No, India Is Not Israel and Pakistan Is Not Palestine

In the aftermath of the April 2022 Pahalgam terror attack, a familiar and flawed analogy re-emerged: that India is becoming Israel and Pakistan is the new Palestine. This comparison, while superficially attractive to some, is both historically inaccurate and strategically misleading. It attempts to map the deeply complex and distinct Israel-Palestine conflict onto the South Asian rivalry between India and Pakistan. But the analogy collapses under scrutiny.

The Israel-Palestine issue is fundamentally about a militarised state occupying a stateless population, where Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank live without sovereignty, legal rights, or freedom of movement. The power dynamic is asymmetrical and rooted in decades of annexation and displacement. In contrast, India and Pakistan are both sovereign states born from a negotiated partition in 1947, with defined international borders and full UN recognition. The Kashmir conflict stems from unresolved territorial claims, not a denial of statehood.

Attempts to paint Pakistan as a Palestinian equivalent ignore its active role in sponsoring cross-border terrorism. From insurgency in Kashmir to destabilisation efforts in Punjab and the Northeast, Pakistan’s state machinery has backed non-state actors to harm Indian interests. This is not the cry of an oppressed people; it's a calculated strategy by a sovereign nation. Equating this with Palestinian resistance dilutes the legitimacy of the Palestinian cause and disregards the structural violence Palestinians endure under Israeli occupation.

Another dangerous layer to this analogy lies in the way internal minority issues are discussed. Critics point to India’s polarisation and rising communal tensions as evidence of a creeping majoritarianism. While legitimate concerns exist, comparing India’s situation to that of apartheid-like conditions in occupied Palestine is disingenuous. Indian Muslims, despite facing challenges, remain politically active, constitutionally protected, and electorally significant. Leaders like Owaisi and Khurshid continue to play roles in national discourse, even being included in high-level delegations after Operation Sindoor.

Compare this to Pakistan, where Ahmadiyyas are denied their Muslim identity by law and minorities regularly face systemic persecution. Shias and Hindus live in constant fear, and blasphemy laws are often weaponised. These are not social biases—they are embedded in Pakistan’s legal and political structures. Meanwhile, Palestinians live in refugee camps, cut off from basic services, legal recourse, and political autonomy. To flatten these distinctions into a simple analogy does injustice to all groups involved.

India’s counter-terrorism operations are often cited in these analogies as parallels to Israeli military actions. But there is a stark difference in both scale and intent. Israel has been criticised for collective punishment—bombing densely populated areas and displacing civilians. India, on the other hand, targets terror networks originating from across the border, not communities as a whole. Its policies are grounded in sovereignty and defense, not occupation.

It’s also important to note India’s nuanced diplomatic position. While strengthening ties with Israel, New Delhi has never wavered from its support for Palestine. India continues to back a two-state solution and speaks against occupation at global forums. This dual strategy—security partnership with Israel and solidarity with Palestine—reflects India’s independent foreign policy, not an imitation of Israeli statecraft.

Those drawing analogies also overlook the strategic implications. Equating the India-Pakistan situation with the Israel-Palestine conflict risks alienating allies in the Global South and undermining India's image as a responsible power. It weakens India's moral stance and damages the credibility of the Palestinian movement by linking it to Pakistan’s state-driven proxy war agenda.

Both conflicts deserve global attention—but not through the lens of reductionist analogies. The Israel-Palestine conflict is about land, statelessness, and systemic oppression. The India-Pakistan dynamic is between two sovereign nations, one of which uses terror to press territorial claims. Lumping these together is intellectually lazy and diplomatically damaging.

We must reject such misleading analogies. They do not clarify—they confuse. They don’t inspire justice—they distort it. Understanding each conflict on its own terms is the only way to move toward meaningful solutions. India is not Israel. Pakistan is not Palestine. Pretending otherwise helps no one.

Reference From: www.ndtv.com