India has always had a somewhat odd relationship with Israel. New Delhi didn't even have full diplomatic relations with the country until the 1990s and officially, India has firmly been in Palestine's corner. Under the radar, however, ties between the two countries have steadily grown to the point that they can no longer be kept secret. And, if the latest vote in the United Nations Human Rights Council is anything to go by, it seems like India doesn't want it to be hidden any more either.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has brought the ties, particularly on the security cooperation front, out in the open and is even planning to break with decades of Indian policy by making a visit to Israel some time this year. Meanwhile, the two countries continue to sign defence deals and build on direct contacts. And now it seems India is even changing its approach at multilateral fora.
On Friday the United Nations Human Rights Council voted on a resolution condemning Israel after a UN report pointed out that the country effectively carried out war crimes during last year's war in the Gaza strip. Traditionally India has always supported Palestine at the UN and as recently as July last year, New Delhi voted in favour of a UNHRC resolution coming down heavily on Israel for the Gaza war.
This time around, however, as the UNHRC put up a resolution based on the UN report, India changed its tune: it abstained. Kenya, Ethiopia, Paraguay and Macedonia also abstained alongside India, with 41 countries, including Britain, France and Germany voting for the resolution condemning Israel. Only one country voted against it: the United States.
The rationale
Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Vikas Swarup sought to clarify India's stance, saying that it had more to do with the reference to the International Criminal Court, which New Delhi does not recognise. “The issue in this particular resolution was the reference to the International Criminal Court. India is not a signatory to the Rome Statute establishing the ICC. In the past too, whenever a Human Rights Council resolution had made a direct reference to the ICC, our general approach had been to abstain," he said.
But India's vote also comes after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Modi, reportedly urging him not to support the resolution. Modi is also expected to visit Israel later this year, in what will be a landmark event in the relationship between the two countries. So even if the ICC turned out to be the technicality that gave India a reason to abstain, it is evident that New Delhi's approach to Israel on the global stage has clearly shifted.
Here are a few excerpts from the UNHRC resolution which India decided not to support:
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has brought the ties, particularly on the security cooperation front, out in the open and is even planning to break with decades of Indian policy by making a visit to Israel some time this year. Meanwhile, the two countries continue to sign defence deals and build on direct contacts. And now it seems India is even changing its approach at multilateral fora.
On Friday the United Nations Human Rights Council voted on a resolution condemning Israel after a UN report pointed out that the country effectively carried out war crimes during last year's war in the Gaza strip. Traditionally India has always supported Palestine at the UN and as recently as July last year, New Delhi voted in favour of a UNHRC resolution coming down heavily on Israel for the Gaza war.
This time around, however, as the UNHRC put up a resolution based on the UN report, India changed its tune: it abstained. Kenya, Ethiopia, Paraguay and Macedonia also abstained alongside India, with 41 countries, including Britain, France and Germany voting for the resolution condemning Israel. Only one country voted against it: the United States.
The rationale
Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Vikas Swarup sought to clarify India's stance, saying that it had more to do with the reference to the International Criminal Court, which New Delhi does not recognise. “The issue in this particular resolution was the reference to the International Criminal Court. India is not a signatory to the Rome Statute establishing the ICC. In the past too, whenever a Human Rights Council resolution had made a direct reference to the ICC, our general approach had been to abstain," he said.
But India's vote also comes after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Modi, reportedly urging him not to support the resolution. Modi is also expected to visit Israel later this year, in what will be a landmark event in the relationship between the two countries. So even if the ICC turned out to be the technicality that gave India a reason to abstain, it is evident that New Delhi's approach to Israel on the global stage has clearly shifted.
Here are a few excerpts from the UNHRC resolution which India decided not to support:
Emphasizing the importance of the safety and well-being of all civilians, reaffirming the obligation to ensure the protection of civilians in armed conflict, and deploring the civilian deaths that resulted from the conflict in and around the Gaza Strip in July and August 2014, including the killing of 1,462 Palestinian civilians, including 551 children and 299 women, and six Israeli civilians,
Gravely concerned by reports regarding serious human rights violations and grave breaches of international humanitarian law, including possible war crimes, including the findings of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, of the independent commission of inquiry on the 2014 Gaza conflict, and of the boards of inquiry convened by the Secretary-General.
Deploring the non-cooperation by Israel with the independent commission of inquiry on the 2014 Gaza conflict and the refusal to grant access to or to cooperate with international human rights bodies seeking to investigate alleged violations of international law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.
Alarmed that long-standing systemic impunity for international law violations has allowed for the recurrence of grave violations without consequence, and stressing the need to ensure accountability for all violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in order to end impunity, ensure justice, deter further violations, protect civilians and promote peace.
Calls upon all States to promote compliance with human rights obligations and all High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to respect, and to ensure respect for, international humanitarian law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, in accordance with article 1 common to the Geneva Conventions, and to fulfil their obligations under articles 146, 147 and 148 of the said Convention with regard to penal sanctions, grave breaches and the responsibilities of the High Contracting Parties.