Why is it in the News?

The Mahatma was deeply sympathetic to the plight of the Jewish people in Europe. But he was against Zionists and the attempt to create a state of their own by force in Palestine, which was already inhabited by the Palestinian Arab people.

What was Mahatma Gandhi’s Views on Jews and A Separate Jewish Homeland?

Gandhi was deeply sympathetic to the Jewish people.

• The Mahatma always made it clear that he had deep sympathies for the Jewish people who had historically been unjustly persecuted for their religion.
• In his article ‘The Jews’ he said, “My sympathies are all with the Jews. They have been the untouchables of Christianity. Religious sanction has been invoked for the justification of the inhuman treatment meted out to them.”
• He further said that the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history and expressed his concern with Britain’s policy of placating Adolf Hitler at the time (before World War II broke out).
• He wrote that“If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified.

Yet, he did not support a Zionist state in Palestine.

• Gandhi opposed the establishment of a Zionist State in Palestine, contending that imposing Jews on the Arabs was both wrong and inhumane. He considered it a crime against humanity to diminish the dignity of the proud Arabs by restoring Palestine, either in part or wholly, as the national home for the Jews.

What are the Reasons Behind His Opposition to A Jewish Homeland?

• Religious Text as a Pretext: Mahatma Gandhi contended that the creation of a separate state based on religious grounds was unjustified.
• He believed that Palestine already belonged to Arab Palestinians, and the British-facilitated settlement of Jews was inherently violent.
• In his view, a religious act, such as Jews returning to Palestine, should not involve the use of force through the bayonet or the bomb.
• Goodwill of Arabs: Gandhi asserted that for Jews to settle in Palestine, it was essential to have the goodwill of the Arabs.
• He argued that this goodwill could only be achieved by forgoing the use of the British bayonet in the process.
• Contradiction to Global Struggle: Gandhi opposed the concept of a Jewish homeland, seeing it as contradictory to the broader struggle for increased rights that Jews were pursuing across the globe.
• He wasn't alone in holding this view, as it was shared by others during that period.
• Forced Relocation Concerns: He questioned the practicality of confining Jews to Palestine, wondering if they would appreciate being compelled to leave other parts of the world where they had settled.
• Gandhi expressed the concern that the Jewish claim for a national home could be seen as providing a justifiable reason for the expulsion of Jews, as witnessed in Germany.

Impact of Mahatma Gandhi’s Views on Indian Foreign Policy

• Shaping India's Foreign Policy through Gandhi's Influence on Nehru: Mahatma Gandhi's perspectives and his staunch anti-imperialism significantly influenced Jawaharlal Nehru, India's inaugural Prime Minister, shaping the nation's foreign policy for decades.
• Nehru, in many ways, inherited and embraced this perspective from Gandhi.
• Rejection of the Two-Nation Solution and Support for the Palestinian Cause: India's political stance toward Israel took firm shape shortly after gaining independence in 1947.
• Both Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi advocated for the Palestinian cause and firmly rejected the concept of two nations based on religious criteria.
• While expressing sympathy for the Jews, they believed that a state founded on religious exclusivity lacked moral and political sustainability, aligning with their opposition to the partition of India.
• India's Anti-Israel Votes at the UN: India's position on Palestine reflected not only its alignment with the Arab world but also resonated with the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations.
• During the UN vote on the partition of Palestine, India, along with Arab countries, cast its vote against the proposal.
• Similarly, when Israel sought admission to the UN, India once again voted against the move.
• Recognition of Israel as a Nation with Limited Diplomatic Relations: India officially acknowledged Israel's status as a nation on September 17, 1950, following similar recognitions by two Muslim-majority countries, Turkey and Iran.
• In 1953, Israel gained permission to establish a consulate in Mumbai, yet it was not granted diplomatic representation in New Delhi.
• Engagement with Palestinian Leadership under Yasser Arafat: During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) emerged as the representative body for the people of Palestine under the leadership of Yasser Arafat.
• India fostered connections with the primary political faction within the PLO, Al Fatah.
• Recognition of PLO as the Legitimate Representative of the Palestinian People: On January 10, 1975, India took a significant step by officially recognizing the PLO as the exclusive and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
• Furthermore, India permitted the PLO to establish an independent office in New Delhi.
• While India was among the last non-Muslim states to recognize Israel, it achieved the distinction of becoming the first non-Arab state to acknowledge the legitimacy of the PLO.

Conclusion

Mahatma Gandhi maintained his perspectives on the Palestine-Israel issue throughout his life, emphasizing his disapproval of the unjust treatment of Jews. Simultaneously, he consistently reaffirmed his longstanding opposition to the creation of a separate nation for the Jewish community.

For numerous decades, Gandhi's viewpoints significantly influenced Indian foreign policy. However, in more recent times, India has undergone a shift in approach, decoupling its relations with Israel and Palestine. Establishing robust ties with Israel marks a departure from the historical hyphenation of India-Israel-Palestine relations, reflecting a changing dynamic in India's diplomatic engagements.