111rights of the Palestinian people is another cornerstone in the structure of a
lasting peace. Israel’s refusal to vacate Arab territories captured as a result of
aggression is a continuing provocation to the Arab States and negates the
principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. If the catastrophe
of another war in the Middle East is to be avoided, Israel should end its
aggression and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people should be
restored to them. (UNGA 1974 , 207)It is, however, possible to identify a pattern. The nomenclature of the
Indian support has been evolutionary and reflected the prevailing interna-
tional position vis-à-vis the Palestinians.
In the initial years, it mostly talked about the ‘implementation’ of the
UN resolutions. The Arab countries interpreted this to mean UN General
Assembly Resolution 194 of December 1948 that established a condi-
tional Palestinian ‘right to return’ to their homes but they carefully skipped
the other and more important General Assembly Resolution 181 that
approved the partition of Palestine. The Arab rejection and hence the
non-implementation of the latter was largely responsible for the prolonged
stateless of the Palestinians. Until the June War of 1967, if Egypt admin-
istered the Gaza Strip, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan had occupied
and annexed the West Bank including the East Jerusalem. Thus, the Arab
liability for the Palestinian stateless was profound and the Indian endorse-
ment of the ‘implementation’ of the UN resolutions was in sync with Arab
interpretations and logic.
Until the early 1970s, the Palestinian issue was seen as a refugee issue
and this was reflected in the UN Security Council Resolution 242 adopted
in the wake of the June War of 1967. Unanimously adopted on 22
November that year, it affirmed its support `achieving a just settlement of
the refugee problem.’ The oil crisis of 1973 and the newly-found wealth
of important Arab countries—notably Saudi Arabia—transformed the
political discourse on Palestine, and the international community began
recognizing the political rights of the Palestinians and their inalienable
right to statehood. The Israeli control of the whole of mandate Palestine
in the wake of the June War made things a lot easier and ending the occu-
pation and implementation of UNSC 242 became the prominent agenda
for India and most of the Third World countries. Over time, even the PLO
endorsed the implementation of Resolution 242, which only flagged the
refugee rights of the Palestinians.
In subsequent years, the Israeli aggression and settlement policies
became prominent in India’s bilateral engagements with the Arab world as
PALESTINE FACTOR