The labyrinth of how the Indian media has framed the Gaza-Israeli conflict demands clarity.

There is a grim reality of October 7th. What Hamas did was undeniably atrocious and deserves unequivocal condemnation. Simultaneously, the actions of the Israeli army in Gaza are equally deplorable, violating the very norms that define our humanity.

In this global spectacle, akin to a sober football match, we find ourselves tallying the casualties: 1400 Israelis Vs 14,000 Palestinians.

The sadness is palpable, and the shame extends to our world leaders. Instead of steering discussions toward peace and ending seven decades of conflict, leaders are entrenched in polarization.

• Love Thy Neighbour: Fighting Global Conflicts

• Is UN fit for Purpose in 2022?  

 The US, the UK, and India lean pro-Israel, while others adopt a more neutral stance. Predictably, Arab and Islamic countries oppose Israeli actions, though not unanimously supporting Hamas.

“

The sadness is palpable, and the shame extends to our world leaders.

Examining the nuances, not all Muslims endorse Hamas and its actions, just as not all Jews support Israeli revenge attacks. Some argue that Jewish history's genocidal experiences make it hypocritical to back the current Israeli offensive in Gaza.

India's historical stance is noteworthy. In 1947, it was among the few non-Arab countries that voted against the partition of Palestine.

An essential piece of history needs to be referred to in this context.

India's decision not to vote in favour of the partition of Palestine in 1947 was influenced by various factors, both internal and external.

During India's struggle for independence from British colonial rule, there was a strong sense of solidarity with anti-colonial movements worldwide. 

The Indian leadership, led by figures like Jawaharlal Nehru, supported the nationalistic aspirations of various colonized nations, including Palestine. 

They (India) saw the creation of Israel as potentially aligning with colonialist tendencies.

The leadership of the newly independent India harboured reservations about the establishment of what they perceived as a settler state in Palestine. 

The unease stemmed from the experience of British colonization in India, leading to a reluctance to endorse a similar model in another part of the world.

In 1947, India proposed an alternative plan for the creation of an independent federal state of Palestine with constitutional safeguards for the Jewish minority.

 This proposal reflected India's commitment to finding a solution that addressed the concerns of all communities in the region.

“

They (India) saw the creation of Israel as potentially aligning with colonialist tendencies

India's post-colonial nationalist elites were cautious about decisions that could be interpreted as aligning with colonial powers. The fear was that supporting the partition might be considered an endorsement of British imperialistic actions.

The geopolitical landscape of the time played a role. India was part of a broader anti-colonial movement, and the Cold War had begun to shape global alliances.

 These factors influenced India's stance on international issues, including the partition of Palestine.

It's essential to understand that India's decision was rooted in its specific historical context and the principles guiding its foreign policy during a critical period of nation-building and anti-colonial sentiment.

Fast forward to the present, and we witness a world leadership seemingly incapacitated election consideration. There are British elections next year, and the current government is already struggling to hold its position. 

The US elections are just a year away, and Trump is already leading the polls. Indian national elections are just six months away. The result of this election is anticipated to change the trajectory of Indian secular politics drastically.

“

... we witness a world leadership seemingly incapacitated election consideration.

Another noteworthy and ongoing discussion assumes how the world perceives the events in Gaza. The question of whether Hamas is a "terrorist" organization is a subject of continuing debate.

 Regardless, Hamas is an elected and legitimate government in Gaza, albeit with a dismal approval rating.

Israel, too, has a legitimate government but was in turmoil even before the October 7th  Hamas attack, facing internal strife. Protests against Prime Minister Netanyahu's controversial judicial reform gave him a poor approval rating.

 “

...Hamas is an elected and legitimate government in Gaza, albeit with a dismal approval rating.

Hence, it would be safe to conclude that the Middle East is currently amidst an armed conflict fought by legitimate governments with poor approval ratings, unfortunately, both counting deaths in thousands.

While Gaza becomes a mass grave and Israel grapples with a grave hostage crisis, the world watches it live and daily. Escaping the gravity of this realism, halting the writing of another violent chapter of history, remains an uncertain challenge.

The UN seems toothless, and the absence of a world leader to inspire hope adds to the gloom. The world leaders are standing polarized.

Against this backdrop, the once-relevant statesmanship addressing world peace, human rights, international agreements, and colonization appears obsolete and untouched.

In the Indian context, a different kind of war is taking place. The media has amplified the Gaza conflict into an info-war.

 It has hybrid recklessly current events and history in an unprofessional manner, even going to the extent of drawing parallels between the October 7th  Hamas attack and the infamous 26/11 terror attack in Mumbai.

 This narrative paints Muslims in India as a threat comparable to Hamas in Israel.

It is not just absurd but highly irresponsible.

As we navigate this information landscape, let's be wary of the dangerous mix of issues by the Indian media – Islamization of terror, nationalism, Muslims, Hindus, pro-Palestine, pro-Israeli sentiments – all intertwined in the lead-up to state and national elections.

“

...attempting to link Hamas and Muslims in India, further clouds the already complex reality.

The looming national elections have intensified the media bias, with some outlets even claiming that Israel is fighting India's war. This narrative, attempting to link Hamas and Muslims in India, further clouds the already complex reality.

Populism seems to have taken centre stage, overshadowing critical matters like world peace, human rights, and international agreements. Creating an imbalanced perspective of mega populations like India is risky and can potentially transform the course of history.

The outlook of events and reporting those events both appears grim, but let's hold onto hope that it won't unfold as it seems.