India’s action against the protests is a stance against terrorism, ‘which by default ends up being a pro-Israel stance,’ says international relations expert.
NEW DELHI—A war of stances and narratives has broken out in the global media after India’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian protests. Some reports say the ban represents a foreign policy shift in an attempt to protect India’s relationship with Israel, one of its largest defense partners. These reports are countered by others, primarily in the Indian media, who say the protests have been banned to maintain law and order.
A report in the Associated Press focused on the situation in Muslim-majority Kashmir, where Indian authorities have barred Palestinian solidarity marches and asked Muslim preachers to refrain from mentioning the conflict in their sermons. The report said India has barred solidarity marches because it fears the protests will jeopardize its rule in what the AP termed a “disputed region.” India has legally claimed Kashmir as its own since the partition of colonial India into India and Pakistan.
However, a leading Indian geo-political analyst told The Epoch Times that India’s act of banning pro-Palestinian protests is primarily a counterterrorism measure.
“This is a very, very strong, robust, uncompromising counterterrorism stance, which by default ends up being a pro-Israel stance,” Abhijit Iyer-Mitra, senior research fellow at the New Delhi-based Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, told The Epoch Times. By a counterterrorism stance, Mr. Iyer-Mitra meant that India will show “exactly zero support for terror.”
After the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi shared two messages on X, formerly known as Twitter. The first message came immediately after the attack. Mr. Modi said: “Deeply shocked by the news of terrorist attacks in Israel. Our thoughts and prayers are with the innocent victims and their families. We stand in solidarity with Israel at this difficult hour.”
The Indian prime minister didn’t mention Palestine at all in his public message. Mr. Iyer-Mitra described the post as a “huge departure” from the way India had communicated previously on the Israeli–Palestine issue.
By Venus Upadhayaya
