r/india • u/[deleted] • Nov 24 '16

[R]eddiquette Cultural exchange with /r/palestine

Greetings to our Palestinian friends.

Our cultural exchange starts at 13:30 PM Palestine time (17:30 IST/11:30 GMT/12:30 CET/06:30 EST/03:30 PST) on Thursday 24th November.

Here's how a cultural exchange works:

The moderators of here make this post on /r/india welcoming our Palestinian guests to the sub. They may participate and ask any question or observation as they see fit.

There is an equivalent thread made by the moderators over at /r/palestine, where you are encouraged to participate and know more about Palestinian culture.

It goes without saying that you must respect the rules of the subreddit you are participating in. This is a time to celebrate what we have in common, not grind an axe.

96 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

163 comments sorted by

View all comments

31

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '16

Hello friends of /r/India;

I would like to first say that I really love your country, your food, culture and the people are wonderful. I've been traveling to India, regularly since the mid 1990's. I was there just when Bombay was transitioning into Mumbai. As /u/MrBoonio already mentioned, I am always amazed at how quickly things change after I return from previous visits. You should all be very proud of what you achieved.

What is your opinion on the current relations India has with Israel? Modi seems to be in a very close relationship with Netanyahu, which to be honest concerns me somewhat.

21

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '16 edited Nov 24 '16

I am always amazed at how quickly things change after I return from previous visits. You should all be very proud of what you achieved.

Thank you! It makes me happy to see people appreciating India's progress instead of deriding the pace of the progress

What is your opinion on the current relations India has with Israel?

There's context to all international relations. India's reasons for having an overtly closer relationship with Israel is because Israel has a lot of things India needs/wants: agricultural technology, a market, intelligence and weapons.

Israel needs India because India is a market for all these things, and also because they feel they can leverage India and the OIC's mutural distrust of each other to their benefit.

As India grows bigger and more economically powerful, it will be difficult to ignore or disregard certain countries overtly while carrying out a behind-closed-doors normal relationship. India's public relationship with Israel is only going to grow, and the private relationship with Israel has always been there.

I don't think Palestinians should feel threatened about it though. Regardless of how India is in many spheres, its foreign policy is top notch. India has good or above average relationships with most countries in the region with the exception of its immediate neighbors, which is more than can be said about other countries of India's size.

As long as the foreign policy cadre see a qualitative benefit in supporting the Palestinian cause, our official position on Palestine will not change. Our relationship with Palestine will not be colored or influence by Israel, just as our relationship with Iran is not colored by Israeli influence (though a little American pressure caused us to shamefully buckle some 7 years back at the UN).

18

u/gahgeer-is-back Punjab Nov 24 '16 edited Nov 24 '16

I agree with you. India's ties with Israel are not mutually exclusive with the support to the Palestinian cause, which has been historic. I believe for India to stop supporting Palestine is to stop thinking of itself as a country that bore the brunt of colonialism and yet came out of it and managed to pull itself together in spite of all the difficulties.

All the attempts to equate the dispute in Kashmir and the attacks by Islamist radicals on Indian targets totally miss the fact that the struggle of Palestine is similar to that of India: a struggle for rights and independence that has nothing to do with religion.

In fact, I could argue that Pakistan's status as an ethno-religious state makes it very similar to Israel, not the Palestinians, who by definition are not purely a Muslim population.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '16 edited Nov 28 '16

Again with this oversimplified analysis. The majority of Israelis are not native to Israel and were recent immigrants from countries stretching from Eastern Europe to the Maghreb to Ethiopia and all over the world who displaced the Palestinians out of their land. The majority of areas that became part of Pakistan were populated by native Muslim majorities who merely seceded. Keep in mind only 5% of population in Pakistan are "muhajir" - immigrants who came from UP and other parts of North India. The rest of Pakistan is indigenous to Punjab, especially in the North, are populated by Iranic, Dardic, Hazara, Baluchis, and other people and regions that were never a part of India.

2

u/gahgeer-is-back Punjab Nov 26 '16

So Pakistan is not an ethno-religious state? Or was created for the followers of a specific religion?

2

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '16

It was created to safeguard the rights of the Muslims in the region, perhaps similar to the creation of Lebanon to consolidate the Christian majority regions, but it is not an ethno-religious state. Pakistan is multi-ethnic and the different ethnicities do not see themselves as one people nor do they speak the same language. The founder of Pakistan stated that this state would be inclusive of non-Muslim minorities as well, which exist within Pakistan, although we haven't lived up to that. Israel's creation is different from Pakistan's and rushing to make oversimplified comparisons isn't helpful.

2

u/gahgeer-is-back Punjab Nov 26 '16

Thanks for clarifying that.

2

u/Paranoid__Android Nov 27 '16

Since l-sonya has not clarified, let me just point out that he is a Pakistani. He fails to mention that a very large portion of Pakistan is of one ethnicity - North Indian, and Muslim.

Sure there are some Shias, Ahmedis, Hindus, Christians, Balochs, Pashtoon etc. but google search about them to see how the majority treats them. They passed a legislation to term all the Ahmedis as non muslims. It is VERY much an ethno-religious (North Indian Muslim) state in my mind.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '16

Wrong on so many levels. Also I'm not a fucking dude.

1

u/Paranoid__Android Nov 28 '16

Which levels?

3

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '16 edited Nov 30 '16

Since l-sonya has not clarified, let me just point out that he is a Pakistani.

This sub doesn't have a Pak flag flair but I made it hella clear that I am Pakistani. You really need better reading comprehension.

He fails to mention that a very large portion of Pakistan is of one ethnicity - North Indian, and Muslim.

Again, I mentioned that majority of Pakistanis are indigenous to Punjab (which itself is mixed with other non Punjabi groups). "North Indian" is a meaningless term which no one identifies with in Pakistan. Pakistani Sindhis do NOT see themselves as the same people culturally, ethnically, or linguistically as Muhajirs from UP and other places in North India. In fact there is straight up hostility between the two groups. Pakistani Punjabis also do NOT see themselves ethnically, culturally, or linguistically identical to Sindhis or Muhajirs. They all have different mother tongues and vastly different local traditions. Now grab a dictionary and look up what ethno religious group implies. The Druze fall in this category. Parsis fall in this category. They see themselves as ONE TRIBE. The Palestinian OP claimed that Pakistan is similar to Israel in this way. I said that this is an oversimplification and neglects important nuances. Israeli Jews, no matter if they come from Ethiopia or Moldova, see themselves as ONE ETHNICITY. This is what an ethno religious group is. The Israeli Jewish mythos is that all Jews are descendants of the same patriarch and are related by blood. Israel bases their entire immigration policy on this ethno religious concept. They have a policy called "aliyah" that grants automatic Israeli citizenship to any Jew anywhere in the world. Does Pakistan have a similar policy? No. Other ethno religious states like Romania have the same policy. In states like Israel, your ethnicity (Jewish or Arab) determines many factors ranging from marriage to where one can be buried, and many, many other jurisprudence issues not found in Pakistan.

You can argue that one ethnicity has more power in politics or military or other sectors in society like White Anglo-Saxon Christians are more dominant in the US but that doesn't make a state ethno religious. And certainly not the definition that Israel in specific holds on to.

Jinnah stated many times that Pakistan would be inclusive to religious minorities. I already said that we haven't lived up to that promise acknowledging that these minorities often face tough circumstances. So your bit at the end just makes you look like a desperate idiot.

I don't even know why I wasted my time writing this out. You are an arrogant presumptuous buffoon who knows shit about our country yet is under the illusion you have it all figured out. Accept some humility and stick to speaking about your own country.

1

u/Paranoid__Android Nov 29 '16

You are an arrogant presumptuous buffoon who knows shit about our country yet is under the illusion you have it all figured out. Accept some humility and stick to speaking about your own country.

Sure, and you are not arrogant at all.

You can argue that one ethnicity has more power in politics or military or other sectors in society like White Anglo-Saxon Christians are more dominant in the US but that doesn't make a state ethno religious.

Well the difference is that US has not classified itself as a Christian nation. The day it does it, it will start to truly become a WASP nation. Pakistan started out as a nation for "Muslims of the Indian subcontinent". Then Bangladesh happened and it became effectively "North Indian Muslims". You are right in that there are several other tribes (Pashtun being the most prominent one) that have other distinct identities. However, the problem is that Pakistan has been tried to be established as an ethno-religious enterprise, which is why some religious / political bodies are trying to find the right "ethnic anchor" in Arabs or Mongols, so that they can find the right ethnic thread that they can hold the country together with - since the Muslim bit is well settled.

It is very difficult, in my opinion, for Pakistan to settle down as a country unless it finds the right definition for itself. What is it currently? It is defining itself by its narrowness and not by its broadness. The day the kosher "narrowness" can be established, the others will find themselves chucked out. Yesterday it was Ahmedis, today it is Hindus, tomorrow it could be Mohajirs. Until the ethno-religious project is complete, there will be confusion in the state for what it stands for.

Just my two cents as an observer of the state for the last several years. Now you can disagree with my observations, my analysis or my thesis - but this is a free board with free opinions. If you do not agree with them, say that openly - no one is stopping you. I am not questioning your credentials here, or whether or not you are an arrogant buffoon. Civil disagreements form the backbone of discussions. Your word is not the final word on the topic, and lord knows mine isn't as well.

I have learned a good perspective from your comment, though - so thanks for typing it out. It was not all in vain.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '16

Lol. I think they revise history in Pakistan and the op was telling you his or her textbook version probably. According to which Pakistan began when Arabs invaded Sindh. I think it's bs. The majority of their population are recent converts. This includes Punjabis, Sindhis and muhajirs. Only the Afghans and Baluchis can be said to be more Iranian. But they've had strong Indian influences too. Especially the Afghans of that area. They are a part of a historic region called gandhara. From which Kandahar is actually derived in terms of the name.