Friday, May 09, 2014
Israeli ties compromise Asian support to Arabs
By Nicola Nasser*
Israeli Prime
Minister Netanyahu’s official visit to Japan
Neither
is the normalization of relations in “a matter of weeks” between Israel and
Turkey, which was the first major Muslim country to recognize the State of
Israel in 1949, as promised by the Turkish premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan on last
April 27.
However
both events should highlight the historic breakthrough Israel has discreetly and quietly achieved in
pivoting to Asia, once an Arab reservoir of support in their conflict with Israel over Palestine
“For
the first time, in 2014, Israeli exports with Asia will exceed trade with the
US, pushing it from second to third
place (behind the EU),” director of the Foreign Trade Administration at Israel’s
Ministry of the Economy, Ohad Cohen, was quoted as saying by Israeli “Globes”
on April 27.
While
opening more trade attaché offices in Asia, the Israeli Ministry of the Economy
has closed a number of European trade offices in Austria ,
Hungary , Finland and Sweden
“Today we have five offices in China , three in India ,
and we have added attaché in Vietnam Manila ,” he added.
While
Obama was trying to forge a US-Asian counterbalance to China in what Chinese
commentators described as “Cold War mentality,” Israel was courting the
emerging Chinese economic superpower as well as India, which the World Bank on
last April 29 reported it had overtaken Japan as the world’s third largest
economy in terms of purchasing power parity.
“‘Pivot
to Asia’ is a term that might be applied to Israel China
to more than $8 billion in 2013. Israel ’s military and technological cooperation
with China had once created
a crisis in the U.S.
Cohen
noted that while the US and
Europe continue to “huff and puff” about the illegal Israeli colonial
settlements in the occupied Palestinian West Bank “Asia
does business. India has
already bought sea-to-sea missiles, radar for a missile-intercept system and
communications equipment from Israel
According
to the web site of the embassy of India in Cairo, Egypt, “Much
of our external trade passes along the Suez Canal, the Red Sea and the Gulf of
Aden,” all almost exclusively Arab sea routes, and “Our total bilateral trade
with the Arab countries is over US$ 110 billion and the region is home to 4.5
million Indians and caters to 70% of our energy imports.”
Indian
Defence Minister Shri A.K. Antony told the 15th Asian Security Conference in
February last year that “West Asia is a critical region” for India and the
“Gulf region is vital for India’s energy security.”
During
2011 to 2012, India’s trade with the Arab Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) was
more than U.S. $145 billion (with exports and imports from the region standing
at 20 percent and 14 percent, respectively), Antony said.
The
“links” with West Asia “have got deepened and
further strengthened in the era of globalization.” Former Prime Minister of India ’s Special Envoy to West Asia, Chinmaya R.
Gharikhan, was on record to attribute the Indian economy growth at more than 8%
to India ’s “dependence” for
70% of its energy needs on West Asia .
Former
Indian ambassador to Oman ,
UAE and Saudi Arabia , Talmiz
Ahmad, on last December 29, wrote in Deccan Chronicle: “The security and
stability of the Gulf and West Asia are
crucial for the long-term interests of the Asian countries. This calls for a
review of the Asian security role in the Gulf.”
Yet,
despite these vital Indian – Arab relations, India
is now the largest customer of the military equipment, the largest military
partner and the largest Asian economic partner of Arabs’ arch enemy, Israel
Such
Indian and Chinese exchanges with Israel
have neutralized Asian pro-Arab and pro-Palestinian influence or at least
created a contradiction between Asia ’s
economic dealings and its verbal political speech.
These
Asian-Israeli exchanges deprived Israel Palestine ,
Syria and Lebanon
Until
peace is made with Arabs and Palestinians in particular, Israel
Even
then, it will continue to consider itself an integral part of western culture
and strategy and to be a western influence doing its best to make the region a
free market for western interests and a strategic monopoly of western powers.
Adding
to the US
Controversial explanation
Writing
in Forbes on May 14 last year, professor at the Josef Korbel School of
International Studies at the University
of Denver , Jonathan Adelman, and the
acting executive director for Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), Asaf Romirowsky, had a controversial explanation of Israel ’s breakthrough in Asia :
Historically, “Asia
largely lacks the anti-Semitism that was so prominent in Europe” and “Israel was like most Asian states … a new state
born after World War II after a struggle with a Western colonial power, in this
case Great Britain
“Geographically, Israel is in West Asia, only four hours by air
from India and 11 hours by
air from China
“Economically, Israel ’s rapid transition from Third World power
to First World ‘start-up nation’ echoes the great transformation underway in
such Asian countries as India ,
China
“Scientifically, Israel
“Militarily, the
Israeli military, a world leader in anti-missile technology (Iron Dome) … is
attractive to Asian countries developing their own militaries.
“Politically, the
growing threat of Islamism draws many of Asian countries towards a country that
is in the forefront of fighting this threat.”
In intelligence
matters, Israeli “Mossad, with its strong human intelligence capabilities, is
attractive for helping these countries overcome foreign threats.”
Adelman and
Romirowsky sound like labouring to produce an academic commercial to “sell” Israel to Asia .
Ironically both
of them had nothing to say about Israel
being promoted mainly by its US
strategic sponsor as “the only democracy in the Middle East .”
Historically Israel was not born after a struggle with the
colonial power of Great
Britain
Militarily, the anti-missile
Iron Dome technology has not proved a success in three Israeli wars on Gaza
Strip and Lebanon
Politically, the
Israeli logistical support of the most extreme among the Islamist insurgents
who are fighting against the government of Syria
doesn’t vindicate that Israel
Taking the wrong side
The argument that
Mossad is attractive for helping Asian countries overcome their threat deserves
more elaboration.
The
fact that the Muslim population in Asia is almost double that of the Arab
countries combined is a factor that could potentially create a cultural bridge
for more interaction between the overwhelmingly Arab West Asia and its mother
continent, but nonetheless there is a worrying negative side.
The
rise of Islamist extremism could make use of this cultural bridge as well, but
the Israeli occupying power is making the best use of it by exploiting this
threat to cement its intelligence ties with Asia .
But
these extremists are at war with the Arabs and not with Israel
Of
course Asia could not idly watch the rise of Islamist extremism and could not
avoid taking sides and embark on a defensive battle against it outside its
borders otherwise it will be risking fighting this evil within its own borders
sooner or later.
However,
Asia seems to take the wrong side. The Israeli
occupying power is not Asia’s best ally to preempt this threat, but
the Arabs who have gained enough intelligence about them and enough experience
in fighting them from Morocco in the far west of the Arab world to Iraq in the
far east.
* Nicola Nasser
is a veteran Arab journalist based in Birzeit, West Bank of the
Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories. An edited version of this article was
first published by Middle East Eye. (nassernicola@ymail.com)
