This strategic meeting is poised to be transformative. A recent call between US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh has set the groundwork for what could be a defining moment in US-India relations.

The meeting comes at a critical juncture in global security.

Beyond traditional defense considerations, both nations face evolving challenges from China’s expanding influence across multiple domains—cybersecurity, space technology, maritime trade, and artificial intelligence.

The $400 billion China-Iran Comprehensive Strategic Partnership has heightened these concerns, particularly for US allies in the Middle East.

India and the United States are eager to deepen their strategic partnership across several key areas.

Defense technology sharing, joint military exercises, and cybersecurity cooperation are expected to feature prominently in their discussions.

Their partnership also extends to critical infrastructure initiatives, most notably the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC).

The IMEC represents far more than just a trade route—it serves as a strategic counterweight to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

While the BRI has enabled China to gain control over critical infrastructure through debt-trap diplomacy and state-directed investments, IMEC offers a transparent, market-driven alternative.

Spanning 4,500 kilometers and connecting India to Europe via the Middle East, IMEC significantly reduces shipping times and provides partner nations with infrastructure development opportunities while safeguarding their sovereignty.

What is the significance of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor?

The corridor’s strength lies in its diverse partnership structure: India’s technological and logistical capabilities, Israel’s innovation and strategic position in the Mediterranean via the Port of Haifa, the UAE’s financial resources and infrastructure expertise, and Europe’s market access and technological advancements.

Unlike the BRI, which promotes Chinese control over vital assets, IMEC ensures that infrastructure development benefits all participating nations while maintaining their strategic independence.

The corridor also enhances global supply chain resilience, mitigating the risks associated with economic coercion and over-reliance on Chinese-controlled trade routes.

Currently, crucial global trade arteries—such as the Malacca Strait, Strait of Hormuz, and Bab el-Mandab—are increasingly vulnerable to Chinese influence.

Given China’s indirect support for Yemen’s Houthi rebels during the war in Gaza, Israel should be particularly concerned. By purchasing large quantities of Iranian oil, China indirectly funds the Houthis through Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which channels resources to its proxies.

American intelligence sources have reportedly revealed that the Houthis are using Chinese weapons for their assaults on shipping in the Red Sea while refraining from attacking Chinese vessels.

The Houthis’ disruptions in the Bab el-Mandab Strait threaten global trade security.

Recent developments further highlight the urgency of countering China’s growing influence.

Senator Marco Rubio’s recent trip to Panama to counter China’s increasing presence in the Panama Canal, as well as the Panamanian government’s subsequent reassessment of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) commitments, indicate that the US is beginning to grasp the stakes and is prepared to confront the challenge.

Israel’s role in this evolving strategic landscape is significant. The Israel-India defense relationship, worth over $10 billion annually in military and cybersecurity technology, has become a crucial component of regional security architecture.

Private-sector engagement has further strengthened these ties, with multinational companies from India making strategic investments in Israeli infrastructure and technology sectors.

One such company, the Adani Group, is of strategic importance in the geopolitical triangle of US-India-Israel.

This Indian conglomerate holds a 70% stake in the Haifa port in northern Israel and is involved in ventures such as military drone production and plans to manufacture commercial semiconductors.

This group is also actively acquiring strategic ports across the Indo-Pacific, challenging China’s monopoly with independent infrastructure development and building alternative supply chains essential for preventing Chinese dominance.

Adani is one of the only private companies globally capable of simultaneously developing and operating key infrastructure—ports, power plants, airports, roads, data centers, transmission grids, and logistics chains.

Unlike China’s state-driven model, this entity operates independently of government control, making it a more reliable partner for nations wary of economic coercion.

The significance of this competition was underscored last year when the company faced an aggressive short-seller attack and legal challenges from the US Department of Justice—moves that directly benefited China.

What is the success of this alliance built upon?

The success of this alliance of US strategic partners depends on continued coordination between government policy and the private sector.

Companies capable of developing and operating strategic infrastructure while maintaining independence from state-directed economic imperialism are crucial partners in this effort and must be supported.

To effectively counter China’s dominance, the US and its allies will have to cultivate multiple Adani-like players across partner nations—companies capable of providing world-class infrastructure without falling under state-directed economic control.

These companies need strategic backing, policy support, and financial resources to scale against China’s subsidized expansion model.

Undermining firms like these through financial warfare, regulatory hurdles, or political miscalculations ultimately serves Beijing’s interests.

These initiatives should not be solely driven by the US but by Israel as well.

A wake-up call for Israel 

The Houthi attacks and their alliances with China and Iran should serve as a wake-up call for Israeli leadership. The realization of China’s BRI mega-project would place Israel in a significantly more difficult position during conflicts, disrupting trade not only for Israel but also for its allies while granting Iran substantial leverage.

The stakes are clear: The emerging partnership between democratic nations provides a crucial counterbalance to China’s expanding influence across multiple domains.

The US-India alliance, which includes key partners like Israel and the UAE, serves as a model for how democratic nations can collaborate to safeguard their strategic interests while promoting transparency and sovereignty.

The upcoming Trump-Modi meeting must enhance this strategic partnership, as it has the potential to significantly contribute to both regional and global security and prosperity.

The article was published on February 9th in The Jerusalem Post.

הפוסט Here’s Why Israel Should Care About the Modi-Trump Meeting הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

With these words, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin introduced his government to the Knesset 27 years ago. The warrior, former head of the IDF, did not warn of threats from Iran or Iraq, nor did he talk about the need to strengthen the military. He spoke about the need to open up to the world and abandon eternal victimhood, about his government’s plan to promote peace and end the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Yitzhak Rabin set out to change Israel’s national priorities. He was no dove. He did not participate in the Oslo Accord signing because he was a left-wing ideologue, nor did he sign the agreement lightly. He did so based on solid reasoning and a broad strategic view. He was a pragmatic man who could read the map, identify opportunities and make tough decisions. He understood that the PLO was growing weaker and that unless he sought agreement with that organization, he would face a tougher alternative – Hamas. He also understood Israel’s changing circumstances following the Gulf War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and dismantling of the Soviet bloc.

Rabin assessed that this was an opportunity to try to resolve the conflicts with Israel’s immediate neighbors so that when the time came, Israel would be able to face its harshest and most dangerous enemies – Iraq and Iran. He was thoroughly aware of the hurdles he would have to face on the path he had chosen, the crises, the disappointments, but he had decided that he would leave our children and grandchildren a different kind of world, one of hope and normalcy.

I had the privilege of serving the State of Israel and working with him. I had the privilege of serving during the Oslo Accord days, of witnessing the changes Rabin underwent and the tremendous breakthroughs made by Israel’s Foreign Service. From a state that just months previously had clashed with the US government over loan guarantees for immigrant absorption, Israel became a desired ally. Relations with the US were transformed, becoming warm and intimate, with every Israeli diplomatic move coordinated with the US administration and receiving its blessing and support.

I saw and experienced how the world opened up to us, how states which did not even recognized us changed their position. From China and India to Morocco, Tunisia and Mauritania. Representatives from Jordan, Qatar, Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco all gathered at my home in New York, where I served as Consul General, to meet Rabin. He also managed to make the old dream of peace with Jordan a reality.

The Middle East began opening up to us, and new channels of cooperation were examined at well-attended economic conferences we held in Morocco and Jordan. Europe, too, opened up to us, giving Israel preferential trade status and making it the first non-European partner in its Horizon 2020 research program.

I had the great privilege of being at Rabin’s side when he addressed the UN General Assembly on October 24, 1996, ten days before his assassination. The hall was packed. Most Heads of State in the audience applauded at length, not only because of what he said but also because they appreciated Rabin and his leadership. They stood in line for long moments to shake his hand. The sympathy of the world enveloped us, constituting the best proof that when we open up to the world, it opens up to us.

Rabin the soldier fought tenaciously against terrorism. I saw him angry and pained when he was informed of a terror attack, I saw him uncompromising when he had to make decisions and I also heard him shouting at Yasser Arafat when he had to. But he also bequeathed us new concepts, redefining the term “security” to include not just tanks, planes and missile boats, but also education, housing and well-being. Security, for Rabin, lay mostly in human hope.

Yitzhak Rabin was a modest man, often introverted, but also sure of himself; a man who did not like small talk and had no patience for fools and liars, for sycophants and fear-mongers. The red-headed Prime Minister spoke his mind, sometimes bluntly. In this sense, he was not blessed with diplomatic skills. But it was his direct style, his deep voice and shy mien that won the hearts of many.

In these days of determined attempts to undermine the State’s gatekeepers and institutions, it is important to remember Rabin’s respect for democracy and the rule of law, even when it concerned his personal life. Let us remember his desire to place the citizens at the top of the government’s priorities, his actions in support of civil equality, his attitude toward the Arab citizens in whom he saw partners, and the real actions he took to rectify past injustices.

Rabin, the man with the analytic mind, had well-defined, firm views, but he knew how to adapt himself when necessity dictated. Rabin knew how to dream and how to make his dreams come true. For him, the essence of Zionism was to establish a safe haven for the Jewish people.

For me, Rabin’s legacy is of integrity and modesty, courageous leadership, respect for democracy and civil rights, the vision of peace, and, above all, a life of hope.

Colette Avital is a former Member of Knesset and Ambassador, and is a Board Member at the Mitvim Institute.

(originally published in the Jerusalem Post)

הפוסט When Israel Smiled at the World, the World Smiled Back הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

They’re only one example of an exceptional level of international involvement in both this year’s Israeli national election campaigns, unprecedented in both scope and style. The posters, their iconography and their message have a significance beyond the intricacies of Israeli politics. They reveal the developing fault lines dividing two competing global camps – liberals and non-liberals – and their growing willingness to support allies and confront foes in a direct, unvarnished manner.

International support for Israeli political candidates engaged in competitive elections is not new. The Sharm el-Sheikh Summit organized by President Clinton to support Shimon Peres’ failed 1996 campaign is a notable example. However, foreign interventions have generally been far more low-key than the explicit pro-Netanyahu lobbying we are now witnessing. Gone are previous campaigns conducted cautiously behind the scenes to back a candidate’s political agenda: these efforts mostly concern the personal rather than the ideological, part of an effort to elevate or to challenge Netanyahu’s image as a global leader.

One of Netanyahu’s main electoral goals is to convince voters that he is indispensable, by branding himself Israel’s only leader with the requisite international magnitude. International feedback is thus a central tool in cementing this play, and in diverting attention from Netanyahu’s pending criminal indictments towards his global prestige. Ahead of the first round of elections in April 2019, Netanyahu’s international allies – leaders of what one could describe as the global non-liberal camp – answered his call by providing both diplomatic gestures and concrete policy steps. The weeks before the election were saturated with international events carefully crafted by the Netanyahu campaign.

Official visits by global allies offered Netanyahu photo-opportunities to land his image as a global leader. Key support was provided by the two competing leaders of the global non-liberal camp: First, Putin, who met with Netanyahu and donated symbolic capital by retrieving Israeli MIA Zachary Baumel’s body. Secondly, and above all else, Trump’s explicit mobilization for Netanyahu’s campaign. Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro were also protagonists in the international re-elect Netanyahu campaign.

Trump’s finest electoral gift was his recognition of the Israeli annexation of the Golan Heights. This act appealed to a majority of Israelis who see the territory as an integral part of Israel. It also resonated with Netanyahu’s own right-wing base who made the annexation of occupied land a leading topic in the campaign. Trump’s declaration allowed Netanyahu to present a clear sense of achievement in the crucial last stretch, which even his opponents could not dispute. Netanyahu once again situated himself as the only Israeli leader capable of stepping onto the international stage and getting results. This, while the international activity of his main contender, Benny Gantz, was limited to speeches at AIPAC and the Munich Security Conference.

Ahead of the coming re-run elections, we already see Netanyahu attempting similar plays to exploit his interpersonal relations with prominent non-liberal leaders to brand him, as his slogan goes, as a leader “of a different league.”

The growing list of world leaders to meet Netanyahu before the election includes another close peer – India’s Prime Minister Modi. But the main campaign’s effort is focused on arranging a timely visit to Israel by Russia’s Putin, during which a monument to fallen Russian soldiers will be unveiled. This step is possibly devised to influence Russianspeaking voters, who are of special electoral importance for Netanyahu this time around. Trump is also reportedly planning moves that can boost Netanyahu’s chances for reelection, possibly including an announcement of new U.S. security guarantees to Israel.

This global support highlights Netanyahu’s status as a central figure in the global non-liberal camp. His domestic policy corresponds with its values, favoring the majoritarian aspect of democracy over liberal values. However, it also put forward a message that goes well beyond the Israeli context – in times of need, the non-liberal network also functions as a practical political alliance.

The liberal camp lags behind, but it too has shown some willingness to get involved in the Israeli election. In light of the global crisis of liberal democracy, there is a growing understanding that like-minded liberals and progressives – in various countries – should better coordinate and cooperate. Bernie Sanders has even called for an “international progressive front” to confront the “new authoritarian axis.” Civil society organizations were the first to take the lead in this challenge, and the Israeli election may signal the beginning of a spillover into the political field. Stav Shaffir, one of the founders of Israel’s left-wing Democratic Camp, has called on progressives to establish a “united movement.”

In this liberal democratic spirit of pushing back, a few days before Israel’s April 2019 election, U.S. Democratic presidential candidates voiced unprecedented criticism of Netanyahu, accusing him of endorsing racism and of being corrupt. Sanders said openly he hoped Netanyahu loses. This was a continuation of a gradual process, in which mainstream Jewish organizations and figures showed willingness to criticize Netanyahu and his domestic policies. This trend was motivated both by resentment towards Netanyahu, and by his overly-close alliance with Trump. Nevertheless, lacking a clear progressive alternative candidate to Netanyahu, liberals’ critical steps never amounted to a direct endorsement of his opponents.

In Europe, liberals have been even more cautious. They tend to refrain from intervening in domestic Israeli politics, partly because they too did not see an appealing alternative to Netanyahu they could wholeheartedly endorse. French President Macron was the exception. Four days prior to the previous election, he hosted Yair Lapid for a meeting, a move which the Blue and White party hoped would boost their international image. Macron’s step could be seen as a personal favor, grounded in pre-existing links with Lapid, but which also stemmed from his position as a central leader within the global liberal camp and as an alternative to Trump.

Despite their limited nature, these tentative steps by liberals indicate that a change may be underway to challenge the loud illiberal support for Netanyahu. But their insufficient nature can be seen by the fact that no further steps have been taken towards the September 2019 elections, and Israel’s center-left politicians have not yet acted to encourage their international allies to take action. That seems even more short-sighted, bearing in mind how global liberals will have no option but to get involved in Israeli affairs should the next Israeli government fulfil Netanyahu’s promise to annex settlements, and as the U.S. presidential election draw near.

Placing the Israeli election as one in a series of global events allows us to obtain a broader perspective of the ongoing realignment of the international system. It demonstrates the willingness of key liberal and non-liberal actors to adopt a more proactive approach in influencing what was until now considered diplomatically as sacred ground – national elections in friendly countries.

It may signal that the gloves are coming off in the global conflict between liberals and nonliberals. However, it also demonstrates the power asymmetry between the camps. The world’s liberals still have much work to do, before they can collectively succeed to turn the tide.

Dr. Gil Murciano is a foreign policy expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP); Dr. Nimrod Goren is Head of Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies.

(originally published in Haaretz)

הפוסט The Israeli Elections and the Global Competition between the Liberal and Non-Liberal Camps הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.