Today, the people of Palestine and Kashmir have become victims of the evil imposed upon them by the festering ideologies crafted by Zionism and Hindutva. On August 26, 2019, a little-known organisation called the Indo-Israeli Friendship Association hosted a talk on Zionism and Hindutva at the University of Mumbai. The keynote speakers were Dr Subramanian Swamy, a Rajya Sabha member, and GadiTaub, a professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Posters promoting the event had the Zionist proponent Theodor Herzl alongside the Hindutva ideologist V.D. Savarkar. Tactically, the ideologues of Zionism and Hindutva have been gathered to protect their ulterior geopolitical-cum-geo-economics agenda against the Muslims. The India and Israel nexus have been termed as a full-blown romance, but the ongoing siege of Kashmir makes this a bloody affair – covert for years and years on the pretext of inventive and polarized reasoning. India has been buying huge arms from Israel since the 1960s. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi paid a visit to Israel in 2017– marking the 25th anniversary of full diplomatic relations. The two nations are historically passionate about their brutal occupations of Kashmir and Palestine. India remains as Israel’s biggest arms exports clients, spending about $10bn over the past decade. Indian police forces have been receiving training in Israel for anti-terror operations, which Israeli conducts against Palestinians. And with the advent of the war on terror, much of the Indian defence establishment made a drastic shift toward a friendlier policy toward Israel and America. There have been geopolitical and geo-economics reasons for this: as an extension of its conflict with Pakistan, India has had maintained a massive diplomatic and intelligence presence in Afghanistan, where its embassy has been bombed twice. And as talks of divestment and boycotts resound in Europe; Israel is now turning toward China and the rest of Asia for future capital. And likewise, India, in turn, looks to Israel not for capital, but for expertise in low-cost infrastructure and high-tech development. The economic ties between Tel Aviv and New Delhi are secured by more than economic agreements. The perception of both Israel and India having a common enemy in Islamic terrorism shapes much of their relationship, and the past five years have seen transformations in both countries that have brought them together and caused them to shape each other in multiple ways that go beyond the purely instrumental. There are many parallels between Hindutva and Zionism. If the Israelis have found and invented ever new ways of humiliating Palestinians in their own land over the past seven decades, Hindutva has been looking to reclaim the imagined “Akhand Bharat” by cleansing it of the people it has always considered invaders The Indian state – under the corrosive sway of Modi’s projected Hindu nationalism – has taken a page out of the hasbara playbook. To manufacture consent and legitimise an occupation, the discourse around Kashmir is being couched in terms of security and ‘counterterrorism. The US waged War on Terror ( WoT) has provided both the Israeli and Indian state with a shared linguistic, legal and policy framework for their projects of dispossession. Palestinian and Kashmiri emancipatory cries are routinely conflated with extremism, which ultimately serves to obscure the reality of state-sponsored violence and evaporate agency from those resisting their oppression. The so-called proponents of the affinity idea assert that for both countries, confronting Islamist terror is a key common ground. DrVivekDehejia, Professor at Carleton University in Canada and Senior Fellow at the IDFC Institute in Mumbai, is one of several commentators calling for a ”tripartite alliance between India, Israel, and the U.S. on the basis that the three countries have suffered from the scourge of Islamic terrorism.” In 2004, when now-Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat, school textbooks published by the Gujarat State Board portrayed ”Hitler as a hero and glorified fascism. The tenth-grade social studies textbook had chapters entitled Hitler, the Supremo, and “Internal Achievements of Nazism.” The section on the “Ideology of Nazism” reads: “Hitler lent dignity and prestige to the German government. He adopted the policy of opposition towards the Jewish people and advocated the supremacy of the German race.” The tenth-grade social studies textbook, published by the state of Tamil Nadu in 2011 (with multiple revised editions until 2017) includes chapters glorifying Hitler, praising his inspiring leadership, achievements and how the Nazis glorified the German state so, “to maintain a German race with Nordic elements, [Hitler] ordered the Jews to be persecuted.” And yet there are many parallels between Hindutva and Zionism. If the Israelis have found and invented ever new ways of humiliating and dehumanizing Palestinians in their own land over the past seven decades and more, Hindutva has been looking to reclaim the imagined “Akhand Bharat” by cleansing it of the people it has always considered impure and invaders. If the Israelis have been shooting down Palestinians like flies under some pretext or the other, Hindutva zealots have been on the rampage since Modi came to power, lynching Muslims in the name of cow and other such excuses. “. And of course, there may have been mutual admiration between the upper caste Hindu Nationalists and the Nazis since the 1940s. After all, the Nazis adopted the Swastika, a symbol commonly used by Brahmans in India, because it was understood as an Aryan symbol indicating racial purity and superiority. The Nazis knew that the early Aryans of India were white invaders. Meanwhile, an ideological syncretism remains the very basis of forming the Chistinio- Zionist-Hindu accord against Islam. As for the polarised Western political thinkers, border disputes, or fault-line wars, are probably the most complicated and difficult issues. Samuel P. Huntington, in The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, states that they “tend to be vicious and bloody, since fundamental issues of identity are at stake. In addition, they tend to be lengthy; they may be interrupted by truces or agreements, but these tend to break down and the conflict is resumed.” They involve fundamental issues of group identity and power and produce large numbers of deaths and refugees-as has been the case in Kashmir. Perhaps the most remarkable trait of all fault-line wars, and so prevalent in this particular one-a characteristic that makes the resolution even more challenging-is the presence of religious differences. “Millennia of human history has shown that religion is not a ‘small difference’ but possibly the most profound difference that can exist between people,” Huntington writes. This is what the misguided Western take on the issues of the Arab-Israeli dispute and the Kashmir issue between India and Pakistan. But in reality, this western doctrinal approach is nothing but an unwarranted escape from an inescapable reality that the resolutions of Palestine and Kashmir are inevitable for the writ of human order. Nevertheless, it seems a shameful international fashion of giving the award to a man who has remained the butcher of humanity. The writer is an independent ‘IR’ researcher and international law analyst based in Pakistan