The origins of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be traced back to the late nineteenth century, with deep-seated roots in the enduring struggle over identity and territory, primarily centred around Jerusalem. In 1947, the United Nations (UN) adopted Resolution 181, more commonly known as the Partition Plan, to divide the British Mandate of Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states. However, this decision ultimately sowed the seeds of an ongoing and unresolved conflict between Israel and Palestine.

During this period, influential leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi played a significant role in shaping India's stance on the Israel-Palestine issue. In 1947, India took a resolute position by voting against UN Resolution 181, advocating instead for a federal state structure with broad autonomy granted to both Arabs and Jews. This approach was strongly influenced by Gandhi's opposition to the establishment of a separate Jewish state, and in the same year, India cast its vote against the partition of Palestine at the United Nations General Assembly.

For most of the period since independence, India aligned itself with the Palestinian struggle, motivated by a combination of anti-colonial solidarity with Arab states and commitment to the Non-Aligned Movement. India voted against Israel's entry into the UN and supported the condemnation of Zionism alongside racism. Nevertheless, New Delhi projected an image of neutrality by recognizing the state of Israel in 1950. At the social level, India was renowned as one of the friendliest destinations for Israeli tourists. Notably, India distinguished itself as the first non-Arab state to formally recognise the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in 1974.

Over time, India's policy concerning this enduring and deeply entrenched conflict has evolved, transitioning from a staunch pro-Palestine stance during the first four decades to a more intricate balancing act. This transformation is largely attributed to India's three-decade-long amicable relationship with Israel, leading India to navigate a delicate diplomatic equilibrium.

In 1950, despite having officially recognized Israel, India refrained from establishing diplomatic relations until 1992. This prolonged delay in diplomatic engagement can be attributed to various factors, including India's substantial Muslim population, the complex dynamics of the Cold War era, and the necessity of maintaining Arab support, all of which collectively influenced India's stance.

Over the past seven decades, India's approach to these nations has undergone significant shifts, reflecting its evolving foreign policy priorities and diplomatic considerations. In 1992, following the conclusion of the Cold War, India made the momentous decision to establish full-fledged diplomatic ties with Israel. This substantial policy shift was championed by the government of P.V. Narasimha Rao, which, in a bold move, prioritized national interests and the promotion of robust economic relations, particularly in the realm of defence cooperation. It is crucial to emphasize that India's decision to recognize Israel did not signify an abandonment of its long-standing principled support for the Palestinian cause. Instead, India continued to vocally advocate for Palestine while concurrently forging closer and more collaborative relationships with Israel.

In recent times, India has adopted a more measured approach in its rhetoric regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict, especially in international forums such as the United Nations. Some argue that India's pro-Palestine stance has not yielded proportional benefits in terms of national interest. Globally, Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, have also shifted their focus away from the Palestinian issue and are increasingly open to normalizing relations with Israel.

While the Palestinians cannot provide India with trade or military technology like Israel can, there are certain strategic gains for India in not alienating them. India is seeking permanent UN Security Council membership, requiring support from the Arab world and developing countries more broadly. India's strategic interests in ties with Gulf Arab states and Iran are also expanding with growing foreign energy dependence and the increasing multipolarity of the Middle East, resulting in competition with China. Geostrategic shifts in the region also mean Israel will be eager for stronger ties with Delhi, largely regardless of how much diplomatic support India gives to the Palestinians.

Juggling these diplomatic moves makes Delhi a more valuable diplomatic partner, giving India more leverage with Israel, Palestine, Arab states, and Iran. If India can accurately gauge the value Middle Eastern countries place on ties with Delhi, it could be possible to achieve India's interests while still adhering to its values.