For the last decade,India has pursued a policy of skillful ambiguity in the Middle East. It has adroitly pursued friendly relations with everyone: Israelis and Palestinians,Iranians and Saudis. While this performance should be applauded as a diplomatic tour de force,Indias nimble statecraft may not be sustainable if New Delhi seeks a greater global role commensurate with its capabilities. India has hedged its position on the two central crises beyond Iran that define the contemporary Middle East: the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and Irans pursuit of nuclear weapons. Should New Delhi seek to maintain friendly relations with all of these parties,it will be difficult to stay relevant. Furthermore,such fence-sitting conflicts with Indias desire to be recognised as a global power.
To date,India and Israel appear to have reached quiet agreement on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. India provides firm rhetorical support to the Palestinian people,but continues to provide billions to Israels defense establishment. Already this year,the two countries reportedly have concluded their largest defense deal to date in which Israel will provide an air defense system to India for $1.4 billion. While public accounts are sketchy,Indo-Israeli counterterrorism and intelligence cooperation also appears robust,with recent press reports that such cooperation includes spy satellite collaboration. In Delhi,it is common to hear criticism of US support to Israel,although India is not without levers in its relationship. As Israels Ambassador to India David Danieli said in a 2006 interview,India certainly can contribute by having a dialogue with Palestinians and with Israel. India maintains equally good relations with both. So the ears of both sides are certainly open to hear Indian views. While India could wait and watch while others do the heavy lifting in the peace process,it is in a unique position to draw on historical goodwill and influence with both parties.
To date,India has masterfully balanced its competing partnerships in the Middle East. As India takes its rightful place on the global stage,empty rhetoric or studied ambiguity wont withstand the increased scrutiny that comes with international prominence. Indias hedging on the Middle East seems particularly incompatible with its UN Security Council ambitions. By its very nature,the Security Council,a body whose work is dominated by the Middle East,requires tough yes or no decisions. The world will be watching as India determines whether it seeks to sit on the sidelines or seeks to influence the strategic orientation of that troubled region.
The writers served in a variety of positions in the US Defense Department focusing on South Asia and the Middle East,respectively
