162 d omestic politicsDuring its six years in power, the NDA government promoted greater
cooperation with Israel without ignoring India’s economic and po liti cal
ties with principal Islamic countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. Its
perceived anti- Muslim sentiments did not spill over into foreign policy.
While the pro- Muslim sentiments of the Congress Party inhibited India
from normalizing ties with Israel, the anti- Muslim sentiments of the
Hindu right were unable to reverse that policy. If one looks at the post-
1992 picture, the anti- Muslim sentiments of the BJP or its supporters
alone are not responsible for the growing po liti cal, economic, and mili-
tary ties between the two countries.
Rather than presenting the BJP’s foreign policy as secular, as some
tend to do, one should look at its rapprochement with Islamic countries
such as Iran and Saudi Arabia as a vindication of the pro- Muslim and pro-
Arab undercurrents of India’s foreign policy. As discussed earlier, even
when it opposed the policy pursued by Indira Gandhi, the Jan Sangh was
also critical of Israel’s actions during the June 1967 war. When it was part
of the Janata government in the late 1970s, it was unable to modify India’s
Israel policy. In short, even a Hindu nationalist party such as the BJP had
to recognize and accommodate the domestic factor when pursuing its
Middle East policy.
Thus, having opted for democracy, India could not ignore the de-
mands and aspirations of diff erent segments of its population. Muslims
are no exception, and the Middle East is not unique. However, rather than
discussing it as part of the demo cratic discourse, aided by offi cial se-
crecy, many took refuge under the “secular” umbrella, missing the color-
ful rainbow.