Full Analysis Summary
Modi's Israel visit
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a two-day state visit to Israel on Feb. 25-26, 2026.
Israeli and many Indian outlets framed the trip as a major upgrade in India–Israel ties, emphasizing technology, defence and trade cooperation.
Modi received ceremonial honours during the visit.
He met Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Isaac Herzog.
He addressed the Knesset amid events billed as an innovation showcase focused on AI, quantum computing and cybersecurity.
The visit included plans for new centres of excellence and bilateral agreements.
Israeli coverage presented the trip as historic and aimed at elevating the relationship to 'special strategic relations'.
Indian mainstream outlets highlighted the warm reception, joint initiatives on defence and science, and ongoing FTA talks as concrete outcomes of the visit.
Coverage Differences
Tone
Israeli sources frame the visit as a historic, celebratory deepening of ties and technology cooperation, while Indian mainstream outlets emphasize practical deliverables and warm bilateral gestures. International outlets add diplomatic context about balancing regional relations. For example, The Jerusalem Post (Israeli) presents the trip as an upgrade to “special strategic relations,” whereas The Indian Express (Asian) foregrounds the red‑carpet reception and Modi being the first Indian leader to receive the Speaker’s Medal; the BBC (Western Mainstream) frames the trip in the context of India’s diplomatic balancing act.
Modi Gaza visit criticism
Modi’s public remarks and the itinerary drew sustained criticism because he did not directly condemn Israeli actions in Gaza or press Israel on civilian deaths, a silence highlighted by several outlets and opposition leaders at home.
TRT World reports Modi "made no public criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza or the occupied West Bank," and Indian opposition figures such as Priyanka Gandhi had urged him to mention the deaths in Gaza - a demand repeated in coverage by Hindustan Times and Gulf News.
Other outlets record Modi offering condolences for the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks and endorsing a UN Security Council-backed Gaza peace initiative, but critics said those remarks did not meet calls to acknowledge Gaza’s humanitarian toll.
Coverage Differences
Narrative Framing
Sources diverge on whether Modi’s words constituted engagement with Gaza’s humanitarian crisis. TRT World (West Asian) and several Indian opposition reports treat Modi’s silence as a clear omission, while Indian government‑friendly and some mainstream outlets emphasize his condolences and support for a Gaza peace initiative, presenting those as diplomatic gestures rather than a direct rebuke of Israeli actions.
Defence and technology cooperation
Coverage focused on an acceleration of defence and technology cooperation, a major objective of the trip that critics say has real consequences given India’s role as a leading buyer of Israeli arms.
The Jerusalem Post and other Israeli outlets highlighted a classified defence framework and potential access to advanced systems, while TRT World and Dainik Jagran cited reporting of Israeli drones, joint ventures such as an Adani–Elbit tie, and SIPRI‑based figures indicating India accounted for a large share of Israeli defence exports.
Several sources also referenced reporting that arms‑related transfers and defence‑industry links continued during the Gaza war, a point that fuels criticism of the trip’s timing.
Coverage Differences
Emphasis
Israeli and pro‑establishment outlets emphasize strategic gains and access to technology (Jerusalem Post, The Jerusalem Post - Israeli), while investigative and West Asian outlets (TRT World, The Canary) foreground allegations of arms supplies during the Gaza war and commercial links (Adani–Elbit) that critics say make the visit politically fraught.
Reactions to diplomatic visit
Domestically and internationally, the visit produced sharply divergent reactions.
Supporters and Israeli officials hailed the strategic payoff.
Opponents in India and several international commentators warned the trip risks legitimising Israeli policy amid reports of heavy civilian casualties in Gaza.
Indian opposition leaders called the visit a betrayal of Palestinian concerns and urged Modi to raise Gaza casualties.
International outlets noted India’s broader balancing act with Gulf states and Iran and recalled India’s past abstentions or positions at UN votes as context for critics’ unease.
Coverage Differences
Contradiction
Supportive outlets (Israeli and pro‑establishment Indian) portray a successful strategic mission; opposition and critical outlets argue the visit legitimises or normalises Israeli actions without adequately addressing civilian suffering. For example, Netanyahu framed the trip positively as strengthening ties (The New Indian Express), while TRT World and Hindustan Times quote opposition calls for Modi to acknowledge Gaza deaths.
Press freedom and protests
A final thread in coverage highlights press freedom, domestic protest and the political costs of the trip.
Investigative and alternative outlets reported measures to restrict critical voices and protests tied to the visit.
The Canary says India ordered X to block the work of a journalist who reported on India–Israel ties and argues this fits a broader pattern of pressure on critical reporting.
Indian outlets record street and parliamentary protest and arrests.
Other pieces note India’s concern to balance Israel ties with Gulf relationships that depend on Indian labour and investment.
Coverage Differences
Unique Coverage
Alternative outlets (The Canary) emphasize measures to silence or censor critics and detail legal or platform actions against journalists, while mainstream outlets focus on diplomatic optics and economic or defence outcomes. For example, The Canary reports India ordered X to block a journalist’s work ahead of the visit; ETV Bharat and Awaz The Voice record domestic political protests and opposition statements.