In February 2026, Indian prime minister Narendra Modi came to Israel on a humiliating visit, not as the strong leader of a global power, but more like one of the leaders of the Pacific island states that continued publicly deepening their ties with Israel despite the brutal and criminal war it was simultaneously waging across the Middle East. The visit served Netanyahu’s false propaganda aimed at the Israeli public: that Israel was doing just fine and that Israelis could simply shut their ears to the criticism coming from around the world.With elections scheduled for October 27 – just days away – Netanyahu cannot once again rely on his good friends Viktor Orbán, who was ousted in Hungary’s most recent election, or Jair Bolsonaro, who is in prison in Brazil, to help his election campaign. After all, the possibility that he himself could be ousted or imprisoned over corruption scandals is hardly something he would want to remind the Israeli public about. Even for the Israeli public, it would be inappropriate to boast about his ties with President Vladimir Putin, as he did during the 2019 election. Modi has come to the rescue.Conduct that in the past would have been described as scandalousAfter Netanyahu said on October 18 that India was one of the countries that could help Israel cope with the loss of U.S. support, he reported in a post on X that on October 22 he had spoken with his friend Modi: “I spoke with my friend, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and invited him to light the torch alongside a brave Indian pilot on Israel’s Independence Day. Modi thanked me for the invitation and said that on land and in the air, India and Israel are fighting terrorism together. He also commended the strong and decades-old ties between us.”This is the kind of conduct that in the past we would have described as scandalous – the intervention of the Indian prime minister in an Israeli election. The ceremony is one in which those who will light the Independence Day torches are supposed to be chosen by the next government and a public committee. Modi’s response to the invitation, and his willingness to let Netanyahu publicise their exchange, indicate that, as far as Modi is concerned, the Israeli election is of no importance and that Netanyahu will remain prime minister when the ceremony is held in May 2027.In May of this year, prime minister Netanyahu said at a conference that despite the “delegitimisation” of Israel around the world, there was “crazy support” for Israel in India.Clearly, this support stems from the tectonic changes that both Indian and Israeli politics and society have undergone. The alliance between the two countries is rooted not merely in shared strategic interests, but also in the ideological affinity and growing alliance between the Hindutva and Kahanist movements.What the two countries have in common is not merely the “fight against terrorism,” as Modi said according to Netanyahu’s post. Both are governed by regimes that are authoritarian, nationalist and extremely racist. While Modi and Netanyahu cultivate security, political and economic ties with Arab states, both are entrenching their rule through persecution, the denial of rights, delegitimisation, and the cultivation of hatred and racist sentiment toward minorities – in India against Muslims, and in Israel, against the Arab minority, most of whom are Muslim (18.0% of Israel’s total population), as well as against Palestinians in the occupied territories.The long association of the Indian far right and IsraelIsrael has long regarded India’s far right – particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its predecessors – as a natural partner because of the Indian far right’s hostility toward Muslims.In a cable dated June 21, 1965, the consul in Bombay, Peretz Gordon, explained that “to this day and for the future the Hindu fears and hates the Muslim alike.” In a cable sent on March 25, 1977, David Turgeman, Israel’s envoy in Washington, wrote that the right-wing Jan Sangh party, the predecessor of the BJP, “because of its anti-Muslim Hindu character, is sympathetic to Israel.”In a cable dated November 21, 1973, Yehoshua Trigor, the consul in Bombay, reported that he had met with the president and vice president of the far-right Hindu Mahasabha party. He wrote that “in the conversation the two voiced declarations of eternal friendship for Israel.” Trigor noted that the party’s political power had declined, adding: “but it is also good that they are sympathetic to us, even if one of the reasons for this is their hatred of Muslims.”On October 29, 1981, the consul in Bombay, Yosef Hassin, wrote that the Jan Sangh party “is a Hindu nationalist party whose political platform is characterised by an extreme anti-Muslim position. Most of Israel’s supporters and friends in India come from its ranks, on the basis of hatred of Haman more than love of Mordecai.” In other words, on the basis of hatred of Muslims (“the evil Haman” is the figure in the Book of Esther who incited the destruction of the Jews in the Persian kingdom), more than love of Jews (“Mordecai the Jew” is the figure in the book who saved the Jews from destruction).In a June 1, 1982 paper for a Foreign Ministry cadet course, supervised by the director of the Asia Department, Yitzhak Navon, the troubled history of Israel’s relations with India since the 1950s was described. Under a list of “factors working in our favour,” it noted “the existence of the Hindu-Muslim conflict, which is a deep and acute divide, and the consolidation of the anti-Muslim right-wing BJP party.”Israel also viewed the Indian National Congress’s need to win elections in which the Muslim minority’s vote was decisive as a factor contributing to its strained relations with the party. For example, a cable sent on April 25, 1980, from the Israeli consulate in Bombay stated that “the January 1980 election campaign was notable for its courtship of the Muslim vote” and that “the weight of the Muslim minority was strengthened by its ability to almost determine the election results.” The same June 1, 1982, paper supervised by Yitzhak Navon, director of the Asia Department, noted that “the closest cooperation between the political system and this minority is precisely with Gandhi’s Congress Party.”‘Sympathy for Israel nourished by hatred of Muslims’In a summary of a Foreign Ministry discussion on December 21, 1989, it was written that there was “a basic sympathy for Israel among broad circles of the public, although at times this sympathy is nourished by hatred of Muslims.” But the director of the Asia Department warned that “one must not build on the Hindus’ hatred of Muslims,” while the ministry’s director-general, Reuven Merhav, cautioned: “It is accepted that one should not exploit the hatred of others. It should be remembered that the existence of 100 million Muslims in India is a fact that the government must take into account.”A great deal has changed since that Foreign Ministry discussion in Jerusalem in December 1989. Hatred of Muslims in India is no longer primarily the preserve of parties sitting in opposition or participating in a coalition. It is now embedded in the party that has ruled the country since 2014. The results of state and national elections in India repeatedly demonstrate that a significant part of the public has been swept up by extreme nationalism and racism and by the messages of Hindutva – even at the cost of giving up civil liberties and democracy under Modi’s rule.Similarly, the results of elections and opinion polls in Israel in recent years, the political, public and media support for the wars in Gaza, Lebanon and elsewhere in the Middle East, and the positions of the Jewish parties contesting the election indicate that the ideology of Rabbi Meir Kahane has won. A significant part of the public has been swept up by extreme nationalism and racism and by the messages of Kahanism – even at the cost of giving up civil liberties and democracy and the flourishing of corruption under Netanyahu’s rule.Similar tactics of Modi and Netanyahu to continue their ruleBut to ensure that their rule remains entrenched, Netanyahu and Modi rely not only on changes in public opinion in their respective countries. They are also working to disrupt elections, particularly by suppressing minority voting. While Netanyahu unsuccessfully tried to officially disqualify the Arab parties from running in the election, he successfully waged an incitement campaign against them and their representatives. He created a situation in which the opposition bloc of Jewish parties repeatedly declared that it would not form a coalition with them, even if that meant losing the election or failing to form an alternative government.All of the Jewish parties also supported disqualifying Balad leader Dr. Sami Abu Shehadeh, a position supported by most Supreme Court justices. Modi, by contrast, was not satisfied with incitement and delegitimsation of cooperation with Muslims. He was required to undertake mass-scale deletions of people from the electoral rolls.The theme of the Independence Day torch-lighting ceremony, to be held in May 2027, will be chosen shortly before the ceremony. If Modi does indeed attend and Netanyahu is still prime minister, it would be fitting for the two of them to light a torch to the alliance between the Hindutva and Kahanist movements.While it is unlikely that this will happen anytime soon, one can only hope that the genuinely liberal, free and democratic forces in both countries will succeed in extinguishing this torch of racism and illiberalism. This will require strong alliances and solidarity among Jewish and Arab citizens in Israel, and among Hindu and Muslim citizens in India – precisely the alliances and solidarity that Modi and Netanyahu are working to prevent.Eitay Mack is an Israeli lawyer and human rights activist.