114 recognition without relations
Two years after the establishment of the State of Israel, India remains
one of the few non- Arab, non- Muslim countries which have not rec-
ognized her. Israel had always attributed a special value to India’s
recognition, due to her prestigious status in Asia. During the past
two years, considerable eff orts have been invested in making con-
tacts with high- ranking Indian personalities but despite many prom-
ises and demonstrations of friendship, India has not yet taken this
step. Now that 60 countries have recognized Israel, recognition by an
additional one is no longer a burning issue and Israel has ceased try-
ing to persuade vacillating countries, including India. Moreover, be-
lated recognition is of lesser po liti cal and moral weight than that
accorded close to the state’s establishment.^36This sour note was valid even four de cades later, when India followed—
not preceded— China in normalizing ties with Israel.^37
Meanwhile, after months of waiting, by mid- September 1950 India be-
gan negotiating with Israel over the timing of recognition. Both sides
agreed that a formal and simultaneous announcement would be made
declaring that India’s recognition would come into force on September 18,
- A communication to this eff ect was sent to the Israeli embassy in
Washington.^38 On September 17, Nehru, in his capacity as foreign minis-
ter, sent a cable to Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett, which read: “In con-
veying to Your Excellency the decision of the Government of India to ac-
cord recognition to the Government of Israel as from September 18 of this
year, I send the greetings of the Government and people of India to the
Government and people of Israel.”^39 A crisp offi cial communiqué issued
in New Delhi declared: “The Government of India have decided to accord
recognition to the Government of Israel.” Interestingly, the Indian “gov-
ernment” chose to recognize the Israeli “government.”^40 By then, Israel
had conducted its fi rst Knesset election; India was still two years away
from its fi rst Lok Sabha elections. Given the circumstances surrounding
Israel’s formation, an explicit and unambiguous reference to the state of
Israel would have been more appropriate. Exploiting this ambiguity, some
Indian scholars suggested that India’s recognition was temporary and
could be withdrawn at any time.^41
There was something amiss in the whole exercise. Neither the formal
communiqué to Israel nor the offi cial statement released in New Delhi
referred to the establishment of diplomatic relations. Because of the