AIPAC Lobbies Indian PM to Form U.S.-Israel-India Front Against Iran

One of the distinguishing characteristics of AIPAC’s Mideast policy initiatives is their overreaching nature. Not content with merely isolating a Hamas-led PA government, they author a bill which criminalizes even the remotest federal interactions with Hamas. Similarly, not content with merely advocating a military strike against Iran, they have a grandiose vision of a united anti-Jihadist front against that country consisting of the U.S., Israel and India. Far-fetched you say? Not according to AIPAC, which recently sent its board of directors to India for consultations at the highest level including with the prime minister.

It’s useful to note the way this story tries to subtly paint a portrait of two states (India and Israel) united in a war against radical Islam, the upshot being the enemy of my enemy is my friend:

The security measures at Number 7 Race Course Road [the Indian PM’s residence] in New Delhi are reminiscent of Jerusalem…As in Israel, special precautions are taken to ensure the protection of the Prime Minister at his official residence. India’s history of political assassinations and terrorism necessitate such measures.

It is in part because of the shared threat of terrorism that the meeting with Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh is about to take place. The AIPAC Board of Directors has journeyed here to meet with India’s national leaders to discuss ways the United States, Israel and India can work more closely together to confront the gravest dangers in today’s world: the proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical arms and terrorism motivated by religious extremism.

If you think about the assumptions behind this trip you realize that AIPAC has created a vision of a global war against Islam with essentially the U.S., Israel and whatever other country it can enlist to fight on its side. It’s frightening, almost terrifying. Do American realize the strategic initiatives that this organization is cooking up for our foreign policy? Where AIPAC wants to take us?

Get a load of this hokum:

As Prime Minister Singh enters and greets us each individually, I am struck by the poignancy of the moment. The leader of this country of 1.1 billion people has once again carved out time to have a meaningful conversation on the critical issues of the day with leaders of America’s pro-Israel community. I remember a previous meeting with Prime Minister Singh in New York when he averred that he knew of no other group in history that has played such a prominent role in the development of civilization as the Jewish people.

In the rough-and-tumble world of politics in the world’s largest democracy, Singh presents himself as a humble and dignified man. He is a Sikh leading a nation of some 885 million Hindus and 145 million Muslims.

Do you hear yet another echo of Israel here? In the rough and tumble of world politics, Israel presents itself as a humble and dignified country. It is a Jewish nation amid a world filled with multitudes of far larger religions.

Finally, the writer gets to the heart of the matter, the solicitation of alliance against Iran:

In our meeting with Prime Minister Singh, we…urge a more assertive stand towards Iran. Prime Minister Singh…emphasizes that Iran is obliged to meet international nuclear commitments but that he hopes that dialogue and diplomacy facilitated by the United Nations will lead to a solution.

So far, thank God, he’s not biting.

The report also notes the delegation’s hopes for closer trade and military relations between India and Israel. But note the dastardly Reds and Mohammedans that stand ominously in the way of closer ties:

While the tangibles of defense and economic cooperation are on the rise, there are still areas of concern. The current government, dependent on the votes of a large Muslim voting bloc and the communist party, prefers a lower profile in its relations with Israel, and India continues to vote against Israel at the United Nations. Regarding the Iranian nuclear threat, India’s two votes against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2005 and 2006 were extremely important and marked a historic change in India’s approach. Yet India could probably use its special relationship with Iran more nimbly and actively to change Iranian policies that New Delhi opposes.

Note the grandiosity of the phrase “Indian could…change Iranian policies that [it] opposes.” What are they smokin’? Neither the UN, EU, NATO or U.S. has been able to change Iranian policies that it opposes. What magic bullet does New Delhi have that none of the others have?

I want to end on a closing note of realism. It is entirely reasonable for Israel to pursue a closer relationship with India. As the report correctly notes, India is rapidly emerging as one of the world’s top economies. For a country so dependent on exports to fuel its economy, it makes perfect sense for Israel to expand trade with that country. It may even make sense to pursue increased military cooperation. But to delude yourself into believing that Israel and India should join together to make war on a common enemy is foolishness of the most dangerous sort. Furthermore, it ignores the growing warming of relations between Pakistan and India. You’ll recall that a recent bombing of the cross-border train that killed scores of citizens of both countries did not even derail a high level ministerial meeting between the two countries.

A war by Israel or the U.S. against Iran is one of the worst ideas that’s come down the pike since the idea of invading Iraq. Not even a 3-way alliance between Israel, India and the U.S. against Iran (were it to happen) would change that.

Hat tip to M.J. Rosenberg for this story.