On June 10, 2024, Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Egypt and Israel to discuss cease-fire proposal between Israel and Hamas. The discussions are a part of broader efforts involving the U.S., Egyptian, and Qatari officials to broker a cease-fire, which would include the release of dozens of hostages and a halt in fighting for six weeks. Despite ongoing negotiations, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated a strong stance on continuing military operations, particularly in Rafah. The situation prompted reflection on President Joe Biden’s stance, with many urging Washington to play a more active role in preventing further escalation.
US President Biden’s reaffirmation of America’s commitment to Israel’s security reaffirmed the United States’ role in the conflict. However, as a sign of the unintended consequences of unconditional support, Israel took further aggressive actions and worsened the humanitarian crisis. This ‘moral and ethical hazards’ scenario emanating from the insurance awarded to Israel, raised questions about the efficacy of America’s security guarantees to Israel.
Importantly, calls for restraint from the U.S. leaders highlighted the need for a more direct approach to managing the crisis. Israel’s autonomy in decision-making, coupled with its disregard for U.S. interests in some instances as aggravated the situation. As tensions persisted, there was a growing realization in the US that a conditional approach to the U.S. support for Israel’s security might be necessary to mitigate the risk of further escalation.
The moral and ethical questions posed by Israel’s actions – particularly in the context of the U.S. support – raise complex questions about the implications for not only the U.S. but other U.S. regional partners. It will set an example for other regional partners of the United States like India and the broader global community to further encourage unconditional hegemonic designs in the region and beyond. Consequently, this could have far-reaching consequences for global stability.
For instance, India mirroring Israel’s actions vis-a-vis smaller neighbors could exacerbate regional conflicts and destabilize the delicate Balance of Power in South Asia. These could include Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka (maritime boundary), and the Maldives. India already has conflictual relationship with all the peripheral states in its neighborhood, Nepal, Myanmar, Bangladesh and Maldives etc. Moreover, India’s adoption of a more aggressive stance, backed by the U.S. support, could escalate tensions with neighboring countries, particularly Pakistan. It would lead to a dangerous spiral of conflict with nuclear implications. Such a scenario would not only threaten regional stability, but also have disastrous effects on the global order.
The exercise of the Indian ‘Maha-Bharat’ doctrine begins with extremism, as manifested in various instances such as the Gaza humanitarian crisis. In India, the internal violation of religious rights, ranging from the demolition of the Babri mosque to the massacre of Muslims in Gujarat, India are obvious examples. According to The New York Times, “The direct language used against the country’s largest minority was a contrast to the image Prime Minister Narendra Modi presents on the world stage.” Modi is infamous for his involvement in the Muslim massacre during the Gujarat riots in 2002. Because of suppressing religious freedom, Modi was banned in the US for several decades. However, the US attitude changed, and he was embraced by the US since he came to power at the beginning of his first term. India began to be seen as a counterweight to China, and also a major US partner in the Indian Ocean Region.
Externally, starting from violation of the United Nation’s resolutions of Kashmir, Bharat’s aggressive operations have extended to Canadian, Qatari and American soil without restraint, besides of course Pakistan. Additionally, there has been an increase in espionage activities across different regions of the world. India stands directly accused of violating the sovereignty of various states worldwide due to its grand strategy of expansion, encompassing political, economic, religious, and territorial aspects.
Above all, reports suggest that both Israel and India are involved in ethnic cleansing while Western leaders turn a blind eye to the sufferings that take place. For instance, Indian imposition of new domicile rules for Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJ&K), soon after the abrogation of Article 370. According to this law, any person any person or persons who may have lived for more than 15 years in IIOJ&K can be recognized as having this region as his domicile territory. Such plan of changing the demography of a state was earlier used by Israel through Palestine’s demographic flooding. This is a clear violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention which prohibits the transfer of civilians into or from occupied territories.
The unconditional support of the United States for its partners like Israel and India tends to exacerbate respective regional instabilities. It is so because both states perceive US support as a ‘carte blanche’ to act aggressively in their respective regions. Any military confrontation between Israel and Iran has the potential to escalate into a broader regional conflict, thereby, threatening the stability of the Middle East. Similarly, any conflict of India with Pakistan can escalate into total war where nuclear use option cannot be ruled out. Indian nuclear modernization is already indicating that it is moving away from No First Use Doctrine.
President Biden’s unwavering support for Israel and India may strain relations with other countries, particularly those in the Middle East and Asia Pacific that have tense relations with these US allies. It could further deepen existing divisions and fuel intra-regional anti-American sentiment, hampering diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts and promote peace.
Ultimately, the delicate balance between supporting Israel’s security and preventing broader conflict in the region remained a central challenge for the Biden administration. Pakistan has also been a non-NATO ally of the US in the past. The US administration will have to tread a path where it does not create imbalance and increase asymmetries in South Asia. Moreover, the erosion of international norms and institutions through exceptionalism would weaken the foundations of the rules-based order, making it harder to resolve conflicts and address common threats such as terrorism, climate change, and pandemics. The current US stance on Israel as well as US backing to India through unconditional support may have grave repercussions for Biden to score another term in the upcoming US elections. Hence, the need for strategic diplomacy, careful negotiations, and a nuanced understanding of the dynamics at play underscores the importance of finding a peaceful resolution to the current war in the Middle East and outstanding disputes in South Asia.
This article was published in another form at: https://dailytimes.com.pk/1214914/domino-effects-and-indian-maha-bharat-doctrine/
Ms Anum A. Khan is Associate Director Research at the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS), Islamabad.
Mr Muhammad Ali Baig is Research Officer at the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS), Islamabad.
