122
Palestinian people and the realization of their cherished aspiration for
their own sovereign state on the basis of a comprehensive peace” (Strategic
Digest 2001 , 445).
The visit of King Abdullah in January 2006 as the chief guest of the
Republic Day celebrations came when Riyadh was trying to rehabili-
tate itself in the wake of the September 11 terror attacks. Through the
Abdullah plan referred earlier, it was signalling a greater accommoda-
tion with Israel. In the Delhi Declaration both King Abdullah and Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh hailed the “Beirut Arab Peace Initiative and
the (Quartet) Road Map” and given their “complementarity” both lead-
ers hoped that these two plans “would invigorate the peace process” and
would lead to “the establishment of a viable and independent State of
Palestine living in peace and prosperity within secured borders side by side
with Israel” (India, MEA 2006a, emphasis added).
The Riyadh Declaration endorsed by King Abdullah and Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh in March 2010 reflected similar shared position. Both
leaders referred to the UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338 as well as the Arab
Peace Initiative and hoped for “the early resumption of the peace pro-
cess.” Urging the need to resolve “the key issues of the dispute” both
called for “a definite timeframe leading to the establishment of a sover-
eign, independent, united and viable Palestinian state.” Though there was
no direct reference to Israel, the leaders registered their support for “the
two-state solution” (India, MEA 2010b).
The Palestine issue figured during the visit of the then Crown Prince
Salman to India in February 2014. Nearly a decade after its uneventful
journey since the Beirut summit, both sides called for “a just, comprehen-
sive and lasting peace in accordance with the Arab Peace Initiative” of
- In tune with the prevailing view in New Delhi, both countries reit-
erated their support for “the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people,
including their establishment of their independent, united and viable state
with East Jerusalem as its capital” (India, MEA 2014 ).
Even Prime Minister Modi who often displayed his public admiration
for Israel could not ignore this pattern. The joint statement issued at the
end of his visit to the Kingdom in April 2016 referred to the Arab Peace
Initiative and extended support to the “legitimate rights of the Palestinian
people, including the establishment of their independent, united and via-
ble state with East Jerusalem as its capital” (India, MEA 2016a). It would
be interesting to watch how India navigates its decade-long phraseology
of ‘East Jerusalem’ with the Kingdom after Modi dropped it during the
visit of President Abbas in May 2017, just weeks before visiting Israel.
P. R. KUMARASWAMY AND MD. M. QUAMAR