An Indo-Arab blunder?

[al-Hasani]

You completely misunderstood what I was trying to say. Tbh it was quite convuluted. What I am trying to say is that Arab-Indian relationship needs to not take into account the relationship each country has with Israel or pakistan. I feel these 3rd countries are limiting the potential of Indo-Arabic trade and co-operation.

Would it not be lovely if India and Pakistan could have normal relations and thus a thriving trade, economic cooperation etc., the Arab world and Israel and all 4 together?

Like in old days where people from all those 4 regions traded with each other and cooperated? Remember that strong economic ties prevent conflict and wars. Look at EU today. People also get to know about each other on a human level. For instance Arab businessmen traveling to India and vice versa. Meddling with the locals, learning the customs, trying the food etc.

This creates bonds and removes mistrust.

I know that I am daydreaming but it was once the case for centuries so why not again? Politics is stupid anyway. A few hundred dinosaurs (mostly corrupt in our region and anywhere else outside of the West - including in the West too) are ruling entire populations and dictating the policies of the countries.

 

[Arya Desa]

Would it not be lovely if India and Pakistan could have normal relations and thriving trade and economic cooperation and the Arab world and Israel and all 4 together?

Like in old days where people from all those 4 regions traded with each other?

In the olden days there was no pakistan.


That aside, it would be wonderful but a normalized relation between Indian and the antagonist is highly unlikely. I feel that Israel and the Arab world will one day work out there problem. All Palestine and Israel need are strong leaders that are willing compromise at the same time, then an open border can be established and all problems will disappear. India could have very strong relations with Arab countries also, not just trade but proper relations.

 

[Burger Boy]

Historically India was aligned with the Arabs moreso than Pakistanis.

Nehru and Nasser spearheaded the non-aligned movements.

India also is an observer state of the Arab league

Though I'm not sure how this will hold with the downfall of the Arab Nationalists and Arab Spring.

 

[KingMamba]

In the olden days there was no pakistan.


That aside, it would be wonderful but a normalized relation between Indian and the antagonist is highly unlikely. I feel that Israel and the Arab world will one day work out there problem. All Palestine and Israel need are strong leaders that are willing compromise at the same time, then an open border can be established and all problems will disappear. India could have very strong relations with Arab countries also, not just trade but proper relations.

India is the antagonist in this story.

 

[kadamba-warrior]

Actually, our expatriate communities contribute immensely to their economies as well. There is a good reason why they were allowed there in the first place.

It is certainly not as a "good will" gesture that any country allows our expatriate communities! In fact, they get labor at a bargain price, thanks to our incompetent governments back home who can't provide with enough opportunities locally.

 

[al-Hasani]

It is certainly not as a "good will" gesture that any country allows our expatriate communities! In fact, they get labor at a bargain price, thanks to our incompetent governments back home who can't provide with enough opportunities locally.

Partially right but I hope that you are aware of the fact that those same workers would not be allowed to work and arrive in such huge numbers anywhere in the world and certainly not Western Europe or USA.

Of course its about business and demand.

The same is the case with Bangladeshi workers going to India to work at a bargain price, is that not right?

 

[kadamba-warrior]

Partially right but I hope that you are aware of the fact that those same workers would not be allowed to work and arrive in such huge numbers anywhere in the world and certainly not Western Europe or USA.

Very true, but even the ME countries allowing "huge numbers" of expatriates is not because of "good will" gesture. It is again because of the supply/demand. Don't you agree?

Moreover, unlike Western Europe and US, most of the ME countries don't give Citizenship and other related rights to expatriates. As a result, they can safely employ any number of expatriates without risking permanent damage of the social, ethnic and religious fabric of the host country!

The same is the case with Bangladeshi workers going to India to work at a bargain price, is that not right?

If they were purely "Bangladeshi workers" who arrived in India legally, they wouldn't have faced this much hostility. Majority of them enter illegally -- to continue as residents! When you have a very large number of illegal migrants entering a poorly policed country like India which itself is poor, you have problem! They are simply a burden on Indian Social Welfare System and also change an already strained social, economic, religious and ethnic fabric of India.

Not the same as Indian expatriates going to ME to earn their livelihoods!

 

[al-Hasani]

Very true, but even the ME countries allowing "huge numbers" of expatriates is not because of "good will" gesture. It is again because of the supply/demand. Don't you agree?

Moreover, unlike Western Europe and US, most of the ME countries don't give Citizenship and other related rights to expatriates. As a result, they can safely employ any number of expatriates without risking permanent damage of the social, ethnic and religious fabric of the host country!



If they were purely "Bangladeshi workers" who arrived in India legally, they wouldn't have faced this much hostility. Majority of them enter illegally -- to continue as residents! When you have a very large number of illegal migrants entering a poorly policed country like India which itself is poor, you have problem! They are simply a burden on Indian Social Welfare System and also change an already strained social, economic, religious and ethnic fabric of India.

Not the same as Indian expatriates going to ME to earn their livelihoods!

Yes, that's what I also wrote after all. This goes for all migrations. I mean there are barely any gifts here in life.

That's correct but you must also be aware of the fact that most Western European states now have very harsh rules when it comes to citizenship. On this front your host or birth nation (USA) are far more lenient despite the growing anti-immigration sentiments mainly aimed towards Latin Americans.

This is a correct observation but somehow my gut feeling tells me that this will also change in the GCC.

Yes, I am aware of that but even the legal Bangladeshi's are working for a bargain price or at least lower wages than most local Indians. Is that not so or am I mistaken?

Also there are millions of illegals (maybe not millions but there are surely 1-2 million illegals in the GCC states alone. Let alone all of the ME so people are also familiar with that aspect of migration.

 

[kadamba-warrior]

Yes, I am aware of that but even the legal Bangladeshi's are working for a bargain price or at least lower wages than most local Indians. Is that not so or am I mistaken?

I will have to admit I don't have exact data on the proportion of legal/illegal entry from Bangladesh. But there is simply no incentive for Bangladeshis to gain entry legally when they can get much more by simply sneaking across the border so easily.

Also there are millions of illegals (maybe not millions but there are surely 1-2 million illegals in the GCC states alone. Let al of all of ME so people are also familiar with that aspect of migration.

Illegal migration is not only unfair on the native population of the host country, but also makes it so much more difficult for others to gain legal entry. I hope you take action against the all illegals -- just as I would like Indian government to deport all illegal immigrants from India.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

brilliantly written, the investments India have in middle-east even with present cold shoulder is staggering
We don't ask middle east to choose side, we ask them for cordial relationship without interfering in Kashmir

they never have "interfered" in Kashmir why should they?

their stances on the issue are known though and I dont think indian grievances or belligerence on the issue affects their views. It's based on principle, not on propaganda (bullshit) propagated by new delhi

Arabs themselves do not support Palestinian cause except token statements, instead they keep slaughtering and backstabbing each other like medieval savages, besides bowing to their western masters. So I dont know how the rest of the world can be expected to speak for Arabs if they themselves do not want to unite and fight injustice

Saddam supported Palestinians; so did Colonel Qaddafi; so did/does Assad.....and we know what's happened or what is happening against them

there always also will be Hezbollah political/military movement of Hezbollah and when deployed and ready for battle (as they were in 2006) they certainly know how to keep the fight going

however its not a Palestinian movement they are a Lebanese nationalist resistance, though at times there has been inter-twining

 

[American Pakistani]

In the olden days there was no pakistan.

hahaha...funny Indian logic...

In Indian books the land of Pakistan dropped from skies in 1947...

 

[Joeblow]

It doesn't have to because it isn't talking about a 'state' of India but India as a geographic entity which they conquered to make One Country; were the author travelling the length & breadth of Africa would he need to elucidate that hes talking about Africa - the continent & not Africa - a country ?

No because its self-understood; you guys have the habit of super-imposing the idea of a geographic India just as there has been a geographic Americas, the Africas etc., onto the State of India as if to speak of one is to speak of the other !

Actually, it might imply a single country since, in 1333 Mohammed Tuglug was the ruler and pretty much controlled most the indo-pak region other the pandaya kingdom to the south and certain areas to the east. So Lord Macaulay could very well have been referring to the a single country

 

[al-Hasani]

I will have to admit I don't have exact data on the proportion of legal/illegal entry from Bangladesh. But there is simply no incentive for Bangladeshis to gain entry legally when they can get much more by simply sneaking across the border so easily.



Illegal migration is not only unfair on the native population of the host country, but also makes it so much more difficult for others to gain legal entry. I hope you take action against the all illegals -- just as I would like Indian government to deport all illegal immigrants from India.

Such data is difficult to come across at it is mostly estimates. It's the same in the GCC and the ME region overall. Northern Africa is also full of Sub-Saharan Africans waiting to sail across the Mediterranean Sea to Europe. Often through the Gibraltar Strait, to nearby Malta, Sicily, Greece etc. Many of them end up staying in those North African Arab states.

So are there not any border control or are there simply too many potential illegal's that you cannot cope with the numbers?

I agree regarding the illegal immigration. KSA has deported about 500.000 illegals since November last year. Can you imagine?

Many illegals have now become KSA citizens too. Most of the Afro-Arabs are actually not those very old remains of former slaves but mostly just Black Muslims from Horn of Africa, Sudan, West Africa etc. who migrated to mainly Hijaz continuously for centuries until KSA was founded. That was "legally" as there were no nationalities back then and such regulations. But now their descendants are citizens.

They migrated mainly to Jeddah which is the main Red Sea port and historically was 1 of the 3 main ports of the ME - the other being Aden and Basra. Or obviously to the two holy sites which always welcomed Muslims from across the world.

 

[Indischer]

hahaha...funny Indian logic...

In Indian books the land of Pakistan dropped from skies in 1947...

Please find a recognized map of Asia before 1947 having Pakistan in it. The land was always there, but the State wasn't. Is it so hard to reconcile to this simple fact?

 

[Contrarian]

Would it not be lovely if India and Pakistan could have normal relations and thus a thriving trade, economic cooperation etc.?

That is already happening partially, it will happen fully within a year or two.
India and Pakistan have already liberalized their trading regimes 80% .

We have moved from a 'positive list' to a 'negative list'. Probably the biggest liberalization of economic ties in 50 years.
Now even the negative list is to be phased out soon - within a couple of years- for complete economic and trade freedom.

Their nationalists are opposing this tooth and nail though for obvious reasons.

Give it a decade or a decade and a half, a large of their economy will be firmly dependent on India