Modi’s Visit to Israel — an appeal to the Global South to rethink the anesthetized “Palestinian Cause.”

As a Muslim Sri Lankan American, I write this with conviction and with urgency. When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi strengthens ties with Israel, it should not be dismissed as mere diplomacy or economics. It reflects something deeper: how democracies facing existential threats recognize one another — and choose clarity over confusion.

The 2008 Mumbai attacks and the October 7 attacks were separated by geography but united in ideology. Both were carried out by radical jihadists who deliberately targeted Jewish civilians. Both sought to humiliate nations and fracture societies. Both were designed to terrorize democracies into paralysis.

India and Israel understand that survival is not aggression; it is necessity.

Sri Lanka and the Imported Conflict

In Sri Lanka, where I was born, a nation painfully emerging from a 30-year ethnic war, we are now seeing imported hostility masquerading as solidarity. In Arugam Bay, Israeli tourists have faced protests. A local Chabad house was pressured to close, and some publicly celebrated its closure.

This is not justice. It is scapegoating.

Sri Lanka knows the cost of ethnic absolutism. We know what happens when grievance becomes identity and identity becomes weaponized. Why would we import a distant conflict when our own soil still carries the memory of division?

The Palestinians I Know

I work with Gazans and Palestinians. They are not slogans or hashtags. They are human beings who want stability, education, mobility, and dignity. Yet Gaza under Hamas and areas governed by the Palestine Liberation Organization have suffered from corruption, repression, and political stagnation.

Privately, many express exhaustion. They want to build, not bury. But publicly, fear governs discourse. Speaking openly for coexistence can carry social and personal risk in Gaza and the West Bank/Judea and Samaria.

A seasoned peacemaker working between Arabs and Jews once told me:

“When a national identity becomes primarily a negation of the other’s sovereignty, it traps its own people. Freedom built on destruction cannot sustain itself.”

That insight is painful but necessary. If a movement is rooted more in denying Jewish sovereignty than in constructing Palestinian institutions, it cannot deliver liberation.

The Muslim Dilemma: Between Suspicion and Silence

As a Muslim, I refuse to surrender my faith to extremists. Yet this is the defining tension of our time. When Islam is scrutinized globally — and when radical Islamists weaponize it for violence — those of us who confront Islamist terror from within our own communities are pushed to the margins.

We are mistrusted by the West and menaced by Islamists.

If we speak against jihadist brutality, we are accused of betraying our people. If we remain silent, we betray our conscience.

Condemning Islamist terror is not an attack on Islam — it is a defense of it. But reformist, coexistence-minded Muslims rarely receive the microphone. The global conversation rewards outrage over nuance, absolutism over courage. The loudest voices dominate headlines, while those working for reform struggle to secure a seat at the table.

Until that changes, radicalism will continue to masquerade as authenticity, and moderation will remain politically homeless.

History, Tribalism, and Agency

Arab society is rich and layered, with traditions of hospitality and loyalty that I deeply respect. But ideological rigidity — including strains influenced by Wahhabism — has made open peacemaking dangerous in some environments. I have heard repeatedly: “We want peace, but we cannot say it publicly.” The fear of communal backlash is real. Families bear consequences. Silence becomes survival.

In the West Bank/Judea and Samaria, Palestinian political culture has also been shaped by the language of permanent struggle. Concepts such as muqawama (resistance), tathbiya (normalization framed as betrayal), and alignment with the so-called “axis of resistance” have created an environment where peacemaking with Jews is not merely unpopular — it is stigmatized. Dialogue becomes treachery and the disapproval of tribal leaders can result in death.

History also casts a long shadow. The 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine reflected not only anti-colonial resistance but a profound rejection of Jewish national revival. These unresolved historical tensions continue to shape narratives today.

Palestinians deserve agency. That means confronting governance failures. It means ending Hamas rule in Gaza. It means rejecting proxy warfare and choosing direct negotiation. Responsibility is not surrender; it is empowerment.

Likewise, the Global South must resist romanticizing conflict. Solidarity should uplift people to build institutions, not entrench them in permanent resistance.

India and Israel demonstrate that democracies under threat can defend themselves while remaining innovative and pluralistic. Sri Lanka, having endured decades of internal war, should understand better than most, the cost of absolutist narratives.

We in South Asia do not need borrowed rage. We need borrowed wisdom.

The Jewish story is one of indigenous return, survival, and resilience. Recognizing that does not negate Palestinian aspirations. But denying it ensures that neither side advances.

As a Muslim Sri Lankan American, I refuse the false choice between supporting Palestinian dignity and acknowledging Jewish sovereignty. Justice demands complexity. Peace demands courage.

In Sri Lanka, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has an opportunity to build domestic legitimacy not through slogans, but through principled leadership. That means proactively investing in education that deepens historical literacy — including serious national engagement with the Holocaust — and creating structured dialogue initiatives that bring Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, and Christian leaders together with Jewish voices.

Ignorance fuels imported hatred. Education dismantles it. By promoting interfaith dialogue, academic exchange, and public forums on antisemitism and pluralism, the government can signal that Sri Lanka will not be a staging ground for external conflicts, but a model of post-conflict maturity and coexistence.

The Global South must move beyond anesthetized slogans and inherited anger. It must choose coexistence over perpetual grievance. Only then can freedom — for Israelis and Palestinians alike — become more than a chant.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)