normalization and after 245Arafat became a liability in promoting India’s interest. But Rao’s critics
were not ready to admit the new realities and hoped that New Delhi could
still promote its interests by playing the PLO card. Blinded by ideological
rhetoric, they were unable to see the new challenges and opportunities
facing Rao.
Israel has nothing to off er. Some were critical over the kind of relations
that India might develop with Israel following normalization. Even be-
fore 1992, counterterrorism was frequently mentioned as a possible area
of cooperation. This evoked strong criticism. Because of its own “fail-
ures” to curb terrorism, they argued, Israel’s assistance would not be
helpful. Even those who were otherwise reconciled to normalization re-
acted strongly over security cooperation with Israel. In their view, India
had both the capacity and experience to overcome any threats from Paki-
stan without outside help. “To give an impression that India will tackle
this threat with [Israel’s] expertise or experience... sends the wrong sig-
nal to many people both at home and abroad.”^28 While bilateral relations
could facilitate a “mutually benefi cial relationship in the fi eld of science
and technology,” another warned that “India must exercise utmost cau-
tion in considering interactions with Israel in regard to security and in-
ternational terrorism. Any such move could create avoidable complica-
tions in our dealings with other states in the region and might eventually
prove counterproductive.”^29
Despite these criticisms, the overwhelming view toward normaliza-
tion was favorable. Things moved swiftly and both countries tried to
make up for lost time. Israel temporarily shifted its consular offi cial to
New Delhi and opened its embassy in February; the Indian embassy was
opened in Tel Aviv on May 15, 1992. Israel soon became a favorite destina-
tion of Indian leaders, offi cials, and businesspeople. The progress made
since 1992 indicates that both countries are determined to reverse the
past by identifying and pursuing new areas of cooperation. Neither has
allowed external factors and extraneous considerations to unduly aff ect
the bilateral relationship. Narasimha Rao thus elevated India’s Israel
policy to the next stage.
Stage 2: Parallel Ties
Normalization marked the second stage of Indo- Israeli rela-
tions. During the cold war, New Delhi treated the Arab- Israeli confl ict as