[192] In 2008, a landmark defense pact was signed, under which India committed its military assets to protect "Qatar from external threats".[193] There has been progress in a proposed deep-sea gas pipeline from Qatar, via Oman, to India.[194]
[edit] Bahrain
India is a close ally of Bahrain, the Kingdom along with its GCC partners are (according to Indian officials) among the most prominent backers of India's bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council,[195] and Bahraini officials have urged India to play a greater role in international affairs. For instance, over concerns about Iran's nuclear programme Bahrain's Crown Prince appealed to India to play an active role in resolving the crisis.[196]
Ties between India and Bahrain go back generations, with many of Bahrain's most prominent figures having close connections: poet and constitutionalist Ebrahim Al-Arrayedh grew up in Bombay, while 17th century Bahraini theologians Sheikh Salih Al-Karzakani and Sheikh Ja`far bin Kamal al-Din were influential figures in the Kingdom of Golkonda[197] and the development of Shia thought in the sub-continent.
Bahraini politicians have sought to enhance these long standing ties, with Parliamentary Speaker Khalifa Al Dhahrani in 2007 leading a delegation of parliamentarians and business leaders to meet Indian President Pratibha Patil, opposition leader L K Advani, and take part in training and media interviews.[198] Politically, it is easier for Bahrain's politicians to seek training and advice from India than it is from the United States or other western alternative.
In December 2007, the Bahrain India Society was launched in Manama to promote ties between the two countries. Headed by the former Minister of Labour Abdulnabi Al Shoala, the Society seeks to take advantage of the development in civil society to actively work to strengthen ties between the two countries, not only business links, but according to the body's opening statement in politics, social affairs, science and culture. India's Minister of State for Foreign Affairs E Ahmed and his Bahraini counterpart Dr Nazar Al Baharna attended the launch.[199]
[edit] Egypt
Modern Egypt-India relations go back to the contacts between Saad Zaghloul and Mohandas Gandhi on the common goals of their respective movements of independence.[200] In 1955, Egypt under Gamal Abdul Nasser and India under Jawaharlal Nehru became the founders of the Non-Aligned Movement. During the 1956 War, Nehru stood supporting Egypt to the point of threatening to withdraw his country from the Commonwealth of Nations. In 1967, following the Arab-Israeli war, India supported Egypt and the Arabs. In 1977, New Delhi described the visit of President Anwar al-Sadat to Jerusalem as a "brave" move and considered the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel a primary step on the path of a just settlement of the Middle East problem. Major Egyptian exports to India include raw cotton, raw and manufactured fertilizers, oil and oil products, organic and non-organic chemicals, leather and iron products. Major imports into Egypt from India are cotton yarn, sesame, coffee, herbs, tobacco, lentils, pharmaceutical products and transport equipment. The Egyptian Ministry of Petroleum is also currently negotiating the establishment of a natural gas-operated fertilizer plant with another Indian company. In 2004 the Gas Authority of India Limited, bought 15% of Egypt Nat Gas distribution and marketing company. In 2008 Egyptian investment in India was worth some 750 million dollars, according to the Egyptian ambassador.[201]
[edit] Iran
After the Iranian Revolution of 1979, Iran withdrew from CENTO and dissociated itself from US-friendly countries, including Pakistan, which automatically entailed improved relationship with the Republic of India.
Currently, the two countries have friendly relations in many areas. There are significant trade ties, particularly in crude oil imports into India and diesel exports to Iran. Iran frequently objected to Pakistan's attempts to draft anti-India resolutions at international organizations such as the OIC. India welcomed Iran's inclusion as an observer state in the SAARC regional organization. Lucknow continues to be a major centre of Shiite culture and Persian study in the subcontinent.
In the 1990s, India and Iran both supported the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan against the Taliban regime. They continue to collaborate in supporting the broad-based anti-Taliban government led by Hamid Karzai and backed by the United States.
[edit] Iraq
Iraq was one of the few countries in the Middle East with which India established diplomatic relations at the embassy level immediately after its independence in 1947.[202] Both nations signed the "Treaty of Perpetual Peace and Friendship" in 1952 and an agreement of cooperation on cultural affairs in 1954.[202] India was amongst the first to recognize the Baath Party-led government, and Iraq remained neutral during the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965. However, Iraq sided alongside other Persian Gulf states in supporting Pakistan against India during the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, which saw the creation of Bangladesh.[202] The eight-year long Iran–Iraq War caused a steep decline in trade and commerce between the two nations.[202]
During the 1991 Persian Gulf War, India remained neutral but permitted refueling for U.S. airplanes.[202] It opposed U.N. sanctions on Iraq, but the period of war and Iraq's isolation further diminished India's commercial and diplomatic ties.[202] From 1999 onwards, Iraq and India began to work towards a stronger relationship. Iraq had supported India's right to conduct nuclear tests following its tests of five nuclear weapons on May 11 and May 13, 1998.[202] In 2000, the then-Vice President of Iraq Taha Yassin Ramadan visited India, and on August 6, 2002 President Saddam Hussein conveyed Iraq's "unwavering support" to India over the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan.[202][203] India and Iraq established joint ministerial committees and trade delegations to promote extensive bilateral cooperation.[128][204] Although initially disrupted during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, diplomatic and commercial ties between India and the new democratic government of Iraq have since been normalized.[204]
[edit] Israel
The creation of Israel at the end of World War II was a complex issue. India, along with Iran and Yugoslavia had recommended a single state with Arab and Jewish majority provinces with an aim to prevent partition of historic Palestine and prevent any conflict that might follow based on its own experience during partition.[205] However, the final UN resolution decided to partition historic Palestine into Arab and Jewish states based on religious and ethnic majority which India opposed in the final vote as it did not agree with concept of partition on the basis of religion.[206]
However, due to the security threat from a US aided Pakistan and its nuclear program in the 80s, Israel and India started a clandestine relationship that involved cooperation between their respective intelligence agencies.[207] Israel shared India's concerns about the growing danger posed by Pakistan and nuclear proliferation to Iran and other Arab states.[208] After the end of the Cold War, formal relations with Israel started improving significantly.[62][209]
Since the establishment of full diplomatic relations with Israel in 1992, India has improved its relation with the Jewish State. India is regarded as Israel's strongest ally in Asia, and Israel is India's second largest arms supplier.
India has entertained Israeli Prime Minister in a visit in 2003,[210] and Israel has entertained Indian dignitaries such as Finance Minister Jaswant Singh in diplomatic visits. India and Israel collaborate in scientific and technological endeavors. Israel's Minister for Science and Technology has expressed interest in collaborating with the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) towards utilizing satellites for better management of land and other resources. Israel has also expressed interest in participating in ISRO's Chandrayaan Mission involving an unmanned mission to the moon.[211] On January 21, 2008 India successfully launched an Israeli spy satellite into orbit from Sriharikota space station in southern India.[212]
Israel and India share intelligence on terrorist groups. They have developed close defense and security ties since establishing diplomatic relations in 1992. Israel is India's second-biggest arms supplier, after Russia. India has bought more than $5 billion worth of Israeli equipment since 2002. In addition, Israel is training Indian military units and discussing an arrangement to give Indian commandos instruction in counter-terrorist tactics and urban warfare.[213] In December 2008, Israel and India signed a memorandum to set up an Indo-Israel Legal Colloquium to facilitate discussions and exchange programs between judges and jurists of the two countries.[214]
[edit] Lebanon
India has a peacekeeping force as part of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). One infantry battalion is deployed in Lebanon and about 900 personnel are stationed in the Eastern part of South Lebanon.[215] The force also provided non-patrol aid to citizens.[216] India and Lebanon have very good relations since the 1950s.
[edit] Oman
India–Oman relations are foreign relations between India and the Sultanate of Oman. India has an embassy in Muscat, Oman. The Indian consulate was opened in Muscat in February 1955 and five years later it was upgraded to a Consulate General and later developed into a full fledged Embassy in 1971. The first Ambassador of India arrived in Muscat in 1973. Oman established its Embassy in New Delhi in 1972 and a Consulate General in Mumbai in 1976.
[edit] Saudi Arabia
Bilateral relations between India and the Saudi Arabia have strengthened considerably owing to cooperation in regional affairs and trade. Saudi Arabia is the one of largest suppliers of oil to India, who is one of the top seven trading partners and the 5th biggest investor in Saudi Arabia.[217]
India and Saudi Arabia are actively cooperating in the field of science and technology. CSIR and the Saudi Arabian Standards Organisation (SASO) have an ongoing programme of technical cooperation (POC) since June 1993. Under this programme, Indian experts in different scientific areas, particularly in the field of measurement and calibration, are deputed to Saudi Arabia on regular basis. Similarly, several Saudi experts and have undergone advanced training in India. National Physical Laboratory has provided expertise and technology for two important SASO projects related to calibration and teleclock system. CSIR and the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST) signed a MoU for bilateral cooperation in 1997 and have an ongoing programme of cooperation, particularly in the field of space science, remote sensing and installation of Internet. Recently a three-member delegation from CSIR, NPL and CFTRI visited SASO during January 2004 and both sides agreed to renew the POC.[218]
[edit] Russia and Central Asia
The dissolution of the Soviet Union and the emergence of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) had major repercussions for Indian foreign policy. Substantial trade with the former Soviet Union plummeted after the Soviet collapse and has yet to recover. Longstanding military supply relationships were similarly disrupted due to questions over financing, although Russia continues to be India's largest supplier of military systems and spare parts.
The relationship with USSR was tested (and proven) during the 1971 war with Pakistan, which led to the subsequent liberation of Bangladesh. Soon after the victory of the Indian Armed Forces, one of the foreign delegates to visit India was Admiral S.G. Gorshkov, Chief of the Soviet Navy. During his visit to Mumbai (Bombay) he came on board INS Vikrant. During a conversation with Vice Admiral Swaraj Prakash, Gorshkov asked the Vice Admiral, "Were you worried about a battle against the American carrier?" He answered himself: "Well, you had no reason to be worried, as I had a Soviet nuclear submarine trailing the American task force all the way into the Indian Ocean." [219]
[edit] Russian Federation
India's ties with the Russian Federation are time-tested and based on continuity, trust and mutual understanding. There is national consensus in both the countries on the need to preserve and strengthen India-Russia relations and further consolidate the strategic partnership between the two countries. A Declaration on Strategic Partnership was signed between former Russian President and current Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and former Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in October 2000.
Russia and India have decided not to renew the 1971 Indo-Soviet Peace and Friendship Treaty and have sought to follow what both describe as a more pragmatic, less ideological relationship. Russian President Yeltsin's visit to India in January 1993 helped cement this new relationship. Ties have grown stronger with President Vladimir Putin's 2004 visit. The pace of high-level visits has since increased, as has discussion of major defence purchases. Russia, is working for the development of the Kudankulam nuclear plant, that will be capable of producing 1000 MW of electricity. Gazprom, is working for the development of oil and natural gas, in the Bay of Bengal. India and Russia, have collaborated extensively, on space technology. Other areas of collaboration include software, ayurveda, etc. India and Russia, have set a determination in increasing trade to $10 billion. Counter-terrorism techniques are also in place between Russia and India. In 2007 President Vladimir Putin was guest of honour at Republic Day celebration on 26 January 2007. 2008, has been declared by both countries as the Russia-India Friendship Year. Bollywood films are quite popular in Russia. The Indian public sector oil company ONGC bought Imperial Energy in 2008. In December 2008, during President Medvedev's visit, to New Delhi, India and Russia, signed a nuclear energy co-operation agreement. In March, 2010, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin signed an additional 19 pacts with India which included civilian nuclear energy, space and military co-operation and the final sale of Admiral Gorshkov (Aircraft Carrier) along with MiG-29K fighter jets.
[edit] Kazakhstan
India is working towards developing strong relations with this resource rich Central Asian country. The Indian oil company, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, has got oil exploration and petroleum development grants in Kazakhstan. The two countries are collaborating in petrochemicals, information technology, and space technology. Kazakhstan has offered India five blocks for oil and gas exploration. India and Kazakhstan, are to set up joint projects in construction, minerals and metallurgy. India also signed four other pacts, including an extradition treaty, in the presence of President Prathibha Patil and her Kazakh counterpart Nursultan Nazarbayev. Kazakhastan will provide uranium and related products under the MoU between Nuclear Power Corp. of India and KazatomProm. These MoU also opens possibilities of joint exploration of uranium in Kazakhstan, which has the worlds' second largest reserves, and India building atomic power plants in the Central Asian country.
[edit] Mongolia
The relations between India and Mongolia are still at a nascent stage and Indo-Mongolian cooperation is limited to diplomatic visits, provision of soft loans and financial aid and the collaborations in the IT sector. India established diplomatic relations in December 1955. India was the first country outside the Soviet block to establish diplomatic relations with Mongolia. Since then, there have been treaties of mutual friendship and cooperation between the two countries in 1973, 1994, 2001 and 2004.
[edit] Seychelles
There are many Indians living in Seychelles. The Indian Navy also helps the Seychelles government defend against pirates.
[edit] Tajikistan
Diplomatic relations were established India and Tajikistan following Tajikistan's independence from the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union, which had been friendly with India. Tajikistan occupies a strategically important position in Central Asia, bordering Afghanistan, the People's Republic of China and separated by a small strip of Afghan territory from Pakistan. India's role in fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and its strategic rivalry with both China and Pakistan have made its ties with Tajikistan important to its strategic and security policies. Despite their common efforts, bilateral trade has been comparatively low, valued at USD 12.09 million in 2005; India's exports to Tajikistan were valued at USD 6.2 million and its imports at USD 5.89 million. India's military presence and activities have been significant, beginning with India's extensive support to the anti-Taliban Afghan Northern Alliance (ANA). India began renovating the Farkhor Air Base and stationed aircraft of the Indian Air Force there. The Farkhor Air Base became fully operational in 2006, and 12 MiG-29 bombers and trainer aircraft are planned to be stationed there.
[edit] Uzbekistan
The countries have some culture in common especially because of deep Turkic and Persian influences in the two countries. India has an embassy in Tashkent. Uzbekistan has an embassy in New Delhi. Uzbekistan has had a great impact on Indian culture mostly due to the Mughal Empire which was founded by Babur of Ferghana (in present-day Uzbekistan) who created his empire southward first in Afghanistan and then in India.
[edit] Africa
India has had good relationships with most sub-Saharan African nations for most of its history. In the Prime Minister's visit to Mauritius in 1997, the two countries secured a deal to a new Credit Agreement of INR 10.50 crore (US$3 million) to finance import by Mauritius of capital goods, consultancy services and consumer durable from India. The government of India secured a rice and medicine agreement with the people of Seychelles. India continued to build upon its historically close relations with Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. Visits from political ministers from Ethiopia provided opportunities for strengthening bilateral cooperation between the two countries in the fields of education and technical training, water resources management and development of small industries. This has allowed India to gain benefits from nations that are generally forgotten by other Western Nations. The South African President, Thabo Mbeki has called for a strategic relationship between India and South Africa to avoid imposition by Western Nations. India continued to build upon its close and friendly relations with Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe. The Minister of Foreign Affairs arranged for the sending of Special Envoys to each of these countries during 1996–97 as a reaffirmation of India's assurance to strengthening cooperation with these countries in a spirit of South-South partnership. These relations have created a position of strength with African nations that other nations may not possess.[220]
[edit] Côte d'Ivoire
The bilateral relations between the Republic of India and the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire have considerably expanded in recent years as India seeks to develop an extensive commercial and strategic partnership in the West African region . The Indian diplomatic mission in Abidjan was opened in 1979. Côte d'Ivoire opened its resident mission in New Delhi in September 2004.[221] Both nations are currently fostering efforts to increase trade, investments and economic cooperation.[222]
[edit] Liberia
The bilateral relations between the Republic of India and the Republic of Liberia have expanded on growing bilateral trade and strategic cooperation. India is represented in Liberia through its embassy in Abidjan (Ivory Coast) and an active honorary consulate in Monrovia since 1984. Liberia was represented in India through its resident mission in New Delhi which subsequently closed due to budgetary constraints.[223]
[edit] Nigeria
India has close relations with this oil rich West African country. Twenty percent of India's crude oil needs are met, by Nigeria. 40,000 barrels per day (6,400 m3/d) of oil, is the amount of oil, that India receives from Nigeria. Trade, between these two countries stands at $875 million in 2005–2006. Indian companies have also invested in manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, iron ore, steel, information technology, and communications, amongst other things. Both India and Nigeria, are members of the Commonwealth of Nations, G-77, and the Non Aligned Movement. The Nigerian President, Olusegun Obasanjo was the guest of honour, at the Republic Day parade, in 1999, and the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, visited Nigeria in 2007, and addressed the Nigerian Parliament.
[edit] South Africa
India and South Africa, have always had strong relations even though India revoked diplomatic relations in protest to the apartheid regime in the mid 20th century. The history of British rule connects both lands. There is a large group of South Africans of Indian descent. Mahatma Gandhi, spent many years in South Africa, during which time, he fought for the rights of the ethnic Indians. Nelson Mandela was inspired by Gandhi. After India's independence, India strongly condemned apartheid, and refused diplomatic relations while apartheid was conducted as state policy in South Africa.
The two countries, now have close economic, political, and sports relations. Trade between the two countries grew from $3 million in 1992–1993 to $4 billion in 2005–2006, and aim to reach trade of $12 billion by 2010. One third of India's imports from South Africa is gold bullion. Diamonds, that are mined from South Africa, are polished in India. Nelson Mandela was awarded the Gandhi Peace Prize. The two countries are also members of the IBSA Dialogue Forum, with Brazil. India hopes to get large amounts of uranium, from resource rich South Africa, for India's growing civilian nuclear energy sector.
[edit] Sudan
Indo-Sudanese relations have always been characterized as longstanding, close, and friendly, even since the early development stages of their countries. The two nations established diplomatic relations shortly after India became known as one of the first Asian countries to recognize the newly independent African country. India and Sudan also share geographic and historical similarities, as well as economic interests. Both countries are former British colonies, and remotely border Saudi Arabia by means of a body of water. India and Sudan continue to have cordial relations, despite issues such as India's close relationship with Israel, India's solidarity with Egypt over border issues with Sudan, and Sudan's intimate bonds with Pakistan and Bangladesh. India had also contributed some troops as United Nations peacekeeping force in Darfur.
[edit] International organizations
India participates in the following international organisations:[224]
- ADB – Asian Development Bank
- AfDB – African Development Bank (nonregional members)
- ASEAN Regional Forum
- ASEAN (dialogue partner)
- BIMSTEC – Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multisectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation
- BIS – Bank for International Settlements
- Commonwealth of Nations
- CERN – European Organization for Nuclear Research (observer)
- CP – Colombo Plan
- EAS
- FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization
- G-15
- G-24
- G-77
- IAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency
- IBRD – International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank)
- ICAO – International Civil Aviation Organization
- ICC – International Chamber of Commerce
- ICRM – International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
- IDA – International Development Association
- IFAD – International Fund for Agricultural Development
- IFC – International Finance Corporation
- IFRCS – International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
- IHO – International Hydrographic Organization
- ILO – International Labor Organization
- IMF – International Monetary Fund
- IMO – International Maritime Organization
- IMSO – International Mobile Satellite Organization
- Interpol – International Criminal Police Organization
- IOC – International Olympic Committee
- IOM – International Organization for Migration (observer)
- IPU – Inter-parliamentary Union
- ISO – International Organization for Standardization
- ITSO – International Telecommunications Satellite Organization
- ITU – International Telecommunication Union
- ITUC – International Trade Union Confederation (the successor to ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions) and the WCL (World Confederation of Labor))
- LAS – League of Arab States (observer)
- MIGA – Multilateral Investment Geographic Agency
- MONUC – United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
- NAM – Nonaligned Movement
- OAS – Organization of American States (observer)
- OPCW – Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
- PCA – Permanent Court of Arbitration
- PIF – Pacific Islands Forum (partner)
- SAARC – South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
- SACEP – South Asia Co-opeative Environment Programme
- SCO – Shanghai Cooperation Organization (observer)
- UN – United Nations
- UNCTAD – United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
- UNDOF – United Nations Disengagement Observer Force
- UNESCO – United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
- UNHCR – United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
- UNIDO – United Nations Industrial Development Organization
- UNIFIL – United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon
- UNMEE – United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea
- UNMIS
- UNOCI – United Nations Operation in Cote d'Ivoire
- UNWTO – World Tourism Organization
- UPU – Universal Postal Union
- WCL – World Confederation of Labor
- WCO – World Customs Organization
- WFTU – World Federation of Trade Unions
- WHO – World Health Organization
- WIPO – World Intellectual Property Organization
- WMO – World Meteorological Organization
- WTO – World Trade Organization
[edit] Non-Aligned Movement
Nonalignment had its origins in India's colonial experience and the nonviolent Indian independence struggle led by the Congress, which left India determined to be the master of its fate in an international system dominated politically by Cold War alliances and economically by Western capitalism. The principles of nonalignment, as articulated by Nehru and his successors, were preservation of India's freedom of action internationally through refusal to align India with any bloc or alliance, particularly those led by the United States or the Soviet Union; nonviolence and international cooperation as a means of settling international disputes. Nonalignment was a consistent feature of Indian foreign policy by the late 1940s and enjoyed strong, almost unquestioning support among the Indian elite.
The term "Non-Alignment" itself was coined by Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru during his speech in 1954 in Colombo, Sri Lanka.
[edit] United Nations
As a founder member of the United Nations, India has been a firm supporter of the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations, and has made significant contributions to the furtherance and implementation of these noble aims, and to the evolution and functioning of its various specialized programmes. It stood at the forefront during the UN's tumultuous years of struggle against colonialism and apartheid, its struggle towards global disarmament and the ending of the arms race, and towards the creation of a more equitable international economic order. At the very first session of the UN, India had raised its voice against colonialism and apartheid, two issues which have been among the most significant of the UN's successes in the last half century. India exulted in the UN's triumph, and saw in the UN's victory, a vindication of the policy relentlessly pursued by it from its initial days at the world forum. India has been a participant in all its peace-keeping operations including those in Korea, Egypt and Congo in earlier years and in Somalia, Angola and Rwanda in recent years. India has also played an active role in the deliberations of the United Nations on the creation of a more equitable international economic order. It has been an active member of the Group of 77, and later the core group of the G-15 nations. Other issues, such as environmentally sustainable development and the promotion and protection of human rights, have also been an important focus of India's foreign policy in international forums. See more
[edit] World Trade Organization
Described by WTO chief Pascal Lamy as one of the organization's "big brothers",[225] India was instrumental in bringing down the Doha round of talks in 2008.[226] It has played an important role of representing as many as 100 developing nations during WTO summits.[227]
[edit] SAARC
Certain aspects of India's relations within the subcontinent are conducted through the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). Its members are Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Established in 1985, SAARC encourages cooperation in agriculture, rural development, science and technology, culture, health, population control, narcotics control and anti-terrorism.
SAARC has intentionally stressed these "core issues" and avoided more divisive political issues, although political dialogue is often conducted on the margins of SAARC meetings. In 1993, India and its SAARC partners signed an agreement to gradually lower tariffs within the region. Forward movement in SAARC has come to a standstill because of the tension between India and Pakistan, and the SAARC Summit originally scheduled for, but not held in, November 1999 has not been rescheduled. The Fourteenth SAARC Summit was held during 3–4 April 2007 in New Delhi.
[edit] International disputes
India's territorial disputes with neighboring Pakistan and People's Republic of China have played a crucial role in its foreign policy. India is also involved in minor territorial disputes with neighboring Bangladesh, Nepal and Maldives. India currently maintains two manned stations in Antarctica but has made some unofficial territorial claims, this is yet to be clarified.
India is involved in the following international disputes:
[edit] Bangladesh
- 6.5 km of the border between India and Bangladesh remains to be demarcated.
- Ongoing discussions with Bangladesh to exchange 162 minuscule enclaves between the two.
[edit] Nepal
- Kalapani village of India is claimed by Nepal and Nawalparasi district of Nepal is claimed by India.
The dispute between India and Nepal involves about 75 km2 (29 sq mi) of area in Kalapani, where China, India, and Nepal meet. Indian forces occupied the area in 1962 after China and India fought their border war. Three villages are located in the disputed zone: Kuti [Kuthi, 30°19'N, 80°46'E], Gunji, and Knabe. India and Nepal disagree about how to interpret the 1816 Sugauli treaty between the British East India Company and Nepal, which delimited the boundary along the Maha Kali River (Sarda River in India). The dispute intensified in 1997 as the Nepali parliament considered a treaty on hydro-electric development of the river. India and Nepal differ as to which stream constitutes the source of the river. Nepal regards the Limpiyadhura as the source; India claims the Lipu Lekh. Nepal has reportedly tabled an 1856 map from the British India Office to support its position. The countries have held several meetings about the dispute and discussed jointly surveying to resolve the issue.[228] Although the Indo-Nepali dispute appears to be minor, it was aggravated in 1962 by tensions between China and India. Because the disputed area lies near the Sino-Indian frontier, it gains strategic value.[229]
[edit] British Indian Ocean Territories
- Dispute over the British Indian Ocean Territories and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands with the former colonial powers. India regards these islands as part of its Lakshadweep Indosphere strategy as part of its oceanic vicinity of its sovereignty and a threat to its integrity of its emerging geo-political might, and does not recognise the crown's rule over these "Indian" islands.
[edit] Maldives
- Dispute over Minicoy Island with Maldives.
[edit] Pakistan
- The unresolved Kashmir dispute and the status of Kashmir with Pakistan, involving the Siachen Glacier, India claims the disputed territory from Pakistan administered Kashmir.
- Boundary issues of the Ferozepur and Pathankot with the Government of Pakistan.
- Dispute over Kori Creek and the maritime boundary regarding the Rann of Kachchh area of India.
- Water-sharing problems with Pakistan over the Indus River (Wular Barrage). (Indus Water Treaty)
- Pakistani sponsorship of terrorism in India
[edit] People's Republic of China
- India claims Aksai Chin and Trans-Karakoram Tract, as part of Jammu and Kashmir.
- China claims most of Arunachal Pradesh, a contested disputed territory of north-east India by not recognising the McMahon Line. The McMahon Line however, had originally stretched farther southward into Indian territory than India's current territorial claims north of the line. The boundary claim itself is therefore still in dispute as it could give more territorial advantage to either nation. In a sense, the line might not serve as an advantage to India's claim, as a more southward boundary could give China more territorial claim.
Two regions are claimed by both India and China. Aksai Chin is in the disputed territory of Kashmir, at the junction of India, Tibet and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir. India claims the 38,000-square-kilometre territory, currently administered by China. India also considers the cessation of Shaksam Valley to China by Pakistan as illegal and a part of its territory. Arunachal Pradesh is a state of India in the country's northeast, bordering on Bhutan, Myanmar and China. Though it is under Indian administration, China calls the 90,000-square-kilometre area as South Tibet. Also the boundary between the North Indian states of Himachal Pradesh and Uttaranchal with China's Tibet is not properly demarcated with some portions under de-facto administration of India.[230]
[edit] Look East Policy
In the post cold war era, a significant aspect of India's foreign policy is the Look East Policy. During the cold war, India's relations with its South East Asian neighbours was not very strong. After the end of the cold war, the government of India particularly realised the importance of redressing this imbalance in India's foreign policy. Consequently, the Narsimha Rao government in the early nineties of the last century unveiled the look east policy. Initially it focused on renewing political and economic contacts with the countries of East and South-East Asia.
At present, under the Look East Policy, the Government of India is giving special emphasis on the economic development of backward north eastern region of India taking advantage of huge market of ASEAN as well as of the energy resources available in some of the member countries of ASEAN like Myanmar.[231] Look-east policy was launched in 1992 just after the end of the cold war, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. After the start of liberalization, it was a very strategic policy decision taken by the government in the foreign policy. To quote Prime Minister Manmohan Singh "it was also a strategic shift in India's vision of the world and India's place in the evolving global economy".
The policy was given an initial thrust with the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao visiting China, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and Singapore and India becoming a important dialogue partner with ASEAN in 1992. Since the beginning of this century, India has given a big push to this policy by becoming a summit level partner of ASEAN (2002) and getting involved in some regional initiatives such as the BIMSTEC and the Ganga Mekong Cooperation and now becoming a member of the East Asia Summit (EAS) in December, 2005.[232]
[edit] India – ASEAN
India's interaction with ASEAN in the cold war era was very limited. India declined to get associated with ASEAN in the 1960s when full membership was offered even before the grouping was formed.[232]
It is only with the formulation of the Look-East policy in the last decade (1992), India had started giving this region due importance in the foreign policy. India became a sectoral dialogue partner with ASEAN in 1992, a full dialogue partner in 1995, a member of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in 1996, and a summit level partner (on par with China, Japan and Korea) in 2002.
The first India-ASEAN Business Summit was held at New Delhi in October 2002. The then Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee addressed this meet and since then this business summit has become an annual feature before the India-ASEAN Summits, as a forum for networking and exchange of business experiences between policy makers and business leaders from ASEAN and India.
Four India-ASEAN Summits, first in 2002 at Phnom Penh (Cambodia), second in 2003 at Bali (Indonesia), third in 2004 at Vientiane (Laos) and the fourth in 2005 at Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia), have taken place till date.
The following agreements have been entered into with ASEAN:
- Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation (for establishing a FTA in a time frame of 10 years) was concluded in Bali in 2003.
- An ASEAN-India Joint Declaration for Cooperation to Combat International Terrorism has been adopted.
- India has acceded to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) in 2003, on which ASEAN was formed initially (in 1967).
- Agreement on "India-ASEAN Partnership for Peace, Progress and Shared Prosperity" was signed at the 3rd ASEAN-India Summit in Nov 2004.
- Setting up of Entrepreneurship Development Centres in ASEAN member states – Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos and Vietnam. (The one in Laos is already functional)
The following proposals were announced by the Prime Minister at the 4th ASEAN-India Summit:
- Setting up centres for English Language Training (ELT) in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam.
- Setting up a tele-medicine and tele-education network for Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos and Vietnam.
- Organising special training courses for diplomats from ASEAN countries.
- Organising an India-ASEAN Technology Summit in 2006.
- Organising education fairs and road shows in ASEAN countries.
- Conducting an India-ASEAN IT Ministerial and Industry Forum in 2006.
The ASEAN region has an abundance of natural resources and significant technological skills. These provide a natural base for the integration between ASEAN and India in both trade and investment. The present level of bilateral trade with ASEAN of nearly US $ 18 billion is reportedly increasing by about 25 % per year. India hopes to reach the level of US $ 30 billion by 2007. India is also improving its relations with the help of other policy decisions like offers of lines of credit, better connectivity through air (open skies policy), rail and road links.[232]
[edit] See also
- List of dignitaries to visit India
- List of state guests on Indian Republic Day (1950-)
- List of diplomatic missions in India
- List of diplomatic missions of India
- Research and Analysis Wing
- Role of India in nonaligned movement
[edit] References
- ^ "Indian economic growth rate eases". BBC. 2007-11-30. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7120343.stm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "personnel (most recent) by country". Nationmaster.com. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mil_per-military-personnel. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
- ^ "Partnering with India: Regional Power, Global Hopes". NBR. 2009-04-02. http://www.nbr.org/publications/element.aspx?id=22. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Ruth David (2006-07-13). "India As A Global Power". Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/2006/07/13/g-8-india-invest-cx_rd_0713qanda.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ US Today on NIC report
- ^ The New Great Game: Why the Bush administration has embraced India
- ^ E.U. India relations
- ^ US-India relations
- ^ G8 SUMMIT: Developing Countries Stand Firm by Kyoto Protocol
- ^ [1][dead link]
- ^ "Analysts Say India'S Power Aided Entry Into East Asia Summit. | Goliath Business News". Goliath.ecnext.com. 2005-07-29. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4519133/ANALYSTS-SAY-INDIA-S-POWER.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Guebert, Alan (2008-08-05). "Guebert: WTO talks show declining U.S. clout – Peoria, IL". pjstar.com. http://www.pjstar.com/business/x1906041915/Guebert-WTO-talks-show-declining-U-S-clout. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Mmegi Online :: Emerging economies eye IMF power". Mmegi.bw. 2007-10-26. http://www.mmegi.bw/index.php?sid=4&aid=149&dir=2007/October/Friday26. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Peter Alford (2008-07-07). "G8 plus 5 equals power shift". The Australian. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23978188-2703,00.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "India, Brazil, South Africa – the power of three". bilaterals.org. http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=9969. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "A History of Indian Participation in UN Peacekeeping Operations". Indianembassy.org. http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/peace_keeping/history_india_UN_peace_keeping.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Four nations launch UN seat bid". BBC. 2004-09-22. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3678736.stm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ High Commission of India in Australia: India Australia Relations
- ^ First Assembly, Geneva, November 15- December 18, 1920
- ^ UN list of members by admission
- ^ [2][dead link]
- ^ a b Fact Sheet: United States and India: Strategic Partnership
- ^ India and China
- ^ The EU's relations with India – Overview
- ^ India and Japan
- ^ India-Israel Partnership
- ^ Mexico » International Relations
- ^ India, Brazil ink nine agreements
- ^ India & Asean
- ^ a b World Report: "India 2nd largest importer of conventional weapons," Business Standard, February 14, 2008
- ^ Indo-Arab relations; an account of India's relations with the Arab World from ancient up to modern times
- ^ A special report on India: India elsewhere: An awkward neighbour in a troublesome neighbourhood December 11, 2008 The Economist
- ^ Prospects for India-Russia Security Relations – Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- ^ a b [3][dead link]
- ^ Singh, Madhur (2008-10-02). "US-India Nuclear Deal Goes Through". Time. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1846460,00.html. Retrieved 2010-04-02.
- ^ Introduction to India's Foreign Policy, Embassy of India – Washington, DC
- ^ India and the world-http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/30ar01.pdf
- ^ Robert Sherrod (19 January 1963). Nehru:The Great Awakening journal=The Saturday Evening Post. 236. pp. 60–67.
- ^ Bhatia, Vinod (1989). Jawaharlal Nehru, as Scholars of Socialist Countries See Him. Panchsheel Publishers. p. 131.
- ^ Dua, B. D.; James Manor (1994). Nehru to the Nineties: The Changing Office of Prime Minister in India. C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. p. 261. ISBN 0774804807.
- ^ "BHARAT RAKSHAK MONITOR: Volume 4(5)". Bharat-rakshak.com. http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE4-5/sainis.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Indira Gandhi (Iron Lady of India)". PeopleForever.org. http://www.peopleforever.org/nfhomepage.aspx?nfid=972. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "National : Task force constituted". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 2005-11-05. http://www.hindu.com/2005/11/05/stories/2005110502491300.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Enjoy the difference". The Asian Age. http://www.asianage.com/presentation/columnisthome/inder-malhotra/china-a-long-view.aspx. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "India-US strategic partnership has unique scope". News.indiainfo.com. http://news.indiainfo.com/2006/09/19/1909india-us-unique.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Ministry of External Affairs website
- ^ India Foreign Relations
- ^ India Foreign Relations – Flags, Maps, Economy, History, Climate, Natural Resources, Current Issues, International Agreements, Population, Social Statistics, Political System
- ^ India – Foreign Relations
- ^ "Embassy of India – India-Israel Bilateral relations". Indembassy.co.il. http://www.indembassy.co.il/India-Israel%20Bilateral%20relations.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Beyond Pokharan II
- ^ PPI: U.S. Exports to India Have Doubled Since 2003
- ^ BBC News: South Asia – Putin backs India's UN seat bid
- ^ UNSC without India unrealistic – The Economic Times
- ^ The Hindu: India & World: "Working together for Security Council seat"
- ^ UN seat 'central' to Australian foreign policy
- ^ "Obama endorses India's bid for permanent seat in UNSC". The Times Of India. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Obama-endorses-Indias-bid-for-permanent-seat-in-UNSC/articleshow/6889364.cms.
- ^ "Obama seeks expanded India-US trade". Al Jazeera English. 6 November 2010. http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/11/2010116132349390763.html. Retrieved 7 November 2010.
- ^ "Obama in Mumbai Calls India Market of the Future". Voice of America. 6 November 2010. http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Obama-Calls-For-More-Trade-with-India-106817488.html. Retrieved 7 November 2010.
- ^ India as an Emerging Power – By Sumit Ganguly ISBN 0714653861
- ^ Russia Strategic cooperation
- ^ a b India and Israel: Dawn of a New Era
- ^ a b c d "India's Northern Exposure". Council on Foreign Relations. http://www.cfr.org/publication/14969/. Retrieved 2008-06-03.
- ^ The Times of India: Indian Maoists haven't evolved
- ^ Scoop: Bhutanese Refugees: Trapped, United States and Tantalized
- ^ http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?263804
- ^ Biggest Air Show ends in India
- ^ Looking out for number one – By Amnon Barzilai
- ^ India Attains Spy Satellite From Israel
- ^ http://web.archive.org/web/20070809144645/http://www.columbia.edu/cu/alliance/documents/Homepage/Paper-Jaffrelot.pdf
- ^ MOFA: Japan-India Partnership in a New Asian Era: Strategic Orientation of Japan-India Global Partnership
- ^ [4][dead link]
- ^ New Delhi looks to Asia for energy
- ^ Security pact with Qatar gives India Gulf toehold
- ^ International Herald Tribune: Brazil finds a belated ally in India
- ^ India looks for key to Nafta in Mexico
- ^ India nixes WTO deal to cut tariffs
- ^ "Dismay at collapse of trade talks". BBC. 2008-07-30. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7532302.stm. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
- ^ Crossette, Barbara (1989-03-07). "India to Provide Aid to Government in Afghanistan". New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE5D7153EF934A35750C0A96F948260. Retrieved 2008-06-03.
- ^ a b "Kabul's India ties worry Pakistan". Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty. http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/04/B5BFE0BE-ED5D-43DE-A768-99A6AB1E6C5C.html. Retrieved 2008-06-03.
- ^ India, Afghanistan united against terror, August 04, 2008
- ^ a b c Myanmar shows India the road to Southeast Asia
- ^ Years of Isolation Produced Intensely Poor Nation
- ^ India-Burma ties
- ^ a b c Realism in India-Myanmar relations
- ^ "Why India shifts its policy on Burma :: KanglaOnline ~ Your Gateway". Kanglaonline.com. http://www.kanglaonline.com/index.php?template=kshow&kid=1374. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "The Telegraph – Calcutta (Kolkata) | Opinion | The absent neighbour". Telegraphindia.com. 2008-11-05. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1081105/jsp/opinion/story_10057616.jsp. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
- ^ [5][dead link]
- ^ "Investigative Reporting from the United Nations". Inner City Press. http://www.innercitypress.com/un1att102108.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ View all comments that have been posted about this article. (2008-05-14). "Burma to Allow 160 Asian Aid Workers". Washingtonpost.com. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051400506_pf.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Indo-China trade to surpass $60 bn before 2010". Business-standard.com. 2008-06-06. http://www.business-standard.com/india/storypage.php?tp=on&autono=39431. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Saibal Dasgupta (2008-01-17). "China is India's largest trade ally – International Business – Biz – The Times of India". Timesofindia.indiatimes.com. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-2706372,prtpage-1.cms. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "news.outlookindia.com". Outlookindia.com. http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=291668. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "US blames India, China for blocking Doha talks". Business-standard.com. 2008-07-29. http://www.business-standard.com/india/storypage.php?autono=329920. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "India, China to work on FTA recommendations- Foreign Trade-Economy-News-The Economic Times". Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 2008-02-20. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-2798864,prtpage-1.cms. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Front Page : India, China to promote cooperation in civil nuclear energy". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 2008-01-15. http://www.hindu.com/2008/01/15/stories/2008011555490100.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Article: India, China top Asian FDI list in Africa. | AccessMyLibrary – Promoting library advocacy". AccessMyLibrary. 2007-03-28. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-30143539_ITM. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Africa: China's Africa Overture Needs Common Touch, 16 November 2007
- ^ "India bringing Maldives into its security net". Indianexpress.com. 2009-08-13. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/India-bringing-Maldives-into-its-security-net/501583. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "SOUTH ASIA | Indian parliament attack kills 12". BBC News. 2001-12-13. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1707865.stm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Pakistan, India inch closer to agreement: People-to-people contact -DAWN – Top Stories; 04 August, 2004". DAWN. 2004-08-04. http://www.dawn.com/2004/08/04/top13.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.[dead link]
- ^ "Search – Global Edition – The New York Times". International Herald Tribune. 2009-03-29. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/01/business/AS-FIN-India-Pakistan-Trade.php. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ India's Sri Lankan scars
- ^ Brief on India-Sri Lanka Relations, Ministry of External Affairs (BSM Division: Sri Lanka)
- ^ Bollywood makes minister Soni's job easier
- ^ The Insider: US, Japan, India & Australia announce military alliance against China
- ^ The Hindu: Australia for practical military cooperation with India
- ^ Indo-Australian Military Cooperation – Australia, India Go For Practical Military Cooperation
- ^ "AFP: Boosting ties, Japan offers India record loan for railway". Afp.google.com. 2008-10-22. http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5giqHnL_f6-aawPmSTcHokJyngxbg. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Pakistan: Now or Never? » Blog Archive » India, Japan in security pact; a new architecture for Asia? | Blogs |". Blogs.reuters.com. 2008-10-25. http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2008/10/25/india-japan-in-security-pact-a-new-architecture-for-asia/. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "India to set up Air Force Academy in Laos". Indianexpress.com. 2008-08-30. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-to-set-up-air-force-academy-in-laos/355204/. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Foreign Policy of India: Text of Documents 1947–59 (p.54)
- ^ I New York Times Sept.10 1965
- ^ Embassy of India in Jakarta
- ^ Indonesian Embassies
- ^ John Victor Morais (translated by Abdul Razak bin Haji Abdul Rahman) (1982). Mahathir: Riwayat Gagah Berani. Arenabuku. pp. 1–Kuasa Yang Merjudikan Seorang Budak Itu Bewasa, Bab 1.
- ^ http://www.newdelhipe.com/philippines-india-relation.html
- ^ a b c d e f g h i "IPCS Special Report – India-Singapore Relations" (PDF). Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. Archived from the original on 2007-06-06. http://web.archive.org/web/20070606205724/http://www.ipcs.org/IPCS-Special-Report-41.pdf. Retrieved 2008-06-18.
- ^ a b "India-Singapore Economic and Commercial Relations". Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry. Archived from the original on 2007-02-19. http://web.archive.org/web/20070219015332/http://www.ficci.com/international/countries/singapore/singapore-commercialrelations.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-18.
- ^ a b "India, Singapore ink pact". Asia Times. 2005-07-02. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GG02Df03.html. Retrieved 2008-06-18.
- ^ a b "India, Singapore trade to touch $50 bn by 2010". The Hindu Business Line. 2005-06-30. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/06/30/stories/2005063002400700.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-18.
- ^ a b c NDTV article
- ^ Iryeon, pp. 161–164. (tr. by Ha Tae-Hung & Grafton K. Mintz) (1972). Samguk Yusa. Seoul: Yonsei University Press. ISBN 8971410175.
- ^ a b IDSA publication
- ^ a b Blue House commentary[dead link]
- ^ Joong-ang Daily News article
- ^ Chosun news article
- ^ a b c d e f FICCI info
- ^ a b c d "India and Vietnam in changing East Asia". Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. Archived from the original on 2007-06-07. http://web.archive.org/web/20070607034939/http://www.ipcs.org/southeastasia_publications2.jsp?action=showView&kValue=2278&country=1016&status=article&mod=a. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ a b "India – Vietnam Economic and Commercial Relations". Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry. Archived from the original on 2007-12-10. http://web.archive.org/web/20071210040001/http://ficci.com/international/countries/vietnam/vietnamcommercialrelation.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ a b c d e "Vietnam, India issue joint declaration on strategic partnership". VietNamNet Bridge. http://english.vietnamnet.vn/politics/2007/07/715169/. Retrieved 2008-06-16.[dead link]
- ^ a b "India-Vietnam: Developing a Strategic Partnership" (PDF). Asian Affairs. http://www.asianaffairs.com/may2008/cdrfiles/india_vietnam.pdf.. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ "Vietnam favours FTA with India". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 2007-07-07. http://www.hindu.com/2007/07/07/stories/2007070761171600.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ a b "Vietnam PM urges greater trade ties with India". The Hindu Business Line. 2007-07-07. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2007/07/07/stories/2007070752021000.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ "Trade with India to reach US $2 billion in 2008". Vietnam Business Finance. 2008-05-03. http://www.vnbusinessnews.com/2008/05/trade-with-india-to-reach-us2-billion.html. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ "India, Vietnam to start direct flights". The Hindu Business Line. 2004-10-18. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2004/10/18/stories/2004101801780500.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ "Vietnam backs India for APEC membership". The Hindu. 2000-11-07. http://www.hinduonnet.com/2000/11/08/stories/0308000c.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
- ^ "India-Mercosur PTA to be ratified- International Business-News-The Economic Times". Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 2007-07-19. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/India-Mercosur_PTA_to_be_ratified/articleshow/2216138.cms. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Indian embassy
- ^ "Front Page : IBSA to collaborate on tackling global crisis". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 2008-10-16. http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/16/stories/2008101659291200.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ (Spanish) Colombian ministry of foreign affairs: Colombia-India relations Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Retrieved December 14, 2007. Archived December 16, 2007 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ "In Light of India (9780151002221): Octavio Paz: Books". Amazon.com. http://www.amazon.com/Light-India-Octavio-Paz/dp/0151002223. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Gandhi, Sajit (ed.), The Tilt: The U.S. and the South Asian Crisis of 1971: National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 79
- ^ Shalom, Stephen R., The Men Behind Yahya in the Indo-Pak War of 1971
- ^ Cold war games
- ^ Sharma, Dhirendra (May 1991). "India's lopsided science". "Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists": 32–36. http://books.google.com/?id=tAwAAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA32&dq=Dhirendra&pg=PA32.
- ^ U.S. State Department
- ^ The Flawed Architect: Henry Kissenger and American Foreign Policy by Jussi M. Hanhimeaki Page 156, Published by Oxford University Press US
- ^ Foreign Relations, 1969–1976, Volume E-7, Documents on South Asia, 1969–1972 150. Conversation Among President Nixon, the President's Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger), and the President's Chief of Staff (Haldeman), Washington November 5, 1971, 8:15–9:00 a.m.
- ^ "South Asia | Kissinger regrets India comments". BBC News. 2005-07-01. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4640773.stm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Indian Troops training with U.S. Army in Hawaii,signonsandiego.com
- ^ Air Force personnel fly with Indian Air Force, pacaf.af.mil
- ^ Indian Soldiers with U.S. Marines, Sailors, navy.mil
- ^ Indo-USA Strategic Partnership by Rejaul Karim Laskar
- ^ http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/details.asp?id=mar2607\edit4
- ^ TI Trade. "The Assam Tribune Online". Assamtribune.com. http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/details.asp?id=apr2307\edit3. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ [6][dead link]
- ^ "Obama backs permanent seat for India on Security Council". CNN. 2010-11-08. http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/08/obama.india.address/index.html.
- ^ EU sees talks with ASEAN, India, SKorea on free-trade pacts in months eubusiness.com
- ^ Bilateral trade relations with India ec.europa.eu
- ^ Mandelson and India warn the French over Mittal news.independent.co.uk
- ^ a b "EU, India to expand cooperation_English_Xinhua". News.xinhuanet.com. 2008-09-30. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/30/content_10135165.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ a b "THE NATION'S FAVOURITE DISH". BBC. 2002-11-04. http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/northwest/series1/curry.shtml. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Sufia Tippu (2006-10-30). "India becomes second largest investor in Britain". ITWire. http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/6717/945/. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Indian investment in London jumps". BBC. 2007-04-27. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6599693.stm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Central, FDI 2005–2006 statistics". Ministry Of Commerce, Government of India. http://dipp.nic.in/fdi_statistics/india_fdi_dec_2006.pdf.
- ^ [7],"www.hindustantimes.com"
- ^ Ramesh, Randeep (2008-11-19). "British minister defends £825m aid to help India's poor | World news". London: The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/19/britain-aid-to-india-825m. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Reaction of France to India's nuclear test
- ^ "France honours India in Bastille Day military parade". France 24. 2009-07-14. http://www.france24.com/en/20090714-france-honours-india-bastille-day-military-parade. Retrieved 2009-11-21.[dead link]
- ^ "What is India?". Meghalayatimes.info. 2009-09-21. http://www.meghalayatimes.info/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1626:what-is-india&catid=45:notebook. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Bulgarian embassy in New Delhi
- ^ Indian embassy in Sofia
- ^ a b "Inauguration of the Embassy of Iceland in New Delhi". Icelandic Foreign Service. 2006-02-26. Archived from the original on October 3, 2006. http://web.archive.org/web/20061003172058/http%3A//www.iceland.org/in/the-embassy/news-and-events/nr/1748. Retrieved 2008-09-28.
- ^ "My background helps me: Kalam". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 2005-05-30. http://www.hindu.com/2005/05/30/stories/2005053014431200.htm. Retrieved 2008-09-28.
- ^ "About the Embassy". Icelandic Foreign Service. http://www.iceland.org/in/the-embassy/about-the-embassy/. Retrieved 2008-09-28.
- ^ "Shri S. Swaminathan to be India's first resident Ambassador to Iceland". NIC India Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi. September 3, 2008. http://meaindia.nic.in/pressrelease/2008/09/03pr01.htm. Retrieved 2008-09-28.[dead link]
- ^ "Indo-Polish relations". Embassy of India in Poland.. Archived from the original on May 2, 2008. http://web.archive.org/web/20080502160858/http%3A//www.indianembassy.pl/iprelation.html. Retrieved 2008-10-10.
- ^ Indian embassy in Bucharest
- ^ Romanian embassy in New Delhi
- ^ VOA News Report
- ^ Indian embassy in Belgrade
- ^ Serbian embassy in New Delhi
- ^ Embassy of India in Ljubljana
- ^ "India, Gulf share special relationship- Indicators-Economy-News-The Economic Times". Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 2008-01-15. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/India_Gulf_share_special_relationship/articleshow/2700623.cms. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Saudi Arabia Woos China and India :: Middle East Quarterly". Meforum.org. http://www.meforum.org/article/1019. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ New Century Foundation. "American Renaissance News: Austere Version Of Islam Finding A Home In India". Amren.com. http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/01/austere_version.php. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "India-Dubai trade records 74% rise- Foreign Trade-Economy-News-The Economic Times". Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 2008-06-02. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/Foreign_Trade/India-Dubai_trade_records_74_rise/articleshow/3093800.cms. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Kuwait Energy Data, Statistics and Analysis – Oil, Gas, Electricity, Coal". Eia.doe.gov. 2009-01-01. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Kuwait/Oil.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Front Page : Qatar to invest $5 billion in India". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 2008-11-12. http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/12/stories/2008111261371200.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Front Page : Navy foils bid to hijack Indian ship in Gulf of Aden". Chennai, India: The Hindu. 2008-11-12. http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/12/stories/2008111258230100.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ [8][dead link]
- ^ Bhardwaj, Priyanka. "A Qatar-to-India Pipeline?". Energy Tribune. http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2245. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ 'India against Security Council membership without veto', Web India, 29 December 2004
- ^ Bahrain accuses Iran of nuclear weapons lie The Times, November 2, 2007
- ^ Juan Cole, Sacred space and holy war: the politics, culture and history of Shi'ite Islam, IB Tauris, 2002 p. 45
- ^ MPs on goodwill visit to India... Gulf Daily News, November 29, 2007
- ^ New society vows to boost India ties Gulf Daily News, December 13, 2007
- ^ "Embassy of India, Cairo". Indembcairo.com. http://www.indembcairo.com/Web%20Pages/gandhi.aspx. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ Egypt State Information Service: Mubarak starts historic visit to India to boost strategic partnership between the two countries[dead link]
- ^ a b c d e f g h US-Iraq War: India's Middle East policy
- ^ India, Iraq Agree on Cooperation
- ^ a b Iraq prizes ties with India: Saddam
- ^ "Myths & Facts – Partition". Jewishvirtuallibrary.org. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf3.html#a. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181". Jewishvirtuallibrary.org. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/partition.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ RAW and MOSSAD, the Secret Link,rediff.com
- ^ Nelson, Dean (2009-09-10). "A.Q. Khan boasts of helping Iran's nuclear programme". London: Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/6170145/A.Q.-Khan-boasts-of-helping-Irans-nuclear-programme.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ U.S. and India Consider 'Asian NATO'
- ^ Ariel Sharon's India visit,rediff.com
- ^ Israel plans thrust on science and technology collaboration, The Times of India, December 24, 2003
- ^ India launches Israeli satellite, BBC News Online, January 21, 2008
- ^ Israel says Mumbai attackers targeted its citizens, Los Angeles Times, November 29, 2008
- ^ India, Israel set up bilateral legal colloquium
- ^ "Pallam Raju to visit Indian peacekeepers in Lebanon". Thaindian.com. http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/pallam-raju-to-visit-indian-peacekeepers-in-lebanon_10093673.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Indian UN vet treats animal victims of Lebanon war". Reuters. 2006-10-26. http://www.reuters.com/article/inDepthNews/idUSEIC54708020061026?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "India, Saudi Arabia to better understanding". Business Standard. http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage_c_online.php?bKeyFlag=IN&autono=38855. Retrieved 2008-06-04.[dead link]
- ^ Indo-Saudi bilateral relations
- ^ [9][dead link]
- ^ Embassy of India (1996-05-16). "Africa (South of Sahara): India's foreign policy". Indianembassy.org. http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Foreign_Policy/africa.htm. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Foreign Relations of India-Ivory Coast". Ministry of External Affairs. http://www.meaindia.nic.in/foreignrelation//11fr05.pdf. Retrieved 2008-10-02.[dead link]
- ^ "India to put $1bn in African oil". BBC. 2006-08-14. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4791381.stm. Retrieved 2008-10-02.
- ^ "Embassy of India". Ministry of External Affairs. 2009. http://www.indemabj.com/index.html. Retrieved 2009-02-28.
- ^ CIA World Fact Book https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/in.html
- ^ "India is among "big brothers" of WTO: Pascal Lamy- Foreign Trade-Economy-News-The Economic Times". Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 2008-08-17. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/Foreign_Trade/India_is_among_big_brothers_of_WTO_Pascal_Lamy/articleshow/3373292.cms. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "News from Canada and the world". The Globe and Mail. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v5/content/subscribe?user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2Fstory%2FLAC.20080730.IBWTO30%2FTPStory%2FBusiness&ord=129452172&brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ "Search – Global Edition – The New York Times". International Herald Tribune. 2009-03-29. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/28/business/EU-WTO-Trade-Talks.php. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
- ^ The Kathmandu Post, 16 July 1997, 2 July 1997, 31 May 1996; The Hindustan Times (Delhi), 9 June 1997, p. 13; Xinhua 11 April 1997
- ^ International Boundary Consultants
- ^ CBC News: China
- ^ [10][dead link]
- ^ a b c "India's Look-East Policy". Indianmba.com. http://www.indianmba.com/Occasional_Papers/OP104/op104.html. Retrieved 2009-11-21.
[edit] External links
- Foreign Relations: Ministry of external affairs, Government of India
- Harvard University homepage India's Foreign Policy, Xenia Dormandy
| |||
| ||
| ||
-
Oil prices steady as investors eye Egypt protest
Washington Post - Pablo Gorondi - 30 minutes ago
AP NEW YORK -- Oil prices were little changed Tuesday as investors waited to see the outcome of the largest protest yet against Egypt's government in the ...
Crude Oil Fluctuates in New York, Reversing Earlier Loss of 1.2 Percent
Bloomberg - Dan Stets - 31 minutes ago
Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Gianna Bern, president of Brookshire Advisory & Research Inc., discusses the outlook for ...
Oil price leaps over Egypt unrest fears
Stuff.co.nz - Hamish Rutherford - 34 minutes ago
Crude oil has risen above US$100 a barrel for the first time in more than two years on fears that protests in Egypt could disrupt supplies or spread unrest ...
NYMEX-Crude eases, but choppy eyeing Egypt, Jordan
Reuters Africa - 1 hour ago
NEW YORK, Feb 1 (Reuters) - US crude oil prices seesawed on Tuesday as the lack of disruption so far to oil shipping and pipeline facilities in Egypt ...
OIL FUTURES: Crude Prices Lose Momentum As Suez Worries Ease
Wall Street Journal - Dan Strumpf - 1 hour ago
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Crude oil prices lost momentum Tuesday as fears over oil supply disruptions at the Suez Canal ...
Oil reserves may be used to cushion Egypt effect
JoongAng Daily - Lee Eun-joo - 1 hour ago
The Korean government is considering releasing oil reserves to prevent a possible supply crunch because of the unfolding political crisis in the Middle East ...
Yedlin: Mideast unrest stirs oil price questions
Calgary Herald - Deborah Yedlin - 1 hour ago
A helicopter flies overhead as Egyptian demonstrators holds-up the national flag during a protest ...
Oil Prices Steady as Wall Street Shares Rise
New York Times - 1 hour ago
By AP Indexes in the United States and Europe recovered their poise on Tuesday and oil prices were steady as investors monitored the protests in Egypt. ...
Stagflationary risks rise from the Arab street
Financial Times - Nouriel Roubini - 1 hour ago
The upheaval in Tunisia and now Egypt has important economic and financial implications. About two-thirds of the world's proven oil ...
Oil price fears on our shores
Herald Sun - 2 hours ago
This week's oil price spike has been driven by fears on world markets that the Suez Canal and an adjoining Egypt-controlled pipeline could be shut down. ...
All 2,590 related articles »
Related
Egypt
Price of petroleum
Suez Canal
Brent Crude
OPEC
Hosni Mubarak
Timeline of articles
Number of sources covering this story
OIL FUTURES: Crude Prices Lose Momentum As Suez Worries Ease
1 hour ago - Wall Street Journal
Oil up on Egypt concerns
13 hours ago - ABC Online
Geopolitical unrest and world oil markets
Jan 31, 2011 - Fortune
US Stocks Rise Slightly; Suez Canal Being Open Provides Relief
Jan 31, 2011 - Wall Street Journal
Oil Futures Choppy as Market Eyes Egypt
Jan 31, 2011 - Wall Street Journal
Egypt fears keep oil above $100, Asian shares gain
Jan 31, 2011 - AFP
Oil gains amid concern Egyptian unrest will spread
Jan 30, 2011 - Sydney Morning Herald
RPT-GLOBAL MARKETS-Egypt unrest rattles world's markets
Jan 28, 2011 - Reuters
Images
Reuters
USA Today
Daily Mail
Globe and Mail
Daily Star - Le...
CBC.ca
Daily Mail
Fox News
The Guardian
All related images »
Videos
Egypt angst pushes oil price to $100 a barrel
euronews - 6 hours ago Watch video
<div class="video-thumb thumbnail"><a class="js-link thumbnail-toggle" href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="return false;"><img src="//i.ytimg.com/vi/0v0HqdvtTOw/default.jpg" alt="" class="thumbnail" width="120" height="90"> <div class="icon play-icon"></div></a></div> <div class="video-details"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v0HqdvtTOw">Egypt angst pushes oil price to $100 a barrel</a> <span class="source">euronews</span> - 6 hours ago <div class="icon video-icon"></div> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v0HqdvtTOw">Watch video</a></div>
All related videos »
Egypt Turmoil Threatens U.S. Economy
By Chris Stirewalt
Published February 01, 2011
| FoxNews.com
- Share
- Comments (6)
- Text Size
The Middle East in Revolt
After decades of living under oppressive dictatorships, the people of the Arab world are rising up to stake their claim to democracy. Inside the historic popular upheaval that began in Tunisia and is spreading to Egypt and across the vital region
As Egypt's Crisis Grows, So Do the Anxieties in Israel
Karl Vick / Jerusalem
- 13 of 12
- View All
A boy holds a defaced poster of Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak in Cairo, Jan. 30, 2011
Goran Tomasevic / Reuters
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firmly ordered his government not to comment on events in Egypt, but the headlines in the Sunday morning papers got the main point across well enough: "A 30-Year Step Backward," "What Frightens Us," "All Alone."
The banners matched the stakes. Egypt under President Hosni Mubarak observed the 1979 peace treaty with the Jewish state, helped put pressure on Hamas from Egypt's border with the Gaza Strip, nursed peace talks with the Palestinians, worked to thwart Iran and along the way provided Israel with 40% of its natural gas. (See TIME's photos of the turmoil in Egypt.)
Most important to a tiny, heavily militarized country preoccupied with risk reduction, analysts say, Mubarak's posture toward Israel served to restrain other Arab states — not to mention the 80 million Egyptians whose attitudes about Israel are among the most negative in the world, according to polls.
Whatever new government might emerge from the historic demonstrations across Egypt — populist, Islamist or national unity — "there can be no doubt that the new regime will seek to deal the peace with Israel a very public blow," Eli Shaked, a former Israeli ambassador to Egypt, writes in the daily Yedioth Ahronoth. "The only people in Egypt who are committed to peace are the people in Mubarak's inner circle."
So that was why Israelis welcomed Mubarak's appointment of intelligence chief Omar Suleiman as his first-ever Vice President. The mustachioed spymaster and former general was a regular visitor to Israel, where he consulted with Israeli defense and intelligence officials on the many issues the two countries held in common in what may have been a "cold peace," but one that has lasted three decades. (See how Hillary Clinton is dialing up the pressure on Mubarak.)
"Egypt and Israel had common strategic interests. To say they were allies is too much: they were not at war," says Shlomo Avineri, a political scientist at Hebrew University. "It is the premier Arab country, and no other country would go to war without Egypt. So there was a substructure of common strategic interest."
Avineri, who held a senior position in the Foreign Ministry of Yitzhak Rabin, describes two possibilities: military rule, with or without Mubarak as figurehead, or "chaos and disintegration" that ends with rule by Islamists and nationalists descended from Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt's second President. Israelis most dread the ascent of the Muslim Brotherhood, the most organized political opposition in Egypt, which like other Arab societies has grown more religious and conservative in recent decades.
"What will not come to pass is that Israel will have a democratic neighbor, because democracies don't appear overnight," Avineri tells TIME. "Look at Russia. You need a civil society. You need political tradition, pluralism, tolerance, existence of effective parties."
Israeli press reports described a weekend of frantic meetings in the upper echelons of government. The Israeli Defense Forces, which have concentrated most of their attention on the borders with Lebanon and Gaza, were described as preparing new deployments to the south, where Israel fought wars with Egypt four times. U.S. diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks last year included diplomats' complaints that the Egyptian military continued to regard Israel as its principal enemy and prepared for war in the Sinai Desert, which lies between them. (See how Israel is backing Mubarak.)
"I have no doubt that the whole defense establishment will now ask for bigger budgets and say, 'Well, we have to adjust ourselves to a situation where Egypt is not the cooperative partner we had until a week ago,'" says Oded Eran, director of the Institute for National Security Studies, a Tel Aviv think tank brimming with retired generals. "Egypt is sort of the beacon or marker for security tension, for dangers with the Arab world."
No one pretends to know the implications. After Egypt signed a peace treaty, Jordan followed, then the Palestine Liberation Organization. In time, the Arab League went from calling for war with Israel to formulating a 2002 plan to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with two states. (Comment on this story.)
But from the Israeli perspective, some of the dangers are immediate. Al-Jazeera aired an interview with an Islamic militant who in the chaos of the past few days had escaped a Cairo jail and made his way back to Gaza, where he pledged to resume attacks on Israel. He said thousands escaped with him.
"Yes, we are very, very worried about the situation," says an Israeli general. The officer spoke privately in observance of the government's order of radio silence, a harm-reduction measure Netanyahu reaffirmed in brief remarks to reporters before Sunday's regular Cabinet meeting. He had spoken with both President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton overnight. "At this time, we must show responsibility and restraint and maximum consideration," the Prime Minister said. "The peace between Israel and Egypt has lasted for more than three decades and our objective is to ensure that these relations will continue to exist."
— With reporting by Aaron J. Klein / Jerusalem
See President Obama's response to the turmoil in Egypt.
See TIME's most unforgettable images of 2010.
View the full list for "The Middle East in Revolt"
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2045328_2045333_2045166,00.html #ixzz1Cj18EUnm
Middle East Turmoil Threatens U.S. Recovery
"270,000"
-- The forecast for U.S. job losses in the next year from IHS Global Insight if oil prices increase by only $11 a barrel as a result of the Mideast crisis
Rising prices for food and fuel helped drive the uprisings racking the Middle East, now those uprisings are pushing prices higher still and threatening America's economic recovery.
Prices had been on the rise for months around the world as increased demand following a long recession – especially driven by economic booms in China and India – squeezed available resources.
YOU MIGHT ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
A Nice, Wholesome Hooters Girl for the Kids
Monster Winter Storm Takes Aim at One-Third of U.S.
7 Insurance Policies That Aren't Worth the Money
A Federal Gravy Train May End
Florida Mom Charged With Killing Children Appears in Court
Massive increases in the cost of staples like flour and cooking fuel helped stoke popular anger in the poor countries in the Middle East and could do the same elsewhere. Note well that the ChiComs are heavily censoring the news on the Arab uprising lest their inflation-strained subjects get any funny ideas.
In the U.S., increased competition and rising domestic demand augmented by a regulatory crackdown on the energy sector – particularly oil and coal -- has driven a still relatively modest increase in food and fuel prices. Enough to be a small drag on recovery, but not stifle it.
In Europe, though, inflation is already sinking in its fangs.
Central bankers and heads of state are preparing to jack up interest rates and tighten monetary supplies in an effort to prevent runaway inflation. When President Obama asked his fellow leaders to keep pushing stimulus, as he is here, they refused, largely on the grounds they feared inflation.
Here, the Federal Reserve has been gushing cheap dollars into the economy for three years and the Obama Democrats have ramped up spending and borrowing to historic highs all in effort to stave off what they said would have been another Great Depression.
But now, economists fear that there will be too many dollars chasing too few goods and that a serious inflationary cycle could begin. As those who endured the 1970s will attest, once begun, an inflationary cycle is hard to shake. Every bit of growth is gobbled up by inflation, and people lose ground in their personal finances.
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Obama have promised that they can switch from stimulus to inflation control at precisely the right moment. But turmoil in the Middle East could trump their abilities to make the transition.
If oil prices shoot up because of concerns over access to the Suez Canal or instability inside significant petroleum producers in the region, it could kick start inflation here. High gas prices push other prices up and with bushels of cheap dollars available, there is little check on costs rising faster than stagnant wages can match.
Inflation stalls recoveries, but so do the steps necessary to prevent inflation – like tightening monetary policy and raising interest rates.
Our stimulus bubble is pretty big, and while Obama and Bernanke promise to let the air out in an orderly fashion, problems abroad could pop it instead.
Mubarak Out of Options
"There are more pro-Islamic, anti-Israel -- I would say maybe even maybe anti-U.S. – forces than pure democrats, as the way we understand it."
-- Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren" discussing the leaders of the Egyptian uprising
Today may see the end of the 30-year reign of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the picture of a troublesome U.S. ally. He has been a stalwart friend in an unstable region, helped protect Israel, all while operating a police state that violates basic American principles of freedom.
Just as the Egyptian military in 1981 installed Mubarak, the former commander of the nation's air force, now the military will uninstall him. But to be replaced with whom?
The military has given license to a one million-person protest march in Cairo today, praising the "great people of Egypt" and promising to leave them unharmed. By encouraging and protecting this massive demonstration, the message from the military to Mubarak: time to go.
Mubarak has responded by offering to open up talks with opposition leaders, offering up his new vice president, formerly the head of his much-hated intelligence service, for parley.
This is a tacit admission by Mubarak that he will not endure the current crisis and is looking to negotiate the terms of his departure.
The military has picked the leaders of Egypt since the 1952 revolution that toppled the Ali Pasha dynasty that had ruled for 150 years. Of course Ali Pasha was himself a general who took power and during the preceding 1,800 years that Egypt was a province of a larger empire, the local military commander usually led the nation. So you can say that Egypt has been under military rule since Julius Caesar.
But in the modern era, Egypt has had three presidents, Gamal Nasser, Anwar Sadat and Mubarak, who all rose from the military ranks. Mubarak is by far the longest serving. Nasser died of a heart attack in 1970, Sadat was killed by Islamists in 1981 and Mubarak has reigned ever since.
What's challenging here is that Mubarak has lived so long.
The military did not much like Mubarak's elevation of his police and intelligence services in recent years and will likely be unimpressed by the offering of the state spymaster as successor.
The general corps no doubt has some options in mind for the successor -- perhaps just-ousted field marshal of the nation's million-man army, 74-year-old Mohamed Hussein Tantawi.
After Sadat's assassination, power was temporarily shifted to the head of the Egyptian parliament while Mubarak's installation could be arranged. If the sight of a million marchers flanked by tanks and columns of troops is enough to get Mubarak to bow out and retire to Europe to count his purloined millions, a similar transitional arrangement might be made.
Mubarak's police may be cruel, but they are vastly outnumbered. And there is now a special U.S. envoy on the ground, former Ambassador Frank Wisner, with a message for Mubarak. An old friend to Mubarak, Wisner will likely be there to help him think through his exit strategy.
If the elections, currently slated for September, can be moved up to a date soon enough to satisfy protestors but far enough away to let passions subside and let the military consolidate power – say, May – power could temporarily shift to some functionary with the blessing of the generals. Then, a suitable replacement can be offered up by the country's ruling party and confirmed by a vote.
This is likely the best case scenario for the U.S. as it promises the greatest degree of stability and least chance for plunging the cornerstone of the Arab world into chaos which might wreck the global economy and produce a new Islamist state bent on renewing war with Israel.
Obama Vision for Egypt Includes Muslim Brotherhood
"…the Muslim Brotherhood is part of the fabric of Egyptian society."
-- A U.S. official talking to the Wall Street Journal about Obama administration efforts to encourage the formation of a new ruling coalition in Egypt
Mohammed ElBaradei, the former U.N. official who thwarted U.S. attempts to end Iran's nuclear program, is trying to form a coalition with the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group that wants to turn Egypt into a theocracy.
ElBaradei is also praising the forbearance of the military for not squashing the protests. But he also envisions civilian control of the military and free elections, something the generals are not likely to find too groovy.
While the military, the Muslims, the secularist reformers and ElBaradei all agree that it's time for Mubarak to go, they will likely be very much at odds over how to replace him.
The military is not keen on the idea of losing control to the Islamists, which is what a snap election might bring. If ElBaradei were to take power with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood, one can see that the Islamists would soon take power from ElBaradei. They might appreciate his longtime support for Iran's nuclear program, but that won't protect him once things get going.
Just as Hezbollah has shown in Lebanon, a coalition government that includes Islamists can quickly become an Islamist government. It is not a movement that leaves much room for compromise. To make an inexact analogy, the Muslim Brotherhood would be like Sinn Fein in Ireland, while Al Qaeda is like the IRA. They pursue the same goals, one politically, the other through terrorism.
Reports today suggest that the Obama White House is looking for friends in the ElBaradei/Islamist coalition. Strategic leaks from the administration point to ongoing talks and encouragement of ElBaradei. Having taken a deliberately lighter touch on Mubarak's abuses of his people, the Obama administration seems to be looking to make the most of the current crisis to move Egypt into real democracy, rather than military-sanctioned semi-democracy.
That plan could include the encouragement of a coalition that includes Islamists.
But while the U.S. can provide intelligence and public encouragement to the ElBaradei/Islamist coalition, the military seems unlikely to step aside to let a coalition of student groups and Muslim hardliners led by a U.N. bureaucrat take control of the country.
If the army doesn't get to call the shots, there's a chance that real shooting will start. While we may find the idea of more than 300 dead in the protests and clashes so far shocking, by the rougher standards of the region and the size of the uprising, this looks like a Tea Party rally. That relative tranquility will not endure if the army sees a real threat from the imams.
Senate Ponders Obamacare Changes as Legal Challenges Mount
"Every person throughout the course of his or her life makes hundreds or even thousands of life decisions that involve the same general sort of thought process that the defendants maintain is 'economic activity.' There will be no stopping point if that should be deemed the equivalent of activity for Commerce Clause purposes."
-- U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson striking down President Obama's national health care law, which forbids any American from not buying health insurance or being enrolled in a government program
A judge's ruling Monday was a vindication for those who argued the federal government did not have the right to punish citizens for refusing to engage in commerce.
The Constitution gives the feds broad power to regulate commerce, but conservatives argue that there is no allowance for the federal government to require people to engage in commerce, as President Obama's national health care law does.
The Obama law says that as a condition of living in the United States, everyone must either buy private insurance or show that they are enrolled in a qualified government health program.
U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson took a hammer to that notion in his ruling, and said that the mandatory purchase of insurance was so central to the legislation that the entire law had to be struck down.
The appeals process will likely include a stay on Vinson's order overturning the law and the case will wend its way to the Supreme Court some time before the middle of next year.
And while the administration is dismissing Vinson's ruling as judicial activism that will be wiped away on appeal, members of Congress saw Tuesday what a conservative ruling from Chief Justice John Roberts' Supreme Court might look like. It might not be just a partial defeat; it could be a total wipeout for the president's law.
This realization will increase interest in the proposals knocking around in the Senate to strip the constitutionally controversial elements from the law.
The irony here for the left is that while the liberal preference for a government-run insurance program to provide universal coverage would be undoubtedly constitutional, Obama's compromise of forcing private companies to cover everyone but then forcing everyone to buy private insurance is in serious doubt. Obama gave up on the so-called "public option" because he said it was politically infeasible, but his solution may be legally infeasible.
While a government plan might have passed when Democrats held both chambers, it's off the table now.
Instead, Republicans and moderate Democrats in the Senate are engaged in a clammy courtship over dealing with the president's mandatory insurance provisions. The danger for Obama's law is that experts pro and con agree that without the power to compel people to buy insurance, the plan will collapse.
Even so, given the prospect of a legal loss and the total destruction of the law, moderate Dems may prefer to salvage something from the law – perhaps more liberal standards for existing government programs or some new regulation of the insurance industry.
The Senators to watch for signs of the start of a compromise would be Nebraska's Ben Nelson, West Virginia's Joe Manchin, Missouri's Claire McCaskill, Connecticut's Joe Lieberman, Virginia's Jim Webb and Oregon's Ron Wyden.
All 47 Republicans in the Senate have now signed on as co-sponsors of the House bill repealing the Obama law entirely. That's not happening, but there could be 13 votes on the Democratic side for something that undoes the central provision of the law.
While President Obama is out talking about the need for government spending on green energy, his domestic agenda may increasingly be given over to defending his signature legislation.
From the 2012 Quote File
"He's got all this soaring rhetoric, but the fact of the matter is he's chicken to address the real issues."
-- Former Gov. Tim Pawlenty, R-Minn., on "FOX & Friends" discussing president Obama's scant mentions of spending and entitlement cuts in his State of the Union address
And Now, A Word From Charles
"Look, everybody would like to have a democratic outcome, but you have to be a child to think that it is the inevitable outcome of this revolution. You have to be a wild-eyed optimist to say it's even the most likely outcome. People say the revolution is broad-based. Of course it is. So was the French and Russian and Iranian."
-- Charles Krauthammer on "Special Report with Bret Baier" discussing the Egyptian uprising.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/01/egypt-turmoil-threatens-economy/#ixzz1Cj07F6mI
Feb 01, 2011
As protests swell in Egypt, U.S. ambassador reportedly speaks to ElBaradei
05:08 AM
Share
18
By Douglas Stanglin, USA TODAY
400 Comments
1 Recommend
At bottom, hundreds of Egyptians gather in Cairo's Tahrir Square in the morning. Top: Later in the day, tens of thousands join them.
CAPTION
By Khaled Desouki, AFP/Getty Images
Update at 10:50 a.m. ET: As hundreds of thousands of protesters pack into central Cairo, opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei says President Hosni Mubarak "must leave to avoid bloodshed."
AFP, quoting U.S. officials, says U.S. Ambassador to Egypt Margaret Scobey spoke today with opposition leader ElBaradei.
AFP quotes unidentified sources in Washington as saying the ambassador told the Nobel laureate that the United States "is interested in a political change in Egypt, but that the U.S. government won't dictate the path which Cairo must follow."
Update at 9:56 a.m. ET: Meanwhile the U.S. State Department has ordered non-essential U.S. government personnel and their families to leave the country amid the growing anti-government protests and uncertainty over the security situation.
It said it had taken the step "in light of recent events," the Associated Press reports
Earlier posting: ElBaradei, a Nobel laureate, tells the broadcaster al-Arabiya,
A mother carries her daughter on her shoulders with the word
CAPTION
By Mohammed Abed, AFP/Getty Images
"We are already discussing the post-Mubarak era," Reuters reports.
"There can be dialogue but it has to come after the demands of the people are met and the first of those is that President Mubarak leaves," he says.
"I hope to see Egypt peaceful and that's going to require as a first step the departure of President Mubarak. If President Mubarak leaves, then everything will progress correctly," he adds.
Meawhile, Muslim Brotherhoood leader Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotquh says the opposition refuses to negotiate with Mubarak or his government.
"Our first job is to see Mubarak step down," he tells AlJazeera TV. He says Mubarak is the one responsible for the "catastrophe" in Egypt.
Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan is calling on Egyptian President to meet the "freedom demands" of protesters. Erdon has also postponed his planned trip to Cairo next week util "the situation returns to normal," the AP reports.
"Listen to people's outcries and extremely humanistic demands," Erdogan says today in a televised address to members of the ruling AK Party, Reuters reports. "Meet the freedom demands of people without a doubt."
ElBaradei seen as a temporary leader.
Key Muslim groups support protest.
Update at 6:52 a.m. ET:Hundreds of thousands of protesters are packing Cairo's Tahrir Square in the largest challenge to the embattled regime of President Hosni Mubarak in a week of demonstrations, USA TODAY's Jim Michaels and Theodore May report.
AlJazeera TV estimates the crowd in the square at near one million. The network also reports that tens of thousands of protesters are being held on nearby Kasr Al Nile bridge nearby and that roads into the heart of the city have been blocked.
Soldiers ring the square, but are letting protesters pass after checking them for IDs and weapons.
The demonstration is under tight army security, but both sides have avoided confrontations. The army has pledged not to use force against demonstrators as long as they are nonviolent.
There is almost a carnival atmosphere in the square, with some people painting their face in the red, white and black national colors. Many fathers have hoisted their children on their shoulders.
The protesters are insisting, however, that Mubarak step down and have rejected his efforts to call on his vice president to open talks with other parties.
"If he doesn't leave, the protest will go on until he does," says Wael Abu Halawa, a 35-year-old imam who joined the protested this morning.
At the center of the protest are two effigies of Mubarak hanging from a traffic signal. One has the Star of David painted on the chest.
The crowds remain in a positive mood as the pack into the square under sunny skies.
Other Egyptians watching from the balconies around the square are tossing dates and bottles of water to the crowds that flow by chanting ""We're not going. He needs to go!"
Earlier posting: Tens of thousands of protesters have gathered Cairo's Tahrir Square and thousands more are streaming into the area past soldiers who have formed a human chain to check demonstrators for IDs and weapons as they enter, AlJazeera reports.
The crowds have gathered despite a cutoff of phone lines, internet and train service in an attempt by authorities to thwart the protesters.
Tanks have been position near the square, AlJazeera reports, but the military so far has maintained its non aggressive posture. The armed forces pledged in a statement on national TV on Monday not to use force against protesters exercising their "legitimate" rights as long as they are nonviolent.
A military spokesman said the military "has not and will not use force against the public" and underlined that "the freedom of peaceful expression is guaranteed for everyone," the Associated Press reports.
Mubarak has rejected the protesters' demands and instead as named a vice president, Omar Suleiman, and ordered him to open talks with others parties and factions.
Protesters are demanding the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak. AlJazeera TV says the crowds will go from the square toward the presidential palace later today.
.
- You might also be interested in:
- News roundup: Van der Sloot tells police he knows where Holloway's body is buried (USATODAY.com in On Deadline)
- Some Boomers 'retire' to jobs that allow them to help others (USATODAY.com in News)
- Did Chinese TV slip a 'Top Gun' clip into its air force report? (USATODAY.com in On Deadline)
- Titans part ways with head coach Jeff Fisher (USATODAY.com in The Huddle)
- Selected for you by a sponsor:
- Sarah Palin: Making Political Hay out of Tragedy (Play Goes Strong)
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/02/hundreds-of-thousands-of-protesters-gather-in-cairos-tahrir-square/1
1 February 2011 Last updated at 15:02 GMTPalestine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThis article is about the geographical area. For the political entity proclaimed in 1988, see State of Palestine.For other uses, see Palestine (disambiguation).It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Levant , Southern Levant and History of the Southern Levant . (Discuss) An 1890 map of Palestine as described by medieval Arab geographers, with Jund Filastin administrative areaThis article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) (January 2011) Palestine (Greek: Παλαιστίνη, Palaistinē; Latin: Palaestina; Hebrew: ארץ־ישראל Eretz-Yisra'el, (formerly also פלשׂתינה, Palestina); Arabic: فلسطين Filasṭīn, Falasṭīn, Filisṭīn) is a conventional name used, among others, to describe a geographic region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, and various adjoining lands.[1][not in citation given][2][not in citation given]
Other terms for the same area include Canaan, Zion, the Land of Israel, and the Holy Land. Southern Levant is another purely geographic term, often implemented for the region, which does not have political or theologic implications.[3]
Origin of name
Further information: Definitions of Palestine and PalestinianThe name "Palestine" is the cognate of an ancient word meaning "Philistines" or "Land of the Philistines".[4][5]
The earliest known mention is thought to be in Ancient Egyptian texts of the temple at Medinet Habu which record a people called the P-r-s-t (conventionally Peleset) among the Sea Peoples who invaded Egypt in Ramesses III's reign.[6] The Hebrew name Peleshet (פלשת Pəléshseth)- usually translated as Philistia in English, is used in the Bible to denote the southern coastal region that was inhabited by the Philistines to the west of the ancient Kingdom of Judah.[7]
The Assyrian emperor Sargon II called the same region Palashtu or Pilistu in his Annals.[4][5][5][8] In the 5th century BC, Herodotus wrote in Ancient Greek of a 'district of Syria, called Palaistinê".[9][10][11] William Beloe notes that "It should be remembered that Syria is always regarded by Herodotus as synonymous with Assyria. What the Greeks called Palestine the Arabs call Falastin, which is the Philistines of Scripture."[12] This is confirmed by George Rawlinson in the third book (Thalia) of The Histories where Palaestinian Syrians are part of the fifth tax district spanning the territory from Phoenicia to the borders of Egypt, but excludes the kingdom of Arabs who were exempt from tax for providing the Assyrian army with water on its march to Egypt. These people had a large city called Cadytis, identified as Jerusalem,[13] and what Herodotus means is Syria (Assyria) of Palestine.
According to Moshe Sharon, Palaestina was commonly used to refer to the coastal region and shortly thereafter, the whole of the area inland to the west of the Jordan River.[4] The latter extension occurred when the Roman authorities, following the suppression of the Bar Kokhba Revolt in the 2nd century AD, renamed "Provincia Judea" (Iudaea Province; originally derived from the name "Judah") to "Syria Palaestina" (Syria Palaestina), in order to complete the dissociation with Judaea.[14][15] Robinson, writing in 1865 when travel by Europeans to the Ottoman Empire became common asserts that, "Palestine, or Palestina, now the most common name for the Holy Land, occurs three times in the English version of the Old Testament; and is there put for the Hebrew name פלשת, elsewhere rendered Philistia. As thus used, it refers strictly and only to the country of the Philistines, in the southwest corner of the land. So, too, in the Greek form, Παλαςτίνη), it is used by Josephus. But both Josephus and Philo apply the name to the whole land of the Hebrews ; and Greek and Roman writers employed it in the like extent."[16]
During the Byzantine period, the entire region (Syria Palestine, Samaria, and the Galilee) was named Palaestina, subdivided into provinces Palaestina I and II.[17] The Byzantines also renamed an area of land including the Negev, Sinai, and the west coast of the Arabian Peninsula as Palaestina Salutaris, sometimes called Palaestina III.[17]
The Arabic word for Palestine is Philistine (commonly transcribed in English as Filistin, Filastin, or Falastin).[18] Moshe Sharon writes that when the Arabs took over Greater Syria in the 7th century, place names that were in use by the Byzantine administration before them, generally continued to be used. Hence, he traces the emergence of the Arabic form Filastin to this adoption, with Arabic inflection, of Roman and Hebrew (Semitic) names.[4] Jacob Lassner and Selwyn Ilan Troen offer a different view, writing that Jund Filastin, the full name for the administrative province under the rule of the Arab caliphates, was traced by Muslim geographers back to the Philistines of the Bible.[19]
The use of the name "Palestine" in English became more common after the European renaissance.[20] The name was not used in Ottoman times (1517–1917). Most of Christian Europe referred to the area as the Holy Land. It was officially revived by the British after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and applied to the territory that was placed under The Palestine Mandate.
Some other terms that have been used to refer to all or part of this land include Canaan, Greater Israel, Greater Syria, the Holy Land, Iudaea Province, Judea,[21] Israel, "Israel HaShlema", Kingdom of Israel, Kingdom of Jerusalem, Land of Israel (Eretz Yisrael or Ha'aretz), Zion, Retenu (Ancient Egyptian), Southern Syria, and Syria Palestina.
Boundaries
The boundaries of Palestine have varied throughout history.[22][23] Prior to its being named Palestine, Ancient Egyptian texts (c. 14 century BC) called the entire coastal area along the Mediterranean Sea between modern Egypt and Turkey R-t-n-u (conventionally Retjenu). Retjenu was subdivided into three regions and the southern region, Djahy, shared approximately the same boundaries as Canaan, or modern-day Israel and the Palestinian territories, though including also Syria.[24]
Scholars disagree as to whether the archaeological evidence supports the biblical story of there having been a Kingdom of Israel of the United Monarchy that reigned from Jerusalem, as the archaeological evidence is both rare and disputed.[25][26] For those who do interpret the archaeological evidence positively in this regard, it is thought to have ruled some time during Iron Age I (1200 - 1000 BC) over an area approximating modern-day Israel and the Palestinian territories, extending farther westward and northward to cover much (but not all) of the greater Land of Israel.[25][26]
Philistia, the Philistine confederation, emerged circa 1185 BC and comprised five city states: Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod on the coast and Ekron, and Gath inland.[8] Its northern border was the Yarkon River, the southern border extending to Wadi Gaza, its western border the Mediterranean Sea, with no fixed border to the east.[6]
By 722 BC, Philistia had been subsumed by the Assyrian Empire, with the Philistines becoming 'part and parcel of the local population,' prospering under Assyrian rule during the 7th century despite occasional rebellions against their overlords.[8][27][28] In 604 BC, when Assyrian troops commanded by the Babylonian empire carried off significant numbers of the population into slavery, the distinctly Philistine character of the coastal cities dwindled away, and the history of the Philistines as a distinct people effectively ended.[8][27][29]
The boundaries of the area and the ethnic nature of the people referred to by Herodotus in the 5th century BC as Palaestina vary according to context. Sometimes, he uses it to refer to the coast north of Mount Carmel. Elsewhere, distinguishing the Syrians in Palestine from the Phoenicians, he refers to their land as extending down all the coast from Phoenicia to Egypt.[30] Josephus used the name Παλαιστινη only for the smaller coastal area, Philistia.[31] Pliny, writing in Latin in the 1st century AD, describes a region of Syria that was "formerly called Palaestina" among the areas of the Eastern Mediterranean.[32]
Since the Byzantine Period, the Byzantine borders of Palaestina (I and II, also known as Palaestina Prima, "First Palestine", and Palaestina Secunda, "Second Palestine"), have served as a name for the geographic area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Under Arab rule, Filastin (or Jund Filastin) was used administratively to refer to what was under the Byzantines Palaestina Secunda (comprising Judaea and Samaria), while Palaestina Prima (comprising the Galilee region) was renamed Urdunn ("Jordan" or Jund al-Urdunn).[4]
The Zionist Organization provided their definition concerning the boundaries of Palestine in a statement to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919; it also includes a statement about the importance of water resources that the designated area includes.[33][34] On the basis of a League of Nations mandate, the British administered Palestine after World War I, promising to establish a Jewish homeland therein.[35] The original Mandate Palestine included what is now Israel, the West Bank (of the Jordan), and trans-Jordan (the present kingdom of Jordan),although the latter was disattached by an administrative decision of the British in 1922.[36] To the Palestinian people who view Palestine as their homeland, its boundaries are those of Mandate Palestine excluding the Transjordan, as described in the Palestinian National Charter.[37]
Additional extrabiblical references
From the Merneptah Stele "Israel is wasted, its seed is no longer"An archaeological textual reference concerning the territory of Palestine is thought to have been made in the Merneptah Stele, dated c. 1200 BC, containing a recount of Egyptian king Merneptah's victories in the land of Canaan, mentioning place-names such as Gezer, Ashkelon and Yanoam, along with Israel, which is mentioned using a hieroglyphic determinative that indicates a nomad people, rather than a state.[38]
Mesha SteleAnother famous inscription is that of the Mesha Stele, bearing an inscription by the 9th century BC Moabite King Mesha, discovered in 1868 at Dhiban (biblical "Dibon," capital of Moab) now in Jordan. The Stele is notable because it is thought to be the earliest known reference to the sacred Hebrew name of God – YHWH. It also notable as the most extensive inscription ever recovered that refers to ancient Israel.
Biblical texts
The Holy Land, or Palestine, showing not only the Ancient Kingdoms of Judah and Israel in which the 12 Tribes have been distinguished, but also their placement in different periods as indicated in the Holy Scriptures. Tobias Conrad Lotter, Geographer. Augsburg, Germany, 1759In the Biblical account, the United Kingdom of Israel and Judah ruled from Jerusalem a vast territory extending far west and north of Palestine for some 120 years. Archaeological evidence for this period is very rare, however, and its implications much disputed.[25][26]
The Hebrew Bible calls the region Canaan (כּנען) (Numbers 34:1–12), while the part of it occupied by Israelites is designated Israel (Yisrael). The name "Land of the Hebrews" (ארץ העברים, Eretz Ha-Ivrim) is also found, as well as several poetical names: "land flowing with milk and honey", "land that [God] swore to your fathers to assign to you", "Land of the Lord", and the "Promised Land".
The Land of Canaan is given a precise description in (Numbers 34:1) as including all of Lebanon, as well (Joshua 13:5). The wide area appears to have been the home of several small nations such as the Canaanites, Hebrews, Hittites, Amorrhites, Pherezites, Hevites and Jebusites. According to Hebrew tradition, the land of Canaan is part of the land given to the descendants of Abraham, which extends from the "river of Egypt" to the Euphrates River (Genesis 15:18) – some identify the river of Egypt with the Nile, others believe it to be a wadi in northern Sinai, cf. Numbers 34:5; Joshua 15:3-4; Joshua 15:47; 1 Kings 8:65; 2 Kings 24:7.
In Exodus 13:17, "And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt."
The events of the Four Gospels of the Christian Bible take place almost entirely in this country, which in Christian tradition thereafter became known as The Holy Land.
In the Qur'an, the term الأرض المقدسة (Al-Ard Al-Muqaddasah, English: "Holy Land") is mentioned at least seven times, once when Moses proclaims to the Children of Israel: "O my people! Enter the holy land which Allah hath assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin." (Surah 5:21)
History
Main articles: History of Palestine and History of IsraelSee also: Time periods in the region of PalestinePaleolithic and Neolithic periods (1 mya–5000 BC)
See also: Paleolithic and NeolithicDouble burial of homo sapiens at Qafzeh caveThe earliest human remains in Palestine were found in Ubeidiya, some 3 km south of the Sea of Galilee (Lake Tiberias), in the Jordan Rift Valley. The remains are dated to the Pleistocene, ca. 1.5 million years ago. It is traces of the earliest migration of Homo erectus out of Africa. The site yielded hand axes of the Acheulean type.[39]
Wadi El Amud between Safed and the Sea of Galilee was the site of the first prehistoric digging in Palestine, in 1925. The discovery of the Palestine Man in the Zuttiyeh Cave in Wadi Al-Amud near Safed in 1925 provided some clues to human development in the area.[40][41]
Qafzeh is a paleoanthropological site south of Nazareth where eleven significant fossilised Homo sapiens skeletons have been found at the main rock shelter. These anatomically modern humans, both adult and infant, are now dated to about 90–100,000 years old, and many of the bones are stained with red ochre which is conjectured to have been used in the burial process, a significant indicator of ritual behavior and thereby symbolic thought and intelligence. 71 pieces of unused red ochre also littered the site.
Mount Carmel has yielded several important findings, among them Kebara Cave that was inhabited between 60,000 – 48,000 BP and where the most complete Neanderthal skeleton found to date. The Tabun cave was occupied intermittently during the Lower and Middle Paleolithic ages (500,000 to around 40,000 years ago). Excavation suggests that it features one of the longest sequences of human occupation in the Levant. In the nearby Es Skhul cave excavations revealed the first evidence of the late Epipalaeolithic Natufian culture, characterized by the presence of abundant microliths, human burials and ground stone tools. This also represents one area where Neanderthals – present in the region from 200,000 to 45,000 years ago – lived alongside modern humans dating to 100,000 years ago.[42]
In the caves of Shuqba in Ramallah and Wadi Khareitun in Bethlehem, stone, wood and animal bone tools were found and attributed to the Natufian culture (c. 12800–10300 BC). Other remains from this era have been found at Tel Abu Hureura, Ein Mallaha, Beidha and Jericho.[43]
A dwelling unearthed at Tell es-SultanBetween 10,000 and 5000 BC, agricultural communities were established. Evidence of such settlements were found at Tel es-Sultan in Jericho and consisted of a number of walls, a religious shrine, and a 23-foot (7.0 m) tower with an internal staircase[44][45] Jericho is believed to be one of the oldest continuously-inhabited cities in the world, with evidence of settlement dating back to 9000 BC, providing important information about early human habitation in the Near East.[46]
Chalcolithic period (4500–3000 BC) and Bronze Age (3000–1200 BC)
See also: Chalcolithic and Bronze AgeAlong the Jericho–Dead Sea–Bir es-Saba–Gaza–Sinai route, a culture originating in Syria, marked by the use of copper and stone tools, brought new migrant groups to the region contributing to an increasingly urban fabric.[47][48][49]
An 1882 rendering of Canaan, as divided among the Twelve Tribes, by the American Sunday-School Union of Philadelphia.By the early Bronze Age (3000–2200 BC) independent Canaanite city-states situated in plains and coastal regions and surrounded by mud-brick defensive walls were established and most of these cities relied on nearby agricultural hamlets for their food needs.[47][50]
Archaeological finds from the early Canaanite era have been found at Tel Megiddo, Jericho, Tel al-Far'a (Gaza), Bisan, and Ai (Deir Dibwan/Ramallah District), Tel an Nasbe (al-Bireh) and Jib (Jerusalem).
The Canaanite city-states held trade and diplomatic relations with Egypt and Syria. Parts of the Canaanite urban civilization were destroyed around 2300 BC, though there is no consensus as to why. Incursions by nomads from the east of the Jordan River who settled in the hills followed soon thereafter.[47][51]
In the Middle Bronze Age (2200–1500 BC), Canaan was influenced by the surrounding civilizations of ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Phoenicia, Minoan Crete, and Syria. Diverse commercial ties and an agriculturally based economy led to the development of new pottery forms, the cultivation of grapes, and the extensive use of bronze.[47][52] Burial customs from this time seemed to be influenced by a belief in the afterlife.[47][53]
Political, commercial and military events during the Late Bronze Age period (1450–1350 BC) were recorded by ambassadors and Canaanite proxy rulers for Egypt in 379 cuneiform tablets known as the Amarna Letters.[54] The Minoan influence is apparent at Tel Kabri.[55]
By c. 1190 BC, the Philistines arrived and mingled with the local population, losing their separate identity over several generations.[27][56]
Iron Age (1200–330 BC)
Pottery remains found in Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gath (city), Ekron and Gaza decorated with stylized birds provided the first archaeological evidence for Philistine settlement in the region. The Philistines are credited with introducing iron weapons and chariots to the local population.[57] Excavations have established that the late 13th, the 12th and the early 11th centuries BC witnessed the foundation of perhaps hundreds of insignificant, unprotected village settlements, many in the mountains of Palestine.[58] From around the 11th century BC, there was a reduction in the number of villages, though this was counterbalanced by the rise of certain settlements to the status of fortified townships.[58]
Developments in Palestine between 1250 and 900 BC have been the focus of debate between those who accept the Old Testament version on the conquest of Canaan by the Israelite tribes, and those who reject it.[59] Niels Peter Lemche, of the Copenhagen School of Biblical Studies, submits that the biblical picture of ancient Israel "is contrary to any image of ancient Palestinian society that can be established on the basis of ancient sources from Palestine or referring to Palestine and that there is no way this image in the Bible can be reconciled with the historical past of the region."[58]
Sites and artifacts, including the Large Stone Structure, Mount Ebal, the Menertaph, and Mesha stelae, among others, are subject to widely varying historical interpretations: the "conservative camp" reconstructs the history of Israel according to the biblical text and views archaeological evidence in that context, whilst scholars in the minimalist or deconstructionist school hold that there is no archaeological evidence supporting the idea of a United Monarchy (or Israelite nation) and the biblical account is a religious mythology created by Judean scribes in the Persian and Hellenistic periods; a third camp of centrist scholars acknowledges the value of some isolated elements of the Pentateuch and of Deuteronomonistic accounts as potentially valid history of monarchic times that can be in accord with the archaeological evidence, but argue that nevertheless the biblical narrative should be understood as highly ideological and adapted to the needs of the community at the time of its compilation.[60][61][62][63][64][65]
Hebrew Bible/Old Testament period
Map of the southern Levant, c.830s BC.Kingdom of JudahKingdom of IsraelPhilistine city-statesPhoenician statesKingdom of AmmonKingdom of EdomKingdom of Aram-DamascusAramean tribesArubu tribesNabatu tribesAssyrian EmpireKingdom of MoabSee also: Archaeology of Israel and History of ancient Israel and JudahAccording to Biblical tradition, the United Kingdom of Israel was established by the Israelite tribes with Saul as its first king in 1020 BC.[66] In 1000 BC, Jerusalem was made the capital of King David's kingdom and it is believed that the First Temple was constructed in this period by King Solomon.[66] By 930 BC, the united kingdom split to form the northern Kingdom of Israel, and the southern Kingdom of Judah.[66] These kingdoms co-existed with several more kingdoms in the greater Palestine area, including Philistine town states on the Southwestern Mediterranean coast, Edom, to the South of Judah, and Moab and Ammon to the East of the river Jordan.[67] According to Jon Schiller and Hermann Austel, among others, while in the past, the Bible story was seen historical truth, "a growing number of archaeological scholars, particularly those of the minimalist school, are now insisting that Kings David and Solomon are 'no more real than King Arthur,' citing the lack of archaeological evidence attesting to the existence of the United Kingdom of Israel, and the unreliability of biblical texts, due to their being composed in a much later period."[68][69]
There was an at least partial Egyptian withdrawal from Palestine in this period, though it is likely that Bet Shean was an Egyptian garrison as late as the beginning of the 10th century BC.[58] The socio-political system was characterized by local patrons fighting other local patrons, lasting until around the mid-9th century BC when some local chieftains were able to create large political structures that exceeded the boundaries of those present in the Late Bronze Age Levant.[58]
Archaeological findings from this era include, among others, the Mesha Stele, from c. 850 BC, which recounts the conquering of Moab, located East of the Dead Sea, by king Omri, and the successful revolt of Moabian king Mesha against Omri's son, presumably King Ahab (and French scholar André Lemaire reported that line 31 of the Stele bears the phrase "the house of David" (in Biblical Archaeology Review [May/June 1994], pp. 30–37).[70]); and the Kurkh Monolith, dated c. 835 BC, describing King Shalmaneser III of Assyria's Battle of Qarqar, where he fought alongside the contingents of several kings, among them King Ahab and King Gindibu.
Between 722 and 720 BC, the northern Kingdom of Israel was destroyed by the Assyrian Empire and the Israelite tribes – thereafter known as the Lost Tribes – were exiled.[66] The most important finding from the southern Kingdom of Judah is the Siloam Inscription, dated c. 700 BC, which celebrates the successful encounter of diggers, digging from both sides of the Jerusalem wall to create the Hezekiah water tunnel and water pool, mentioned in the Bible, in 2Kings 20:20.[71][72][73][74] In 586 BC, Judah was conquered by the Babylonians and Jerusalem and the First Temple destroyed.[66] Most of the surviving Jews, and much of the other local population, were deported to Babylonia.[27][75]
Persian rule (538 BC)
After the Persian Empire was established, the region became part of the Eber-Nari satrapy or District number V (corresponding the regions of (Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine and Cyprus) according to Herodotus and Arrian, which included three administrative areas: Phoenicia, Judah and Samaria, and the Arabian tribes. The Phoenician cities of Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, and Aradus were vassal states ruled by hereditary local kings who struck their own silver coins and whose power was limited by the Persian satrap and local popular assemblies. The economies of these cities were mainly based on maritime trade. During military operations, the Phoenicians were obliged to put their fleet at the disposal of the Persian kings. Judah and Samaria enjoyed considerable internal autonomy. Bullae and seal impressions of the end of the 6th and beginning of the 5th centuries mention the province of Judah. Its governors included Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel under Cyrus and Darius I; Nehemiah ; Bagohi, who succeeded Nehemiah and whose ethnicity is difficult to determine; and "Yehizkiyah the governor" and "Yohanan the priest," known from coins struck in Judah in the 4th century BCE. From the second half of the 5th century the province of Samaria was governed by Sanballat and his descendants.[76][77][78][79]
According to the bible and implications from the Cyrus Cylinder, Jews were allowed to return to what their holy books had termed the Land of Israel, and having been granted some autonomy by the Persian administration, it was during this period that the Second Temple in Jerusalem was built.[27][80] Sebastia, near Nablus, was the northernmost province of the Persian administration in Palestine, and its southern borders were drawn at Hebron.[27][81] Some of the local population served as soldiers and lay people in the Persian administration, while others continued to agriculture. In 400 BCE, the Nabataeans made inroads into southern Palestine and built a separate civilization in the Negev that lasted until 160 BC.[27][82]
Classical antiquity
Main article: JudeaSee also: Classical antiquityHellenistic rule (333 BC)
The Persian Empire fell to Greek forces of the Macedonian general Alexander the Great.[83][84] After his death, with the absence of heirs, his conquests were divided amongst his generals, while the region of the Jews ("Judah" or Judea as it became known) was first part of the Ptolemaic dynasty and then part of the Seleucid Empire.[85]
The landscape during this period was markedly changed by extensive growth and development that included urban planning and the establishment of well-built fortified cities.[81][83] Hellenistic pottery was produced that absorbed Philistine traditions. Trade and commerce flourished, particularly in the most Hellenized areas, such as Ashkelon, Jaffa,[86] Jerusalem,[87] Gaza,[88] and ancient Nablus (Tell Balatah).[83][89]
The Jewish population in Judea was allowed limited autonomy in religion and administration.[90]
Hasmonean dynasty (140 BC)
The extent of the Hasmonean kingdom.An independent Jewish kingdom under the Hasmonean Dynasty existed from 140–37 BC. In the 2nd century BC fascination in Jerusalem for Greek culture resulted in a movement to break down the separation of Jew and Gentile and some people even tried to disguise the marks of their circumcision.[91] Disputes between the leaders of the reform movement, Jason and Menelaus, eventually led to civil war and the intervention of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.[91] Subsequent persecution of the Jews led to the Maccabean Revolt under the leadership of the Hasmoneans, and the construction of a native Jewish kingship under the Hasmonean Dynasty.[91] After approximately a century of independence disputes between the Hasmonean rivals Aristobulus and Hyrcanus led to control of the kingdom by the Roman army of Pompey. The territory then became first a Roman client kingdom under Hyrcanus and then, in 70 AD, a Roman Province administered by the governor of Syria.[92]
Roman rule (63 BC)
Roman Iudaea Province in the 1st century AD as based on Robert W. Funk's The Acts of Jesus, Michael Grant's's Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels and John P. Meier's A Marginal Jew.Though General Pompey arrived in 63 BC, Roman rule was solidified when Herod, whose dynasty was of Idumean ancestry, was appointed as king.[83][93] Urban planning under the Romans was characterized by cities designed around the Forum – the central intersection of two main streets – the Cardo, running north-south and the Decumanus running east-west.[94] Cities were connected by an extensive road network developed for economic and military purposes. Among the most notable archaeological remnants from this era are Herodium (Tel al-Fureidis) to the south of Bethlehem,[95] Masada and Caesarea Maritima.[83][96] Herod arranged a renovation of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, with a massive expansion of the Temple Mount platform and major expansion of the Jewish Temple around 19 BC. The Temple Mount's natural plateau was extended by enclosing the area with four massive retaining walls and filling the voids. This artificial expansion resulted in a large flat expanse which today forms the eastern section of the Old City of Jerusalem.
Around the time associated with the birth of Jesus, Roman Palestine was in a state of disarray and direct Roman rule was re-established.[83][97] The early Christians were oppressed and while most inhabitants became Romanized, others, particularly Jews, found Roman rule to be unbearable.[83][97]
First Jewish revolt shekel issued in 68. Obverse: "Shekel Israel, year 3". Reverse: "Jerusalem the Holy"As a result of the First Jewish-Roman War (66–73), Titus sacked Jerusalem destroying the Second Temple, leaving only supporting walls, including the Western Wall.
Bar Kochba revolt silver Shekel. Obverse: the Jewish Temple facade with the rising star, surrounded by "Shimon". Reverse: A lulav, the text reads: "To the freedom of Jerusalem"In 135, following the fall of a Jewish revolt led by Bar Kokhba in 132–135, the Roman emperor Hadrian attempted the expulsion of Jews from Judea. His attempt was as unsuccessful as were most of Rome's many attempts to alter the demography of the Empire; this is demonstrated by the continued existence of the rabbinical academy of Lydda in Judea, and in any case large Jewish populations remained in Samaria and the Galilee.[14] Tiberias became the headquarters of exiled Jewish patriarchs. The Romans joined the province of Judea (which already included Samaria) together with Galilee to form a new province, called Syria Palaestina, to complete the disassociation with Judaea.[14] Notwithstanding the oppression, some two hundred Jewish communities remained. Gradually, certain religious freedoms were restored to the Jewish population, such as exemption from the imperial cult and internal self-administration. The Romans made no such concession to the Samaritans, to whom religious liberties were denied, while their sanctuary on Mt.Gerizim was defiled by a pagan temple, as part of measures were taken to suppress the resurgence of Samaritan nationalism.[14]
In 132 AD, the Emperor Hadrian changed the name of the province from Iudaea to Syria Palaestina and renamed Jerusalem "Aelia Capitolina" and built temples there to honor Jupiter. Christianity was practiced in secret and the Hellenization of Palestine continued under Septimius Severus (193–211 AD).[83] New pagan cities were founded in Judea at Eleutheropolis (Bayt Jibrin), Diopolis (Lydd), and Nicopolis (Emmaus).[81][83]
Byzantine (Eastern Roman) rule (330–640 AD)
5th century AD: Byzantine provinces of Palaestina I (Philistia, Judea and Samaria) and Palaestina II (Galilee and Perea).Emperor Constantine I's conversion to Christianity around 330 AD made Christianity the official religion of Palaestina.[98][99] After his mother Empress Helena identified the spot she believed to be where Christ was crucified, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher was built in Jerusalem.[98] The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and the Church of the Ascension in Jerusalem were also built during Constantine's reign.[98] This was the period of its greatest prosperity in antiquity. Urbanization increased, large new areas were put under cultivation, monasteries proliferated, synagogues were restored, and the population West of the Jordan may have reached as many as one million.[14]
Palestine thus became a center for pilgrims and ascetic life for men and women from all over the world.[81][98] Many monasteries were built including the St. George's Monastery in Wadi al-Qelt, the Monastery of the Temptation and Deir Hajla near Jericho, and Deir Mar Saba and Deir Theodosius east of Bethlehem.[98]
In 351-352, a Jewish revolt against Byzantine rule in Tiberias and other parts of the Galilee was brutally suppressed. Imperial patronage for Christian cults and immigration was strong, and a significant wave of immigration from Rome, especially to the area about Aelia Capitolina and Bethlehem, took place after that city was sacked in 410.[14]
In approximately 390 AD, Palaestina was further organised into three units: Palaestina Prima, Secunda, and Tertia (First, Second, and Third Palestine), part of the Diocese of the East.[100][98] Palaestina Prima consisted of Judea, Samaria, the coast, and Peraea with the governor residing in Caesarea. Palaestina Secunda consisted of the Galilee, the lower Jezreel Valley, the regions east of Galilee, and the western part of the former Decapolis with the seat of government at Scythopolis. Palaestina Tertia included the Negev, southern Jordan—once part of Arabia—and most of Sinai with Petra as the usual residence of the governor. Palestina Tertia was also known as Palaestina Salutaris.[98][101]
During the 5th and the 6th centuries a series of nationalistic insurrections erupted across Palaestina province, led by the Samaritans against the Christian East Roman/Byzantine Empire. The revolts, some of which had messianic aspirations by Samaritan leaders like Justa and Julianus ben Sabar, were marked by great violence on both sides, and their brutal suppression at the hands of the Byzantines and their Ghassanid allies severely reduced the Samaritan population.
Bede in his Historia Ecclesiastica, still draws on Orosius' information gathered from the local Jews to describe Palestine as one of the provinces of "Syria, which is called Aran by the Hebrews. The place is between the River Euphrates and the Great Sea, and extends towards Egypt; its largest provinces are Commagene, Phoenicia, and Palestine, as well as the countries of the Saraceni and the Nabathaei. It has twelve gentes."54[102]
In 536 AD, Justinian I promoted the governor at Caesarea to proconsul (anthypatos), giving him authority over the two remaining consulars. Justinian believed that the elevation of the governor was appropriate because he was responsible for "the province in which our Lord Jesus Christ... appeared on earth".[103] This was also the principal factor explaining why Palestine prospered under the Christian Empire. The cities of Palestine, such as Caesarea Maritima, Jerusalem, Scythopolis, Neapolis, and Gaza reached their peak population in the late Roman period and produced notable Christian scholars in the disciplines of rhetoric, historiography, Eusebian ecclesiastical history, classicizing history and hagiography.[103]
Byzantine administration of Palestine was temporarily suspended during the Persian occupation of 614–28, when it became a Jewish authonomy. Byzantium lost control permanently after the Muslims arrived in 634 AD, defeating the empire's forces decisively at the Battle of Yarmouk in 636 AD. Jerusalem capitulated in 638 AD and Caesarea between 640 AD and 642 AD.[103]
Islamic period (634–1918 AD)
The Islamic prophet Muhammad established a new unified religious movement in the Arabian peninsula at the beginning of the 7th century. The subsequent Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates saw a century of rapid expansion of Arab power well beyond the Arabian peninsula in the form of a vast Muslim Arab Empire.
Arab Caliphate rule (638–1099 AD)
In 638 AD, following the Siege of Jerusalem, the Caliph Omar Ibn al-Khattab and Safforonius, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, signed Al-Uhda al-'Omariyya (The Umariyya Covenant), an agreement that stipulated the rights and obligations of all non-Muslims in Palestine.[98] Christians and Jews where considered People of the Book, enjoyed some protection but had to pay a special poll tax called jizyah ("tribute") in return for this protection. During the early years of Muslim control of the city, a small permanent Jewish population returned to Jerusalem after a 500-year absence.[104]
Omar Ibn al-Khattab was the first conqueror of Jerusalem to enter the city on foot, and when visiting the site that now houses the Haram al-Sharif, he declared it a sacred place of prayer.[105][106] Cities that accepted the new rulers, as recorded in registrars from the time, were: Jerusalem, Nablus, Jenin, Acre, Tiberias, Bisan, Caesarea, Lajjun, Lydd, Jaffa, Imwas, Beit Jibrin, Gaza, Rafah, Hebron, Yubna, Haifa, Safed and Ashkelon.[107]
Umayyad rule (661–750 AD)
Under Umayyad rule, the Byzantine province of Palaestina Prima became the administrative and military sub-province (jund) of Filastin – the Arabic name for Palestine from that point forward.[108] It formed one of five subdivisions of the larger province of ash-Sham (Arabic for Greater Syria).[109] Jund Filastin (Arabic جند فلسطين, literally "the army of Palestine") was a region extending from the Sinai to the plain of Acre. Major towns included Rafah, Caesarea, Gaza, Jaffa, Nablus and Jericho.[110] Lod served as the headquarters of the province of Filastin and the capital later moved to Ramla. Jund al-Urdunn (literally "the army of Jordan") was a region to the north and east of Filastin which included the cities of Acre, Bisan and Tiberias.[110]
In 691, Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan ordered that the Dome of the Rock be built on the site where the Islamic prophet Muhammad is believed by Muslims to have begun his nocturnal journey to heaven, on the Temple Mount. About a decade afterward, Caliph Al-Walid I had the Al-Aqsa Mosque built.[111]
It was under Umayyad rule that Christians and Jews were granted the official title of "Peoples of the Book" to underline the common monotheistic roots they shared with Islam.[107][112]
Abbasid rule (750–969 AD)
The Baghdad-based Abbasid Caliphs renovated and visited the holy shrines and sanctuaries in Jerusalem[113] and continued to build up Ramle.[107][114] Coastal areas were fortified and developed and port cities like Acre, Haifa, Caesarea, Arsuf, Jaffa and Ashkelon received monies from the state treasury.[115]
A trade fair took place in Jerusalem every year on September 15 where merchants from Pisa, Genoa, Venice and Marseilles converged to acquire spices, soaps, silks, olive oil, sugar and glassware in exchange for European products.[115] European Christian pilgrims visited and made generous donations to Christian holy places in Jerusalem and Bethlehem.[115] During Harun al-Rashid's (786–809) reign the first contacts with the Frankish Kingdom of Charlemagne occurred, though the actual extent of these contacts is not known. As a result, Charlemagne sent money for construction of churches and a Latin Pilgrims' Inn in Jerusalem.[116] The establishment of the Pilgrims' Inn in Jerusalem is seen as a fulfillment of Umar's pledge to Bishop Sophronious to allow freedom of religion and access to Jerusalem for Christian pilgrims.[117]
The influence of the Arab tribes declined and the only context where they are reported is in uprising against the central authority.[118] I 796, a civil war between the Mudhar and Yamani tribes occurred, resulting in widespread destruction in Palestine.[119] The Abbasids visited the country less frequently than the Ummayads, but ordered some significant constructions in Jerusalem. Thus, Al-Mansur Ordered in 758 the renovation of the Dome of the Rock that had collapsed in an earthquake.[120]
Fatimid rule (969–1099 AD)
From their base in Tunisia, the Shi'ite Fatimids, who claimed to be descendants of Muhammad through his daughter Fatimah, conquered Palestine by way of Egypt in 969 AD.[121] Their capital was Cairo. Jerusalem, Nablus, and Askalan were expanded and renovated under their rule.[115]
After the 10th century, the division into Junds began to break down.[115] In the second half of the 11th century the Fatimids empire suffered setback from fighting with the Seljuk Turks. Warfare between the Fatimids and Seljuks caused great disruption for the local Christians and for western pilgrims. The Fatimids had lost Jerusalem to the Seljuks in 1073,[122] but recaptured it from the Ortoqids, a smaller Turkic tribe associated with the Seljuks, in 1098, just before the arrival of the crusaders.[123]
- See also the Mideastweb map of "Palestine Under the Caliphs", showing Jund boundaries (external link).
Crusader rule (1099–1187 AD)
The kingdom of Jerusalem and the other Crusader states in 1135The Kingdom of Jerusalem was a Christian kingdom established in the Levant in 1099 after the First Crusade. It lasted nearly two hundred years, from 1099 until 1291 when the last remaining possession, Acre, was destroyed by the Mamluks.
At first the kingdom was little more than a loose collection of towns and cities captured during the crusade. At its height, the kingdom roughly encompassed the territory of modern-day Israel and the Palestinian territories. It extended from modern Lebanon in the north to the Sinai Desert in the south, and into modern Jordan and Syria in the east. There were also attempts to expand the kingdom into Fatimid Egypt. Its kings also held a certain amount of authority over the other crusader states, Tripoli, Antioch, and Edessa.
Many customs and institutions were imported from the territories of Western Europe from which the crusaders came, and there were close familial and political connections with the West throughout the kingdom's existence. It was, however, a relatively minor kingdom in comparison and often lacked financial and military support from Europe. The kingdom had closer ties to the neighbouring Kingdom of Armenia and the Byzantine Empire, from which it inherited "oriental" qualities, and the kingdom was also influenced by pre-existing Muslim institutions. Socially, however, the "Latin" inhabitants from Western Europe had almost no contact with the Muslims and native Christians whom they ruled.
Under the European rule, fortifications, castles, towers and fortified villages were built, rebuilt and renovated across Palestine largely in rural areas.[115][124] A notable urban remnant of the Crusader architecture of this era is found in Acre's old city.[115][125]
During the period of Crusader control, it has been estimated that Palestine had only 1,000 poor Jewish families.[126] Jews fought alongside the Muslims in Jerusalem in 1099 and Haifa in 1100 against the Crusaders. They were not allowed to live in Jerusalem and initially most of cities saw the destruction of the Jewish communities, but communities did continue in the rural areas. For instance, it is known about at least 24 villages in the Galilee were Jews lived.[citation needed] Later in the history of the Crusaders state Jews settled in the Coastal cities. Unlike the treatment of Jews by the Crusaders Europe, where many Massacres occurred, in Palestine no distinction was made between Jews and other non Christians and there were no laws specifically against Jews.[clarification needed] Some Jews from Europe visited the country, like Benjamin of Tudela who wrote about it.[127] Maimonides escaped to Palestine from the Almohads in 1165 and visited Acre, Jerusalem and Hebron, finally settling in Fostat in Egypt.[128]
In July 1187, the Cairo-based Kurdish General Saladin commanded his troops to victory in the Battle of Hattin.[129][130] Saladin went on to take Jerusalem. An agreement granting special status to the Crusaders allowed them to continue to stay in Palestine and In 1229, Frederick II negotiated a 10-year treaty that placed Jerusalem, Nazareth and Bethlehem once again under Crusader rule.[129]
In 1270, Sultan Baibars expelled the Crusaders from most of the country, though they maintained a base at Acre until 1291.[129] Thereafter, any remaining Europeans either went home or merged with the local population.[130]
Mamluk rule (1270–1516 AD)
Tower of Ramla, constructed in 1318Palestine formed a part of the Damascus Wilayah (district) under the rule of the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and was divided into three smaller Sanjaks (subdivisions) with capitals in Jerusalem, Gaza, and Safed.[130] Celebrated by Arab and Muslim writers of the time as the "blessed land of the Prophets and Islam's revered leaders,"[130] Muslim sanctuaries were "rediscovered" and received many pilgrims.[131]
During the end of the 13th century the Mamluks fought against the Mongols, and a decisive battle took place in Ain Jalut in the Jezreel Valley on 3 September 1260. The Mamluks achieved a decisive victory, and the battle established a highwater mark for the Mongol conquests.
The Mamluks, continuing the policy of the Ayyubids, made the strategic decision to destroy the coastal area and to bring desolation to many of its cities, from Tyre in the north to Gaza in the south. Ports were destroyed and various materials were dumped to make them inoperable. The goal was to prevent attacks from the sea, given the fear of the return of the crusaders. This had a long term affect on those areas, that remained sparsely populated for centuries. In Jerusalem, the walls, gates and fortifications were destroyed as well, for similar reasons. The activity in that time concentrated more inland.[132] The Mamluks constructed a "postal road" from Cairo to Damascus, that included lodgings for travelers (khans) and bridges, some of which survive to this day (Jisr Jindas, near Lod). The also saw the construction of many schools and the renovation of mosques neglected or destroyed during the Crusader period.[131]
In 1267 the Catalan Rabbi Nahmanides left Europe following disputation of Barcelona,[133] he made aliyah to Jerusalem. There he established a synagogue in the Old City that exists until present day, known as the Ramban Synagogue and re-established Jewish communal life in Jerusalem.
In 1486, hostilities broke out between the Mamluks and the Ottoman Turks in a battle for control over western Asia. The Mamluk armies were eventually defeated by the forces of the Ottoman Sultan, Selim I, and lost control of Palestine after the 1516 battle of Marj Dabiq.[130][134]
Ottoman period
Ottoman rule (1516–1831 AD)
Territory of the Ottoman Empire in 1683After the Ottoman conquest, the name "Palestine" disappeared as the official name of an administrative unit, as the Turks often called their (sub)provinces after the capital. Following its 1516 incorporation in the Ottoman Empire, it was part of the vilayet (province) of Damascus-Syria until 1660. Nonetheless, the old name remained in popular and semi-official use.[135] Many examples of its usage in the 16th and 17th centuries have survived,[136][137][138] for example, the English reference book Modern history or the present state of all nations written in 1744 states that "Jerusalem is still reckoned the capital city of Palestine"[139]
It then became part of the vilayet of Saida (Sidon), briefly interrupted by the 7 March 1799 – July 1799 French occupation of Jaffa, Haifa, and Caesarea. During the Siege of Acre in 1799, Napoleon prepared a proclamation declaring an Israelite state in the area of Palestine within Ottoman Syria.[140]
Egyptian rule (1831–1841)
On 10 May 1832 the territories of Bilad ash-Sham, which include modern Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Palestine were conquered and annexed by Muhammad Ali's expansionist Egypt (nominally still Ottoman) in the 1831 Egyptian-Ottoman War. Britain sent the navy to shell Beirut and an Anglo-Ottoman expeditionary force landed, causing local uprisings against the Egyptian occupiers. A British naval squadron anchored off Alexandria. The Egyptian army retreated to Egypt. Muhammad Ali signed the Treaty of 1841. Britain returned control of the Levant to the Ottomans.
Ottoman rule (1841–1917)
In the reorganisation of 1873, which established the administrative boundaries that remained in place until 1914, Palestine was split between three major administrative units. The northern part, above a line connecting Jaffa to north Jericho and the Jordan, was assigned to the vilayet of Beirut, subdivided into the sanjaks (districts) of Acre, Beirut and Nablus. The southern part, from Jaffa downwards, was part of the special district of Jerusalem. Its southern boundaries were unclear but petered out in the eastern Sinai Peninsula and northern Negev Desert. Most of the central and southern Negev was assigned to the wilayet of Hijaz, which also included the Sinai Peninsula and the western part of Arabia.[141]
Nonetheless, the old name remained in popular and semi-official use.[135] During the 19th century, the Ottoman Government employed the term Ardh-u Filistin (the 'Land of Palestine') in official correspondence, meaning for all intents and purposes the area to the west of the River Jordan which became 'Palestine' under the British in 1922.[142] However, the Ottomans regarded "Palestine" as an abstract description of a general region but not as a specific administrative unit with clearly defined borders. This meant that they did not consistently apply the name to a clearly defined area.[141] Ottoman court records, for instance, used the term to describe a geographical area that did not include the sanjaks of Jerusalem, Hebron and Nablus, although these had certainly been part of historical Palestine.[143][144] Amongst the educated Arab public, Filastin was a common concept, referring either to the whole of Palestine or to the Jerusalem sanjak alone[145] or just to the area around Ramle.[146]
The end of the 19th century saw the beginning of Zionist immigration. The "First Aliyah" was the first modern widespread wave of Zionist aliyah. Jews who migrated to Palestine in this wave came mostly from Eastern Europe and from Yemen. This wave of aliyah began in 1881–82 and lasted until 1903.[147] An estimated 25,000[148]–35,000[149] Jews immigrated during the First Aliyah. The First Aliyah laid the cornerstone for Jewish settlement in Israel and created several settlements such as Rishon LeZion, Rosh Pina, Zikhron Ya'aqov and Gedera.
Tel Aviv was founded on land purchased from Bedouins north of Jaffa. This is the 1909 auction of the first lotsThe "Second Aliyah" took place between 1904 and 1914, during which approximately 40,000 Jews immigrated, mostly from Russia and Poland,[150] and some from Yemen. The Second Aliyah immigrants were primarily idealists, inspired by the revolutionary ideals then sweeping the Russian Empire who sought to create a communal agricultural settlement system in Palestine. They thus founded the kibbutz movement. The first kibbutz, Degania, was founded in 1909. Tel Aviv was founded at that time, though its founders were not necessarily from the new immigrants. The Second Aliyah is largely credited with the Revival of the Hebrew language and establishing it as the standard language for Jews in Israel. Eliezer Ben-Yehuda contributed to the creation of the first modern Hebrew dictionary. Although he was an immigrant of the First Aliyah, his work mostly bore fruit during the second.
Ottoman rule over the eastern Mediterranean lasted until World War I when the Ottomans sided with the German Empire and the Central Powers. During World War I, the Ottomans were driven from much of the region by the British Empire during the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
20th century
Ottoman administrative divisions in the region prior to WWIPalestine in British map 1924 the map now in the National Library of ScotlandIn common usage up to World War I, "Palestine" was used either to describe the Consular jurisdictions of the Western Powers[151] or for a region that extended in the north-south direction typically from Rafah (south-east of Gaza) to the Litani River (now in Lebanon). The western boundary was the sea, and the eastern boundary was the poorly-defined place where the Syrian desert began. In various European sources, the eastern boundary was placed anywhere from the Jordan River to slightly east of Amman. The Negev Desert was not included.[152]
For 400 years foreigners enjoyed extraterritorial rights under the terms of the Capitulations of the Ottoman Empire. One American diplomat wrote that "Extraordinary privileges and immunities had become so embodied in successive treaties between the great Christian Powers and the Sublime Porte that for most intents and purposes many nationalities in the Ottoman empire formed a state within the state".[153]
The Consuls were originally magistrates who tried cases involving their own citizens in foreign territories. While the jurisdictions in the secular states of Europe had become territorial, the Ottomans perpetuated the legal system they inherited from the Byzantine Empire. The law in many matters was personal, not territorial, and the individual citizen carried his nation's law with him wherever he went.[154] Capitulatory law applied to foreigners in Palestine. Only Consular Courts of the State of the foreigners concerned were competent to try them. That was true, not only in cases involving personal status, but also in criminal and commercial matters.[155]
According to American Ambassador Morgenthau, Turkey had never been an independent sovereignty.[156] The Western Powers had their own courts, marshals, colonies, schools, postal systems, religious institutions, and prisons. The Consuls also extended protections to large communities of Jewish protégés who had settled in Palestine.[157]
The Moslem, Christian, and Jewish communities of Palestine were allowed to exercise jurisdiction over their own members according to charters granted to them. For centuries the Jews and Christians had enjoyed a large degree of communal autonomy in matters of worship, jurisdiction over personal status, taxes, and in managing their schools and charitable institutions. In the 19th century those rights were formally recognized as part of the Tanzimat reforms and when the communities were placed under the protection of European public law.[158][159]
Under the Sykes–Picot Agreement of 1916, it was envisioned that most of Palestine, when freed from Ottoman control, would become an international zone not under direct French or British colonial control. Shortly thereafter, British foreign minister Arthur Balfour issued the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which promised to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine.[160]
The British-led Egyptian Expeditionary Force, commanded by Edmund Allenby, captured Jerusalem on 9 December 1917 and occupied the whole of the Levant following the defeat of Turkish forces in Palestine at the Battle of Megiddo in September 1918 and the capitulation of Turkey on 31 October.[161]
Mandate Palestine (1920–1948)
Main article: Mandate PalestineThe new era in Palestine. The arrival of Sir Herbert Samuel, H.B.M. High Commissioner with Col. Lawrence, Emir Abdullah, Air Marshal Salmond and Sir Wyndham Deedes, 1920.Following the First World War and the occupation of the region by the British, the principal Allied and associated powers drafted the Mandate which was formally approved by the League of Nations in 1922. Great Britain administered Palestine on behalf of the League of Nations between 1920 and 1948, a period referred to as the "British Mandate." Two states were established within the boundaries of the Mandate territory, Palestine and Transjordan.[162][163] - The preamble of the mandate declared:
"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."[164]
Not all were satisfied with the mandate. Some of the Arabs felt that Britain was violating the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence and the understanding of the Arab Revolt. Some wanted a unification with Syria: In February 1919 several Moslem and Christian groups from Jaffa and Jerusalem met and adopted a platform which endorsed unity with Syria and opposition to Zionism (this is sometimes called the First Palestinian National Congress). A letter was sent to Damascus authorizing Faisal to represent the Arabs of Palestine at the Paris Peace Conference. In May 1919 a Syrian National Congress was held in Damascus, and a Palestinian delegation attended its sessions.[165] In April 1920 violent Arab disturbances against the Jews in Jerusalem occurred which became to be known as the 1920 Palestine riots. The riots followed rising tensions in Arab-Jewish relations over the implications of Zionist immigration. The British military administration's erratic response failed to contain the rioting, which continued for four days. As a result of the events, trust between the British, Jews, and Arabs eroded. One consequence was that the Jewish community increased moves towards an autonomous infrastructure and security apparatus parallel to that of the British administration.
In April 1920 the Allied Supreme Council (the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan) met at Sanremo and formal decisions were taken on the allocation of mandate territories. The United Kingdom obtained a mandate for Palestine and France obtained a mandate for Syria. The boundaries of the mandates and the conditions under which they were to be held were not decided. The Zionist Organization's representative at Sanremo, Chaim Weizmann, subsequently reported to his colleagues in London:
There are still important details outstanding, such as the actual terms of the mandate and the question of the boundaries in Palestine. There is the delimitation of the boundary between French Syria and Palestine, which will constitute the northern frontier and the eastern line of demarcation, adjoining Arab Syria. The latter is not likely to be fixed until the Emir Feisal attends the Peace Conference, probably in Paris.[166]
Churchill and Abdullah (with Herbert Samuel) during their negotiations in Jerusalem, March 1921The purported objective of the League of Nations Mandate system was to administer parts of the defunct Ottoman Empire, which had been in control of the Middle East since the 16th century, "until such time as they are able to stand alone."[167]
In July 1920, the French drove Faisal bin Husayn from Damascus ending his already negligible control over the region of Transjordan, where local chiefs traditionally resisted any central authority. The sheikhs, who had earlier pledged their loyalty to the Sharif of Mecca, asked the British to undertake the region's administration. Herbert Samuel asked for the extension of the Palestine government's authority to Transjordan, but at meetings in Cairo and Jerusalem between Winston Churchill and Emir Abdullah in March 1921 it was agreed that Abdullah would administer the territory (initially for six months only) on behalf of the Palestine administration. In the summer of 1921 Transjordan was included within the Mandate, but excluded from the provisions for a Jewish National Home.[168] On 24 July 1922 the League of Nations approved the terms of the British Mandate over Palestine and Transjordan. On 16 September the League formally approved a memorandum from Lord Balfour confirming the exemption of Transjordan from the clauses of the mandate concerning the creation of a Jewish national home and from the mandate's responsibility to facilitate Jewish immigration and land settlement.[169] With Transjordan coming under the administration of the British Mandate, the mandate's collective territory became constituted of 23% Palestine and 77% Transjordan. The Mandate for Palestine, while specifying actions in support of Jewish immigration and political status, stated, in Article 25, that in the territory to the east of the Jordan River, Britain could 'postpone or withhold' those articles of the Mandate concerning a Jewish National Home. Transjordan was a very sparsely populated region (especially in comparison with Palestine proper) due to its relatively limited resources and largely desert environment.
Palestine and Transjordan were incorporated (under different legal and administrative arrangements) into the Mandate for Palestine issued by the League of Nations to Great Britain on 29 September 1923In 1923 an agreement between the United Kingdom and France established the border between the British Mandate of Palestine and the French Mandate of Syria. The British handed over the southern Golan Heights to the French in return for the northern Jordan Valley. The border was re-drawn so that both sides of the Jordan River and the whole of the Sea of Galilee, including a 10-metre wide strip along the northeastern shore, were made a part of Palestine[170] with the provisons that Syria have fishing and navigation rights in the Lake.[171]
The Palestine Exploration Fund published surveys and maps of Western Palestine (aka Cisjordan) starting in the mid-19th century. Even before the Mandate came into legal effect in 1923 (text), British terminology sometimes used '"Palestine" for the part west of the Jordan River and "Trans-Jordan" (or Transjordania) for the part east of the Jordan River.[172][173]
Rachel's Tomb on a 1927 British Mandate stamp. "Palestine" is shown in English, Arabic (فلسطين), and Hebrew, the latter includes the acronym א״י for Eretz YisraelThe first reference to the Palestinians, without qualifying them as Arabs, is to be found in a document of the Permanent Executive Committee, composed of Muslims and Christians, presenting a series of formal complaints to the British authorities on 26 July 1928.[174]
Infrastructure and development
Between 1922 and 1947, the annual growth rate of the Jewish sector of the economy was 13.2%, mainly due to immigration and foreign capital, while that of the Arab was 6.5%. Per capita, these figures were 4.8% and 3.6% respectively. By 1936, the Jewish sector had eclipsed the Arab one, and Jewish individuals earned 2.6 times as much as Arabs. In terms of human capital, there was a huge difference. For instance, the literacy rates in 1932 were 86% for the Jews against 22% for the Arabs, but Arab literacy was steadily increasing.[175]
Under the British Mandate, the country developed economically and culturally. In 1919 the Jewish community founded a centralized Hebrew school system, and the following year established the Assembly of Representatives, the Jewish National Council and the Histadrut labor federation. The Technion university was founded in 1924, and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 1925.[176]
As for Arab institutions, the office of "Mufti of Jerusalem", traditionally limited in authority and geographical scope, was refashioned by the British into that of "Grand Mufti of Palestine". Furthermore, a Supreme Muslim Council (SMC) was established and given various duties, such as the administration of religious endowments and the appointment of religious judges and local muftis. During the revolt (see below) the Arab Higher Committee was established as the central political organ of the Arab community of Palestine.
During the Mandate period, many factories were established and roads and railroads were built throughout the country. The Jordan River was harnessed for production of electric power and the Dead Sea was tapped for minerals – potash and bromine.
1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine
Main article: 1936–1939 Arab revolt in PalestineSparked off by the death of Shaykh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam at the hands of the British police near Jenin in November 1935, in the years 1936–1939 the Arabs participated in an uprising and protest against British rule and against mass Jewish immigration. The revolt manifested in a strike and armed insurrection started sporadically, becoming more organized with time. Attacks were mainly directed at British strategic installations such as the Trans Arabian Pipeline (TAP) and railways, and to a lesser extent against Jewish settlements, secluded Jewish neighborhoods in the mixed cities, and Jews, both individually and in groups.
Violence abated for about a year while the Peel Commission deliberated and eventually recommended partition of Palestine. With the rejection of this proposal, the revolt resumed during the autumn of 1937. Violence continued throughout 1938 and eventually petered out in 1939.
The British responded to the violence by greatly expanding their military forces and clamping down on Arab dissent. "Administrative detention" (imprisonment without charges or trial), curfews, and house demolitions were among British practices during this period. More than 120 Arabs were sentenced to death and about 40 hanged. The main Arab leaders were arrested or expelled.
The Haganah (Hebrew for "defense"), an illegal Jewish paramilitary organization, actively supported British efforts to quell the insurgency, which reached 10,000 Arab fighters at their peak during the summer and fall of 1938. Although the British administration did not officially recognize the Haganah, the British security forces cooperated with it by forming the Jewish Settlement Police and Special Night Squads.[177] A terrorist splinter group of the Haganah, called the Irgun (or Etzel)[178] adopted a policy of violent retaliation against Arabs for attacks on Jews.[179] At a meeting in Alexandria in July 1937 between Jabotinsky and Irgun commander Col. Robert Bitker and chief-of-staff Moshe Rosenberg, the need for indiscriminate retaliation due to the difficulty of limiting operations to only the "guilty" was explained. The Irgun launched attacks against public gathering places such as markets and cafes.[180]
The Arab revolt of 1936–39 in Palestine. A Jewish bus equipped with wire screens to protect civilian riders against rocks and grenades[citation needed] thrown by militants.The revolt did not achieve its goals, although it is "credited with signifying the birth of the Arab Palestinian identity.".[181] It is generally credited with forcing the issuance of the White Paper of 1939 which renounced Britain's intent of creating a Jewish National Home in Palestine, as proclaimed in the 1917 Balfour Declaration.
Another outcome of the hostilities was the partial disengagement of the Jewish and Arab economies in Palestine, which were more or less intertwined until that time. For example, whereas the Jewish city of Tel Aviv previously relied on the nearby Arab seaport of Jaffa, hostilities dictated the construction of a separate Jewish-run seaport for Tel Aviv.
World War II and Palestine
When the Second World War broke out, the Jewish population sided with Britain. David Ben Gurion, head of the Jewish Agency, defined the policy with what became a famous motto: "We will fight the war as if there were no White Paper, and we will fight the White Paper as if there were no war." While this represented the Jewish population as a whole, there were exceptions (see below).
As in most of the Arab world, there was no unanimity amongst the Palestinian Arabs as to their position regarding the combatants in World War II. A number of leaders and public figures saw an Axis victory as the likely outcome and a way of securing Palestine back from the Zionists and the British. Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, spent the rest of the war in Nazi Germany and the occupied areas, in particular encouraging Muslim Bosniaks to join the Waffen SS in German-conquered Bosnia. About 6,000 Palestinian Arabs and 30,000 Palestinian Jews joined the British forces.
On 10 June 1940, Italy declared war on the British Commonwealth and sided with Germany. Within a month, the Italians attacked Palestine from the air, bombing Tel Aviv and Haifa.[182]
In 1942, there was a period of anxiety for the Yishuv, when the forces of German General Erwin Rommel advanced east in North Africa towards the Suez Canal and there was fear that they would conquer Palestine. This period was referred to as the two hundred days of anxiety. This event was the direct cause for the founding, with British support, of the Palmach[183]—a highly-trained regular unit belonging to Haganah (which was mostly made up of reserve troops).
On 3 July 1944, the British government consented to the establishment of a Jewish Brigade with hand-picked Jewish and also non-Jewish senior officers. The brigade fought in Europe, most notably against the Germans in Italy from March 1945 until the end of the war in May 1945. Members of the Brigade played a key role in the Berihah's efforts to help Jews escape Europe for Palestine. Later, veterans of the Jewish Brigade became key participants of the new State of Israel's Israel Defense Force.
Starting in 1939 and throughout the war and the Holocaust, the British reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed into Palestine, following the publication of the MacDonald White Paper. Once the 15,000 annual quota was exceeded, Jews fleeing Nazi persecution were placed in detention camps or deported to places such as Mauritius.[184]
In 1944 Menachem Begin assumed the Irgun's leadership, determined to force the British government to remove its troops entirely from Palestine. Citing that the British had reneged on their original promise of the Balfour Declaration, and that the White Paper of 1939 restricting Jewish immigration was an escalation of their pro-Arab policy, he decided to break with the Haganah. Soon after he assumed command, a formal 'Declaration of Revolt' was publicized, and armed attacks against British forces were initiated. Lehi, another splinter group, opposed cessation of operations against the British authorities all along. The Jewish Agency which opposed those actions and the challenge to its role as government in preparation responded with "The Hunting Season" – severe actions against supporters of the Irgun and Lehi, including turning them over to the British.
The country developed economically during the war, with increased industrial and agricultural outputs and the period was considered an `economic Boom'. In terms of Arab-Jewish relations, these were relatively quiet times.[185]
End of the British Mandate 1945–1948
Main article: British–Zionist conflictArab autobus after an attack by Irgun, 29 December 1947In the years following World War II, Britain's control over Palestine became increasingly tenuous. This was caused by a combination of factors, including:
- World public opinion turned against Britain as a result of the British policy of preventing Holocaust survivors from reaching Palestine, sending them instead to Cyprus internment camps, or even back to Germany, as in the case of Exodus 1947.
- The costs of maintaining an army of over 100,000 men in Palestine weighed heavily on a British economy suffering from post-war depression, and was another cause for British public opinion to demand an end to the Mandate.[186]
- Rapid deterioration due to the actions of the Jewish paramilitary organizations (Hagana, Irgun and Lehi), involving attacks on strategic installations (by all three) as well as on British forces and officials (by the Irgun and Lehi). This caused severe damage to British morale and prestige, as well as increasing opposition to the mandate in Britain itself, public opinion demanding to "bring the boys home".[187]
- US Congress was delaying a loan necessary to prevent British bankruptcy. The delays were in response to the British refusal to fulfill a promise given to Truman that 100,000 Holocaust survivors would be allowed to emigrate to Palestine.[citation needed]
In early 1947 the British Government announced their desire to terminate the Mandate, and asked the United Nations General Assembly to make recommendations regarding the future of the country.[188] The British Administration declined to accept the responsibility for implementing any solution that wasn't acceptable to both the Jewish and the Arab communities, or to allow other authorities to take over responsibility for public security prior to the termination of its mandate on 15 May 1948.[189]
UN partition and the 1948 Israeli-Arab War
|
On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted 33 to 13 with 10 abstentions, in favour of a plan to partition the territory into separate Jewish and Arab states, under economic union, with the Greater Jerusalem area (encompassing Bethlehem) coming under international control. Zionist leaders (including the Jewish Agency), accepted the plan, while Palestinian Arab leaders rejected it and all independent Muslim and Arab states voted against it.[190][191][192] Almost immediately, sectarian violence erupted and spread, killing hundreds of Arabs, Jews and British over the ensuing months.
The rapid evolution of events precipitated into a Civil War. Arab volunteers of the Arab Liberation Army entered Palestine to fight with the Palestinians, but the April–May offensive of Yishuv forces defeated the Arab forces and Arab Palestinian society collapsed. Some 300,000 to 350,000 Palestinians caught up in the turmoil fled or were driven from their homes.
On 14 May, the Jewish Agency declared the independence of the state of Israel. The neighbouring Arab state intervened to prevent the partition and support the Palestinian Arab population. While Transjordan took control of territory designated for the future Arab State, Syrian, Iraqi and Egyptian expeditionary forces attacked Israel without success. The most intensive battles were waged between the Jordanian and Israeli forces over the control of Jerusalem.
On June 11, a truce was accepted by all parties. Israel used the lull to undertake a large-scale reinforcement of its army. In a series of military operations, it then conquered the whole of the Galilee region, both the Lydda and Ramle areas, and the Negev. It also managed to secure, in the Battles of Latrun, a road linking Jerusalem to Israel. In this phase, 350,000 more Arab Palestinians fled or were expelled from the conquered areas.
During the first 6 months of 1949, negotiations between the belligerents came to terms over armistice lines that delimited Israel's borders. On the other side, no Palestinian Arab state was founded: Jordan annexed the Arab territories of the Mandatory regions of Samaria and Judea (today known as the West Bank), as well as East Jerusalem, while the Gaza strip came under Egyptian administration.
The New Historians, like Avi Shlaim, hold that there was an unwritten secret agreement between King Abdullah of Transjordan and Israeli authorities to partition the territory between themselves, and that this translated into each side limiting their objectives and exercising mutual restraint during the 1948 war.[193]
1948 to present
 | This section's representation of one or more viewpoints about a controversial issue may be unbalanced or inaccurate. Please improve the article or discuss the issue on the talk page. |
| Arab-Israeli conflict | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Israel and members of the Arab League | |||||||
| |||||||
| Belligerents | |||||||
 Arab nations |  Israel | ||||||
| Arab-Israeli conflict series Participants | |||||||
On the same day that the State of Israel was announced, the Arab League announced that it would set up a single Arab civil administration throughout Palestine,[194][195] and launched an attack on the new Israeli state. The All-Palestine government was declared in Gaza on 1 October 1948,[196] partly as an Arab League move to limit the influence of Transjordan over the Palestinian issue. The former mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, was appointed as president. The government was recognised by Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, but not by Transjordan (later known as Jordan) or any non-Arab country. It was little more than an Egyptian protectorate and had negligible influence or funding. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the area allocated to the Palestinian Arabs and the international zone of Jerusalem were occupied by Israel and the neighboring Arab states in accordance with the terms of the 1949 Armistice Agreements. Palestinian Arabs living in the Gaza Strip or Egypt were issued with All-Palestine passports until 1959, when Gamal Abdul Nasser, president of Egypt, issued a decree that annulled the All-Palestine government.
In addition to the UN-partitioned area allotted to the Jewish state, Israel captured and incorporated[citation needed]a further 26% of the Mandate territory (namely of the territory to the west of the Jordan river). Jordan captured and annexed about 21% of the Mandate territory, which it referred to as the West Bank (to differentiate it from the newly-named East Bank – the original Transjordan). Jerusalem was divided, with Jordan taking the eastern parts, including the Old City, and Israel taking the western parts. The Gaza Strip was captured by Egypt. In addition, Syria held on to small slivers of Mandate territory to the south and east of the Sea of Galilee, which had been allocated in the UN partition plan to the Jewish state. Negotiations involving the United Nations over the current status of Jerusalem as a capital city are still continuing as a part of the UN-sponsored "Two-State Solution". Currently, Jerusalem as a whole is not internationally or legal recognised as the capital city of the State of Israel or the Palestinian Territories.
For a description of the massive population movements, Arab and Jewish, at the time of the 1948 war and over the following decades, see Palestinian exodus and Jewish exodus from Arab lands.
In the course of the Six Day War in June 1967, Israel captured the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) from Jordan and the Gaza Strip from Egypt.
From the 1960s onward, the term "Palestine" was regularly used in political contexts. The Palestine Liberation Organization has enjoyed status as a non-member observer at the United Nations since 1974, and continues to represent "Palestine" there.[197] According to the CIA World Factbook,[198][199][200] of the ten million people living between Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea, about five million (49%) identify as Palestinian, Arab, Bedouin and/or Druze. One million of those are citizens of Israel. The other four million are residents of the West Bank and Gaza, which are under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian National Authority, which was formed in 1994, pursuant to the Oslo Accords. As of July 2009, approximately 305,000 Israelis live in the 121 officially-recognised settlements in the West Bank.[201] The 2.4 million[citation needed] West Bank Palestinians (according to Palestinian evaluations) live primarily in four blocs centered in Hebron, Ramallah, Nablus, and Jericho. In 2005, Israel withdrew its army and all the Israeli settlers were evacuated from the Gaza Strip, in keeping with Ariel Sharon's plan for unilateral disengagement, and control over the area was transferred to the Palestinian Authority. However, due to the Hamas-Fatah conflict,and to local elections, the Gaza Strip has been in control of Hamas since 2006. Even after this disengagement, the UN, Human Rights Watch, and many other international bodies and NGOs consider Israel to be the occupying power of the Gaza Strip because Israel controls Gaza's airspace and territorial waters, and does not allow the movement of goods in or out of Gaza by air or sea.[202][203][204]
Demographics
Early demographics
Estimating the population of Palestine in antiquity relies on two methods – censuses and writings made at the times, and the scientific method based on excavations and statistical methods that consider the number of settlements at the particular age, area of each settlement, density factor for each settlement.
According to Magen Broshi, an Israeli archaeologist "... the population of Palestine in antiquity did not exceed a million persons. It can also be shown, moreover, that this was more or less the size of the population in the peak period—the late Byzantine period, around AD 600"[205] Similarly, a study by Yigal Shiloh of The Hebrew University suggests that the population of Palestine in the Iron Age could have never exceeded a million. He writes: "... the population of the country in the Roman-Byzantine period greatly exceeded that in the Iron Age...If we accept Broshi's population estimates, which appear to be confirmed by the results of recent research, it follows that the estimates for the population during the Iron Age must be set at a lower figure."[206]
Demographics in the late Ottoman and British Mandate periods
In the middle of the 1st century of the Ottoman rule, i.e. 1550 AD, Bernard Lewis in a study of Ottoman registers of the early Ottoman Rule of Palestine reports:[207]
From the mass of detail in the registers, it is possible to extract something like a general picture of the economic life of the country in that period. Out of a total population of about 300,000 souls, between a fifth and a quarter lived in the six towns of Jerusalem, Gaza, Safed, Nablus, Ramle, and Hebron. The remainder consisted mainly of peasants, living in villages of varying size, and engaged in agriculture. Their main food-crops were wheat and barley in that order, supplemented by leguminous pulses, olives, fruit, and vegetables. In and around most of the towns there was a considerable number of vineyards, orchards, and vegetable gardens.
By Volney's estimates in 1785, there were no more than 200,000 people in the country.[208] According to Alexander Scholch, the population of Palestine in 1850 had about 350,000 inhabitants, 30% of whom lived in 13 towns; roughly 85% were Muslims, 11% were Christians and 4% Jews[209]
According to Ottoman statistics studied by Justin McCarthy,[210] the population of Palestine in the early 19th century was 350,000, in 1860 it was 411,000 and in 1900 about 600,000 of which 94% were Arabs. In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews.[211] McCarthy estimates the non-Jewish population of Palestine at 452,789 in 1882, 737,389 in 1914, 725,507 in 1922, 880,746 in 1931 and 1,339,763 in 1946.[212]
Official reports
In 1920, the League of Nations' Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine stated that there were 700,000 people living in Palestine:
Of these 235,000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or—a small number—are Protestants. The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30 years a few hundreds came to Palestine. Most of them were animated by religious motives; they came to pray and to die in the Holy Land, and to be buried in its soil. After the persecutions in Russia forty years ago, the movement of the Jews to Palestine assumed larger proportions.[213]
By 1948, the population had risen to 1,900,000, of whom 68% were Arabs, and 32% were Jews (UNSCOP report, including bedouin).
Current demographics
According to Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics, as of May 2006, of Israel's 7 million people, 77% were Jews, 18.5% Arabs, and 4.3% "others".[214] Among Jews, 68% were Sabras (Israeli-born), mostly second- or third-generation Israelis, and the rest are olim — 22% from Europe,the former Soviet republics, Russia, and the Americas, and 10% from Asia and Africa, including the Arab countries.[215]
Of Israel's 7 million citizens, 516,569 Jewish ones live in enclaves referred to as Israeli settlements and outposts in various lands adjacent to the state of Israel occupied by Israel during the Six Day War.[216][217][218]
According to Palestinian evaluations, The West Bank is inhabited by approximately 2.4 million Palestinians and the Gaza Strip by another 1.4 million. According to a study presented at The Sixth Herzliya Conference on The Balance of Israel's National Security[219] there are 1.4 million Palestinians in the West Bank. This study was criticised by demographer Sergio DellaPergola, who estimated 3.33 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip combined at the end of 2005.[220]
According to these Israeli and Palestinian estimates, the population in Israel and the Palestinian Territories stands between 9.8 and 10.8 million.
Jordan has a population of around 6,000,000 (2007 estimate).[221][222] Long term Palestinian war refugees constitute approximately half of this number.[223]
See also
- Israeli-Palestinian conflict
- Names of the Levant
- Outline of the Palestinian territories
- Place names of Palestine
- Province of Judah ("Yehud Medinata")
References
- ^ "The Palestine Exploration Fund". The Palestine Exploration Fund. http://www.pef.org.uk/oldsite/Paldef.htm. Retrieved 2008-04-04.
- ^ http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=31&letter=P
- ^ de Geus, 2003, p. 7.
- ^ a b c d e Sharon, 1988, p. 4.
- ^ a b c Room, 1997, p. 285.
- ^ a b Fahlbusch et al., 2005, p. 185.
- ^ Lewis, 1993, p. 153.
- ^ a b c d Carl S. Ehrlich "Philistines" The Oxford Guide to People and Places of the Bible. Ed. Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan. Oxford University Press, 2001.
- ^ Jacobson, David M., Palestine and Israel, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 313 (Feb., 1999), pp. 65–74
- ^ The Southern and Eastern Borders of Abar-Nahara Steven S. Tuell Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 284 (Nov., 1991), pp. 51–57
- ^ Herodotus' Description of the East Mediterranean Coast Anson F. Rainey Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 321 (Feb., 2001), pp. 57–63
- ^ Beloe, W., Rev., Herodotus, (tr. from Greek), with notes, Vol.II, London, 1821, p.269
- ^ Elyahu Green, Geographic names of places in Israel in Herodotos
- ^ a b c d e f Lehmann, Clayton Miles (Summer 1998). "Palestine: History: 135–337: Syria Palaestina and the Tetrarchy". The On-line Encyclopedia of the Roman Provinces. University of South Dakota. http://www.usd.edu/~clehmann/erp/Palestine/history.htm#135-337. Retrieved 2008-07-06.
- ^ Sharon, 1998, p. 4. According to Moshe Sharon: "Eager to obliterate the name of the rebellious Judaea", the Roman authorities renamed it Palaestina or Syria Palaestina.
- ^ Robinson, Edward, Physical geography of the Holy Land, Crocker & Brewster, Boston, 1865, p.15
- ^ a b Kaegi, 1995, p. 41.
- ^ Marshall Cavendish, 2007, p. 559.
- ^ Lassner and Troen, 2007, pp. 54–55.
- ^ Gudrun Krämer (2008) A History of Palestine: From the Ottoman Conquest to the Founding of the State of Israel Translated by Gudrun Krämer and Graham Harman Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-11897-3 p 16
- ^ Judea[dead link]
- ^ According to the Jewish Encyclopedia published between 1901 and 1906: "Palestine extends, from 31° to 33° 20′ N. latitude. Its southwest point (at Raphia = Tell Rifaḥ, southwest of Gaza) is about 34° 15′ E. longitude, and its northwest point (mouth of the Liṭani) is at 35° 15′ E. longitude, while the course of the Jordan reaches 35° 35′ to the east. The west-Jordan country has, consequently, a length of about 150 English miles from north to south, and a breadth of about 23 miles at the north and 80 miles at the south. The area of this region, as measured by the surveyors of the English Palestine Exploration Fund, is about 6,040 square miles. The east-Jordan district is now being surveyed by the German Palästina-Verein, and although the work is not yet completed, its area may be estimated at 4,000 square miles. This entire region, as stated above, was not occupied exclusively by the Israelites, for the plain along the coast in the south belonged to the Philistines, and that in the north to the Phoenicians, while in the east-Jordan country the Israelitic possessions never extended farther than the Arnon (Wadi al-Mujib) in the south, nor did the Israelites ever settle in the most northerly and easterly portions of the plain of Bashan. To-day the number of inhabitants does not exceed 650,000. Palestine, and especially the Israelitic state, covered, therefore, a very small area, approximating that of the state of Vermont." From the Jewish Encyclopedia Boundaries and Extent
- ^ According to the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition (1911), [1] Palestine is:
- "[A] geographical name of rather loose application. Etymological strictness would require it to denote exclusively the narrow strip of coast-land once occupied by the Philistines, from whose name it is derived. It is, however, conventionally used as a name for the territory which, in the Old Testament, is claimed as the inheritance of the pre-exilic Hebrews; thus it may be said generally to denote the southern third of the province of Syria.
- Except in the west, where the country is bordered by the Mediterranean Sea, the limit of this territory cannot be laid down on the map as a definite line. The modern subdivisions under the jurisdiction of the Ottoman Empire are in no sense conterminous with those of antiquity, and hence do not afford a boundary by which Palestine can be separated exactly from the rest of Syria in the north, or from the Sinaitic and Arabian deserts in the south and east; nor are the records of ancient boundaries sufficiently full and definite to make possible the complete demarcation of the country. Even the convention above referred to is inexact: it includes the Philistine territory, claimed but never settled by the Hebrews, and excludes the outlying parts of the large area claimed in Num. xxxiv. as the Hebrew possession (from the " River of Egypt " to Hamath). However, the Hebrews themselves have preserved, in the proverbial expression " from Dan to Beersheba " (Judg. xx.i, &c.), an indication of the normal north-and-south limits of their land; and in defining the area of the country under discussion it is this indication which is generally followed.
- Taking as a guide the natural features most nearly corresponding to these outlying points, we may describe Palestine as the strip of land extending along the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea from the mouth of the Litany or Kasimiya River (33° 20' N.) southward to the mouth of the Wadi Ghuzza; the latter joins the sea in 31° 28' N., a short distance south of Gaza, and runs thence in a south-easterly direction so as to include on its northern side the site of Beersheba. Eastward there is no such definite border. The River Jordan, it is true, marks a line of delimitation between Western and Eastern Palestine; but it is practically impossible to say where the latter ends and the Arabian desert begins. Perhaps the line of the pilgrim road from Damascus to Mecca is the most convenient possible boundary. The total length of the region is about 140 m (459.32 ft); its breadth west of the Jordan ranges from about 23 m (75.46 ft) in the north to about 80 m (262.47 ft) in the south."
- ^ Sir Alan Gardiner, Egypt of the Pharaohs, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1961) 1964 pp.131, 199, 285, n.1.
- ^ a b c Thomas L. Thompson (1999). The Mythic Past: How Writers Create the Past. Basic Books. ISBN 0465006493. http://books.google.com/?id=QzOJ9nMlUJcC&pg=RA1-PR11&dq=archaeological+evidence+israel+kingdom.
- ^ a b c Israel Finkelstein and Neil Ascher Silberman (2000). "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts". Bible and Interpretation. http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Finkelstein_Silberman022001.shtml. Retrieved 2007-05-14.
- ^ a b c d e f g Shahin (2005), page 6
- ^ "The Philistines". Jewish Virtual Library. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Philistines.html. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ "Philistines" A Dictionary of the Bible. W. R. F. Browning. Oxford University Press, 1997. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press.
- ^ Herodotus, The Histories Bk.7.89
- ^ e.g. Antiquities 1.136.
- ^ cf. Pliny, Natural History V.66 and 68.
- ^ "Zionist Organization Statement on Palestine, Paris Peace Conference, (February 3, 1919) The Boundaries of Palestine". Jewishvirtuallibrary.org. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/zoparis.html. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ "Statement of the Zionist Organization Regarding Palestine Presented to the Paris Peace Conference (with proposed map of Zionist borders) February 3, 1919". Mideastweb.org. http://www.mideastweb.org/zionistborders.htm. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ "Middle East Documents Balfour Declaration". Mideastweb.org. http://www.mideastweb.org/mebalfour.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-16.
- ^ "The British Mandate for Palestine". Mideastweb.org. http://www.mideastweb.org/mandate.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-16.
- ^ Said and Hitchens, 2001, p. 199.
- ^ Carol A. Redmount, 'Bitter Lives: Israel in and out of Egypt' in The Oxford History of the Biblical Word, ed: Michael D. Coogan, (Oxford University Press: 1999), p. 97
- ^ Galilee, Sea of. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online
- ^ "Human Evolution and Neanderthal Man" (PDF). Antiquity Journal. http://antiquity.ac.uk/Ant/034/0090/Ant0340090.pdf.
- ^ Amud. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online
- ^ Olson, S. Mapping Human History. Houghton Mifflin, New York (2003). p.74–75.
- ^ Belfer-Cohen and Bar-Yosef, 2000, pp. 19–38.
- ^ Stearns, 2001, p. 13.
- ^ Harris, 1996, p. 253.
- ^ Gates, 2003, p. 18.
- ^ a b c d e Shahin (2005), page 4
- ^ Rosen, 1997, pp. 159–161.
- ^ Neil Asher Silberman, Thomas E. Levy, Bonnie L. Wisthoff, Ron E. Tappy, John L. Meloy "Near East" The Oxford Companion to Archaeology. Brian M. Fagan, ed., Oxford University Press 1996.
- ^ Canaan. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
- ^ Mills, 1990, p. 439.
- ^ "Palestine: Middle Bronze Age". Encyclopedia Britannica Online. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-45048/Palestine. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ Ember & Peregrine, 2002, p. 103.
- ^ William H. Propp "Amarna Letters" The Oxford Companion to the Bible. Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan, eds. Oxford University Press Inc. 1993. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press.
- ^ Remains Of Minoan-Style Painting Discovered During Excavations Of Canaanite Palace, ScienceDaily (Dec. 7, 2009) [2]
- ^ Carl S. Ehrlich "Philistines" The Oxford Guide to People and Places of the Bible. Ed. Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan. Oxford University Press, 2001. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press.
- ^ Philistine. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online
- ^ a b c d e Niels Peter Lemche. "On the Problems of Reconstructing Pre-Hellenistic Israelite (Palestinian) History". Journal of Hebrew Scriptures. http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/JHS/Articles/article_13.htm. Retrieved 2007-05-10.
- ^ Gyémánt, Ladislau (2003). Historiographic Views on the Settlement of the Jewish Tribes in Canaan. 1/2003. Sacra Scripta. pp. 26–30. http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=ed58f96d-8032-41bb-8d65-f34a8b8f2a36&articleId=835a199a-72a0-4b2d-ba9c-32b1347129f5.
- ^ Finkelstein, Mazar and Schmidt, 2007, pp. 10–20
- ^ Erlanger, Steven (2005-08-05). "King David's Palace Is Found, Archaeologist Says". The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/05/international/middleeast/05jerusalem.html?ex=1280894400&en=3c435bc7bd0cd531&ei=5088. Retrieved 2007-05-24.
- ^ Matthew Sturgis, It ain't necessarily so, ISBN 0-7472-4510-X
- ^ Carol A. Redmount, 'Bitter Lives: Israel in and out of Egypt' in The Oxford History of the Biblical Word, ed: Michael D. Coogan, (Oxford University Press: 1999)
- ^ Stager, Lawrence E., "Forging an Identity: The Emergence of Ancient Israel" in Michael Coogan ed. The Oxford History of the Biblical World, Oxford University Press, 2001. p.92
- ^ M. G. Hasel, "Israel in the Merneptah Stela", BASOR 296, 1994, pp.54 & 56, n.12.
- ^ a b c d e "Facts about Israel:History". Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affaits. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/History/History+of+Israel/Facts%20About%20Israel-%20History. Retrieved 2007-05-10.
- ^ Bienkowski, op.cit.
- ^ Austel in Grisanti and Howard, 2003, p. 160.
- ^ Schiller, 2009, p. 98.
- ^ ""House of David" Restored in Moabite Inscription: A new restoration of a famous inscription reveals another mention of the "House of David" in the ninth century BC". Jewishhistory.com. http://www.jewishhistory.com/jh.php?id=Assyrian&content=content/house_of_david. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ Pritchard, Texts p. 321
- ^ Pritchard, Pictures p. 275, 744
- ^ J. Simons, Jerusalem in the Old Testament (1952) p. 175-92
- ^ Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol. 14 pp. 1440-1441
- ^ "Babylon" A Dictionary of the Bible. W. R. F. Browning. Oxford University Press, 1997. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press.
- ^ *Dandamaev, M (1994): "[3]", in E. Yarshater (ed.) Encyclopaedia Iranica vol. 7.
- ^ Drumbrell, WJ (1971): "The Tell el-Maskuta Bowls and the 'Kingdom' of Qedar in the Persian Period", BASOR 203, pp. 33–44.
- ^ Tuell (1991): "The Southern and Eastern Borders of Abar-Nahara", BASOR n. 234, pp. 51–57
- ^ http://www.livius.org/sao-sd/satrap/satrap.htm
- ^ Diana Edelman (November 2005). "Redating the Building of the Second Temple". http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Edelman_Redating_Second_Temple.htm.
- ^ a b c d Palestine. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
- ^ "Avdat: A Nabatean City in the Negev". Jewish Virtual Library. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Archaeology/Avdat.html. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Shahin (2005), p. 7
- ^ "Hellenistic Greece:Alexander the Great". Washington State University. 1996. http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/ALEX.HTM. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ Pastor, 1997, p. 41.
- ^ "Palestine". Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/oscar/print?articleId=108522&fullArticle=true&tocId=45078. Retrieved 2007-08-14.
- ^ Julie Galambush (2006). "The Reluctant Parting: How the New Testament's Jewish Writers Created a Christian Book". HarperCollins.ca. http://www.harpercollins.ca/global_scripts/product_catalog/book_xml.asp?isbn=0060872012&tc=cx. Retrieved 2007-08-20.
- ^ Dick Doughty (September–October 1994). "Gaza:Contested Crossroads". SaudiAramcoWorld. http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/199405/gaza-contested.crossroads.htm. Retrieved 2007-08-20.
- ^ "Tell Balatah (Shechem or Ancient Nablus)". World Monuments Watch:100 Most Endangered Sites 2006. Archived from the original on 2007-09-27. http://web.archive.org/web/20070927195313/http://wmf.org/resources/sitepages/palestinian_territories_tell_balatah.html. Retrieved 2007-08-20.
- ^ Hayes & Mandell, 1998, p. 41.
- ^ a b c Johnston, 2004, p. 186.
- ^ Chancey, 2005, p. 44.
- ^ "Herod". Concise Encyclopedia Britannica. http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9040191/Herod. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ "Introducing Young People to the Protection of Heritage Sites and Historic Cities" (PDF). UNESCO. 2003. http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:2NfvwatBy4oJ:www.iccrom.org/eng/02info_en/02_04pdf-pubs_en/ICCROM_doc09_ManualSchoolTeachers_en.pdf. Retrieved 2007-08-14.
- ^ "HERODIUM (Jebel Fureidis) Jordan/Israel". The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites. http://icarus.umkc.edu/sandbox/perseus/pecs/page.1979.a.php. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ "publisher=The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites". http://icarus.umkc.edu/sandbox/perseus/pecs/page.887.a.php. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ a b "Judaea-Palestine". UNRV History: Roman Empire. http://www.unrv.com/provinces/judaea.php. Retrieved 2007-08-14.
- ^ a b c d e f g h Shahin (2005), page 8
- ^ Shaye I.D. Cohen. "Legitimization Under Constantine". PBS. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/legitimization.html. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ Thomas A. Idniopulos (1998). "Weathered by Miracles: A History of Palestine From Bonaparte and Muhammad Ali to Ben-Gurion and the Mufti". The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/i/idinopulos-miracles.html. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ "Roman Arabia". Encyclopedia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-439113/Palaestina-Salutaris. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- ^ Merrills, A. H., History and Geography in Late Antiquity, Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought fourth Series, Cambridge University Press, Melbourne, 2005, pp.242-243
- ^ a b c Kenneth G. Holum "Palestine" The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Ed. Alexander P. Kazhdan. Oxford University Press 1991.
- ^ Gil, Moshe (February 1997). A History of Palestine, 634-1099. Cambridge University Press. pp. 68–71. ISBN 0-521-59984-9.
- ^ "Caliph Umar'S Address After Jerusalem". Cyberistan.org. http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/umar.html. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City By Dore Gold, pg. 97
- ^ a b c Shahin, 2005, p. 10.
- ^ Walid Khalidi (1984). Before Their Diaspora. Institute for Palestine Studies, Washington DC. pp. 27–28.
- ^ Haim Gerber (Fall 2003). "Zionism, Orientalism, and the Palestinians". Journal of Palestine Studies (Journal of Palestine Studies) 33 (1): 23–41. doi:10.1525/jps.2003.33.1.23. http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/jps.2003.33.1.23?cookieSet=1&journalCode=jps.
- ^ a b James Parkes. "Palestine Under the Caliphs". MidEastWeb. http://www.mideastweb.org/palcaliph1.htm. Retrieved 2007-08-20.
- ^ Rizwi Faizer (1998). "The Shape of the Holy: Early Islamic Jerusalem". Rizwi's Bibliography for Medieval Islam. Archived from the original on 2007-06-09. http://web.archive.org/web/20070609095128/http://us.geocities.com/rfaizer/reviews/book9.html. Retrieved 2007-07-14.
- ^ Ahl al-Kitab. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online
- ^ Ghada Hashem Talhami (February 2000). The Modern History of Islamic Jerusalem: Academic Myths and Propaganda. VII. Middle East Policy Council. Archived from the original on 2007-09-27. http://web.archive.org/web/20070927231823/http://www.mepc.org/journal_vol7/0002_talhami.asp. Retrieved 2007-08-20.
- ^ Yaacov Lev (2007). The Ethics and Practice of Islamic Medieval Charity. 5. History Compass. pp. 603–618.
- ^ a b c d e f g Shahin (2005), p. 11
- ^ Gil, Moshe (February 1997). A History of Palestine, 634-1099. Cambridge University Press. pp. 159 and 285–289. ISBN 0-521-59984-9.
- ^ M. Cherif Bassiouni (2004). "Islamic Civilization: An Overview". Middle East Institute: The George Camp Keiser Library. Archived from the original on 2007-09-28. http://web.archive.org/web/20070928035435/http://www.mideasti.org/indepth/islam/civilization.html. Retrieved 2007-08-14.
- ^ Gil, Moshe (February 1997). A History of Palestine, 634-1099. Cambridge University Press. pp. 279–281. ISBN 0-521-59984-9.
- ^ Gil, Moshe (February 1997). A History of Palestine, 634-1099. Cambridge University Press. 283–284. ISBN 0-521-59984-9.
- ^ Gil, Moshe (February 1997). A History of Palestine, 634-1099. Cambridge University Press. pp. 297–298. ISBN 0-521-59984-9.
- ^ "Egypt: The Fatimid Period 969 - 1771". Arab Net. 2002. http://www.arab.net/egypt/et_fatimid.htm. Retrieved 2007-08-14.
- ^ Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine (Cambridge, 1992) p. 410; p. 411 n. 61
- ^ Holt, pp. 11–14.
- ^ David Nicolle (July 2005). Crusader Castles in the Holy Land 1192-1302. Osprey. ISBN 9781841768274. http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title_detail.php/title=S8278~per=41.
- ^ "Projects:The Old City of Akko (Acre)". Israeli Antiquities Authority. http://www.iaa-conservation.org.il/Projects_Item_eng.asp?subject_id=11&site_id=5&id=22. Retrieved 2007-08-14.
- ^ Frank Heynick, Jews and medicine, An Epic Saga, KTAV Publishing House, Inc., 2002 p.103, commenting on Maimonidies' decision not to settle there a century later.
- ^ A History of the Crusades: The Impact of the Crusades on the Near East (vol 5), By Kenneth M. Setton, Norman P. Zacour, Harry W. Hazard, Marshall Whithed Baldwin, Robert Lee Wolff, Univ of Wisconsin Press, 1985, ISBN 0-299-09144-9, 9780299091446, pp. 96.
- ^ Sefer HaCharedim Mitzvat Tshuva Chapter 3
- ^ a b c Kenneth Setton, ed. A History of the Crusades, vol. I. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1958
- ^ a b c d e Shahin (2005), page 12.
- ^ a b Walid Khalidi (1984). Before Their Diaspora. Institute for Palestine Studies, Washington DC. pp. 28–29.
- ^ Myriam Rosen-Ayalon, ``Between Cairo and Damascus: Rural Life and Urban Economics in the Holy Land During the Ayyuid, Maluk and Ottoman Periods in The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land edited Thomas Evan Levy, Continuum International Publishing Group, 1998
- ^ p. 73 in Jonathan Sachs (2005) To heal a fractured world: the ethics of responsibility. London: Continuum (ISBN 978-0-8264-8039-2)
- ^ Chase, 2003, pp. 104–105.
- ^ a b Gerber, 1998.
- ^ Fuller, Thomas (1639). The historie of the holy warre. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gRw_AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA248&dq=palestine&hl=en&ei=wThDTbmoEdSChQe--smyAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEwQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=palestine&f=false. Retrieved 28 Jan 2011.
- ^ Milner, John (1687). A collection of the church-history of Palestine: From the birth of Christ to the beginning of the empire of Diocletian. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bjQBAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=palestine&hl=en&ei=NDhDTaaWN4mHhQeSobmOAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false. Retrieved 28 Jan 2011.
- ^ The London Magazine and Monthly Chronologer. 1751. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oF9FAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA206&dq=palestine&hl=en&ei=eDhDTYmIKIO1hAf_6tG7AQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=palestine&f=false. Retrieved 28 Jan 2011.
- ^ Salmon, Thomas (1744). Modern history or the present state of all nations. p. 461. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=f7I-AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA534&dq=palestine&hl=en&ei=QDlDTaeFMp2ShAfY9tzvAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwADgo#v=onepage&q=palestine&f=false. Retrieved 28 Jan 2011.
- ^ Ben Weider (1997). "Napoléon et les Juifs (in french)". http://www.napoleonicsociety.com/french/pdf/NapoleonJuifs.pdf. Retrieved 23 January 2011. "Bonaparte, Commandant en chef des Armées de la République Française en Afrique et en Asie, aux héritiers légitimes de la Palestine"
- ^ a b Gideon Biger, The Boundaries of Modern Palestine, 1840-1947, pp. 13–15. Routledge, 2004. ISBN 0-7146-5654-2
- ^ Mandel, 1976, p. xx.
- ^ Judith Mendelsohn Rood, Sacred Law in the Holy City, p. 46. Brill Publishers, 2004.
- ^ Bernard Lewis, "Palestine: On the History and Geography of a Name", International History Review 11 (1980): 1–12
- ^ Porath, 1974, pp. 8–9.
- ^ Haim Gerber (1998) referring to fatwas by two Hanafite Syrian jurists.
- ^ Scharfstein, Sol, Chronicle of Jewish History: From the Patriarchs to the 21st Century, p.231, KTAV Publishing House (1997), ISBN 0-88125-545-9
- ^ "New Aliyah - Modern Zionist Aliyot (1882 - 1948)". Jewish Agency for Israel. http://www.jafi.org.il/education/100/concepts/aliyah3.html. Retrieved 2008-10-26.
- ^ "The First Aliyah". Jewishvirtuallibrary.org. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Immigration/First_Aliyah.html. Retrieved 2009-06-16.
- ^ "Israeli government site on the Second Aliyah". Moia.gov.il. http://www.moia.gov.il/Moia_en/AboutIsrael/aliya2.htm. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ e.g. American Consuls in the Holy Land, 1832-1914 By Ruth Kark, Hebrew University Magnes Press, 1994, ISBN 0-8143-2523-8, page 139 [4]
- ^ Biger, Gideon (1981). Where was Palestine? Pre-World War I perception, AREA (Journal of the Institute of British Geographers) Vol 13, No. 2, pp. 153–160.
- ^ The Capitulations of the Ottoman Empire and the Question of their Abrogation as it Affects the United States, Lucius Ellsworth Thayer, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1923), pp. 207-233 [5]
- ^ The Abrogation of the Turkish Capitulations, Norman Bentwich, Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law, Third Series, Vol. 5, No. 4 (1923), pp. 182-188 [6]
- ^ From Occupation to Interim Accords, Israel and the Palestinian Territories. Raja Shehadeh, Kluwer Law International, 1997, ISBN 90-411-0618-9, page 75
- ^ Ambassador Morgenthau's Story, Henry Morgenthau, Cornell University Library 2009, ISBN 1-112-30638-2, Chapter 10, page 70 [7]
- ^ The Habsburgs and the Jewish Philanthropy in Jerusalem during the Crimean War (1853-6), Yochai Ben-Ghedalia, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2009 [huji.ac.il/publications/BenGhedalia.pdf
- ^ See Jews, Turks, Ottomans, Avigdor Levy (Editor) Syracuse University Press, 2003, ISBN 0-8156-2941-9, page 109; Christian communities in Jerusalem and the West Bank since 1948, By Daphne Tsimhoni, Praeger, 1993, ISBN 0-275-93921-9, Page xv
- ^ See International law: achievements and prospects, UNESCO, editor Mohammed Bedjaoui, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1991, ISBN 92-3-102716-6, page 7
- ^ Baylis Thomas,''How Israel was Won'' (1999) p.19. Books.google.com. 1999. ISBN 9780739100646. http://books.google.com/books?id=6T_Ff6Ra57sC&pg=PA9. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ Hughes, 1999, p. 17; p. 97.
- ^ Boundaries Delimitation: Palestine and Trans-Jordan, Yitzhak Gil-Har, Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Jan., 2000), pp. 68-81
- ^ See Marjorie M. Whiteman, Digest of International Law, vol. 1, US State Department (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963) pp 650-652
- ^ "The Palestine Mandate". Avalon.law.yale.edu. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ see A History of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, By Mark A. Tessler, Indiana University Press, 1994, ISBN 0-253-20873-4, pages 155–156
- ^ 'Zionist Aspirations: Dr Weizmann on the Future of Palestine', The Times, Saturday, 8 May 1920; p. 15.
- ^ Article 22, The Covenant of the League of Nations and "Mandate for Palestine," Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 11, p. 862, Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem, 1972
- ^ Gelber, 1997, pp. 6–15.
- ^ Sicker, 1999, p. 164.
- ^ "The Council for Arab-British Understanding". CAABU. http://www.caabu.org/press/focus/gee.html. Retrieved 2009-06-16.
- ^ No. 565. — EXCHANGE OF NOTES * CONSTITUTING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BRITISH AND FRENCH GOVERNMENTS RESPECTING THE BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN SYRIA AND PALESTINE FROM THE MEDITERRANEAN TO EL HAMMÉ, PARIS MARCH 7, 1923, Page 7 Border Treaty
- ^ Ingrams, 1972
- ^ "Mandate for Palestine - Interim report of the Mandatory to the LoN/Balfour Declaration text". League of Nations. 1921-07-30. http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/349b02280a930813052565e90048ed1c. Retrieved 2007-03-08.
- ^ Henry Laurens, La Question de Palestine, Fayard, Paris 2002 vol.2 p.101
- ^ Rashid Khalidi, The Iron Cage: The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood, 2006. Beacon Press. [8].
- ^ "The Jewish Community under the Mandate". Jewishvirtuallibrary.org. 1930-03-30. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/jews_mandate.html. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ see see Uniform and History of the Palestine Police
- ^ Etzel - The Establishment of Irgun.
- ^ "Restraint and Retaliation". Etzel. http://www.etzel.org.il/english/ac03.htm. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ see for example the incident on 14 March 1937 when Arieh Yitzhaki and Benjamin Zeroni tossed a bomb into the Azur coffee house outside Tel Aviv in Terror Out of Zion, by J. Bowyer Bell, Transaction Publishers, , 1996, ISBN 1-56000-870-9, pages 35–36.
- ^ "Aljazeera: The history of Palestinian revolts". Web.archive.org. Archived from the original on 2005-12-15. http://web.archive.org/web/20051215061527/http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9A489B74-6477-4E67-9C22-0F53A3CC9ADF.htm. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ "Why Italian Planes Bombed Tel-Aviv?". Isracast.com. 2009-09-09. http://www.isracast.com/article.aspx?ID=470&t=Why-Italian-Planes-Bombed-Tel-Aviv. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ How the Palmach was formed (History Central)
- ^ Karl Lenk, The Mauritius Affair, The Boat People of 1940/41, London 1991
- ^ James L. Gelvin, The Israel-Palestine conflict, Cambridge University Press, 2007, page 120.
- ^ The Rise and fall of the British Empire, By Lawrence James, Macmillan, 1997, ISBN 0-312-16985-X, page 562
- ^ For instance, in his memoir The Revolt, Menachem Begin cites Colonel Archer-Cust, Chief Secretary of the British Government in Palestine, as saying in a lecture to the Royal Empire Society that "The hanging of the two British Sergeants [an Irgun retaliation to British executions] did more than anything to get us out [of Palestine]".
- ^ see Request for a Special Session of the General Assembly on Palestine
- ^ see Rabbi Silver's request regarding the formation of a Jewish militia and the dissolution of the mandate in S/PV.262, Minutes 262nd Meeting of the UN Security Council,5 March 1948
- ^ Plascov, Avi (2008). The Palestinian refugees in Jordan 1948-1957. Routledge. p. 2. ISBN 978-0714631202. http://books.google.com/?id=daLPXTYcoewC&printsec=frontcover&q=. Retrieved 2009-12-11.
- ^ Bovis, H. Eugene (1971). The Jerusalem question, 1917-1968. Hoover Institution Press,U.S.. p. 40. ISBN 978-0817932916. http://books.google.com/?id=1L49R1xKA6QC&printsec=frontcover&q=. Retrieved 2009-12-11.
- ^ 6 Arab states, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen: 4 Moslem states, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey: Greece, Cuba and India also voted against. See Henry Cattan, The Palestine question, Routledge, London 1988 p.36
- ^ Avi Shlaim in Pappe's The Israel/Palestine question, p. 187.
- ^ Truman, the Jewish Vote, and the Creation of Israel, John Snetsinger, Hoover Press, 1974, ISBN 0-8179-3391-3, page 107. Books.google.com. 1974. ISBN 9780817933913. http://books.google.com/?id=JAW2aHnkL4UC&pg=PA107&dq=. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ see The Middle East Journal, Middle East Institute (Washington, D.C.), 1949 – Page 78, October 1): Robert A. Lovett, Acting Secretary of State, announced the US would not recognize the new Arab Government in Palestine, and Foreign relations of the United States, 1948. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa, Volume V, Part 2, page 1448
- ^ First Declaration of Independence of the State of Palestine. Books.google.com. 1996-11. ISBN 9789041103413. http://books.google.com/?id=DWhgIe3Hq98C&printsec=frontcover&dq=#PPA294,M1. Retrieved 2010-08-24.
- ^ Rupert Cornwell (July 8, 1998). "UN upgrades Palestine status". Independent, The (London). http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_19980708/ai_n14176782.[dead link]
- ^ [9][dead link]
- ^ [10][dead link]
- ^ [11][dead link]
- ^ "IDF: More than 300,000 settlers live in West Bank". haaretz.com. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1103125.html. Retrieved 9 May 2010.
- ^ "Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territories: The conflict in Gaza: A briefing on applicable law, investigations and accountability". Amnesty International. 2009-01-19. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE15/007/2009/en/4c407b40-e64c-11dd-9917-ed717fa5078d/mde150072009en.html. Retrieved 2009-06-05.
- ^ "Human Rights Council Special Session on the Occupied Palestinian Territories" July 6, 2006; Human Rights Watch considers Gaza still occupied.
- ^ Levs, Josh (2009-01-06). "Is Gaza 'occupied' territory?". CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/06/israel.gaza.occupation.question/index.html. Retrieved 2009-05-30.
- ^ Magen Broshi, The Population of Western Palestine in the Roman-Byzantine Period, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 236, p.7, 1979.
- ^ Yigal Shiloh, The Population of Iron Age Palestine in the Light of a Sample Analysis of Urban Plans, Areas, and Population Density, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 239, p.33, 1980.
- ^ Bernard Lewis, Studies in the Ottoman Archives—I, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 469–501, 1954
- ^ Katz, 115 citing C.F.C Conte de Volney: Travels through Syria & Egypt in the years 1783, 1784, 1785 (London, 1798). Vol II p. 219
- ^ Scholch, 1985, p. 503.
- ^ McCarthy, 1990, p.26.
- ^ McCarthy, 1990.
- ^ McCarthy, 1990, pp. 37–38.
- ^ Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine[dead link]
- ^ Central Bureau of Statistics, Government of Israel. "Population, by religion and population group" (PDF). http://www1.cbs.gov.il/shnaton56/st02_01.pdf. Retrieved 2006-04-08.
- ^ Central Bureau of Statistics, Government of Israel. "Jews and others, by origin, continent of birth and period of immigration" (PDF). http://www1.cbs.gov.il/shnaton56/st02_24.pdf. Retrieved 2006-04-08.
- ^ Israel Central Bureau of Statistics: [12] [13] [14]
- ^ Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies: [15] [16] [17] [18]
- ^ Foundation for Middle East Peace: [19] [20].
- ^ Bennett Zimmerman & Roberta Seid (January 23, 2006). "Arab Population in the West Bank & Gaza: The Million Person Gap". American-Israel Demographic Research Group. http://web.archive.org/web/20080416015924/www.thefourthwayisrael.com/demographicadvantage.html. Retrieved 2006-09-27.
- ^ Sergio DellaPergola (Winter 2007, No. 27). "Letter to the Editor". Azure. Archived from the original on 2007-09-27. http://web.archive.org/web/20070927012451/http://www.azure.org.il/magazine/magazine.asp?id=356. Retrieved 2007-01-11.
- ^ Jordan: Facts & Figures, accessed 22 May 2007.
- ^ CIA World Factbook, accessed 22 May 2007.
- ^ Assessment for Palestinians in Jordan, Minorities at Risk, accessed 22 May 2007.
Bibliography
|
|
External links
 | This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive and inappropriate external links. (November 2010) |
 | Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Maps of the history of the Middle East |
 | Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Palestine |
- www.palestinecenter.org - A website with current and historical information about Palestine
- Palestine Royal Commission Report (the Peel Report) (London, 1937) Jewishvirtuallibrary.org
- www.mideastweb.org - A website with a wealth of statistics regarding population in Palestine
- Coins and Banknotes of Palestine under the British Mandate
- WorldStatesmen- Maps, flags, chronology, see Israel and Palestinian National Authority
- hWeb - Israel-Palestine in Maps
- Palestine Fact Sheet from the Common Language Project
- 1911 Encyclopedia description of Palestine
- Liberal Democrat Friends of Palestine
- Maps
- Sykes-Picot Agreement, 1916
- 1947 UN Partition Plan
- 1949 Armisitice Lines
- Israel After 1949 Armistice Agreements
Arab–Israeli conflict
| Arab-Israeli Conflict | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Arab Nations Have been in war with Israel Israel Gaza Strip and West Bank | |||||||
| |||||||
| Belligerents | |||||||
 Arab League |  Israel | ||||||
The Arab–Israeli conflict (Arabic: الصراع العربي الإسرائيلي, Hebrew: הסכסוך הישראלי-ערבי) refers to the political tensions and open hostilities between the Arab peoples and the Jewish community of the Middle East that have lasted for over a century. Some trace the beginning of the conflict to large-scale Jewish return to Palestine, especially after the establishment of the Zionist movement, which intensified with the creation of the modern State of Israel in 1948. Others see it as a part of Arab nationalism, whose central premise is that the peoples of the Arab world, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Arabian Sea, constitute one nation bound together by common linguistic, cultural, religious, and historical heritage.[1] Territory regarded by the Jewish people as their historical homeland is regarded by the Pan-Arab movement as belonging to the Palestinian Arabs,[2] and in the Pan-Islamic context, in territory regarded as Muslim lands.
The conflict, which started as a political and nationalist conflict over competing territorial ambitions following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, has shifted over the years from the large scale regional Arab–Israeli conflict to a more local Israeli–Palestinian conflict, though the Arab world and Israel generally remain at odds with each other over specific territory.
Contents[hide] |
[edit] Religious aspects of the conflict
Groups on both sides, including Hamas and the defunct[3] Gush Emunim, evoke religious arguments for their uncompromising positions.[4] The Likud is currently the most prominent Israeli political party that includes the Biblical claim to the Land of Israel in its platform.[5]
The Land of Canaan or Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) was, according to the Torah, promised by God to the Children of Israel. The Israelites conquered and ruled that land from the 14th or 13th century BCE to the 1st century BCE (with short periods of foreign rule), remaining an ethnic majority of the population in the area until the 7th century CE. Contemporary history of the Arab–Israeli conflict is very much affected by Christian and Muslim religions belief and their interpretations of the idea of the Chosen concept in their policies with regard to the "Promised Land" and the "Chosen City" of Jerusalem.[6]
In his 1896 manifesto The Jewish State, Theodor Herzl repeatedly refers to the Biblical Promised land concept.[7] In the same period, Jewish migration to Palestine (Aliyah) increased in volume.
Christian Zionists support Israel because they recognize an ancestral right of Jews to this land, as suggested, for instance, by Paul in Romans 11 of the New Testament. Some also believe that the return of Jews in Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Christ.[8][9]
muslums also claim to have religious priority in accordance with the Quran.[10] Contrary to the Jewish claim that this land was promised only to the descendants of Abraham's younger son Isaac, they argue that the Land of Canaan was promised to all descendants of Abraham, with Arabs claiming to be the descendants of his elder son Ishmael.[10] Additionally, Muslims also revere many holy sites which were originally founded by Jews in the Biblical period, such as The Cave of the Patriarchs and the Temple Mount, and in the past 1,400 years have constructed Islamic landmarks on these ancient Jewish sites, such as the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Muslims also believe that Muhammad passed through Jerusalem on his first journey to heaven. Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, claims that all of the land of Israel is an Islamic "Waqf", which must be governed by Muslims.[11]
[edit] History
[edit] End of 19th century–1948
In the late 19th century, under Zionism, many European Jews purchased swamps and other desert land from the Ottoman sultan and his agents. At that time, Jerusalem did not extend beyond the walled area and had a population of only a few tens of thousands. Under the Zionists, collective farms, known as kibbutzim, were established, as was the first entirely Jewish city in modern times, Tel Aviv.
Before World War I, the Middle East, including Palestine, had been under the control of the Ottoman Empire for nearly 500 years. During the closing years of their empire the Ottomans began to espouse their Turkish ethnic identity, asserting the primacy of Turks within the empire, leading to discrimination against the Arabs.[12] The promise of liberation from the Ottomans led many Jews and Arabs to support the allied powers during World War I, leading to the emergence of widespread Arab nationalism.
In 1917, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration, which stated that the government viewed favourably "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people" but "that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine". The Declaration was issued as a result of the belief of key members of the government, including Prime Minister Lloyd George, that Jewish support was essential to winning the war; however, the declaration caused great disquiet in the Arab world.[13] After the war, the area came under British rule as the British Mandate of Palestine. The area mandated to the British included what is today Israel, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza.
| Arab League |
This article is part of the series: |
|
|
It was at this point in time that Jewish immigration to Palestine increased. By 1931, 17 percent of the population of Palestine were Jews, an increase of six percent since 1922.[14] Jewish immigration increased soon after the Nazis came to power in Germany, causing the Jewish population in Palestine to double.[15] Palestinian Arabs saw this rapid influx of Jewish immigrants as a threat to their homeland and their identity as a people. Moreover, Jewish policies of purchasing land and prohibiting the employment of Arabs in Jewish-owned industries and farms greatly angered the Palestinian Arab communities.[16] Demonstrations were held as early as 1920, protesting what the Arabs felt were unfair preferences for the Jewish immigrants set forth by the British mandate that governed Palestine at the time. This resentment led to outbreaks of violence. In March 1920, a first violent incident occurred in Tel Hai, and later that year riots broke out in Jerusalem. Winston Churchill's 1922 White Paper tried to reassure the Arab population, denying that the creation of a Jewish state was the intention of the Balfour Declaration. In 1929, after a demonstration by Vladimir Jabotinsky's political group Betar at the Western Wall, riots started in Jerusalem and expanded throughout Palestine; Arabs murdered 67 Jews in the city of Hebron, in what became known as the Hebron Massacre.
During the week of riots, at least 116 Arabs and 133 Jews[17] were killed and 339 wounded.[18]
In the 1930s Izz ad-Din al-Qassam organized and established the Black Hand, an anti-Zionist and anti-British militant organisation. He recruited and arranged military training for peasants and by 1935 he had enlisted between 200 and 800 men. The cells were equipped with bombs and firearms, which they used to kill Zionist settlers in the area, as well as engaging in a campaign of vandalism of Jewish settler plantations.[19] By 1936, escalating tensions led to the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine.[20]
In response to Arab pressure,[21] the British Mandate authorities greatly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants to Palestine (see White Paper of 1939 and the Exodus ship). These restrictions remained in place until the end of the mandate, a period which coincided with the Nazi Holocaust and the flight of Jewish refugees from Europe. As a consequence, most Jewish entrants to Palestine were illegal (see Aliyah Bet), causing further tensions in the region. Following several failed attempts to solve the problem diplomatically, the British asked the newly formed United Nations for help. On 15 May 1947 the UN appointed a committee, the UNSCOP, composed of representatives from eleven states. To make the committee more neutral, none of the Great Powers were represented.[22] After five weeks of in-country study, the commission recommended creating a partitioned state with separate territories for the Jews and the Arabs in Palestine . This "two state solution" was accepted with resolution 181 by the UN General Assembly in November 1947 by 33 votes to 13 with 10 abstentions. The Arab states, which constituted the Arab League, voted against. On the ground, Arab and Jewish Palestinians were fighting openly to control strategic positions in the region. Several major atrocities were committed by both sides.[23]
In the months prior to the end of the Mandate the Haganah launched a number of offensives in which they gained control over all the territory allocated by the UN to the Jewish State, creating a large number of refugees and capturing the towns of Tiberias, Haifa, Safad, Beisan and, in effect, Jaffa.
On May 14, 1948, one day before the end of the British Mandate of Palestine, Israel declared its independence and sovereignty on the portion partitioned by UNSCOP for the Jewish state. The next day, the Arab League reiterated officially their opposition to the "two-state solution" in a letter to the UN.[24] That day, the armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq invaded the territory partitioned for the Arab state, thus starting the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The nascent Israeli Defense Force repulsed the Arab nations from part of the occupied territories, thus extending its borders beyond the original UNSCOP partition.[25] By December 1948, Israel controlled most of the portion of Mandate Palestine west of the Jordan River. The remainder of the Mandate consisted of Jordan, the area that came to be called the West Bank (controlled by Jordan), and the Gaza Strip (controlled by Egypt). Prior to and during this conflict, 711,000[26] Palestinian Arabs fled their original lands to become Palestinian refugees, in part, due to an alleged promise from Arab leaders that they would be able to return when the war had been won. Many Palestinians fled from the areas that are now present-day Israel as a response to alleged massacres of Arab towns by militant and terrorist[citation needed] Jewish organizations like the Irgun and the Stern Gang (See Deir Yassin massacre). Many historians speculate that these massacres took place with the intention of causing psychological distress amongst the Arab population, giving them ample reason and fear to flee their homes and surrounding areas.[citation needed] The War came to an end with the signing of the 1949 Armistice Agreements between Israel and each of its Arab neighbours. This 1949 armistice line, the so-called green line, is to this day the internationally recognized border of the state of Israel. It is often referred to as the "pre-1967" border.[citation needed]
[edit] 1949–1967
Before the adoption by the United Nations of Resolution 181 in November 1947 and the declaration of the State of Israel in May 1948, several Arab countries adopted discriminatory measures against their local Jewish populations. The status of Jewish citizens in Arab states worsened dramatically following the 1948 Israeli-Arab conflict. Jews were uprooted from their longtime residency or became political hostages of the Arab–Israeli conflict.
As a result, a large number of Jews were forced to emigrate from Arab lands, although some emigrated for ideological reasons.[27] Over 700,000 Jews emigrated to Israel between 1948 and 1952, with approximately 285,000 of them from Arab countries.[28][27]
After the 1967 war, more than 850,000 Jews had left their birthplaces and their homes in some 10 Arab countries. To-day, fewer than 7,000 Jews remain in these same countries. Individual and communal properties were confiscated without compensation.[29] [30][31] Riots in Yemen and Syria killed hundreds of Jews. In Libya, Jews were deprived of citizenship, and in Iraq, their property was seized.[32] Today, these displaced Jews and their descendants represent 41% of the total population of Israel. For details, see Jewish exodus from Arab lands. [33] As a result of Israel's victory in its 1948 war of independence, any Arabs caught on the wrong side of the cease-fire line were unable to return to their homes in what became Israel. Likewise, any Jews on the West Bank or in Gaza were exiled from their property and homes to Israel. The main difference between the two is that Arabs were allowed to stay in Israel and gain citizenship post-1948, while Jews were completely removed from Arab-held areas after 1948. Today's Palestinian refugees are the descendants of those who left, the responsibility for their exodus being a matter of dispute between the Israeli and the Palestinian side (see Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus).[34][35]
In 1956, Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, and blockaded the Gulf of Aqaba, in contravention of the Constantinople Convention of 1888. Many argued that this was also a violation of the 1949 Armistice Agreements.[36][37] On July 26, 1956, Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal Company, and closed the canal to Israeli shipping.[38]
Israel responded on October 29, 1956, by invading the Sinai Peninsula with British and French support. During the Suez Canal Crisis, Israel captured the Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula. The United States and the United Nations soon pressured it into a ceasefire.[38][39] Israel agreed to withdraw from Egyptian territory. Egypt agreed to freedom of navigation in the region and the demilitarization of the Sinai. The United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) was created and deployed to oversee the demilitarization.[40] The UNEF was only deployed on the Egyptian side of the border, as Israel refused to allow them on its territory.[41]
On May 19, 1967, Egypt expelled UNEF observers,[42] and deployed 100,000 soldiers in the Sinai Peninsula.[43] It again closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping,[44][45] returning the region to the way it was in 1956 when Israel was blockaded.
On May 30, 1967, Jordan signed a mutual defense pact with Egypt. Egypt mobilized Sinai units, crossing UN lines (after having expelled the UN border monitors) and mobilized and massed on Israel's southern border. On June 5, Israel launched an attack on Egypt. The Israeli Air Force (IAF) destroyed most of the Egyptian Air Force in a surprise attack, then turned east to destroy the Jordanian, Syrian and Iraqi air forces.[citation needed] This strike was the crucial element in Israel's victory in the Six-Day War.[43][45] At the war's end, Israel had gained control of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem, Shebaa farms, and the Golan Heights. The results of the war affect the geopolitics of the region to this day.
[edit] 1967–1973
In the summer of 1967, Arab leaders met in Khartoum in response to the war, to discuss the Arab position toward Israel. They reached consensus that there should be no recognition, no peace, and no negotiations with the State of Israel, the so-called "three no's".[46]
In 1969, Egypt initiated the War of Attrition, with the goal of exhausting Israel into surrendering the Sinai Peninsula.[47] The war ended following Nasser's death in 1970.
On October 6, 1973, Syria and Egypt staged a surprise attack on Israel on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish calendar. The Israeli military were caught off guard and unprepared, and took about three days to fully mobilise.[48][49] The Yom Kippur War accommodated indirect confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union. When Israel had turned the tide of war, the USSR threatened military intervention. The United States, wary of nuclear war, secured a ceasefire on October 25.[48][49]
[edit] 1974–2000
[edit] Egypt
Following the Camp David Accords of the late 1970s, Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty in March, 1979. Under its terms, the Sinai Peninsula returned to Egyptian hands, and the Gaza Strip remained under Israeli control, to be included in a future Palestinian state. The agreement also provided for the free passage of Israeli ships through the Suez Canal and recognition of the Strait of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba as international waterways.
[edit] Jordan
In October 1994, Israel and Jordan signed a peace agreement, which stipulated mutual cooperation, an end of hostilities, and a resolution of other issues. The conflict between them had cost roughly 18.3 billion dollars. Its signing is also closely linked with the efforts to create peace between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) representing the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). It was signed at the southern border crossing of Arabah on October 26, 1994 and made Jordan only the second Arab country (after Egypt) to normalize relations with Israel.
[edit] Iraq
In June 1981, Israel attacked and destroyed newly built Iraqi nuclear facilities in Operation Opera.
During the Gulf War, Iraq fired 39 Scud missiles into Israel, in the hopes of uniting the Arab world against the coalition which sought to liberate Kuwait. At the behest of the United States, Israel did not respond to this attack in order to prevent a greater outbreak of war.
[edit] Lebanon
In 1970, following an extended civil war, King Hussein expelled the Palestine Liberation Organization from Jordan. September 1970 is known as the Black September in Arab history and sometimes is referred to as the "era of regrettable events". It was a month when Hashemite King Hussein of Jordan moved to quash the autonomy of Palestinian organisations and restore his monarchy's rule over the country.[50] The violence resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people, the vast majority Palestinians.[51] Armed conflict lasted until July 1971 with the expulsion of the PLO and thousands of Palestinian fighters to Lebanon. The PLO resettled in Lebanon, from which it staged raids into Israel. In 1981, Syria, allied with the PLO, positioned missiles in Lebanon. In June 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon. Within two months the PLO agreed to withdraw thence.
In March 1983, Israel and Lebanon signed a ceasefire agreement. However, Syria pressured President Amin Gemayel into nullifying the truce in March 1984. By 1985, Israeli forces withdrew to a 15 km wide southern strip of Lebanon, until its complete withdrawal in May 2000, seen by Arab Muslims as the result of painful blows suffered at the hands of Hezbollah. They claim that they had won the war and had forced Israel out.[52]
[edit] Palestinians
In December 1987, the First Intifada began. The First Intifada was a mass Palestinian uprising against Israeli rule in the Palestinian Territories.[53] The rebellion began in the Jabalia refugee camp and quickly spread throughout Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Palestinian actions ranged from civil disobedience to violence. In addition to general strikes, boycotts on Israeli products, graffiti and barricades, Palestinian demonstrations that included stone-throwing by youths against the Israel Defense Forces brought the Intifada international attention. The PLO was excluded from peace negotiations until it recognized Israel and renounced terrorism the following year. In mid-1993, Israeli and Palestinian representatives engaged in peace talks in Oslo, Norway. As a result, in September 1993, Israel and the PLO signed the Oslo Accords, known as the Declaration of Principles or Oslo I; in side letters, Israel recognized the PLO as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people while the PLO recognized the right of the state of Israel to exist and renounced terrorism, violence and its desire for the destruction of Israel. The Oslo II agreement was signed in 1995 and detailed the division of the West Bank into Areas A, B, and C. Area A was land under full Palestinian civilian control. In Area A, Palestinians were also responsible for internal security. The Oslo agreements remain important documents in Israeli-Palestinian relations.
[edit] 2000–2009
The Second Intifada forced Israel to rethink its relationship and policies towards the Palestinians. Following a series of suicide bombings and attacks, the Israeli army launched Operation Defensive Shield. It was the largest military operation conducted by Israel since the Six Day War.[54]
As violence between the Israeli army and Palestinian militants intensified, Israel expanded its security apparatus around the West Bank by re-taking many parts of land in Area A. Israel established a complicated system of roadblocks and checkpoints around major Palestinian areas to deter violence and protect Israeli settlements. However, since 2008, the IDF has slowly transferred authority to Palestinian security forces.[55][56][57]
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon began a policy of unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2003. This policy was fully implemented in August 2005.[58] Sharon's announcement to disengage from Gaza came as a tremendous shock to his critics both on the left and on the right. A year previously, he had commented that the fate of the most far-flung settlements in Gaza, Netzararem and Kfar Darom, was regarded in the same light as that of Tel Aviv.[59] The formal announcements to evacuate seventeen Gaza settlements and another four in the West Bank in February 2004 represented the first reversal for the settler movement since 1968. It divided his party. It was strongly supported by Trade and Industry Minister Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni, the Minister for Immigration and Absorption, but Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom and Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly condemned it. It was also uncertain whether this was simply the beginning of further evacuation.[60]
In June 2006, Hamas militants infiltrated an army post near the Israeli side of the Gaza Strip and abducted Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Two IDF soldiers were killed in the attack, while Shalit was wounded after his tank was hit with an RPG. 3 days later Israel launched Operation Summer Rains to secure the release Shalit. [61] To date, he's been held hostage by Hamas, who barred the International Red Cross from seeing him, and demands the release of 450 Palestinian prisoners.[62][63][64]
In July 2006, Hezbollah fighters crossed the border from Lebanon into Israel, attacked and killed eight Israeli soldiers, and abducted two others as hostages, setting off the 2006 Lebanon War which caused much destruction in Lebanon.[65] A UN-sponsored ceasefire went into effect on August 14, 2006, officially ending the conflict.[66] The conflict killed over a thousand people, mostly Lebanese civilians,[67][68][69][70][71] severely damaged Lebanese civil infrastructure, and displaced approximately one million Lebanese[72] and 300,000–500,000 Israelis, although most were able to return to their homes.[73][74][75] After the ceasefire, some parts of Southern Lebanon remained uninhabitable due to Israeli unexploded cluster bomblets.[76]
In the aftermath of the Battle of Gaza, where Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in a violent civil war with rival Fatah, Israel placed restrictions on its border with Gaza borders and ended economic cooperation with the Palestinian leadership based there. Israel and Egypt have imposed a blockade on the Gaza Strip since 2007. Israel maintains the blockade is necessary to limit Palestinian rocket attacks from Gaza and to prevent Hamas from smuggling advanced rockets and weapons capable of hitting its cities.[77]
On September 6, 2007, in Operation Orchard, Israel bombed an eastern Syrian complex which was allegedly a nuclear reactor being built with assistance from North Korea.[78] Israel had also bombed Syria in 2003.
In April 2008, Syrian President Bashar Al Assad told a Qatari newspaper that Syria and Israel had been discussing a peace treaty for a year, with Turkey as a go-between. This was confirmed in May 2008 by a spokesman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. As well as a peace treaty, the future of the Golan Heights is being discussed. President Assad said "there would be no direct negotiations with Israel until a new US president takes office." [79]
Speaking in Jerusalem on August 26, 2008, then United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized Israel's increased settlement construction in the West Bank as detrimental to the peace process. Rice's comments came amid reports that Israeli construction in the disputed territory had increased by a factor of 1.8 over 2007 levels.[80]
A fragile six-month truce between Hamas and Israel expired on December 19, 2008;[81] attempts at extending the truce failed amid accusations of breaches from both sides.[82][83][84][85] Following the expiration, Israel launched a raid on a tunnel suspected of being used to kidnap Israeli soldiers which killed several Hamas fighters.[86] Following this, Hamas resumed rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli cities, most notably firing over 60 rockets on December 24. On December 27, 2008, Israel launched Operation Cast Lead against Hamas. Numerous human rights organizations accused Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes.[87]
In 2009 Israel placed a 10-month settlement freeze on the West Bank. Hillary Clinton praised the freeze as an "unprecedented" gesture that could "help revive Middle East talks."[88][89]
A raid was carried out by Israeli naval forces on six ships of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in May 2010.[90] after the ships refused to dock at Port Ashdod. On the MV Mavi Marmara, activists clashed with the Israeli boarding party. During the fighting, nine activists were killed by Israeli special forces.[91][92][93][94] Several dozen other passengers and seven Israeli soldiers were injured,[92] with some of the commandos suffering from gunshot wounds.[95][96]
[edit] 2010–present
Following the latest round of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, 13 Palestinian militant movements led by Hamas initiated a terror campaign designed to derail and disrupt the negotiations.[97] Attacks on Israelis have increased exponentially since August 2010, after 4 Israeli civilians were killed by Hamas militants. Palestinian militants have increased the frequency of rocket attacks aimed at Israelis. On August 2, Hamas militants launched seven Katyusha rockets at Eilat and Aqaba, killing one Jordanian civilian and wounding 4 others.[98]
In an interview on October 2010, the Palestinian reformist Zainab Rashid criticized Syria and Iran, which she says deliberately attempted to derail the negotiations in order to divert attention from their own domestic problems and suppress initiatives of democratization. She said, "The most convincing proof is the attempts of these regimes to make deceitful and callous use of the Palestinian cause and to manipulating Palestinian elements in order to spark disputes. They miss no opportunity to sabotage peace efforts, as we saw at the outset of the latest round of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, when Hamas received a directive from the Syrian and Iranian regimes which control it to carry out two attacks in the West Bank, shortly before the first session of peace talks, with the intent of undermining the negotiations. This is what all the dictatorships have done throughout the history of this struggle in order to prevent its resolution.[99]
[edit] Cost of conflict
A report by Strategic Foresight Group has estimated the opportunity cost of conflict for the Middle East from 1991-2010 at $12 trillion. The report's opportunity cost calculates the peace GDP of countries in the Middle East by comparing the current GDP to the potential GDP in times of peace. Israel's share is almost $1 trillion, with Iraq and Saudi Arabia having approximately $2.2 and $4.5 trillion, respectively. In other words, had there been peace and cooperation between Israel and Arab nations since 1991, the average Israeli citizen would be earning over $44,000 instead of $23,000 in 2010.[100]
In terms of the human cost, estimates range from 51,000 fatalities (35,000 Arabs and 16,000 Jews) from 1950 to 2007,[101] to 92,000 fatalities (74,000 military and 18,000 civilian from 1945 to 1995).[102]
[edit] See also
- One-state solution
- International law and the Arab-Israeli conflict
- Arab League and the Arab-Israeli conflict
- History of the Arab-Israeli conflict
- Soviet Union and the Arab–Israeli conflict and Russia and the Arab–Israeli conflict
- Foreign relations of Israel
- Israel – European Union relations
- Israeli-Palestinian conflict
- Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict
- Israeli–Lebanese conflict
- Occupation of the Gaza Strip by Egypt
- Occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem by Jordan
- Policide
- Political status of the West Bank and Gaza Strip
- Jewish-Islamic conflict in the days of Muhammad
- Conflict: Middle East Political Simulator
- Civil defense in Israel
- Israeli casualties of war
- Palestinian casualties of war
- List of modern conflicts in the Middle East
- Palestinian political violence
[edit] References
- ^ Sela, 151
- ^ The Palestinian National Charter - Article 6
- ^ Encyclopaedia Judaica: Volume 8, p. 145
- ^ Weinberger, Peter E. (2004-05). "INCORPORATING RELIGION INTO ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACEMAKING: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICYMAKERS". Center for World Religions, Diplomacy, and Conflict Resolution, Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University. http://crdc.gmu.edu/docs/recommendations.pdf. Retrieved 2008-08-30.
- ^ "Likud - Platform". www.Knesset.gov.il. http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm. Retrieved 2008-09-04.
- ^ Avi Beker, The Chosen: The History of an Idea and the Anatomy of an Obsession, New York: Palgrave Mcmillan, 2008
- ^ The State of the Jews, Theodor Hertzl, 1896, Translated from the German by Sylvie D'Avigdor, published in 1946 by the American Zionist Emergency Council. The original German title, "Der Judenstaat", literally means "The Jews' State". Archived 2009-10-25.
- ^ Seven Major Prophetic Signs Of The Second Coming
- ^ Review of On the Road to Armageddon: How Evangelicals Became Israel's Best Friend
- ^ a b 'Jerusalem in the Qur'an', Masjid Dar al-Qur'an, Long Island, New York. 2002
- ^ http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
- ^ Fraser, T.G. The Middle East: 1914-1979. St. Martin's Press, New York. (1980) Pg. 2
- ^ Segev, Tom (2000): One Palestine, Complete, pp. 48-49, Abacus, ISBN 0-349-11286-X.
- ^ Lesch, Ann M. and Tschirgi, Dan. Origins and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Greenwood Press: West Port, Connecticut. (1998). Pg. 47
- ^ Smith, Charles D. Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict: A History With Documents. Bedford/St. Martin's: Boston. (2004). Pg. 129
- ^ Lesch, Ann M. and Tschirgi, Dan. Origins and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Greenwood Press: West Port, Connecticut. (1998). Pg.47,51
- ^ San Francisco Chronicle, Aug. 9, 2005, "A Time of Change; Israelis, Palestinians and the Disengagement"
- ^ NA 59/8/353/84/867n, 404 Wailing Wall/279 and 280, Archdale Diary and Palestinian Police records.
- ^ Segev, Tom (1999). One Palestine, Complete. Metropolitan Books. pp. 360–362. ISBN 0805048480.
- ^ Lesch, Ann M. and Tschirgi, Dan. Origins and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Greenwood Press: West Port, Connecticut. (1998). Pg.
- ^ "The Struggle against Jewish Immigration to Palestine". Middle Eastern Studies. July 1, 1998. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-53356391/struggle-against-jewish-immigration.html. Retrieved 2010-04-20.
- ^ Smith, Charles D. Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict: A History With Documents. Bedford/St. Martin's: Boston. (2004). Pg. 186
- ^ Fraser, T.G. The Middle East: 1914-1979. St. Martin's Press, New York. (1980). Pg. 41
- ^ "Statement by the Arab League States Following the Establishment of the State of Israel". 15 May 1948. http://www.ibiblio.org/sullivan/docs/ArabStatement1948.html. Retrieved 2009-10-24.
- ^ Smith, Charles D. Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict: A History With Documents. Bedford/St. Martin's: Boston. (2004). Pg. 198
- ^ GENERAL PROGRESS REPORT AND SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONCILIATION COMMISSION FOR PALESTINE, Covering the period from 11 December 1949 to 23 October 1950, GA A/1367/Rev.1 23 October 1950
- ^ a b Aliyeh to Israel: Immigration under Conditions of Adversity - Shoshana Neumann, Bar-Ilan University, page 10.
- Asia: Yemen - 45,127 (6.7), Turkey - 34,647 (5), Iraq - 124,225 (18), Iran - 25,971 (3.8), Syria and Lebanon - 3,162 (0.5), Eden - 3,320 (0.5); Africa: Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria - 52,565 (7.7), Libya - 32,130 (4.6) (Keren-Hayesod, 1953).
Note: The numbers add up to 286,500 (without Turkey, see also: History of the Jews in Turkey). - ^ '1942 - 1951', Jewish Agency for Israel.
- During the first four years of statehood, the country had to struggle for its existence, while simultaneously absorbing over 700,000 immigrants. - ^ http://spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=3471 IRWIN COTLER: JEWISH REFUGEES FROM ARAB COUNTRIES: THE CASE FOR RIGHTS AND REDRESS
- ^ Why Jews Fled the Arab Countries by Ya'akov Meron. Middle East Quarterly, September 1995
- ^ Jews in Grave Danger in All Moslem Lands, The New York Times, May 16, 1948, quoted in Was there any coordination between Arab governments in the expulsions of the Middle Eastern and North African Jews? (JIMENA)
- ^ Aharoni, Ada (Volume 15, Number 1/March 2003). "The Forced Migration of Jews from Arab Countries". Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group. http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/content/w91udxrhc7cf5a86.
- ^ "All I wanted was justice" - Adi Schwarz, Haaretz, Jan. 10 2008.
- According to official Arab statistics, some 850,000 Jews left those countries from 1948 to the beginning of the 1970s, and about 600,000 of them were absorbed in Israel - ^ Erskine Childers, "The Other Exodus", The Spectator, 12 May 1961, reprinted in Walter Laqueur (ed.) The Israel-Arab Reader: A Documentary History of the Middle East Conflict,(1969) rev.ed. Pelican, 1970 pp. 179–188 p.183.
- ^ Morris, Benny (2004). The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited. Cambridge University Press. P.114
- ^ Howard M. Sachar. A History of Israel from the Rise of Zionism to Our TimePublished by Alfred A. Knopf (New York). 1976. p. 455. ISBN 0-394-28564-5.
- ^ "Background Note: Israel". US State Department. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3581.htm. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ a b "1956: Egypt Seizes Suez Canal". British Broadcasting Service. 1956-07-26. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/26/newsid_2701000/2701603.stm. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ "UN GA Resolution 997". Mideast Web. http://www.mideastweb.org/ga997.htm. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ "Israel - MSN Encarta". Archived from the original on 2009-10-31. http://www.webcitation.org/5kwKackbs.
- ^ First United Nations Emergency Force (Unef I) - Background (Full Text)
- ^ "UN: Middle East - UNEF I, Background". United Nations. http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/co_mission/unef1backgr2.html. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ a b Lorch, Netanel (2003-09-02). "The Arab-Israeli Wars". Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/History/Modern+History/Centenary+of+Zionism/The+Arab-Israeli+Wars.htm. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ 'Egypt Closes Gulf Of Aqaba To Israel Ships: Defiant move by Nasser raises Middle East tension', The Times, Tuesday, May 23, 1967; pg. 1; Issue 56948; col A.
- ^ a b "The Disaster of 1967". The Jordanian Government. http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/his_periods3.html. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ "President Mubarak Interview with Israeli TV". Egyptian State Information Service. 2006-02-15. http://www.sis.gov.eg/En/Politics/Presidency/President/Interview/000001/0401050300000000000154.htm. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ "Israel: The War of Attrition". Encyclopedia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-219430/Israel. Retrieved 2007-03-03.
- ^ a b "Israel: The Yom Kippur War". Encyclopedia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-219432/Israel. Retrieved 2007-03-03.
- ^ a b "Arab-Israeli War of 1973". Encarta Encyclopedia. Archived from the original on 2009-10-31. http://www.webcitation.org/5kwKa1wQy. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
- ^ Shlaim. Avi. "Lion of Jordan; The life of King Hussein in War in Peace", 2007, pg.301.
- ^ Massad, Joseph Andoni. "Colonial Effects: The Making of National Identity in Jordan", pg. 342.
- ^ Middle East Intelligence Bulletin
- ^ "Uprising by Palestinians against Israeli rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip territories", Intifada, Microsoft Encarta.
- ^ Harel, Amos; Avi Isacharoff (2004). The Seventh War. Tel-Aviv: Yedioth Aharonoth Books and Chemed Books. pp. 274–275. ISBN 9655117677 9789655117677.
- ^ http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=172860 PA security forces seize 17 bombs, transfer them to IDF
- ^ http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=178633 UN: Israel has dismantled 20 percent of West Bank checkpoint
- ^ http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=170599 Israel sets up trial program to expedite PA export process
- ^ "Special Update: Disengagement – August 2005", Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
- ^ Ma'ariv II December 2002
- ^ Shindler, Colin. "A History of Modern Israel", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, pg. 314
- ^ [1] – Haaretz, [2] – UPI: – "[K]idnapped soldier Gilad Shalit"
- ^ Deal's collapse extends Shalit saga
- ^ "Who are the deadly terrorists Israel refuses to release for Shalit?"
- ^ "Israel to publish Hamas prisoner list"
- ^ Israel (country), Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia., 2007, p. 12. Archived 2009-10-31.
- ^ "Lebanon truce holds despite clashes", CNN
- ^ guardian.co.uk (September 14, 2006). "Amnesty report accuses Hizbullah of war crimes". Retrieved July 16, 2008.
- ^ Reuters via The Epoch Times (August 6, 2006). "No Let Up in Lebanon War". Retrieved July 16, 2008.
- ^ Associated Press via CHINAdaily (July 30, 2006). "Rice postpones trip to Beirut". Retrieved July 16, 2008.
- ^ Sarah Martin and Kristele Younes, Refugees International (August 28, 2006). "Lebanon: Refugees International's Statement for Donors' Conference". Retrieved July 16, 2008.
- ^ Human Rights Watch (August 2006). "Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians in Lebanon". Retrieved 2007-04-05.
- ^ Lebanon Higher Relief Council (2007). "Lebanon Under Siege". Retrieved March 5, 2007.
- ^ Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs (July 12, 2006). "Hizbullah attacks northern Israel and Israel's response". Retrieved March 5, 2007.
- ^ "Middle East crisis: Facts and Figures". BBC News Online. August 31, 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5257128.stm. Retrieved July 13, 2008.
- ^ "Israel says it will relinquish positions to Lebanese army". August 15, 2006. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-08-14-mideast_x.htm.
- ^ "'Million bomblets' in S Lebanon". BBC News Online. September 26, 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5382192.stm. Retrieved July 13, 2008.
- ^ "Gaza crisis: key maps and timeline". BBC News (BBC MMIX). January 6, 2009. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5122404.stm. Retrieved June 16, 2009.
- ^ The White House "Statement by the Press Secretary". April 24, 2008. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/04/20080424-14.html= The White House.
- ^ Walker, Peter; News Agencies (May 21, 2008). "Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria". London: The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/21/israelandthepalestinians.syria. Retrieved May 21, 2008. "Israel and Syria are holding indirect peace talks, with Turkey acting as a mediator..."
- ^ Sengupta, Kim (August 27, 2008). "Rice calls for Israel to stop building in West Bank". The Independent (London). http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/rice-calls-for-israel-to-stop-building-in-west-bank-909669.html. Retrieved April 7, 2010.
- ^ "TIMELINE – Israeli-Hamas violence since truce ended". Reuters. January 5, 2009. http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE50423320090105.
- ^ "Hamas 'might renew' truce in Gaza". BBC. December 23, 2008. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7797144.stm. Retrieved January 1, 2010.
- ^ "Israel Rejected Hamas Ceasefire Offer In December". Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/09/israel-rejected-hamas-cea_n_156639.html?page=2&show_comment_id=19558888#comment_19558888.
- ^ Anthony H. Cordesman, 'THE "GAZA WAR": A Strategic Analysis,' Center for Strategic & International Studies, February 2009 p.9
- ^ 'Israeli Airstrike on Gaza Threatens Truce with Hamas,' Fox News, November 4, 2008
- ^ Larry Derfner (US News): Why the Gaza War Between Israel and Hamas Broke Out Now
- ^ "Demands grow for Gaza war crimes investigation" UK Guardian, Jan 13, 2009.
- ^ http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/1109/Mitchell_brief_as_Netanyahu_to_announce_partial_settlement_freeze.html
- ^ "Palestinians blast Clinton for Israel praise". CNN. November 1, 2009. http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/11/01/mideast.talks.clinton/index.html.
- ^ Black, Ian; Haroon Siddique (May 31, 2010). "Q&A: The Gaza Freedom flotilla". The Guardian (London: Guardian News and Media). http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/31/q-a-gaza-freedom-flotilla. Retrieved June 2, 2010.
- ^ Al Jazeera staff and agencies (2010-06-05). "Flotilla activists 'shot 30 times'". Al-Jazeera. http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/06/20106535425983666.html. Retrieved 2010-06-06.
- ^ a b Edmund Sanders (June 1, 2010). "Israel criticized over raid on Gaza flotilla". Los Angeles Times. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-israel-flotilla-20100531,0,1839736.story. Retrieved June 2, 2010.[dead link]
- ^ Ivan Watson; Talia Kayali (June 4, 2010). "Autopsies reveal 9 men on Gaza aid boat shot, 5 in head". CNN World. http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/04/gaza.raid.autopsies/. Retrieved June 4, 2010.
- ^ CNN Wire Staff (May 31, 2010). "Israeli assault on Gaza-bound flotilla leaves at least 9 dead". CNN. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/05/31/gaza.protest/index.html?hpt=T1. Retrieved June 2, 2010.
- ^ Yaakov Katz (2010-06-04). "'We had no choice'". JPost.com. http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177445. Retrieved 2010-07-06.
- ^ Yaakov Katz (2010-06-01). "Vicious conflict aboard 'Mavi Marmara'". JPost.com. http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177067. Retrieved 2010-07-06.
- ^ http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0831/Hamas-targets-Israeli-Palestinian-talks-by-killing-four-Israelis Hamas targets Israeli-Palestinian talks by killing four Israelis
- ^ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/jordan/7922624/Jordanian-national-killed-in-multiple-militant-rocket-strike.html Jordanian national killed in multiple militant rocket strike
- ^ Palestinian Reformist: The Islamization of the Palestinian Cause is an Obstacle to Its Resolution. October 26, 2010. Translation by MEMRI.
- ^ Cost of Conflict in the Middle East, Strategic Foresight Group
- ^ Pipes, Daniel (2007-10-08). "Arab-Israeli Fatalities Rank 49th". http://www.danielpipes.org/4990/arab-israeli-fatalities-rank-49th. Retrieved 2009-04-21.
- ^ Buzan, Barry (2003). Regions and powers. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521891110. http://books.google.com/?id=N3LfkrrNM4QC&pg=PA215&dq=arab-israeli+fatalities. Retrieved 2009-04-21.
[edit] Further reading
- Associated Press, comp. (1996). Lightning Out of Israel: [The Six-Day War in the Middle East]: The Arab-Israeli Conflict. Commemorative Ed. Western Printing and Lithographing Company for the Associated Press. ASIN B000BGT89M.
- Bard, Mitchell (1999). Middle East Conflict. Indianapolis: Alpha Books. ISBN 0-02-863261-3.
- Barzilai, Gad. (1996). Wars, Internal Conflicts and Political Order: A Jewish Democracy in the Middle East. Albany: State University of New York Press. ISBN0-7914-2944-X
- Brown, Wesley H. & Peter F. Penner (ed.): Christian Perspectives on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Neufeld Verlag, Schwarzenfeld 2008. ISBN 978-3-937896-57-1.
- Carter, Jimmy (2006). Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-7432-8502-6.
- Casper, Lionel L. (2003). Rape of Palestine and the Struggle for Jerusalem. New York & Jerusalem: Gefen Publishing House. ISBN 965-229-297-4.
- Citron, Sabina (2006). The Indictment: The Arab-Israeli Conflict in Historical Perspective. New York & Jerusalem: Gefen Publishing House. ISBN 965-229-373-3.
- Cramer, Richard Ben (2004). How Israel Lost: The Four Questions. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-7432-5028-1.
- Dershowitz, Alan (2004). The Case for Israel. New York: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0-471-67952-6.
- Falk, Avner (2004). Fratricide in the Holy Land: A Psychoanalytic View of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Madison: U of Wisconsin P. ISBN 0-299-20250-X
- Gelvin, James L. (2005). The Israel-Palestine Conflict: 100 Years of War. New York & Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge UP. ISBN 0-521-61804-5.
- Gold, Dore (2004). Tower of Babble: How the United Nations Has Fueled Global Chaos. New York: Crown Forum. ISBN 1-4000-5475-3.
- Finkelstein, Norman G. (2003). Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. Verso Books. ISBN 1-85984-442-1.
- Goldenberg, Doron (2003). State of Siege. Gefen Publishing House. ISBN 965-229-310-5.
- Gopin, Marc. (2002). Holy War, Holy Peace: How Religion Can Bring Peace to the Middle East. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-514650-6.
- Hamidullah, Muhammad (January 1986). "Relations of Muslims with non-Muslims". Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 7 (1): 9. doi:10.1080/13602008608715960.
- Howell, Mark (2007). What Did We Do to Deserve This? Palestinian Life under Occupation in the West Bank, Garnet Publishing. ISBN 1-85964-195-4
- Israeli, Raphael (2002). Dangers of a Palestinian State. New York & Jerusalem: Gefen Publishing House. ISBN 965-229-303-2.
- Katz, Shmuel (1973). Battleground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine. Shapolsky Pub. ISBN 0-933503-03-2.
- Khouri, Fred J. (1985). The Arab-Israeli dilemma (3rd ed.). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 0-8156-2339-9.
- Lewis, Bernard (1984). The Jews of Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP. ISBN 0-691-05419-3.
- Lesch, David (2007). The Arab-Israeli Conflict A History. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0195172302.
- –––. (September 1990). "The Roots of Muslim Rage." The Atlantic Monthly.
- Maoz, Zeev (2006). Defending the Holy Land. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. ISBN 0-472-11540-5
- Morris, Benny (1999). Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001. New York: Knopf. ISBN 0-679-42120-3.
- Rogan, Eugene L., ed., and Avi Shlaim, ed. (2001). The War for Palestine: Rewriting the History of 1948. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. ISBN 978-0521794763.
- Segev, Tom (1999). One Palestine Complete: Jews and Arabs Under British Mandate. New York: Henry Holt & Co. ISBN 0-8050-6587-3.
[edit] External links
| Find more about Arab–Israeli conflict on Wikipedia's sister projects: | |
 | Definitions from Wiktionary |
 | Images and media from Commons |
 | Learning resources from Wikiversity |
 | News stories from Wikinews |
 | Quotations from Wikiquote |
 | Source texts from Wikisource |
 | Textbooks from Wikibooks |
[edit] Government and official sources
- Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs
- League of Arab States
- Palestinian Authority Ministry of Foreign Affairs
- US State Department Mideast Peace information
- United Nations on the Question of Palestine, and *Israel's UN mission's responses
- Arab-Israeli Conflict from UCB Libraries GovPubs
[edit] Regional media
- Israeli
- Israel News - Yedioth Aharonoth Israel's largest newspaper, centrist (Hebrew)
- IsraelInsider Israel's Daily Online News Magazine (see also Israelinsider)
- Jerusalem Post, Israel's oldest English newspaper, conservative
- Ha'aretz Israeli newspaper, liberal
- Jerusalem Newswire Christian-run Jerusalem-based news website, conservative
- Arab
- Lebanon Daily Star, largest English-circulation newspaper in the Arab world
- Al Jazeera, pan-Arab news station (see also Al Jazeera)
- Al Ahram, Egypt's largest newspaper (see also Al Ahram)
- Palestine Chronicle, weekly electronic paper
[edit] Think tanks and strategic analysis
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, influential centrist Israeli think tank specializing in military and strategic analysis
- Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs (PASSIA), Palestinian research organization
- Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information Joint Israeli-Palestinian think tank
- Middle East Research and Information Project (see also Middle East Research and Information Project)
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy (see also Saban Center for Middle East Policy)
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy (see also Washington Institute for Near East Policy)
- Original analysis of current developments in the peace-process, from Middle East Media Research Institute
- The Ariel Center for Policy Research
- A Regional Perspective on the Arab-Israeli Conflict by Jay Shapiro
- Obama and the Palestinian Question by Alvaro de Vasconcelos, Opinion, June 2009 European Union Institute for Security Studies
[edit] Peace proposals
[edit] Maps
- MideastWeb Middle East Map Collection
- FactsOfIsrael.com Maps, history, statistics, victims
- University of Texas Map Collection
[edit] General sources
- Crisis Guide: The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict from the Council on Foreign Relations
- Resources >Modern Period>20th Cent.>History of Israel>State of Israel The Jewish History Resource Center, Project of the Dinur Center for Research in Jewish History, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
- Daily digest of commentary about the Arab-Israeli conflict from around the world
- Israel and the Palestinians
- Encarta Encyclopedia on the Arab-Israeli Conflict (Archived 2009-10-31)
- Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict, includes links to historical sources, as well as sources representing the Arab and Israeli sides of the conflict.
- The Guardian (UK) A Brief History of Arab-Israeli Conflict (flash)
- Mideast: Land of Conflict from CNN
- Israel-Palestine Conflict at the Open Directory Project
- University of Texas Center for Mideast Studies extensive collection of updated links
- Diplomacy Monitor - Middle East
- Information (articles, reports, maps, books, links, ...) on the israeli palestinian conflict (middle east conflict)
- Holy Land, Unholy War Independent coverage of the Middle East conflicts by the news agency Inter Press Service
- "A Brief History of the Arab-Israeli Conflict" by Jeremy Pressman
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||
| ||
Indo-Israeli relations
| Indo-Israeli relations | |
  | |
 | |
Indo-Israeli relations refers to the bilateral ties between the State of Israel and the Republic of India.
Official diplomatic relations between Israel and India did not exist until 1992 but since then the two countries have developed a solid relationship. India did not recognize the state of Israel until that time for two main reasons. Firstly, although India belonged to Non-Aligned Movement, it was an ally of the USSR, and yet followed the general pattern of non-aligned countries with regards to foreign relations. Secondly, India was a strong supporter of Palestinian independence. In 1947 New-Delhi proposed to the Special Committee of the United Nations on Palestine (UNSCOP) the creation of a federal Palestine with autonomous status for the Jewish population.[1] After the Kashmiri insurrection in 1989, the collapse of the USSR and the military escalation with Pakistan, the political framework changed, resulting in the establishment of relations between India and Israel in 1992. The loss of the Indian National Congress in the general elections and the coming of the Bharatiya Janata Party, along with concerns about Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent[2][3] are also to take into consideration. Establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel also was a step in strengthening relationships with the United States[4] The new level of collaboration between the two countries was pursued even after the Indian National Congress returned to power in 2004. Israel is now India's second largest arms provider after Russia. India is viewed by both the Israelis and the Palestinians as a trustworthy intermediary.[5]
Contents[hide] |
[edit] History
Jews from Eretz Yisrael reached Indian shores as early as 562 BCE. The Hindu king Chandragupta gave them permission to live freely, build synagogues, and own property without conditions attached as long as the world and moon exist.[6][7]
Persian speaking Jews from Afghanistan and Iran came to India along with the invading armies of Ghaznavids, Ghori and Mughals between the 11th and 16th centuries . Some of them were traders and courtiers of the Mughals. Akbar's Jewish advisors significantly influenced his religious policies. A Jew was the tutor to the Mughal crown Prince, Dara Shikoh; both of whom where assassinated by Aurangzeb when he usurped the throne. Jews traded freely in Kashmir, the Punjab, and throughout the Mughal Empire.[8] Later Arabic-speaking Baghdadi Jews came to India as traders in the wake of European colonizations. They, eventually established manufacturing and commercial houses of fabulous wealth.[8] The Portuguese were intolerant towards Jews; especially during their Goa Inquisition, where they forcibly converted and persecuted Jews along with Hindus and newly converted Christians who still observed Hindu customs.[9][10]
Anti-Semitism in India only began when the Portuguese arrived in 1498.[9]
India gained independence from the British Empire in 1947, a year before the State of Israel was founded. India, along with Iran and Yugoslavia had recommended a single state with Arab and Jewish majority provinces with an aim to prevent partition of Palestine and prevent any conflict that might follow based on its own experience during partition.[11] However, the final UN resolution decided to partition Palestine into Arab and Jewish states based on religious and ethnic majority which India opposed in the final vote as it did not agree with concept of partition on the basis of religion.[citation needed] Gandhi opposed the creation of Israel as he was against the creation of countries based on religion.[12]
India established official relations with Israel in 1991, although informal ties had existed previously, involving such figures as Moshe Dayan.[13] Israel provided India with crucial information during its multiple wars.[14]India's first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru supported the creation of Israel.[15] Although India did not subscribe to the Partitioning of Palestine plan of 1947 and voted against Israel's admission in the United Nations in 1949, it did recognize Israel as a nation in 1950.[16] Various Hindu organizations, led by the Sangh Parivar, openly supported the Jewish cause and the creation of Israel.[17] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, founder of Hindutva, openly supported Israel when it was created and viewed it's creation as "joyous" and condemned India's vote at the UN against Israel.[18] According to Subhash Kapila the opposition to the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel during the 1960s and 1970s arose from the Congress Party's desire to appease the Muslims in India as well as to continue the foreign policies of the Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi era.[15]
The percentage of Indian Jews in the country dropped from 20,000 at independence to less than 6,000 in the wake of Jewish immigration to Israel. Jews have historically lived in Muslim neighborhoods in India due to their dietary habits (between Jewish Kosher and Islamic Halal) as well as linguistic affiliations to the early Persian and Arabic speaking Jews.[19]
According to an international opinion survey conducted in 2009 on behalf of the Israeli Foreign Ministry, India is the most pro-Israel country in the world.[20]
[edit] Military and strategic ties
India and Israel have increased cooperation in military and intelligence ventures since the establishment of diplomatic relations. While India and Israel were officially "rivals" during the Cold War, the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of Islamic terrorism in both countries have generated a solid strategic alliance.[21] India recently launched a military satellite for Israel through its Indian Space Research Organization.[22]
In 1997, Israel's President Ezer Weizman became the first head of the Jewish state to visit India. He met with Indian President Shankar Dayal Sharma, Vice President K.R. Narayanan and Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda. Weizman negotiated the first weapons deal between the two nations, involving the purchase of Barak-1 vertically-launched surface-to-air (SAM) missiles from Israel. The Barak-1 has the ability to intercept anti-ship cruise missiles such as the Harpoon.[23] The purchase of the Barak-1 missiles from Israel by India was a tactical necessity since Pakistan had purchased P3-C II Orion maritime strike aircraft and 27 Harpoon sea-skimming anti-ship missiles from the United States.[23] Israel was one of the selected few nations, a group that also included France and Russia, that did not condemn India's 1998 Pokhran-II nuclear tests.[24]
In naval terms, Israel sees great strategic value in an alliance with the Indian Navy, given India's dominance of South Asian waters. Since the Mediterranean has a dominant Arab and European presence that is hostile to the Israeli navy in varying degrees, it thus sees the potential of establishing a logistical infrastructure in the Indian Ocean with the cooperation of the Indian Navy. In 2000, Israeli submarines reportedly conducted test launches of cruise missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads in the waters of the Indian Ocean, off the Sri Lanka coast.[21]
In 1996 India purchased 32 Searcher" Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Electronic Support Measure sensors and an Air Combat Manoeuvering Instrumentation simulator system from Israel.[23] Since then Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) has serviced several large contracts with the Indian Air Force including the upgrading of the IAF's Russian-made MiG-21 ground attack aircraft and there have been further sales of unmanned aerial vehicles as well as laser-guided bombs.[25]
A Rediff story in 2003 revealed that the Indian external intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) had clandestine links with the Mossad, Israel's external intelligence agency. When R&AW was founded in 1968 by Rameshwar Nath Kao, he was advised by the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to cultivate links with Mossad. This was suggested as a countermeasure to military links between that of a hostile Pakistan and China, as well as with North Korea. Israel was also concerned that Pakistani army officers were training Libyans and Iranians in handling Chinese and North Korean military equipment.[26] Though India planned to bomb Kahuta, as in Operation Opera, where Israel destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor, the plan was later dropped.
Pakistan feared intelligence relations between India and Israel threatened Pakistani security. When young Israeli tourists began visiting the Kashmir valley in the early nineties, Pakistan suspected they were disguised Israeli army officers there to help Indian security forces with counter-terrorism operations. Israeli tourists were attacked, with one slain and another kidnapped. Pressure from the Kashmiri Muslim diaspora in the United States led to his release.[26]
Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd signed a $2.5 billion deal with India to develop an anti-aircraft system and missiles for the country, in the biggest defense contract in the history of Israel at the time.[when?] IAI CEO Yitzhak Nissan visited India to finalize the agreement with heads of the defense establishment and the country's president. IAI is developing the Barak-8 missile for the Indian Navy and Air Force which is capable of protecting sea vessels and ground facilities from aircraft and cruise missiles. The missile has a range of over 70 kilometres. The missile will replace the current obsolete Russian system used by India.[8]
On November 10, 2008, Indian military officials visited Israel to discuss joint weapons development projects, additional sales of Israeli equipment to the Indian military, and counter-terrorism strategies. The new round of talks was seen as a significant expansion in the Indian-Israeli strategic partnership.[9]
In 2008, Israel surpassed Russia as the largest arms supplier to India.[27]
In December 2009, Gabi Ashkenazi the general of Israel Defence Forces made a historic state visit to India to cement the defense ties between the two countries. He pledged every help to India in fighting terrorism.[28][29][30][31]
[edit] Trade agreements
India's commerce minister, Jyotiraditya Scindia, visited Israel in February 2010 to discuss a free-trade agreement. He met with Israeli president Shimon Peres; Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, and representatives of Israel's water technology and high-tech industries. During the visit President Shimon Peres offered New Delhi his country's complete cooperation in the fight against terror saying, "India's security is as important to Israel as its own" [32]
Bilateral trade, which was at $200 million in 2001, grew to $4.1 billion by 2009, excluding defense trade. This includes manufacturing, satellite launch, agriculture and diamond industries. In 2008, PBEL, a joint venture of two Israeli real estate firms and an Indian developer, announced an investment of $1 billion in real estate projects in India. The plan is to build 10 million square feet of world-class residential and business space in three cities.[33] A formal free trade agreement was on progress as of 2010 for a two way agreement that would give Indian industries access to the Israeli high technology sector, and Israel access to Indian domestic market.[34] This is a step ahead of the Preferential Trade Agreement (PTA) that a Joint Study Group (JSG) set up by the two countries had recommended to improve trade ties. It is estimated that bilateral trade would exceed $12 billion in 5 years with this trade agreement. The current areas that are to be given focus are software, communication, homeland security, science and medicine, bio and agro-technologies, water.[35][36]
[edit] Science and technology collaboration
India is building closer ties with Israel in the areas of nanotechnology, information technology, water technology and biotechnology. [37] In 1998, the Indo-Israel Joint Symposium on Human Genome was held in Jerusalem. Subsequently, as a follow up to the symposium, a call for joint research proposals on Human Genome was issued in July 1999 for which 11 proposals were received. Out of these, 6 research projects have been recommended for implementation.[38] Another Indo-Israel status seminar on human Genome Research was organized in India on December 2000.[39] In 1999-2000, Israel and India were involved in 22 joint research projects.[40] Scientists from both countries visited the laboratories of their collaborators and short term exchange visits were organized.[38][41] The Indo-Israel Joint Committee of scientists was constituted with the DST (Department of Science and Technology)and India as Co-chairmen with representatives from various research organizations in India and the Ministry of Information Technology as members. The 4th Meeting of the joint committee was held in the first week of November 1999 in Jerusalem, attended by a 3 member Indian delegation.[38]
In 2003, Israel's Minister for Science and Technology said that Israel was interested in strengthening science and technology ties with India considering that the latter had a rich base of scientists and technologists and the two countries could benefit by synergising their activities.[41] In 2003, the two countries proposed to double the investment under the ongoing science and technology collaboration to $1 million with $0.5 million from each country in the next biennial period starting October 2004.[41]
In 2004, the Ministry of Science and Technology in India signed an MoU with Israel for jointly funding industrial R&D projects.[42]
In an agreement signed on May 30, 2005, India and Israel pledged to set up a fund to encourage investment and joint industrial ventures. According to the Press Trust of India, there are five priority areas for enhanced collaboration: nanotechnology, biotechnology, water management, alternative energy, and space and aeronautics. India and Israel will each start by contributing US$1 million to provide risk-free grants to entrepreneurs in the two countries.[43] India purchased 50 Israeli drones for $220 million in 2005.[44] India was considering buying the newer Harop drone.[45] India is also in the process of obtaining missile-firing Hermes 450s.
In 2008, Israel and India finalised a three-year plan to introduce crops such as olives, dates and grapes to be introduced and cultivated in the states of Rajasthan and Maharashtra, to create an agricultural market that meets Western demand for products like olive oil. In addition to the hope that this plan would boost yield and stave off famine, officials presented the project as symbolic.[46]
[edit] Space collaboration
Israel's Minister for Science and Technology has expressed interest in collaborating with the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) towards utilizing satellites for better management of land and other resources. Israel has also expressed interest in participating in ISRO's Chandrayaan mission of sending an unmanned craft to the moon.[41] A Memorandum of Understanding, signed by ISRO and Israel's space agency, provides for cooperation in multiple areas of space science and technology[47]
Israel's TecSAR radar satellite was launched by India on 22 January 2008.[48][49] The Indian PSLV launch-vehicle was chosen instead of its own home grown Shavit rocket.[50] This was due to the cost of the PSLV, $15 million compared to the Shavit at $20 million.[51]
In March 2009, India launched the RISAT-2 satellite which is based on the technology employed in Israel's TecSAR. The satellite has the capability to take high resolution images at night and can carry out reconnaissance operations even through a dense cloud cover. Most Indian satellites currently in operation lack these capabilities. The decision to purchase the satellite was taken in the wake of the 2008 Mumbai attacks.[52] The 300 kilogram RISAT-2 was successfully launched by India's PSLV rocket in April 2009.[53]
A spokesman of the Indian Space Research Organization said that RISAT-2 is an Indian satellite built with assistance from Israel.[54] India is also developing its own, indigenous version of RISAT-2, capable of taking images through clouds and at night. It will be launched in late 2009.[55]
[edit] Tourism
After completing their military service, many Israeli young people travel to India.
[edit] Diplomatic visits
In 2003 Ariel Sharon was the first Israeli Prime Minister to visit India. He was welcomed by the center-right wing Bharatiya Janata Party led National Democratic Alliance coalition government of India.[56] Several newspapers expressed positive views on his visit, and Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee voiced confidence that Sharon's visit would pave the way for further consolidating bilateral ties.[57] Sharon's visit was condemned by some, especially in leftist[58] and Muslim circles.[59] Hundreds of supporters of India's various pro-Islamic and communist parties rallied in New Delhi. Nearly 100 Muslims were arrested.[59] Students of the Aligarh Muslim University joined the protests and demanded that India sever all ties with Israel and increase ties with Palestine.[60] The Hindi-language daily Navbharat Times condemned the protests and called him an important friend of India." The Hindu nationalist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) condemned the protest against Sharon.[61][62] RSS spokesperson Ram Madhav said: The entire world acknowledges that Israel has effectively and ruthlessly countered terror in the Middle East. Since India and Israel are both fighting a war against terrorism, therefore, we should learn a lesson or two from them. We need to have close cooperation with them in this field.[61][62] The RSS newspaper Panchjanya described the visit of Ariel Sharon as an opportunity for India to get closer to Israel and fight terrorism jointly.[61][62] Sharon expressed satisfaction over his talks with Indian leaders. Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee also expressed satisfaction, saying that the visit would increase ties between India and Israel.[63] Sharon invited Vajpayee to visit Israel.[64] Sharon said that Israelis "regard India to be one of the most important countries in the world," and Vajpayee was sure that Sharon's visit would bring the two states closer together. Sharon said that terrorism was a menace that required an international response.[59]
[edit] Delegations and diplomatic visits to Israel
In August 2007, a delegation of the All India Organisation of Imams and Mosques led by Maulana Jamil Ilyas visited Israel. The Israel visit follows a trip to India earlier this year by Jewish rabbis to Delhi for an inter-faith meeting. The meet led to a joint statement.[65] Maulana Ilyas said
We are coming with the message of peace and goodwill from Indian Muslims who believe in the Indian tradition of resolving issues through dialogue and peaceful means," said Ilyasi, who is the leader of 500,000 imams across India. Our visit to Israel will be historical in terms of developing a dialogue between Judaism and Islam in the Indian subcontinent, where more than 40 percent of the world's Muslim population lives. Interaction with both Palestinian and Jewish sisters and brothers and their religious leadership will lay a solid foundation for future engagement.[65]
Ilyasi claimed Israel treats Muslims better than India does: "I was pleasantly surprised to know that the Sharia (Islamic law) is being supported by the Israeli government; whereas, in India, only local Muslims implement it. That is unique." Ilyasi was apparently referring to the existence of government-sanctioned Islamic courts in the Israeli justice system, which handle marriage, divorce and conversion issues for Muslim Israelis. Similar religious courts exist for Jews and Christians.[66] The visit was organised by the American Jewish Council. The visit was touted as a dialogue of democracies.[67]
In 2000 Jaswant Singh became the first Indian foreign minister to visit Israel.[68] Following the visit, the two countries set up a joint anti-terror commission. The foreign ministers of the two countries said intensified cooperation would range from counter terrorism to information technology.[69][70]
In early 2006 Indian government ministers Sharad Pawar, Kapil Sibal and Kamal Nath visited Israel.[71] Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has also visited Israel.[72]
India's commerce minister, Jyotiraditya Scindia, visited Israel in February 2010 to discuss a free-trade agreement. He met with Israeli president Shimon Peres; Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, and representatives of Israel's water technology and high-tech industries.[73]
[edit] Jewish-Hindu interfaith summit
The world's first Jewish-Hindu interfaith leadership summit, spearheaded by Hindu organizations in India and Jewish organizations in Israel, as well as the American Jewish Committee, was held in New Delhi on February 2007. The chief Rabbi of Israel, Yona Metzger, was actively involved in the dialogue, together with Swami Dayanand Saraswati. They stated that "The Jewish and Hindu communities are committed to the ancient traditions of Judaism and Hindu dharma respectively, and have both, in their own ways, gone through the painful experiences of persecution, oppression and destruction."[74] Mertzger quoted:
"For thousands of years we have marched on parallel causes and have now built bridges of cooperation between the two religions. Jews have lived in India for over 2000 years and have never been discriminated against. This is something unparalleled in human history".[75]
[edit] Bnei Menashe controversy
The Bnei Menashe ("Children of Menasseh", Hebrew בני מנשה) are a group of more than 8,000 people from India's remote North-Eastern border states of Manipur and Mizoram who claim descent from one of the Lost Tribes of Israel. On March 31, 2005 Sephardi Rabbi Shlomo Amar, one of Israel's two chief rabbis, accepted the Bnei Menashe's claim because of their exemplary devotion to Judaism. His decision was significant because it paved the way for all of the Bnei Menashe to enter Israel under Israel's Law of Return. In the past two decades, some 1,300 Bnei Menashe have moved to Israel. Indian Jews including the Bnei Menashe have never suffered anti-Semitism in India, but they regard Israel as their homeland and decided to emigrate "on Zionist considerations."[10] On November 9, 2005, the Israeli government halted all conversions of the Bnei Menashe in India, saying it was straining relations between the two countries. Indian officials reportedly expressed concern about the conversions and indicated mass conversions are considered illegal in India. The decision led to criticism from supporters of the Bnei Menashe who say Israeli officials failed to explain to the Indian government that the rabbis were not proselytising, but rather formalizing the conversions of Bnei Menashe who had already accepted Judaism [11]. In July 2006 Israeli Immigration Absorption Minister Zeev Boim said that the 218 Bnei Menashe who were formally converted in 2005 by the Chief Rabbinate "would be allowed to come here, but first the government must decide what its policy will be towards those who have yet to (formally) convert." [76]
[edit] See also
- Indian Jews
- Hinduism in Israel
- Israel-Pakistan relations
- Indo-Iranian relations
- Sino-Israeli relations
| |||
| |||
[edit] References
- ^ c.f. C. Jaffrelot, Inde-Israel, le nouvel élément clé de l'axe du bien ? Critique Internationale, n°21, October 2003.
- ^ c.f. C. Jaffrelot, op.cit.
- ^ c.f. A Financial Times article.
- ^ Indo-Israeli Ties: The Post-Arafat Shift- Power and Interest News Report
- ^ name="talk">Talk to Palestine, Israel tells India Rediff - February 09, 2006
- ^ Three years in America, 1859-1862(p.59,p.60)By Israel Joseph Benjamin
- ^ Roots of Dalit history, Christianity, theology, and spirituality(p.28), James Massey, I.S.P.C.K.
- ^ a b (Nathan Katz and Ellen S. Goldberg) THE LAST JEWS IN INDIA AND BURMA
- ^ a b Who are the Jews of India? - The S. Mark Taper Foundation imprint in Jewish studies. University of California Press. 2000. p. 26. ISBN 9780520213234. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=ZWX6pF2PTJwC&pg=PA26.; "When the Portuguese arrived in 1498, they brought a spirit of intolerance utterly alien to India. They soon established an Office of Inquisition at Goa, and at their hands Indian Jews experienced the only instance of anti-Semitism ever to occur in Indian soil."
- ^ Daus, Ronald (1983). Die Erfindung des Kolonialismus. Wuppertal/Germany: Peter Hammer Verlag. ISBN 3-87294-202-6.
- ^ http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf3.html#a
- ^ http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers2%5Cpaper131.html
- ^ Moshe Dayan and India
- ^ India-Israel Partnership
- ^ a b INDIA – ISRAEL RELATIONS: THE IMPERATIVES FOR ENHANCED STRATEGIC COOPERATION - Subhash Kapila - South Asia Analysis Group
- ^ Dissent in Israel,Frontline
- ^ Hindu pro-Zionism
- ^ Savarkar, Vinayak. "GLAD TO NOTE THAT INDEPENDENT JEWISH STATE IS ESTABLISHED". Historic statements - Veer Savarkar. www.docstoc.com. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/8423379/Historic-Statements-Veer-Savarkar. Retrieved 2010-02-23.
- ^ http://www.jcpa.org/jl/jl101.htm
- ^ From India with love
- ^ a b India and Israel Forge a Solid Strategic Alliance by Martin Sherman,The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
- ^ [1]
- ^ a b c The Barak Missile Deal Scandal involving graft for an unnecessary missile system would hamper relations in 2006.Israel-India Military and Civil Trade Ties Skyrocket,The Jewish Institute for National security Affairs
- ^ [2]
- ^ India-Israel Military Ties Continue to Grow,The Jewish Institute for National ecurity Affairs
- ^ a b RAW and MOSSAD, the Secret Link,rediff.com
- ^ [3]
- ^ "IDF official announcement". http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/today/09/12/1001.htm.
- ^ "JPOST article". http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1259831476468&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull.
- ^ "HAARETZ article". http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1133119.html.
- ^ "Arutz Sheva article". http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/134822.
- ^ http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article109349.ece
- ^ Top Israeli firms enter India's realty market
- ^ India Israel Free Trade
- ^ Israel trade negotiations
- ^ Israel pushes for free trade with India
- ^ Israel, India to hold free-trade talks
- ^ a b c Annual Report 1999-2000,Department of Science and Technology, India
- ^ Annual Report 2000-2001,Department of Science and Technology, India
- ^ Annual Report 2001 - 2002,Department of Science and Technology, India
- ^ a b c d Israel plans thrust on science and technology collaboration, The Times of India
- ^ Annual Report 2004-2005,Department of Science and Technology, India
- ^ India forms science ties with Canada, Israel, Vietnam,scidev.net
- ^ India Israeli Drones
- ^ Israel negotiating Harop drone with India
- ^ Blakely, Rhys (2008-05-22). "A million olive trees to make Indian desert bloom for farmers". London: The Times. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3981145.ece. Retrieved 2009-03-12.
- ^ 2003 Good Year for India; Israel Shows Interest in Mission to the Moon,Space Age Publishing
- ^ [4]India Launches Israeli Radar Satellite
- ^ [5]India Launches Israeli Spy Satellite
- ^ [6],Israel Chooses India to Launch Its Satellites
- ^ Yiftah Shapir: Launch Of Israel's TecSAR Satellite
- ^ Report: India bought advanced spy satellite from Israel
- ^ Spy satellite RISAT takes off from Sriharikota
- ^ India to launch Israel-backed satellite
- ^ ISRO gearing up to put Israeli satellite in orbit
- ^ Ariel Sharon's India visit,rediff.com
- ^ Ariel Sharon arrives in India,Rediff.com
- ^ Left wants 'killer' Sharon to go home,Rediff.com
- ^ a b c India and Israel vow to fight terrorism,BBC
- ^ AMU students protest against Sharon's visit
- ^ a b c RSS slams Left for opposing Sharon's visit
- ^ a b c Google Cache of above
- ^ Sharon's visit will consolidate ties PM,rediff.com
- ^ Sharon invites Vajpayee to Israel,rediff.com
- ^ a b http://www.indianmuslims.info/news/2007/aug/15/american_jewish_group_takes_indian_muslims_israel.html
- ^ http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/123448
- ^ http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/dialogue-democracy-indian-muslims-visit-israel
- ^ Peres Visit Highlights Growing Ties Between Israel and New Ally India,United Jewish Communities
- ^ India/Israel,fas.org
- ^ Jaswant to visit Israel to boost bilateral ties,The Daily Excelsior
- ^ Talk to Palestine, Israel tells India Rediff - February 09, 2006
- ^ http://www.narendramodi.in/pages/119
- ^ India, Israel to hold free-trade talks
- ^ World's Jewish and Hindu Leaders Gather in New Delhi, wfn.org
- ^ RELIGIOUS LEADERS WANT TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION, NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM, The Daily Star (Egypt)
- ^ [7]
[edit] External links
- Rediff Portal - Ariel Sharon's visit to India
- India-Israel Fellowship
| |||
| |||
-
Huge protests fan Egypt unrest
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12331520
<div class="warning"> <img class="holding" src="http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/51053000/jpg/_51053586_jex_943116_de36-1.jpg" alt="Egypt protests" /> <p><strong>Please turn on JavaScript.</strong> Media requires JavaScript to play.</p> </div>
Click to play
Click to play
Advertisement
The BBC's John Simpson describes the scene in Cairo's Tahrir Square
Continue reading the main story
Egypt Unrest
Egyptian protesters are holding huge rallies in Cairo and other cities as they step up their efforts to force President Hosni Mubarak from power.
Organisers have been hoping to bring one million people on to the streets of the capital. The demonstration is the biggest since the protests began.
The atmosphere has been festive, with protesters singing and chanting.
Protest leaders, including Mohamed ElBaradei, have called on Mr Mubarak to step down by Friday at the latest.
"They hope that this will end today or Friday at the latest, and they called the coming Friday 'the Friday of departure', but I hope that President Mubarak will take heed before then and leave the country after 30 years of rule and give the people a chance, and I don't expect that he wants to see more blood," Mr ElBaradei told al-Arabiya TV.
Festive atmosphere
BBC correspondents in Cairo's Tahrir Square say the crowds there are already much bigger than on the previous seven days of protests.
Journalists at the scene estimated that hundreds of thousands of people - men, women and children from a cross-section of Egyptian society - have gathered, although in the absence of official estimates, there is no way of finding out the exact numbers.
Continue reading the main story
At the scene
The great strength of this popular uprising is that it is happening across Egypt.
Hundreds of thousands of people, young and old, men and women of all faiths are taking to the streets.
In the northern city of Alexandria the main focus was the famous Ibrahim Mosque in the centre of this historical coastal city.
Tens of thousands descended on the square. They climbed on roofs and the tops of cars and in trees to get a vantage point, all calling for the removal of Hosni Mubarak.
I saw one effigy of the president being hanged and another man threw shoes at it. Other people carried aloft a coffin representing the end of the Mubarak regime.
These are scenes that would have been unthinkable only days ago in such an authoritarian country.
Egypt's powerful army has vowed it will not use force against the protesters.
Many carried placards and banners daubed with anti-Mubarak slogans. Earlier, crowds cheered as an effigy of the president was hung from a set of traffic lights in the square.
Meanwhile, new Vice-President Omar Suleiman said he would hold cross-party talks on constitutional reform.
Mr Mubarak reshuffled his cabinet on Monday to try to head off the protests, replacing the widely despised Interior Minister Habib al-Adly.
Prime Minister Ahmad Shafiq told state TV the new government would ensure bread supplies, tackle security problems and "review our entire political, constitutional and legislative situation, into something more satisfactory and appropriate for us as Egyptian citizens".
"Everything is subject to amendments, without limits," he said.
But analysts say the army's statement has been a major blow for President Mubarak, and appears to have encouraged protesters, who are flocking to central Cairo in their thousands.
The feeling that change is coming in Egypt is getting stronger, says the BBC's Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen in Cairo. Too much has happened too quickly to go back to the way things were before, he says.
Continue reading the main story
The UN human rights chief, Navi Pillay, says 300 people may been killed across the country since the protests began a week ago. They followed an internet campaign and were partly inspired by the ousting of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia last month.
Egypt has since cut off the internet in the country and text messaging services have been disrupted.
In other developments:
- The US state department announced it had ordered all non-emergency US embassy and government personnel to leave Egypt
- AFP news agency reported that US Ambassador Margaret Scobey had spoken by phone to Mr ElBaradei
- In an opinion piece for the New York Times, US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee head John Kerry called on Mr Mubarak to step down and engineer a peaceful transition
- The US has despatched a special envoy to Cairo, former ambassador to Egypt Frank Wisner
In Egypt's second biggest city, Alexandria, thousands of people have gathered to call for the president to step down.
Continue reading the main story
Egypt's crisis
- Most populous Arab nation, with 84.5 million inhabitants
- Authoritarian President Hosni Mubarak has ruled for 30 years
- Protests against corruption, lack of democracy, inflation, unemployment
- Unrest triggered by overthrow of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia
1 February 2011 Last updated at 14:51 GMT
Share this page
Jordan protests: King Abdullah names Marouf Bakhit PM
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories
- Jordan rally targets government
- Jordan acts to pre-empt public discontent
- Mid-East: Will there be a domino effect?
King Abdullah of Jordan has dismissed his cabinet and appointed a new prime minister amid large street protests.
New PM Marouf Bakhit has been charged with carrying out "true political reforms", but the Islamist opposition rejected the appointment.
The protesters had demanded action on unemployment and rising prices and the right to elect the prime minister.
They blamed former PM Samir Rifai for the country's economic problems and had called on him to stand down.
The palace said the king had accepted his resignation earlier on Tuesday.
In a statement, it said Mr Bakhit's mission was "to take practical, quick and tangible steps to launch true political reforms, enhance Jordan's democratic drive and ensure safe and decent living for all Jordanians".
Reform was a "necessity to provide a better life for our people, but we won't be able to attain that without real political reforms, which must increase popular participation in the decision-making", it said.
'History of corruption'
Mr Bakhit, a retired army major-general, served as Jordan's prime minister from 2005 until his resignation in 2007.
Continue reading the main story
"Start Quote
He is not the right person to run things at this current state and get Jordan out of crisis"
End Quote Zaki Bani Rsheid Islamic Action Front (IAF)
Before then he served as the kingdom's national security adviser and its ambassador to Israel.
He was also the head of a state committee that oversaw the implementation of the peace treaty that Jordan signed with Israel in 1994, and served as ambassador to Turkey for three years.
He has a doctorate in political science and taught the subject at a university for army and police recruits in southern Jordan.
The country's powerful Islamist opposition movement, the Islamic Action Front (IAF), said it did not welcome Mr Bakhit's appointment.
"With the choice of Bakhit, it's obvious that reforms have not started yet. We are against Bakhit because our experience with him is not encouraging," IAF head Hamzah Mansur told the AFP news agency.
"There is no reason to stop the protests now," he said.
The IAF has always said it believed elections in 2007, after which Mr Bakhit stood down, were rigged.
"He carried out the worst parliamentary elections in Jordan in 2007," said Zaki Bani Rsheid, another IAF leader.
"He is not the right person to run things at this current state and get Jordan out of crisis," he said.
"We need a man who is well respected by the people, a man who does not have a history of corruption and oppression. How can he lead political reform?"
The IAF has said repeatedly it is not seeking to oust King Abdullah, who has the power to appoint governments, approve legislation and dissolve parliament.
Jordan has a high unemployment rate among its population of six million, the majority of whom are under 25, and is suffering from the rising food and fuel prices which have affected many of its neighbours.
The country has seen three weeks of largely peaceful protests, inspired by those in Tunisia which unseated President Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali and the ongoing unrest in Egypt.
The government recently announced a $125m (£78m) package to reduce prices, as well as measures to boost salaries, in an attempt to ease the protests.
But many of those on the streets said the measures were not enough and have demanded more extensive political reforms, including the right to directly elect the prime minister.
More on This Story
Related Stories
- Jordan rally targets government 22 JANUARY 2011, MIDDLE EAST
- Jordan acts to pre-empt public discontent 19 JANUARY 2011, BUSINESS
- Mid-East: Will there be a domino effect? 01 FEBRUARY 2011, MIDDLE EAST
- Jordan loyalists sweep election 10 NOVEMBER 2010, MIDDLE EAST
- Q&A: Jordan election 04 NOVEMBER 2010, MIDDLE EAST
- Country profile: Jordan 01 FEBRUARY 2011, COUNTRY PROFILES
- Marouf Bakhit appointed PM 24 NOVEMBER 2005, MIDDLE EAST
- Jordan king names new court staff 16 NOVEMBER 2005, MIDDLE EAST
From other news sites
Channel 4 King of Jordan sacks Cabinet amid demonstrations 23 mins ago
Yahoo! UK and Ireland Jordan king fires govt, Islamists slam new PM 35 mins ago
Telegraph King of Jordan sacks cabinet 41 mins ago
Charlotte Observer* Jordan's king fires Cabinet amid protests 1 hr ago
NEWS.com.au Jordanian king names new prime minister 1 hr ago
About these results
* May require registration or subscription
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12336960 Egypt crisis: Indian Embassy officials stay on
NDTV.com - 1 hour agoDespite two flights ferrying people back home, not one Indian embassy official has left Cairo. NDTV spoke to the Indian ambassador in the control room which ...Krishna describes Egypt crisis its 'internal affair'
Sify - 1 hour agoExternal Affairs Minister SM Krishna describing the anti-government protests in Egypt as an 'internal affair', on Tuesday said the safety of Indians in ...Passengers complain of being fleeced by AI
IBNLive.com - 1 hour agoMumbai: Stranded passengers returning home from Egypt on Tuesday complained that Air India charged a hefty sum of Rs 45000 to Rs 55000 for a one-way ticket ...Air India responds to allegations of overcharging Indians in Cairo
NDTV.com - 2 hours agoNew Delhi: With the Egypt crisis deepening and Indians caught in the mayhem, Air India flew 300 Indians to Mumbai. Some passengers say that Air India has ...Air India fleeces passengers from Cairo
NewsX - 3 hours agoPassengers coming back to India from Egypt revealed that they have had to pay a huge price to get back to India.Indians from Egypt accuse Air India of overcharging
Economic Times - 4 hours agoMUMBAI: Indians who were brought back to the country from strife-ridden Egypt on special Air India flights complained Tuesday of being overcharged by the ...Stranded passengers from Egypt complain of high fares charged by Air India
The Hindu - 5 hours agoPTI PTI Indians arrive in Mumbai from Egypt, on Monday. Stranded passengers returning home from Egypt on Tuesday complained that Air India charged a hefty ...Did Air India charge Indians in Cairo more than necessary?
NDTV.com - 7 hours agoMumbai: A special Air India flight from Cairo - the second in two days - has landed in Mumbai, bringing Indians back home after they were caught in the ...6 Tamilians from Egypt arrive by special Air India flight
Daily News & Analysis - 7 hours agoPlace: Chennai | Agency: PTI Six Tamilians who were stranded at Cairo due to the developments in that country arrived here by a special Air India flight. ...Flight from Cairo: Passengers complain of exorbitant AI fares
Oneindia - 7 hours agoMumbai, Feb 1 (PTI) Several Indian passengers who wereflown home from strife-hit Cairo on two Air India (AI) flightshave complained that the airline charged ...Related
Timeline of articles
Number of sources covering this storyAir India fleeced us, say Indians rescued from Egypt1 hour ago - SifyFlight from Cairo: Passengers complain of exorbitant AI fares8 hours ago - Hindustan TimesWe didn't expect a problem this big, say Egypt evacuees22 hours ago - Daily News & Analysis300 Indians returning from Egypt on special AI flightJan 30, 2011 - Hindustan TimesSpecial AI flight to bring back Indians from CairoJan 30, 2011 - Economic TimesImages
The HinduArab NewsThe HinduNDTV.comIndependent Onl...International B...Mid-DayDeccan HeraldIndia TodayVideos
Mass rallies across Egypt tell Mubarak to go
Reuters Africa - - 4 minutes agoCAIRO, Feb 1 (Reuters) - At least one million Egyptians took to the streets on Tuesday in scenes never before seen in the ...Egyptians fill Tahrir Square in massive rally
USA Today - - 9 minutes agoCAIRO — Hundreds of thousands of protesters packed into Tahrir Square on Tuesday in the largest challenge to the ...Factbox: Egypt's powerful military
Reuters - 11 minutes ago(Reuters) - Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's ruling apparatus has relied on the military since he came to power in 1981. All four Egyptian presidents ...Egypt is a PR problem for Obama team?
Washington Post (blog) - - 14 minutes ago"It's no secret that Tom's style is one of running a very intense process," the official said. "Lots of meetings. ...Hundreds of thousands join Egypt day of anger
Africasia - 15 minutes agoMassive tides of protesters flooded Cairo and Egypt's second city Alexandria on Tuesday in the biggest outpouring of anger yet in their eight-day drive to ...Egyptians Rally Against Mubarak as Turmoil Spreads
San Francisco Chronicle - 18 minutes ago(Updates with death toll in third paragraph, official's comment in fifth. See EXTRA for news on unrest in Egypt.) Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Egyptians poured ...British tourists in Egypt enjoy despite ongoing protests
Sify - 22 minutes agoLondon, Feb 1 (IANS) Despite the political turmoil in Egypt, British holidaymakers seem to have a gala time in that country. Tourists in the Red Sea resort ...William Hague orders rescue flight for stranded Britons
Independent - 28 minutes agoThe Foreign Office will send a charter flight to Egypt tomorrow to help stranded Britons, with further flights on standby if necessary, Foreign Secretary ...Cairo Street Debate: When Mubarak Foes and Backers Clash
TIME - - 32 minutes agoIt was almost midday, and a group of several hundred men paused in front of Cairo's 6 October Bridge, where four sand-colored Egyptian army tanks blocked ...How Egypt's Opposition Got a More Youthful Mojo
TIME - - 32 minutes agoIf the Tunisian revolution was sparked by the self-immolation of a poor fruit vendor, you could say that Egypt's weeklong protests had their genesis in an ...Timeline of articles
Number of sources covering this storyEgyptians fill Tahrir Square in massive rally9 minutes ago - USA TodayMubarak Offers to Negotiate8 hours ago - Wall Street JournalEgyptian protesters are conflicted over US role22 hours ago - The Associated PressEgypt protests: Monday 31 January 2011 as it happenedJan 31, 2011 - Telegraph.co.ukEgypt protesters call for 'million-man march'Jan 31, 2011 - Sydney Morning HeraldObama's day: 'Orderly transition' in EgyptJan 31, 2011 - USA TodayOpposition Unites in EgyptJan 31, 2011 - Wall Street JournalThe Globe's Patrick Martin on the streets of CairoJan 30, 2011 - Globe and MailCanada warns tourists to consider leaving EgyptJan 30, 2011 - Toronto StarUS offers evacuation flights as Mubarak clings to powerJan 30, 2011 - NDTV.comImages
Africasia
USA Today
Christian Scien...
Financial TimesNewsday (subscr...RadioFreeEurope...CBS NewsWired News (blo...New York Daily ...Videos
Battle for narrative
Ynetnews - - 13 minutes agoIn the wake of the major Egyptian riots, the unrest in other Arab countries and the uncertain outcome of all this, another battlefront will soon be greatly ...As Egypt's Crisis Grows, So Do the Anxieties in Israel
TIME - - 32 minutes agoIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firmly ordered his government not to comment on events in Egypt, but the headlines in the Sunday morning papers ...Egypt the Day After
Huffington Post (blog) - 50 minutes agoThe Obama administration, and the rest of the world, must get used to the idea that there is a new Egypt and a new Middle East. ...
When the Jasmine Revolt was in full swing, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a pan-Arab audience on the Al Arabiya channel, "We are not taking sides."more by Hillary Rodham Clinton - 50 minutes ago - Huffington Post (blog) (1 occurrences)How the US Will Lose Egypt
msnbc.com (blog) - 52 minutes agoThe Egyptian protests bear an uncanny resemblance to the 1979 Iranian revolution, but historian Geoffrey Wawro urges the US to learn the lessons of ...Egyptians Flood Tahrir Square for Massive Protests
Voice of America - - 1 hour agoPhoto: AP Hundreds of thousands of people have flooded into central Cairo, where protesters have called for a "million-strong" march to press their demand ...Egypt Turmoil Threatens US Economy
Fox News - - 2 hours agoRising prices for food and fuel helped drive the uprisings racking the Middle East, now those uprisings are pushing prices higher still ...Egypt's revolution has nothing to do with Israel
Washington Post (blog) - - 2 hours agoThe Obama administration and many elite liberal opinion makers seem to be certain that the Middle East is really all about Israel. ...Arab Revolutions: From Tunisia To Egypt, Is This The Beginning Of A Trend?
Huffington Post - 2 hours agoProtests continue to sweep Egypt, as the world waits to see if President Hosni Mubarak will be forced from office. Those protesters are not alone. ...Biggest corporate stakes in Egypt's power shift
Fortune - - 3 hours agoFORTUNE -- The recent demonstrations in Egypt have rocked world markets and sent investors ...People's gain is loss for US and Israel as Arab allies falter
Sydney Morning Herald - - 3 hours agoBenjamin Netanyahu sits next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a dinner in Jerusalem last week. Photo: REUTERS The people-power surge cutting ...Timeline of articles
Number of sources covering this storyAs Egypt's Crisis Grows, So Do the Anxieties in Israel32 minutes ago - TIMEIranian leaders, opposition both embrace Egyptian protesters13 hours ago - CNNInvestors weigh Egypt's global implications19 hours ago - MarketWatchEgyptian evolutionJan 31, 2011 - BBC NewsWhat the U.S. Loses if Mubarak GoesJan 31, 2011 - TIMEArab Elite Say Monarchies Are Safe From UnrestJan 30, 2011 - New York TimesDubai Index Falls Most Since May, Leads Mideast DropJan 30, 2011 - BusinessWeekWith Egypt, Diplomatic Words Often FailJan 29, 2011 - New York TimesWithout Egypt, Israel will be left with no friends in MideastJan 29, 2011 - Ha'aretzImages
Sydney Morning ...Telegraph.co.uk...
RadioFreeEurope...
Aljazeera.net
The GuardianThe Guardian (b...Videos
As Protests Continue, Egypt's Economy Severely Affected
Voice of America - 11 minutes agoPhoto: AP Egypt's economy has all but ground to a halt, with banks closed, the country's credit ranking cut and international corporations and retailers ...Egypt to pay benefits to those who miss work due to protest
Jerusalem Post - 22 minutes agoBy JPOST.COM STAFF Egyptian Finance Minister Samir Radwan on Tuesday said that those who have lost work because of the mass protests in the country will ...Egyptian finance minister issues immediate measures
CNN International - 1 hour agoBy the CNN Wire Staff (CNN) -- Egypt's new finance minister announced Tuesday immediate economic measures to help the country get back to normal, ...Egypt finance minister says economy hit by protests
Reuters Africa - - 1 hour agoLONDON, Feb 1 (Reuters) - Egyptian Finance Minister Samir Radwan said the country's economy had been damaged by week-long protests against President Hosni ...Egypt says to open cash machines to civil servants
Reuters - - 2 hours agoCAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's state banks will reopen their cash machines to pensioners and government employees to collect pensions and salaries as of ...Foreign Investors Lose an Ally in Egypt
Wall Street Journal (blog) - 7 hours agoBy Summer Said A new finance minister was appointed in Egypt Monday, after the previous cabinet was sacked by President Hosni Mubarak following a week of ...Don't sacrifice country, Egypt finance minister says
CNN (blog) - 7 hours agoEgypt's newly appointed finance minister Samir Radwan has urged protesters trying to topple President Hosni Mubarak's regime not to risk the country's ...Egypt's new finance minister pleads not to sacrifice country
CNN International - - 21 hours agoTune into Quest Means Business at 1900 GMT, 2000 CET with CNN's Richard Quest to view the full interview and for complete coverage on the ...Egypt finance minister says has "national mission"
Reuters - - 21 hours agoAn Egyptian soldier guards a burnt building of the ruling National Democratic party in Cairo January 31, 2011. By Yasmine Saleh CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's ...Egypt Names Radwan Finance Minister in New Cabinet, Replaces Boutros-Ghali
Bloomberg - - Jan 31, 2011Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, facing unprecedented protests calling for his ouster, appointed a new ...-
Egypt-Iran Axis? Not Likely
TIME (blog) - - 16 minutes agoConservative media has been running hard with various alarmist themes about the uprising in Iran--the influence of Islamists, the potential threat to oil ...From Diplomat to Revolutionary: Can Mohamed ElBaradei Stay?
TIME - - 33 minutes agoHaving Mohamed ElBaradei atop a million-person revolution is not unlike having the head of your school's debate club quarterbacking the varsity football ...US ambassador talks to Egypt's ElBaradei
AFP - - 42 minutes agoWASHINGTON — The US ambassador to Egypt spoke to the country's top dissident Mohamed ElBaradei Tuesday as mass protests built in Cairo, in another apparent ...
ElBaradei told a reporter from Der Spiegel magazine in an interview, of which a translation from German is published on the IAEA website, "I am afraid that the memory of Hiroshima is beginning to fade. I am afraid that nuclear weapons will fall into the hands of dictators or terrorists. And, I am also afraid of the nuclear arsenals of democratic countries, for as long as these weapons exist there can be no security against the catastrophic...more by Mohamed ElBaradei - 33 minutes ago - TIME (2 occurrences)FACTBOX-Who is the Muslim Brotherhood?
Reuters Africa - 49 minutes agoFeb 1 (Reuters) - After 30 years of President Hosni Mubarak's authoritarian rule, Egypt's opposition is weak and fragmented. The Muslim Brotherhood has the ...Egypt: Another Case in the Muslim World of Stumbling From One Revolution To ...
Huffington Post (blog) - 1 hour agoIs Egypt's rebellion a coincidence, or is there something in Muslim culture that all too often perpetuates a vicious cycle? As an Arab raised in the Muslim ...ElBaradei's Decade of Scolding Mubarak Belies Image of Distant Bureaucrat
Bloomberg - - 1 hour agoMohamed ElBaradei, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, attends the World Economic Forum ...Mortimer Zuckerman: Muslim Brotherhood would be a disaster for Egypt
BBC News - 1 hour agoHe owns the New York Daily News and is a prominent commentator on US policy in the Middle East. He says if the opposition group the Muslim Brotherhood were ...Egypt Protests: Will the Real Mohammed ElBaradei Please Stand Up?
Fox News - - 1 hour agoIn the name of democratic reform, Mohammed El Baradei is doing his best to appear as the annointed one to succeed Egyptian President Hosni ...Egypt, 'Ummah Duniyah', Roars: Hear Me Muslim Arabs, We Are All Qahirene!
Huffington Post (blog) - 1 hour agoIn the years that I lived in Riyadh, my devoted driver was an Egyptian from Cairo. Like me, he was a guest worker in the Kingdom. ...People power, Egyptian style
Manila Bulletin - - 1 hour agoMANILA, Philippines – If Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak hasn't yet resigned by this time, the ongoing revolution shall have ...Timeline of articles
Number of sources covering this storyFrom Diplomat to Revolutionary: Can Mohamed ElBaradei Stay?33 minutes ago - TIMEThe Muslim Brotherhood may gain power in Egypt by default21 hours ago - The GuardianBrotherhood shows strength, limits in Egypt chaosJan 31, 2011 - The Associated PressIsrael Sticks Up For MubarakJan 31, 2011 - The AtlanticEgypt's Muslim Brotherhood mutes its religious message for protestsJan 30, 2011 - Los Angeles TimesProfile: Egypt's Muslim BrotherhoodJan 28, 2011 - BBC NewsImages
CBS News
Reuters
CNN Internation...
Globe and Mail
USA TodayHa'aretzFox NewsNew York Times ...
The Guardian- Stern action on Shunglu Committee's first report: PMO
- Child rights body to probe AIIMS abuse case
- 5,000 cameras to monitor criminals in Haryana
- Duped Indian students in US face uncertain future
- Maoism, terrorism, fundamentalism serious challenges: PM
- Chouhan links farmers' suicides to internal security
- Six criminals held from Orissa lawmaker's house
Mercedes relaunches premium car Maybach
IANS - 29 minutes agoNew Delhi, Feb 1 (IANS) Mercedes Benz India, the German luxury car manufacturer's Indian subsidiary Tuesday relaunched its super-luxury sedan Maybach's two variants -- the 57 S and 62 -- with a price tag of Rs.4.85 crore and Rs.5.10 crore (ex-showroom Delhi). More »Mercedes relaunches premium car Maybach
Russian tourists not to leave Egypt despite unrest
IANS - 33 minutes agoMoscow, Feb 1 (IANS/RIA Novosti) Russian tourists in Egypt have … More »Russian tourists not to leave Egypt despite unrest
''No major difficulties to meet MoEF''s condition …
PTI - 21 minutes agoBhubaneswar, Feb 1 (PTI) A day after the Ministry of Environment … More »''No major difficulties to meet MoEF''s condition …
Top Stories
Deccan, Taj and Business Jets join hands to launch Powerfly
Mumbai, Feb 1 (PTI) Air charter services provider Deccan Charters, Taj Air -- the executive charter service of Indian Hotels Company -- and Business Jets India today joined hands to launch Powerfly, which will offer services on demand by leveraging the synergies of the three brands."We believe the air charter service industry …
IRDA asks insurers not to outsource core activities
New Delhi, Feb 1 (PTI) Issuing guidelines on outsourcing, insurance regulator IRDA today said that insurers should not outsource core activities like investment and grievance redressal as it may dilute internal controls.The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) has outlined the business verticals of insurance …
Bain Capital, GIC likely to pick up stake in Hero Honda:Report
Singapore/New Delhi, Feb 1 (PTI) US-based private equity firm Bain Capital and the Singapore Investment Corp (GIC) are believed to be close to buying a minority stake in two-wheeler major Hero Honda.According to a report by Singapore-based ''Financial Times'' newspaper, the expected transaction could be worth up to USD …
Essar appoints StanChart bank to determine value in telco JV
New Delhi, Feb 1 (PTI) Essar group is understood to have appointed Standard Chartered bank, while UK-based Vodafone has mandated Goldman Sachs for determining the value of their telecom joint venture -- a move that will enable the Indian firm to part sell its stake.Essar holds 33 per cent stake in Vodafone-Essar, which …
Credit card complaints top list of grievances: RBI ombudsman
Mumbai, Feb 1 (PTI) Credit card grievances relating to overcharging and issuance of unsolicited cards accounted for bulk of the complaints received by the banking ombudsman during 2009-10.The banking ombudsman has received 18,810 credit card complaints, which accounted for 24 per cent of the total grievances received during …
New aviation charter alliance Powerfly to take wings Feb 14
Mumbai, Feb 1 (IANS) Deccan Charters Limited, Taj Air and Business Jets India Tuesday announced a strategic alliance 'Powerfly' to offer customers a wider choice of aircraft and network.
Flying Maruti car at AeroIndia this year
New Delhi, Feb 1 (IANS) India may soon have its own 'flying car', making the 'Star Wars' movie fantasy a reality for Indians. And it will be showcased alongside fighter jets.
Murli Deora signals no hike in diesel prices
NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India will not increase diesel prices for now, the oil minister signalled on Wednesday, as the government walks a tightrope between reducing the burden of subsidies and tackling public anger over inflation.
Police register case against Citigroup CEO Pandit - WSJ
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Police in India registered a case against Citigroup Inc Chief Executive Vikram Pandit and other top bank officials in connection with an employee's alleged $67.2 million fraud, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.
Fed takes bold, risky step to bolster economy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Federal Reserve launched a controversial new policy on Wednesday, committing to buy $600 billion more in government bonds by the middle of next year in an attempt to breathe new life into a struggling U.S. economy.
Business Video News
1 - 4 of 30Top Stories
Child rights body to probe AIIMS abuse case
New Delhi, Feb 1 (IANS) The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has been asked to enquire into sexual abuse allegations by an eight-year-old boy against a junior resident doctor of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Women and Child Development Minister Krishna Tirath said Tuesday.
Two judges helped Kunhalikutty in sex scandal case, alleges relative
Kozhikode (Kerala), Feb 1 (IANS) Two former high court judges helped Kerala's former industry minister and Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) leader P.K. Kunhalikutty in the Kozhikode ice cream parlour sex scandal case, the leader's relative alleged Tuesday.
Centre depriving us security-related funds: Mizoram CM
New Delhi, Feb 1 (PTI) Mizoram Chief Minister Lal Thanhawala today charged the Centre with meting out injustice to his state by "depriving funds" under security-related expenditure.The Centre tends to take the peaceful situation in the state for granted, he told the conference of chief ministers on internal security here. …
PM, HM express concern over religious fundamentalism
Apparently exercising caution in referring to rightwing groups, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today expressed concern over threats from various sources including religious fundamentalism while Home Minister P Chidambaram spoke about "new groups" that are suspected to be behind some terror attacks in recent years. ...
New terror modules emerging: PC
Home Minister P. Chidambaram Tuesday said new terror groups were emerging and there was no room for complacency even though the internal security situation in the country had vastly improved in the past year.
'Inflation will brought under control'
Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has said inflation would be soon brought under control.
BJP smells "corruption" in Posco clearance, demands CBI probe
Bhubaneswar, Feb 1 (PTI) The BJP today slammed the UPA government at the Centre for according conditional clearance to Posco project in Orissa and demanded that a CBI probe should be ordered into the matter."The whole process of clearance smacks of pay-offs. Like the 2G spectrum scam, this is another blow to the country,"BJP''s …
Latest Videos
1 - 4 of 30
Thousands more were out in the streets in Suez, and the Associated Press news agency reported protests in Mansoura, north of Cairo, and the southern cities of Assiut and Luxor.
With limited bus, train and internal flight services, access to the capital has been restricted.
Unnamed security officials were reported as saying all roads and public transportation to Cairo had been shut down.
Some protesters camped out in Tahrir Square on Monday night, saying they would stay there until Mr Mubarak's 30-year rule ended.
One demonstrator, Tarek Shalabi, told the BBC that groups were camped out in tents or sleeping out in the square, and described the atmosphere as "overwhelming".
"We're here because we want to make a statement. We're not going until Mubarak steps down," he said.
He said a stage had been set up where people could go up and make speeches, read out poetry or sing or chant political slogans.
Meanwhile, crowds of pro-Mubarak demonstrators held counter-protests elsewhere in the capital, raising fears of possible confrontations between the different groups.
'Legitimate'
On Monday, the Egyptian army said it respected the "legitimate rights of the people".
In its statement, carried on Egyptian media, the military said: "To the great people of Egypt, your armed forces, acknowledging the legitimate rights of the people... have not and will not use force against the Egyptian people."
Correspondents say the announcement is absolutely critical because it takes away a huge measure of uncertainty from the mind of any potential demonstrator.
A coalition of political opposition groups - incorporating the Muslim Brotherhood, political parties such as that led by Mr ElBaradei, and other prominent figures - has reportedly met, and told the Egyptian government that it will begin talks on its demands only after Mr Mubarak has stood down.
Concerns have also grown about the economy, as global oil prices on Monday topped $100 (£62) a barrel amid fears over the ongoing unrest.
Are you in Egypt? Are you part of the anti-government protests? Send us your comments using the form below.
Send your pictures and videos to yourpics@bbc.co.uk or text them to 61124 (UK) or +44 7725 100 100 (International). If you have a large file you can upload here.
The National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations
 | This article needs references that appear in reliable third-party publications. Primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article. Please add more appropriate citations from reliable sources. (May 2009) |
The National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations (NCUSAR) is an American non-profit organization NGO dedicated to improving American knowledge and understanding of the Arab world.
Contents[hide] |
[edit] Background
Founded in 1983, NCUSAR has public charity status in accordance with Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code. All contributions are tax-deductible to the fullest extent allowed by law.
The headquarters of the Council are located at 1730 M Street, Washington DC. Utilizing its politically central location and ties with sister organizations, the Council plays a leading role in convening regular meetings of the heads of a dozen Arab-U.S. relations organizations devoted to sharing information, discussing strategies, avoiding duplication of effort, and identifying and pursuing opportunities for greater inter-organizational cooperation.
The Council is staffed by professionals and experts in the field of Arab politics. Most notable is President and CEO Dr. John Duke Anthony. Vice Presidents Patrick Macino and Dr. James Winship act as Director of Development and Program Manager respectively, while Megan Geissler heads the nationally recognized Model Arab League. These managers are backed by a team of interns who work seasonally. A fall spring internship opportunity is offered to college students, and a special fellowship exists for summer interns.
The National Council is supported primarily by philanthropists, individuals, and institutions in the United States and the Arab world. Their involvement with the Council often begins with a single event or activity and grows into a broader and lasting relationship based on a shared commitment to the Council's vision and mission. The number of people involved with the Council has grown greatly over the years thanks to connections that developed into significant bonds of cooperation.
[edit] Vision
The National Council's vision is a relationship between the United States and its Arab partners, friends, and allies that rests on as solid and enduring a foundation as possible. This foundation is dedicated to mutual political endeavors, economic ventures, and reciprocal appreciation for culture and heritage.
[edit] Mission
The National Council's mission is educational. It seeks to enhance American awareness understanding of Arab countries, the Middle East, and the Islamic world. It fulfills these goals by promoting programs for leadership development, educational lectures and publications, and public forums.
NCUSAR hosts the annual Arab-U.S. Policymakers Conference, a gathering of prominent minds to discuss that year's pressing issues in the Arab world. It also sponsors the intercollegiate Model Arab League, a student forum similar to the Model United Nations. Study abroad opportunities exist in the form of the Yemen College of Middle Eastern Studies and the Cairo League of Arab States Exchange. The National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations periodically sponsors public educational programs on Capitol Hill. There, an assemblage of domestic and internationally renowned specialists analyze, discuss, and debate issues of importance to the relationship between the U.S., Middle East, and Islamic World. Such events seek to strengthen bonds of trust and friendship while examining complex political issues.
As a public service the Council serves as a nexus of information and contacts for grassroots, governmental, business, religious, and international institutions. In these ways the Council helps strengthen and expand the overall Arab-U.S. relationship.
[edit] Publications
In addition to the distribution of routine newsletters, the Council provides a number of valuable resources concerning Arab politics, history, and relation with the West. Video and audio recordings as well as transcripts of events hosted by the Council are made available to the public on a regular basis. Most notable of these are videos and transcripts of the forum discussions held at the annual Arab-U.S. Policymakers Conference. Also offered are free essays and articles published by Dr. John Duke Anthony, who has written in the past for Encyclopedia Britannica and the Gulf Co-operation Council. The NCUSAR also posts resources it deems useful in spreading knowledge about the Arab World.
The National Council publishes the Saudi-U.S. Relations Information Service (SUSRIS) The SUSRIS project offers an objective and comprehensive view of the U.S.-Saudi Arabia relationship. SUSRIS's main goal is to provide information from a variety of sources that would otherwise be difficult for most readers to uncover. It's free e-newsletter offers original materials such as interviews, essays, and more. Since its launch in 2003, the response to this resource has been extraordinary, with monthly Web site visits measured in the millions. The success of this publication is clear as SUSRIS is routinely cited by major international media as a news source. A subscription to the e-newsletter is free and open to the general public.
[edit] External links
- National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations (NCUSAR).
- Arab-U.S. Policymakers Conference
- Model Arab League
- Free NCUSAR Publications
Israel – United States relations
| | This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. The talk page may contain suggestions. (July 2010) |
| Israel – United States relations | |
 | |
 | |
Israel – United States relations are an important factor in the United States government's overall policy in the Middle East. The United States Congress places considerable importance on the maintenance of a close and supportive relationship with Israel. The main expression of Congressional support for Israel has been foreign aid, with Israel being the largest recipient of US aid from 1976 to 2004;[1] Aid to Israel has been surpassed by aid to Iraq, following the 2003 invasion. Congress monitors this aid closely, along with other issues in bilateral relations. Congressional concerns have affected different administrations' policies over the last 60 years.
Bilateral relations have evolved from an initial US policy of sympathy and support for the creation of a Jewish homeland in 1948 to an unusual partnership that links a small but militarily powerful Israel, dependent on the United States for its economic and military strength, with the US superpower trying to balance competing interests in the region. Some in the United States question the levels of aid and general commitment to Israel, and argue that a US bias toward Israel operates at the expense of improved US relations with various Arab and Muslim governments. Others maintain that Israel is a strategic ally, and that US relations with Israel strengthen the US presence in the Middle East.[2] Israel is one of the United States' two original major non-NATO allies in the Middle East. Currently, there are seven major non-NATO allies in the Greater Middle East.
[edit] Attitude toward the Zionist movement
The Christian belief in the return of the Jews to the Holy Land has deep roots, which pre-date both the establishment of Zionism and the establishment of Israel. Support for Zionism among American Jews was minimal however, until the involvement of Louis Brandeis in the Federation of American Zionists,[3] starting in 1912 and the establishment of the Provisional Executive Committee for General Zionist Affairs in 1914; it was empowered by the Zionist Organization 'to deal with all Zionist matters, until better times come.".[4] The British Balfour Declaration of 1917 both advanced the Zionist movement of the time and gave it official legitimacy.
While Woodrow Wilson was sympathetic to the plight of Jews in Europe, he repeatedly stated in 1919 that U.S. policy was to "acquiesce" in the Balfour Declaration but not officially support Zionism.[5] The US Congress however passed the Lodge-Fish resolution,[6] the first joint resolution stating its support for "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people" on September 21, 1922.[7][8] The same day, the Mandate of Palestine was approved by the Council of the League of Nations. Despite two similar attempts by Congress during the war, the policy of acquiescence continued until after WWII.
During the war, US foreign policy decisions were often ad hoc moves and solutions dictated by the demands of the war. At the Biltmore Conference in May, 1942, the Zionist movement made a fundamental departure from traditional Zionist policy and its stated goals,[9] with its demand "that Palestine be established as a Jewish Commonwealth."[10]
Following the war, the "new postwar era witnessed an intensive involvement of the United States in the political and economic affairs of the Middle East, in contrast to the hands-off attitude characteristic of the prewar period. Under Truman the United States had to face and define its policy in all three sectors that provided the root causes of American interests in the region: the Soviet threat, the birth of Israel, and petroleum."[11]
[edit] Recognition of the State of Israel
Previous American presidents, although encouraged by active support from members of the American and world Jewish communities, as well as domestic civic groups, labor unions, political parties, supported the Jewish homeland concept, alluded to in Britain's 1917 Balfour Declaration, they officially continued to "acquiesce". Throughout the Roosevelt and Truman administrations, the Departments of War and State recognized the possibility of a Soviet-Arab connection and the potential Arab restriction on Oil supplies to the US, and advised against U.S. intervention on behalf of the Jews.[12] With continuing conflict in the area and worsening humanitarian conditions among Holocaust survivors in Europe, on 29 November 1947 and with US support, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 181, the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, which was to create Jewish and Arab states and take effect upon British withdrawal. The decision was heavily lobbied by Zionist supporters, which Truman himself later noted,[13] and rejected by the Arabs.
As the end of the mandate approached, the decision to recognize the Jewish state remained contentious, with significant disagreement between President Truman, his domestic and campaign adviser, Clark Clifford, and both the State Department and Defense Department. Truman, while sympathetic to the Zionist cause, was most concerned about relieving the plight of the displaced persons; Secretary of State George Marshall feared U.S. backing of a Jewish state would harm relations with the Muslim world, limit access to Middle Eastern oil, and destabilize the region. On May 12, 1948, Truman met in the Oval Office with Secretary of State Marshall, Under Secretary of State Robert A. Lovett, Counsel to the President Clark Clifford and several others to discuss the Palestine situation. Clifford argued in favor of recognizing the new Jewish state in accordance with the partition resolution. Marshall opposed Clifford's arguments, contending they were based on domestic political considerations in the election year. Marshall said that if Truman followed Clifford's advice and recognized the Jewish state, then he would vote against Truman in the election. Truman did not clearly state his views in the meeting.[14] Two days later, on May 14, 1948, the United States, under Truman, became the first country to extend de facto recognition to the State of Israel, 11 minutes after it unilaterally declared itself independent. With this unexpected decision, US representative to the United Nations Warren Austin, whose team had been working on an alternative trusteeship proposal, shortly thereafter left his office at the UN and went home. Secretary of State Marshall sent a State Department official to the United Nations to prevent the entire United States delegation from resigning.[14] De jure recognition came on January 31, 1949.
Following UN mediation by American Ralph Bunche, the 1949 Armistice Agreements ended the 1948 Arab Israeli War. Related to enforcement of the armistice, the United States signed the Tripartite Declaration of 1950 with Britain and France. In it, they pledged to take action within and outside the United Nations to prevent violations of the frontiers or armistice lines, and outlined their commitment to peace and stability in the area, their opposition to the use or threat of force, and reiterated their opposition to the development of an arms race in the region.
Under rapidly changing geopolitical circumstances, U.S. policy in the Middle East generally, was geared toward supporting Arab states independence, the development of oil-producing countries, preventing Soviet influence from gaining a foothold in Greece, Turkey and Iran, as well as preventing an arms race and maintaining a neutral stance in the Arab-Israeli conflict. U.S. policymakers initially used foreign aid to support these objectives.
[edit] Foreign policy of U.S. government
[edit] Eisenhower Administration (1953-1961)
 | This section requires expansion. |
During these years of austerity, the United States provided Israel moderate amounts of economic aid, mostly as loans for basic food stuffs; a far greater share of state income derived from German war reparations, which were used for domestic development.
France became Israel's main arms supplier at this time and provided Israel with advanced military equipment and technology. This support was seen by Israel to counter the perceived threat from Egypt under President Gamal Abdel Nasser with respect to the "Czech arms deal" of September 1955. During the 1956 Suez Crisis for differing reasons, France, Israel and Britain colluded to topple Nasser by regaining control of the Suez Canal, following its nationalization, and to occupy parts of western Sinai assuring free passage of shipping in the Gulf of Aqaba.[15] In response, the U.S., with support from Soviet Union at the United Nations intervened on behalf of Egypt to force a withdrawal. Afterward, Nasser expressed a desire to establish closer relations with the United States. Eager to increase its influence in the region, and prevent Nasser from going over to the Soviet Bloc, U.S. policy was to remain neutral and not become too closely allied with Israel. In the early 1960s, the U.S. would begin to sell advanced, but defensive, weapons to Israel, Egypt and Jordan, including Hawk anti aircraft missiles.
[edit] Kennedy and Johnson administrations (1961–1969)
During Lyndon B. Johnson's presidency, U.S. policy shifted to a whole-hearted, but not unquestioning, support for Israel. Prior to the Six-Day War of 1967, U.S. administrations had taken considerable care to avoid giving the appearance of favoritism. Writing in American Presidents and the Middle East, George Lenczowski notes, "Johnson's was an unhappy, virtually tragic presidency", regarding "America's standing and posture in the Middle East", and marked a turning point in both U.S.-Israeli and U.S.-Arab relations.[16] He characterizes the Middle Eastern perception of the US as moving from "the most popular of Western countries" before 1948, to having "its glamour diminished, but Eisenhower's standing during the Arab-Israeli Suez Crisis convinced many Middle Eastern moderates that, if not actually lovable, the United States was at least a fair country to deal with; this view of U.S. fairness and impartiality still prevailed during Kennedy's presidency; but during Lyndon B. Johnson's presidency America's policy took a definite turn in the pro-Israeli direction. The June war of 1967 confirmed this impression, and from 1967 on [writing in 1990] the United States emerged as the most distrusted if not actually hated country in the Middle East."
Leading up to the war, while the Administration was sympathetic to Israel's need to defend itself against foreign attack, the U.S. worried that Israel's response would be disproportionate and potentially destabilizing. Israel's raid into Jordan after the Samu Incident was very troubling to the U.S. because Jordan was also an ally and had received over $500 million in aid for construction of the East Ghor Main Canal, which was virtually destroyed in subsequent raids.
The primary concern of the Johnson Administration was that should war break out in the region, the United States and Soviet Union would be drawn into it. Intense diplomatic negotiations with the nations in the region and the Soviets, including the first use of the Hotline, failed to prevent war. When Israel launched preemptive strikes against the Egyptian Air force, Secretary of State Dean Rusk was disappointed as he felt a diplomatic solution could have been possible.
In 1966, when defecting Iraqi pilot Munir Redfa landed in Israel flying a Soviet-built MiG-21 fighter jet, information on the plane was immediately shared with the United States.
During the Six-Day War, Israeli jets and torpedo boats attacked the USS Liberty, a US Navy intelligence ship in Egyptian waters, killing 34 and wounding 171. Israel claimed the Liberty was mistaken as the Egyptian vessel El Quseir, and it was an instance of friendly fire. The U.S. government accepted it as such, although the incident raised much controversy, and is still believed by many to have been deliberate. Following the war, the perception in Washington was that many Arab states (notably Egypt) had permanently drifted toward the Soviets. In 1968, with strong support from Congress, Johnson approved the sale of Phantom fighters to Israel, establishing the precedent for U.S. support for Israel's qualitative military edge over its neighbors. The U.S., however, continued to provide military equipment to Arab states such as Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, to counter Soviet arms sales in the region.
During the Israeli-Egyptian War of Attrition, Israeli commandos captured a Soviet-built P-12 radar station in an operation code-named Rooster 53. Previously-unknown information was subsequently shared with the U.S.
When the French government imposed an arms embargo on Israel in 1967, Israeli spies procured designs of the Dassault Mirage 5 from a Swiss-Jewish engineer in order to build the IAI Kfir. These designs were also shared with the United States.
[edit] Nixon and Ford Administrations (1969–1977)
[edit] Rogers Plan of 1970
On 19 June 1970, Secretary of State William P. Rogers formally proposed the Rogers Plan, which called for a 90 day cease-fire and a military standstill zone on each side of the Suez Canal, to calm the ongoing War of Attrition. It was an effort to reach agreement specifically on the framework of UN Resolution 242, which called for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 and mutual recognition of each state's sovereignty and independence.[17] The Egyptians accepted the Rogers Plan, but the Israelis were split and did not; they failed to get sufficient support within the 'unity government'. Despite the Labor-dominant Alignment's, formal acceptance of UN 242 and "peace for withdrawal" earlier that year, Menachem Begin and the right wing Gahal alliance were adamantly opposed to withdraw from the Palestinian Territories; the second-largest party in the government resigned on August 5, 1970.[18] Ultimately the plan also failed due to insufficient support from Nixon for his Secretary of State's plan, preferring instead the position of his National Security Advisor, Henry Kissinger, not to pursue the initiative.
No breakthrough occurred even after President Sadat of Egypt in 1972 unexpectedly expelled Soviet advisers from Egypt, and again signaled to Washington his willingness to negotiate.[19] Faced with this lack of progress on the diplomatic front, and hoping to force the Nixon administration to become more involved, Egypt prepared for military conflict. In October 1973, Egypt and Syria, with additional Arab support, attacked Israeli forces occupying their territory since the 1967 war, thus starting the Yom Kippur War.
Despite intelligence indicating an attack from Egypt and Syria, Prime Minister Golda Meir made the controversial decision not to launch a pre-emptive strike. Meir, among other concerns, feared alienating the United States, if Israel was seen as starting another war, as Israel only trusted the United States to come to its aid. In retrospect, the decision not to strike was probably a sound one. Later, according to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, had Israel struck first, they would not have received "so much as a nail." On October 6, 1973, during the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur, Egypt and Syria, with the support of Arab expeditionary forces and with backing from the Soviet Union, launched simultaneous attacks against Israel. The resulting conflict is known as the Yom Kippur War. The Egyptian Army was initially able to breach Israeli defenses advance into the Sinai and establish defensive positions along the east bank of the Suez Canal, but were later repulsed in a massive tank battle when they tried to advance further to draw pressure away from Syria. The Israelis then crossed Suez Canal. Major battles with heavy losses for both sides took place. At the same time, the Syrians almost broke through Israel's thin defenses in the Golan Heights, but were eventually stopped by reinforcements and pushed back, followed by a successful Israeli advance into Syria. Israel also gained the upper hand in the air and at sea early in the war. Days into the war, Meir authorized the assembly of Israeli nuclear bombs. This was done openly, in order to draw American attention, but Meir authorized their use against Egyptian and Syrian targets if Arab forces managed to advance too far.[20][21] The Soviets began to resupply Arab forces, predominantly Syria. Golda Meir asked President Nixon for help with military supply. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told Nixon "Let Israel bleed". The New York Times reported three years afterwards that Kissinger delayed the airlift because he wanted to see Israel "bleed just enough to soften it up for the post-war diplomacy he was planning." However, President Nixon ordered the full scale commencement of a strategic airlift operation to deliver weapons and supplies to Israel; this last move is sometimes called "the airlift that saved Israel." However, by the time the supplies arrived, Israel was gaining the upper hand.
Again, the U.S. and Soviets feared that they would be drawn into a Middle East conflict. After the Soviets threatened intervention on the behalf of Egypt, following Israeli advances beyond the cease-fire lines, the U.S. increased the Defense Condition (DEFCON) from four to three, the highest peacetime level. This was prompted after Israel trapped Egypt's Third Army east of the Suez canal.
Kissinger realized the situation presented the United States with a tremendous opportunity—Egypt was totally dependent on the U.S. to prevent Israel from destroying the army, which now had no access to food or water. The position could be parlayed later into allowing the United States to mediate the dispute, and push Egypt out of Soviet influences. As a result, the United States exerted tremendous pressure on the Israelis to refrain from destroying the trapped army. In a phone call with Israeli ambassador Simcha Dinitz, Kissinger told the ambassador that the destruction of the Egyptian Third Army "is an option that does not exist." The Egyptians later withdrew their request for support and the Soviets complied.
After the war, Kissinger pressured the Israelis to withdraw from Arab lands; this contributed to the first phases of a lasting Israeli-Egyptian peace. American support of Israel during the war contributed to the 1973 OPEC embargo against the United States, which was lifted in March 1974.
[edit] Carter administration (1977–1981)
The Jimmy Carter years were characterized by very active U.S. involvement in the Middle East peace process. With the May 1977 election of Likud's Menachem Begin as prime minister, after 30 years of leading the Israeli government opposition, major changes took place regarding Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories.[2] This, in turn led to friction in U.S.-Israeli bilateral relations. The two frameworks included in the Carter-initiated Camp David process were viewed by right wing elements in Israel as creating U.S. pressures on Israel to withdraw from the captured Palestinian territories, as well as forcing it to take risks for the sake of peace with Egypt. Likud governments have since argued that their acceptance of full withdrawal from the Sinai as part of these accords and the eventual Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty fulfilled the Israeli pledge to withdraw from occupied territory.[2] President Carter's support for a Palestinian homeland and for Palestinian political rights particularly created tensions with the Likud government, and little progress was achieved on that front.
[edit] Reagan administration (1981–1989)
Israeli supporters expressed concerns early in the first Ronald Reagan term about potential difficulties in U.S.-Israeli relations, in part because several Presidential appointees had ties or past business associations with key Arab countries (Secretaries Caspar Weinberger and George P. Shultz, for example, were officers in the Bechtel Corporation, which has strong links to the Arab world, see Arab lobby in the United States.) But President Reagan's personal support for Israel and the compatibility between Israeli and Reagan perspectives on terrorism, security cooperation, and the Soviet threat, led to considerable strengthening in bilateral relations.
In 1981, Weinberger and Israeli Minister of Defense Ariel Sharon signed Strategic Cooperation Agreement, establishing a framework for continued consultation and cooperation to enhance the national security of both countries. In November 1983, the two sides formed a Joint Political Military Group, which meets twice a year, to implement most provisions of that agreement. Joint air and sea military exercises began in June 1984, and the United States constructed two War Reserve Stock facilities in Israel to stockpile military equipment. Although intended for American forces in the Middle East, the equipment can be transferred to Israeli use if necessary.
U.S.-Israeli ties strengthened during the second Reagan term. Israel was granted "major non-NATO ally" status in 1989 that gave it access to expanded weapons systems and opportunities to bid on U.S. defense contracts. The United States maintained grant aid to Israel at $3 billion annually and implemented a free trade agreement in 1985. Since then all customs duties between the two trading partners have been eliminated. However, relations soured when Israel carried out Operation Opera, an Israeli airstrike on the Osirak nuclear reactor in Baghdad. Reagan suspended a shipment of military aircraft to Israel, and harshly criticized the action. Relations also soured during the 1982 Lebanon War, when the United States even contemplated sanctions to stop the Israeli Siege of Beirut. The U.S. reminded Israel that weaponry provided by the U.S. was to be used for defensive purposes only, and suspended shipments of cluster munitions to Israel. Although the war exposed some serious differences between Israeli and U.S. policies, such as Israel's rejection of the Reagan peace plan of September 1, 1982, it did not alter the Administration's favoritism for Israel and the emphasis it placed on Israel's importance to the United States. Although critical of Israeli actions, the United States vetoed a Soviet-proposed United Nations Security Council resolution to impose an arms embargo on Israel.
In 1985, the U.S. supported Israel's economic stabilization through roughly $1.5 billion in two-year loan guarantees the creation of a U.S.-Israel bilateral economic forum called the U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG).
The second Reagan term ended on what many Israelis considered to be a sour note when the United States opened a dialogue with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in December 1988. But, despite the US-PLO dialogue, the Pollard spy case, or the Israeli rejection of the Shultz peace initiative in the spring of 1988, pro-Israeli organizations in the United States characterized the Reagan Administration (and the 100th Congress) as the "most pro-Israel ever" and praised the positive overall tone of bilateral relations.
[edit] George H.W Bush administration (1989–1993)
Secretary of State James Baker told an American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC, a pro-Israel lobby group) audience on May 22, 1989, that Israel should abandon its "expansionist policies," a remark many took as a signal that the relatively pro-Israel Reagan years were over. President Bush raised the ire of the Likud government when he told a press conference on March 3, 1990, that East Jerusalem was occupied territory and not a sovereign part of Israel as Israel claims. Israel had annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, an action which did not gain international recognition. The United States and Israel disagreed over the Israeli interpretation of the Israeli plan to hold elections for a Palestinian peace conference delegation in the summer of 1989, and also disagreed over the need for an investigation of the Jerusalem incident of October 8, 1990, in which Israeli police killed 17 Palestinians.
Amid the Iraq-Kuwait crisis and Iraqi threats against Israel generated by it, former President Bush repeated the U.S. commitment to Israel's security. Israeli-U.S. tension eased after the start of the Persian Gulf war on January 16, 1991, when Israel became a target of Iraqi Scud missiles. The United States urged Israel not to retaliate against Iraq for the attacks because it was believed that Iraq wanted to draw Israel into the conflict and force other coalition members, Egypt and Syria in particular, to quit the coalition and join Iraq in a war against Israel. Israel did not retaliate, and gained praise for its restraint.
Following the Gulf War, the administration immediately returned to Arab-Israeli peacemaking, believing there was a window of opportunity to use the political capital generated by the U.S. victory to revitalize the Arab-Israeli peace process. On 6 March 1991, President Bush addressed Congress in a speech often cited as the administration's principal policy statement on the new order in relation to the Middle East, following the expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.[22][23] Michael Oren summarizes the speech, saying: "The president proceeded to outline his plan for maintaining a permanent U.S. naval presence in the Gulf, for providing funds for Middle East development, and for instituting safeguards against the spread of unconventional weapons. The centerpiece of his program, however, was the achievement of an Arab-Israeli treaty based on the territory-for-peace principle and the fulfillment of Palestinian rights." As a first step Bush announced his intention to reconvene the international peace conference in Madrid.[22]
Unlike earlier American peace efforts however, no new aid commitments would be used. This was both because President Bush and Secretary Baker felt the coalition victory and increased U.S. prestige would itself induce a new Arab-Israeli dialogue, and because their diplomatic initiative focused on process and procedure rather than on agreements and concessions. From Washington's perspective, economic inducements would not be necessary, but these did enter the process because Israel injected them in May. Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir's request for $10 billion in U.S. loan guarantees added a new dimension to U.S. diplomacy and sparked a political showdown between his government and the Bush administration.[24]
Bush and Baker were thus instrumental in convening the Madrid peace conference in October 1991 and in persuading all the parties to engage in the subsequent peace negotiations. It was reported widely that the Bush Administration did not share an amicable relationship with the Likud government of Yitzhak Shamir. The Israeli government however, did win the repeal of UN Resolution 3379, which equated Zionism with racism. After the conference, in December 1991, the UN passed United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/86; Israel had made revocation of resolution 3379 a condition of its participation in the Madrid peace conference.[25] After the Labor party won the 1992 election, U.S.-Israel relations appeared to improve. The Labor coalition approved a partial housing construction freeze in the occupied territories on July 19, something the Shamir government had not done despite Bush Administration appeals for a freeze as a condition for the loan guarantees.
[edit] Clinton administration (1993–2001)
Israel and the PLO exchanged letters of mutual recognition on September 10, and signed the Declaration of Principles on September 13, 1993. President Bill Clinton announced on September 10 that the United States and the PLO would reestablish their dialogue. On October 26, 1994, President Clinton witnessed the Jordan-Israeli peace treaty signing, and President Clinton, Egyptian President Mubarak, and King Hussein of Jordan witnessed the White House signing of the September 28, 1995 Interim Agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
President Clinton attended the funeral of assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in Jerusalem in November, 1995. Following a March 1996 visit to Israel, President Clinton offered $100 million in aid for Israel's anti-terror activities, another $200 million for Arrow anti-missile deployment, and about $50 million for an anti-missile laser weapon. President Clinton disagreed with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's policy of expanding Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, and it was reported that the President believed that the Prime Minister delayed the peace process. President Clinton hosted negotiations at the Wye River Conference Center in Maryland, ending with the signing of an agreement on October 23, 1998. Israel suspended implementation of the Wye agreement in early December 1998, when the Palestinians violated the Wye Agreement by threatening to declare a state (Palestinian statehood was not mentioned in Wye). In January 1999, the Wye Agreement was delayed until the Israeli elections in May.
Ehud Barak was elected Prime Minister on May 17, 1999, and won a vote of confidence for his government on July 6, 1999. President Clinton and Prime Minister Barak appeared to establish close personal relations during four days of meetings between July 15 and 20. President Clinton mediated meetings between Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat at the White House, Oslo, Shepherdstown, Camp David, and Sharm al-Shaykh in the search for peace.
[edit] George W. Bush administration (2001–2009)
President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Sharon established good relations in their March and June 2001 meetings. On October 4, 2001, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Sharon accused the Bush Administration of appeasing the Palestinians at Israel's expense in a bid for Arab support for the U. S. anti-terror campaign. The White House said the remark was unacceptable. Rather than apologize for the remark, Sharon said the United States failed to understand him. Also, the United States criticized the Israeli practice of assassinating Palestinians believed to be engaged in terrorism, which appeared to some Israelis to be inconsistent with the U.S. policy of pursuing Osama bin Laden "dead or alive."
In 2003, on the heels of the Second Intifada and a sharp economic downturn in Israel, the U.S. provided Israel with $9 billion in conditional loan guarantees made available through 2011 and negotiated each year at the U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG).
All recent U.S. administrations have disapproved of Israel's settlement activity as prejudging final status and possibly preventing the emergence of a contiguous Palestinian state. President Bush, however noted the need to take into account changed "realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers," asserting "it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949." He later emphasized that it was a subject for negotiations between the parties.
At times of violence, U.S. officials have urged Israel to withdraw as rapidly as possible from Palestinian areas retaken in security operations. The Bush Administration insisted that United Nations Security Council resolutions be "balanced," by criticizing Palestinian as well as Israeli violence and has vetoed resolutions which do not meet that standard.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did not name a Special Middle East Envoy and did not say that she would not get involved in direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations of issues. She said that she preferred to have the Israelis and Palestinians work together, although she traveled to the region several times in 2005. The Administration supported Israel's disengagement from Gaza as a way to return to the Road Map process to achieve a solution based on two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. The evacuation of settlers from the Gaza Strip and four small settlements in the northern West Bank was completed on August 23, 2005.
[edit] During 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
[edit] Military Relations
On July 14, 2006, the US Congress was notified of a potential sale of $210 million worth of jet fuel to Israel. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency noted that the sale of the JP-8 fuel, should it be completed, will "enable Israel to maintain the operational capability of its aircraft inventory." and "The jet fuel will be consumed while the aircraft is in use to keep peace and security in the region."[26] It was reported in 24 July that the United States was in the process of providing Israel with "bunker buster" bombs, which would allegedly be used to target the leader of Lebanon's Hezbollah guerilla group and destroy its trenches.[27]
American media also questioned whether Israel violated an agreement not to use cluster bombs on civilian targets. Although many of the cluster bombs used were advanced M-85 munitions developed by Israel Military Industries, Israel also used older munitions purchased from the U.S. Evidence during the conflict had shown that cluster bombs had hit civilian areas, although the civilian population had mostly fled, as well as Israel claiming that Hezbollah frequently used civilian areas to stockpile weaponry and fire rockets from in violation of international law. Many bomblets remained undetonated after the war, causing hazard for Lebanese civilians. Israel said that it had not violated any international law because cluster bombs are not illegal and were used only on military targets.[28]
[edit] Opposing immediate unconditional ceasefire
On July 15, the United Nations Security Council again rejected pleas from Lebanon that it call for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported the U.S. was the only member of out the 15-nation UN body to oppose any council action at all.[29]
On July 19, the Bush administration rejected calls for an immediate ceasefire.[30] Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said certain conditions had to be met, not specifying what they were. John Bolton, then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, rejected the call for a ceasefire, on the grounds that such an action addressed the conflict only superficially: "The notion that you just declare a ceasefire and act as if that is going to solve the problem, I think is simplistic."[31]
On July 26, foreign ministers from the United States, Europe and the Middle East that met in Rome vowed "to work immediately to reach with the utmost urgency a ceasefire that puts an end to the current violence and hostilities," though the US maintained strong support for the Israeli campaign and the conference's results were reported to have fallen short of Arab and European leaders' expectations.[32]
[edit] Strained relations under Benjamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama
Israeli-US relations came under increased strain during Prime Minister Netanyahu's second administration and the new Obama administration in March 2010, when Israel announced it would continue to build 1,600 new homes that were already under construction in a Jewish area of East Jerusalem, during Vice-President Joe Biden's visit to Israel. The incident was described as "one of the most serious rows between the two allies in recent decades".[33] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Israel's move was "deeply negative" for US-Israeli relations.[34] East Jerusalem is, on the international diplomatic stage, widely considered to be occupied territory—building on occupied land is widely considered to be illegal under international law.[33] Israel disputes this, as it annexed East Jerusalem and proclaimed the city as its capital in 1980, under the Jerusalem Law.
[edit] Current issues
[edit] United States military and economic aid
Since the 1970s, Israel has been one of the top recipients of U.S. foreign aid.[36] While it is mostly military aid, in the past a portion was dedicated to economic assistance, but all economic aid to Israel ended in 2007. In 2004, the second-largest recipient of economic foreign aid from the United States was Israel, second to post-war Iraq. In terms of per capita value Israel ranks first, though other middle eastern countries get US aid as well — Egypt gets around $2.2 billion per year, Jordan gets around $400 million per year, and the Palestinian Authority gets around $1 billion per year.[37]
In 2007, the United States increased its military aid to Israel by over 25% to an average of $3 billion per year for the following ten year period. The United States ended economic aid to Israel in 2007, due to Israel's growing economy.[38][39]
In 1998, Israeli, congressional, and Administration officials agreed to reduce U.S. $1.2 billion in Economic Support Funds (ESF) to zero over ten years, while increasing Foreign Military Financing (FMF) from $1.8 billion to $2.4 billion. Separate from the scheduled cuts, there was an extra $200 million in anti-terror assistance, $1.2 billion to implement the Wye agreement, and the supplemental appropriations bill assisted for another $1 billion in FMF for the 2003 fiscal year. For the 2005 fiscal year, Israel received $2.202 billion in FMF, $357 million in ESF, and migration settlement assistance of $50 million. For 2006, the Administration has requested $240 million in ESF and $2.28 billion in FMF. H.R. 3057, passed in the House on June 28, 2005, and in the Senate on July 20, approved these amounts. House and Senate measures also supported $40 million for the settlement of immigrants from the former Soviet Union and plan to bring the remaining Ethiopian Jews to Israel.[citation needed]
Israeli press reported that Israel requested $2.25 billion in special aid in a mix of grants and loan guarantees over four years, with one-third to be used to relocate military bases from the Gaza Strip to Israel in the disengagement from the Gaza Strip and the rest to develop the Negev and Galilee regions of Israel and for other purposes, but none to help compensate settlers or for other civilian aspects of the disengagement. An Israeli team has visited Washington to present elements of the request, and preliminary discussions are underway. No formal request has been presented to Congress. In light of the costs inflicted on the United States by Hurricane Katrina, an Israeli delegation intending to discuss the aid canceled a trip to Washington.
Congress has legislated other special provisions regarding aid to Israel. Since the 1980s, ESF and FMF have been provided as all grant cash transfers, not designated for particular projects, transferred as a lump sum in the first month of the fiscal year, instead of in periodic increments. Israel is allowed to spend about one-quarter of the military aid for the procurement in Israel of defense articles and services, including research and development, rather than in the United States. Finally, to help Israel out of its economic slump, the U.S. provided $9 billion in loan guarantees over three years, use of which was extended to 2008.
President Obama's Fiscal Year 2010 budget proposes $53.8 billion for appropriated international affairs' programs. From that budget, $5.7 billion is appopriated for foreign military financing, military education, and peacekeeping operations. From that $5.7 billion, $2.8 billion, almost 50% is appropriated for Israel.[40] Israel also has available roughly $3 billion of conditional loan guarantees, with additional funds coming available if Israel meets conditions negotiated at the U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG).
In 2010, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees approved President Obama's request for $3 billion in military aid to Israel in the 2011 budget.[41] The appropriation has not yet been approved by Congress.
Former head of the Israeli Air Force, retired Major General Eitan Ben Eliyahu, has called the American sale of Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II nuclear capable stealth fighter bombers to Israel a key test of the relationship.[42]
[edit] Washington pressures against peace talks with Syria
Syria has repeatedly requested that Israel re-commence peace negotiations with the Syrian government.[43] There is an on-going internal debate within the Israeli government regarding the seriousness of this Syrian invitation for negotiations. Some Israeli officials asserted that there had been some unpublicized talks with Syria not officially sanctioned by the Israeli government.[44][45][46]
The United States demanded that Israel desist from even exploratory contacts with Syria to test whether Damascus is serious in its declared intentions to hold peace talks with Israel. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was forceful in expressing Washington's view on the matter to Israeli officials that even exploratory negotiations with Syria must not be attempted. For years, Israel obeyed Washington's demand to desist from officially returning to peace talks.[47][48] Around May 2008 however, Israel informed the U.S. that it was starting peace talks with Syria brokered by Turkey. However, Syria withdrew from the peace talks several months later in response to the Gaza War.
[edit] Military sales to China
Over the years, the United States and Israel have regularly discussed Israel's sale of sensitive security equipment and technology to various countries, especially the People's Republic of China. U.S. administrations believe that such sales are potentially harmful to the security of U.S. forces in Asia. China has looked to Israel to obtain technology it could not acquire from elsewhere, and has purchased a wide array of military equipment and technology, including communications satellites. To further foster its relationship with China, Israel has strongly limited its cooperation with Taiwan. In 2000, the United States persuaded Israel to cancel the sale of the Phalcon, an advanced, airborne early-warning system developed by Israel Aircraft Industries, to China. In 2005, the U.S. Department of Defense was angered by Israel's agreement to upgrade Harpy Killer unmanned aerial vehicles, which it had sold to China in 1999, and which China tested over the Taiwan Strait in 2004. The Department suspended technological cooperation with the Israeli Air Force on the future F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft as well as several other cooperative programs, held up shipments of some military equipment, and refused to communicate with Israeli Defense Ministry Director, General Amos Yaron, whom Pentagon officials believe misled them about the Harpy deal. According to a reputable Israeli military journalist[citation needed] the U.S. Department of Defense demanded details of 60 Israeli deals with China, an examination of Israel's security equipment supervision system, and a memorandum of understanding about arms sales to prevent future difficulties.
[edit] Maintenance contract with Venezuela
On October 21, 2005, it was reported that pressure from Washington forced Israel to freeze a major contract with Venezuela to upgrade its 22 U.S.-manufactured F-16 fighter jets. The Israeli government had requested U.S. permission to proceed with the deal, but permission was not granted.[49]
[edit] Jerusalem
Since capturing East Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War, Israel has insisted that Jerusalem is its eternal and indivisible capital. The United States does not agree with this position and believes the permanent status of Jerusalem is still subject to negotiations. This is based on the UN's 1947 Partition plan for Palestine, which called for separate international administration of Jerusalem. This position was accepted at the time by most other countries and the Zionist leadership, but rejected by the Arab countries. As a result, most countries had located their embassies in Tel Aviv before 1967; Jerusalem was also located on the contested border. The Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo Accords signed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization in September 1993 similarly state that it is a subject for permanent status negotiations. U.S. Administrations have consistently indicated, by keeping the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv, that Jerusalem's status is unresolved.
In 1995, however, both houses of Congress overwhelmingly passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act to move the embassy to Jerusalem, no later than May 31, 1999, and suggested funding penalties on the State Department for non-compliance. Executive Branch opposition to such a move, on constitutional questions of Congressional interference in foreign policy, as well as a series of presidential waivers, based on national security interests, have delayed the move by all successive administrations, since it was passed during the Clinton Administration.[50]
The U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem was first established in 1844, just inside the Jaffa Gate. A permanent consular office was established in 1856 in this same building. The mission moved to Street of the Prophets in the late 19th century, and to its present location on Agron Street in 1912. The Consulate General on Nablus Road in East Jerusalem was built in 1868 by the Vester family, the owners of the American Colony Hotel. In 2006, the U.S. Consulate General on Agron Road leased an adjacent building, a Lazarist monastery built in the 1860s, to provide more office space.[51]
In March 2010 Gen. David Petraeus was quoted by Max Boot claiming the lack of progress in the Middle East peace process has "fomented anti-Americanism, undermined moderate Arab regimes, limited the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships, increased the influence of Iran, projected an image of U.S. weakness, and served as a potent recruiting tool for Al Qaeda."[52] When questioned by journalist Philip Klein, Petraeus said Boot "picked apart" and "spun" his speech. He believes there are many important factors standing in the way of peace, including "a whole bunch of extremist organizations, some of which by the way deny Israel's right to exist. There's a country that has a nuclear program who denies that the Holocaust took place. So again we have all these factors in there. This [Israel] is just one."[53]
US-Israeli relations came under strain in March 2010, as Israel announced it was building 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem as Vice President Joe Biden was visiting.[54] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described the move as "insulting".[54] Israel apologized for the timing of the announcement.
[edit] Public opinion
| | The frequent references in this article or section reduce readability. Please improve the article by rearranging citations so they interrupt the text less frequently. |
Poll results fluctuate every year, although both sides of sympathy have modestly stepped up since 1998 and those with no preference have modestly decreased. The greatest percentage consistently sympathize with Israel (Gallup Poll). The September 11, 2001 attacks and 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War both saw heights in American sympathy for Israel, with most Americans putting the blame on Hezbollah for the war and the civilian casualties.[5] The record-breaking height of sympathy for Israel was during the 1991 Gulf War, as well as the all-time low of sympathy for the Palestinians, whose leadership supported Saddam Hussein.[55]
As of July 2006, polls claimed that 44% of Americans thought that the "United States supports Israel about the right amount," 11% thought "too little", and 38% thought "too much".[56][57][58][59] Many in the United States question the levels of aid and general commitment to Israel, and argue that a U.S. bias operates at the expense of improved relations with various Arab states. Others maintain that democratic Israel is a helpful and strategic ally, and believe that U.S. relations with Israel strengthen the U.S. presence in the Middle East.[60] A 2002–2006 Gallup Poll of Americans by party affiliation (Republican/Democratic) and ideology (conservative/moderate/liberal) found that although sympathy for Israel is strongest amongst the right (conservative Republicans), the group most on the left (liberal Democrats) also have a greater percentage sympathizing with Israel. Although proportions are different, each group has most sympathizing more with Israel, followed by both/neither, and lastly more with the Palestinians.[6]. Gallup's Feb. 1–4 World Affairs poll included the annual update on Americans' ratings of various countries around the world, and asked Americans to rate the overall importance to the United States of what happens in most of these nations. According to one 2007 poll, Israel was the only country that a majority of Americans felt favorably toward and said that what happens there is vitally important to the United States.[7]
Israeli attitudes toward the U.S. are largely positive. In several ways of measuring a country's view of America (American ideas about democracy; ways of doing business; music, movies and television; science and technology; spread of U.S. ideas), Israel came on top as the developed country who viewed it most positively.[8]
[edit] Immigration
Israel is in large part a nation of Jewish immigrants. Israel has welcomed newcomers inspired by Zionism, the Jewish national movement. Zionism is an expression of the desire of many Jews to live in a historical homeland. The largest numbers of immigrants have come to Israel from countries in the Middle East and Europe.
The United States has played a special role in assisting Israel with the complex task of absorbing and assimilating masses of immigrants in short periods of time. Soon after Israel's establishment, President Truman offered $135 million in loans to help Israel cope with the arrival of thousands of refugees from the Holocaust. Within the first three years of Israel's establishment, the number of immigrants more than doubled the Jewish population of the country.
Mass immigrations have continued throughout Israeli history. Since 1989, Israel absorbed approximately one million Jews from the former Soviet Union. The United States worked with Israel to bring Jews from Arab countries, Ethiopia and the former Soviet Union to Israel, and has assisted in their absorption into Israeli society. In addition, large numbers of Jewish immigrants arrive from the United States each year, while some Israelis who leave the country have also settled in the United States.
[edit] Economy
The cornerstone of the vibrant U.S.-Israel economic relationship is the 1985 Free Trade Agreement (FTA), the first FTA ever signed by the United States. Over the last 20 years the FTA has enabled a sevenfold expansion of bilateral trade. Israel has become one of the largest trading partners of the U.S. in the Middle East and Israel's prime export destination is the United States. The U.S. and Israel also discuss fiscal and other possible macroeconomic reforms as part of the annual U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG) meeting, as well as negotiate terms for remaining guarantees to be disbursed from the $9 billion in loan guarantees allotted to Israel in 2003.
[edit] Corporate exchange
Several regional America-Israel Chambers of Commerce exist to facilitate expansion by Israeli and American companies into each other's markets.[61] American companies such as Motorola, IBM, Microsoft and Intel chose Israel to establish major R&D centers. Israel has more companies listed on the NASDAQ than any country outside North America.
[edit] Strategic cooperation
The U.S. and Israel are engaged in extensive strategic, political and military cooperation. This cooperation is broad and includes American aid, intelligence sharing, and joint military exercises. American military aid to Israel comes in different forms, including grants, special project allocations and loans.
[edit] Memorandum of Understanding
To address threats to security in the Middle East, including joint military exercises and readiness activities, cooperation in defense trade and access to maintenance facilities. The signing of the Memorandum of Understanding marked the beginning of close security cooperation and coordination between the American and Israeli governments. Comprehensive cooperation between Israel and the United States on security issues became official in 1981 when Israel's Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and American Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger signed a Memorandum of Understanding that recognized "the common bonds of friendship between the United States and Israel and builds on the mutual security relationship that exists between the two nations." The memorandum called for several measures.
[edit] Missile program
One facet of the U.S.-Israel strategic relationship is the joint development of the Arrow Anti-Ballistic Missile Program. Designed to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles, the Arrow is the most advanced missile defense system in the world. The development is funded by both Israel and the United States. The Arrow has also provided the U.S. the research and experience necessary to develop additional weapons systems.
[edit] Counter-terrorism
In April 1996, President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Shimon Peres signed the U.S.-Israel Counter-terrorism Accord. The two countries agreed to further cooperation in information sharing, training, investigations, research and development and policymaking.
[edit] Homeland security
At the federal, state and local levels there is close Israeli-American cooperation on Homeland Security. Israel was one of the first countries to cooperate with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in developing initiatives to enhance homeland security. In this framework, there are many areas of partnership, including preparedness and protection of travel and trade. American and Israeli law enforcement officers and Homeland Security officials regularly meet in both countries to study counter-terrorism techniques and new ideas regarding intelligence gathering and threat prevention.
In December 2005, the United States and Israel signed an agreement to begin a joint effort to detect the smuggling of nuclear and other radioactive material by installing special equipment in Haifa, Israel's busiest seaport. This effort is part of a nonproliferation program of the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration that works with foreign partners to detect, deter, and interdict illicit trafficking in nuclear and other radioactive materials.
[edit] Espionage
Although there is strong intelligence cooperation and sharing between the two countries, both have engaged in covert espionage operations inside the other.
[edit] American spying on Israel
In 1986, Yosef Amit, an Israeli intelligence officer, was charged with spying for the United States. Amit had sold CIA officials classified documents detailing Israeli troop movements and future plans in Lebanon and the Palestnian territories, and also sold top-secret documents from the Israeli internal security service Shin Bet. He was discovered by Shin Bet and the Israel Police after a friend reported that Amit had told him about ties with American intelligence. A search of his home uncovered numerous classified documents, and Amit was tried and imprisoned until 1993.
In 1996, the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) wiretapped the phone lines to Israel's embassy in Washington and broke the Israeli security code, exposing Israel's deepest policy secrets to the United States. In addition, the NSA wiretapped the homes of all embassy staff in Chevy Chase. The embassy staff discovered the wiretapping after several years, leading to a major shift in protocol. Every staff member was warned about the possibility of being listened to on ordinary and secure phone lines, sent very few telegrams, and sometimes travelled to Israel to deliver reports orally. In addition, Israel believes that U.S. intelligence has tried to listen in on conversations between the Israeli government and staff at its embassies around the world. The Israeli security service Shin Bet has instructed all diplomats going abroad to treat every phone conversation as if it were being tapped, and to discuss classified information in sign language.[62]
In November 2004, a submarine identified as American was detected by the Israeli Navy eighteen kilometers off the coast of Haifa and was chased away. The submarine was thought to have been trying to gather intelligence on Israel.[63]
U.S. Intelligence has allegedly spied on Israel's secret nuclear weapons program at the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona. According to a government-sponsored book on Israeli intelligence, American intelligence has tried to gather intelligence on Israel's nonconventional capabilities, and on "what goes on behind its decision-making echelons" through the use of electronic eavesdropping and trained staff at its embassy in Tel Aviv.[64] The Negev Nuclear Reasearch Center itself was photographed by American reconnaisance satellites. The American intelligence community first found out about Israel's alleged nuclear project in the 1960s, and the U.S. government demanded that Israel submit to inspections on the facility. Israel agreed, but demanded that it receive advance warning of all inspections, disguised doors leading to top-secret rooms within the facility, and limited the areas where inspectors could go.
According to WikiLeaks, the American embassy in Tel Aviv was told by the U.S. government to collect information on senior Israeli figures, and to gather intelligence on Israel's military and political moves, national infrastructure, coded means of producing passports and government ID badges, future military plans, terror-fighting methods, the impact of reserve duty in the Palestinian territories, and Israel's preparedness.
[edit] Israeli spying on the United States
In 1984, Jonathan Pollard, a Jewish naval intelligence employee, made a deal with Israel's Lekem scientific and technological intelligence agency along with his wife. Pollard sold Lekem tens of thousands of classified documents, beginning in June 1984. His removal of documents was reported by a co-worker, leading to his arrest and conviction. Four Israeli officials also were indicted, but all remained in Israel to avoid possible arrest. Pollard was sentenced to life in prison and his wife to two consecutive five-year terms. Pollard received a stronger sentence than many other spies from less friendly nations in order to discourage allies from spying.[65] He was granted Israeli citizenship in 1996, and Israeli officials periodically raise the Pollard case with U.S. counterparts.
Another Jewish national of the U.S., Ben-ami Kadish, worked as a mechanical engineer in the United States Army. He secretly sold Israel numerous national-defense related classified documents, including designs for nuclear weapons, an F-15 fighter, and Patriot missile. He began selling these documents in 1979, and continued until his discovery in 1985.
After the Pollard affair, Israeli intelligence allegedly continued to spy on the American military-industrial complex in order to bolster its own defense industries, defying strict orders from Israel's political leadership to cease spying on the United States.
[edit] See also
| Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush |
- America-Israel Friendship League
- Foreign relations of the United States
- Foreign relations of Israel
- United States Ambassador to Israel
- USS Liberty incident
- Israel lobby in the United States
- Arab lobby in the United States
- The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy
- AIPAC
- United States security assistance to the Palestinian Authority
[edit] References
- ^ U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel (Adapted from the summary of a report by Jeremy M. Sharp, Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs, December 4, 2009) [1]
- ^ a b c Israeli-United States Relations (Adapted from a report by Clyde R. Mark, Congressional Research Service, Updated October 17, 2002) [2]
- ^ Patriot, Judge, and Zionist
- ^ Jeffrey S. Gurock, American Zionism: mission and politics, p144, citing Jacob De Haas, Louis D. Brandeis (New York: 1929) and Chaim Weizmann, Trial and Error (Philadelphia:1949). v.I, p.165
- ^ Walworth (1986) 473-83, esp. p. 481; Melvin I. Urofsky, American Zionism from Herzl to the Holocaust, (1995) ch. 6; Frank W. Brecher, Reluctant Ally: United States Foreign Policy toward the Jews from Wilson to Roosevelt. (1991) ch 1-4.
- ^ Walter John Raymond, Dictionary of politics: selected American and foreign political and legal terms, p287
- ^ John Norton Moore, ed., The Arab Israeli Conflict III: Documents, American Society of International Law (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1974), p 107-8
- ^ Rubenberg, Cheryl (1986). Israel and the American National Interest: A Critical Examination. University of Illinois Press. pp. 27. ISBN 0-252-06074-1.
- ^ American Jewish Year Book Vol. 45 (1943-1944) Pro-Palestine and Zionist Activities, pp 206-214
- ^ Michael Oren, Power, Faith and Fantasy, Decision at Biltmore, pp 442-445: Convening in the art deco dining halls of New York's Biltmore Hotel in May 1942, Zionist representatives approved an eight point plan that, for the first time, explicitly called for the creation of a "Jewish Commonwealth integrated in the structure of the new democratic world." Gone were the proposals for an amorphous Jewish national home in Palestine, for carving out Jewish cantons and delineating autonomous regions with and over arching Arab state. Similarly, effaced was the long-standing Zionist assumption that Palestine's fate would be decided in London. Instead, the delegates agreed that the United States constituted the new Zionist "battleground" and that Washington would have the paramount say in the struggle for Jewish sovereignty. Henceforth the Zionist movement would strive for unqualified Jewish independence in Palestine, for a state with recognized borders, republican institutions, and a sovereign Army, to be attained in cooperation with America.
- ^ Lenczowski, George (1990). American Presidents and the Middle East. Duke University Press. pp. 6. ISBN 0-8223-0972-6.
- ^ Truman LibraryThe United States and the Recognition of Israel: Background
- ^ Lenczowski, American Presidents and the Middle East, p. 28, cite, Harry S. Truman, Memoirs 2, p. 158. The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders — actuated by a political motive and engaging in political threats — disturbed and annoyed me.
- ^ a b Truman LibraryThe United States and the Recognition of Israel: A Chronology
- ^ Avi Shlaim, The Protocol of Sèvres,1956: Anatomy of a War Plot Published in International Affairs, 73:3 (1997), 509-530
- ^ George Lenczowski, American Presidents and the Middle East, Duke University Press, 1990, p.105-115
- ^ "The Ceasefire/Standstill Proposal" 19 June 1970, http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.nsf/db942872b9eae454852560f6005a76fb/3e33d676ae43229b85256e60007086fd!OpenDocument last visited 2007/6/11
- ^ William B. Quandt, Peace Process, American Diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli Conflict since 1967, p194, and ff. Begin himself explained Gahal's resignation from the government, saying "As far as we are concerned, what do the words 'withdrawal from territories administered since 1967 by Israel' mean other than Judea and Samaria. Not all the territories; but by all opinion, most of them."
- ^ "The Camp David Accords: A Case of International Bargaining" Shibley Telhami, Columbia International Affairs Online, http://www.ciaonet.org/casestudy/tes01/index.html, last visited 2007/6/11
- ^ Cohen, Avner. "The Last Nuclear Moment" The New York Times, 6 October 2003.
- ^ Farr, Warner D. "The Third Temple's Holy of Holies: Israel's Nuclear Weapons." Counterproliferation Paper No. 2, USAF Counterproliferation Center, Air War College, September 1999.
- ^ a b Michael Oren, Power, Faith and Fanatsy, p569
- ^ 'New World Order'
- ^ Scott Lasensky, Underwriting Peace in the Middle East: U.S. Foreign Policy and the Limits of Economic Inducements, Middle East Review of International Affairs: Volume 6, No. 1 - March 2002
- ^ 260 General Assembly Resolution 46-86- Revocation of Resolution 3379- 16 December 1991- and statement by President Herzog, 16 Dec 1991 VOLUME 11-12: 1988-1992 and statement by President Herzog, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs web site.
- ^ Defense Security Cooperation Agency news release 14 July 2006, Transmittal No. 06-40, [3]
- ^ Israel to get U.S. "bunker buster" bombs - report, Reuters, 24 July 2006
- ^ BBC NEWS | Middle East | US probes Israel cluster bomb use
- ^ "Headlines for July 17, 2006". Democracy Now!. http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/17/1423239.
- ^ "Headlines for July 19, 2006". Democracy Now!. 19 July 2006. http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/19/1345246.
- ^ "Headlines for July 20, 2006". Democracy Now!. http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/20/1434244.
- ^ "Rome talks yield no plan to end Lebanon fighting". Reuters. 2006-07-26. http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-07-26T185440Z_01_L26848349_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-MEETING.xml.
- ^ a b "US-Israel row: Israeli views". BBC News. March 24, 2010. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8585239.stm.
- ^ "Clinton rebukes Israel over homes". BBC News. March 12, 2010. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8565455.stm.
- ^ U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel. Congressional Research Service report for Congress. Jan 2, 2008. By Jeremy M. Sharp.
- ^ U.S. Military Assistance and Arms Transfers to Israel, World Policy Institute.
- ^ Tarnoff, Curt; Nowels, Larry (2004), Foreign Aid: An Introductory Overview of U.S. Programs and Policy, State Department, pp. 12–13, CRS Report for Congress. Order Code 98-916, http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/31987.pdf, retrieved 2008-03-04
- ^ Forbes (July 29, 2007).[4]"Israeli PM announces 30 billion US dollar US defence aid". Retrieved August 3, 2007.
- ^ New York Times, August 17, 2007 "US and Israel sign Military deal".Retrieved Aug 17, 2007.
- ^ http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
- ^ "Military Aid to Israel," US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, August 3rd, 2010.
- ^ Ramirez, Luis. "Israeli Purchase of Fighter Jets Seen as Litmus Test for Continued US Support." voanews.com, 17 August 2010. Retrieved: 18 August 2010.
- ^ The Times (UK), December 20, 2006, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article758520.ece , last visited Feb. 26, 2007
- ^ "Syrians and Israelis 'held talks'," BBC, 1/16/07
- ^ "Syrian, Israeli backdoor talks now emerging," Christian Science Monitor, 1/18/07
- ^ "Why can't they just make peace?," Economist, 1/18/07
- ^ Haaretz, February 24, 2007, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/829441.html last visited Feb. 26/07
- ^ The Times (UK), December 20, 2006, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article758520.ece last visited Feb. 26, 2007
- ^ DefenseNews.com - U.S. Forced Israel to Freeze Venezuelan F-16 Contract: Ministry - 10/21/05 10:01
- ^ Background: Gilo is not a settlement
- ^ About the U.S. Consulate
- ^ Petraeus Throws His Weight Into Middle East Debate
- ^ http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/boot/265971
- ^ a b Bowen, Jeremy (May 9, 2010). "Analysis: Bleak climate for Mid-East talks". BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8660471.stm. Retrieved June 1, 2010.
- ^ http://hrw.org/reports/2003/iraqjordan/Iraqjordan0503-03.htm
- ^ PollingReport compilation
- ^ CBS NEWS POLL: FIGHTING IN THE MIDDLE EAST
- ^ Thoughts on aid
- ^ New Poll Shows Strong and Stable U.S. Support for Israel in Third Week of Conflict with Iran-Backed Hezbollah
- ^ Israel, the Palestinians....
- ^ http://www.israeltrade.org/
- ^ http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/u-s-spied-on-israel-s-washington-embassy-claims-ex-envoy-1.327522
- ^ "Report: Submarine spying off coast last year was American." AP, 5 June 2005.
- ^ http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4B94T220081210
- ^ Ross, Michael: The Volunteer: The Amazing True Story of an Israeli Spy on the Trail of International Terrorists (2007)
[edit] Bibliography
- "Israeli-United States Relations" Almanac of Policy Issues
- Ball, George W. and Douglas B. Ball. The Passionate Attachment: America's Involvement With Israel, 1947 to the Present. New York: W.W. Norton, 1992. (ISBN 0-393-02933-6)
[edit] Further reading
- Leep, Matthew Coen. "The Affective Production of Others: United States Policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict," Cooperation and Conflict 45(3): 331-352 (2010)
[edit] External links
- Israel and the United States: Friends, Partners, Allies
- Israeli–United States Relations Congressional Research Service
- Origins of the US-Israeli Strategic Partnership
- Israeli Embassy in Washington,D.C. page on U.S.-Israel relations
- United States Embassy in Israel
- Israel: Background and Relations with the United States CRS Report for Congress
- Israeli–United States Relations Policy Almanac
- U.S. rejects Israeli request to join visa waiver plan by Aluf Benn, Haaretz, February 19, 2006
- How Special is the U.S.-Israel relationship?
- Address by PM Olmert to a Joint Meeting of the U.S. Congress
- President Bush Meets with Bipartisan Members of Congress on the G8 Summit Transcript
- President Discusses Foreign Policy During Visit to State Department Transcript
- President Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel Participate in Joint Press Availability Transcript
- U.S.-Israel Relations
- Coming Moment of Truth between Israel and the US by Gidi Grinstein Reut Institute
- Vital Support: Aid to Israel and US National Security Interests
- A Crisis in U.S.-Israel Relations: Have We Been Here Before? Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- George W. Bush speech in 2008 about Israel–US relations
| |||
| |||
Search Results
Barack Obama's Middle East Policy
2 Dec 2007 ... As president, Barack Obama would extend the Middle East an olive branch at the end of a stick: he is the dovish hawk of the Democratic field ...
middleeast.about.com/od/usmideastpolicy/a/me071202a.htm - Cached - SimilarInsight into Obama's Middle East Policy? :: Daniel Pipes
30 Dec 2008 ... JP title: Insight into Bush's 'promising' Middle East] Two events earlier this month summed up differing views of George W. Bush's Middle ...
www.danielpipes.org/.../insight-into-obamas-middle-east-policy - Cached - SimilarObama's Middle East challenge - The Obama Presidency - Al Jazeera ...
28 Jan 2009 ... A Middle East policy based on the principles Obama outlined at his inauguration will find few partners in the region and if Obama's ...
english.aljazeera.net/.../theobamapresidency/.../200912694223241504.html - Cached - SimilarMiddle East Policy Council | Assessing the Obama Strategy toward ...
11 Nov 2010 ... Whereas Bush had pursued a unilateralist foreign policy, Obama was ... even sought the democratization the greater Middle East, Obama made ...
www.mepc.org/articles.../assessing-obama-strategy-toward-war-terror - CachedHillary Clinton admits that Obama's Middle East policy is a ...
19 Jan 2011 ... Ajami doesn't even mention Israel, but we're the one country in the Middle East where Obama's foreign policy was forceful... in the wrong ...
israelmatzav.blogspot.com/.../hillary-clinton-admits-that-obamas.html - CachedBarack Obama on the Middle East | FPIF
10 Jan 2008 ... Stephen Zunes, "Barack Obama on the Middle East" (Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, January 10, 2008). Print; Share. Search Region ...
www.fpif.org/articles/barack_obama_on_the_middle_east - CachedObama's Middle East Policy | The Weekly Standard
1 Jul 2010 ... Lee Smith devoted his weekly column at Tablet to a worthwhile symposium on Obama's foreign policy in the Middle East. ...
www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamas-middle-east-policy - CachedElliott Abrams: Pressure Points » Blog Archive » Obama at Half ...
19 Jan 2011 ... Obama at Half Time: Two Years in the Middle East ... his Middle East policy is the product of his view of America and the world. ...
blogs.cfr.org/.../obama-at-half-time-two-years-in-the-middle-east/ - CachedRubinReports: Two Photos That Express Obama Middle East Policy ...
17 Apr 2010 ... On one level, the two pictures above tell the story of the Obama Administration Middle East policy; on the other hand, they are very ...
rubinreports.blogspot.com/2010/04/picture-post-3.html - CachedNews Analysis: New US Congress affects Obama's Middle East policy
4 Nov 2010 ... According to analysts that spoke to Xinhua, Obama will now face limitations on his movement regarding the Middle East because a Republican ...
news.xinhuanet.com › Home › World - Cached
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
Posts
![[14]](http://www.cbs.gov.il/archive/shnaton47/st02-07.gif){kind=link}
1 comment:
This post is very nice and amazing. Please, continued to write same wonderful post.
Post a Comment