For over five decades, if there is one thing Muslims across the world have in common apart from their faith, it is a deep, visceral hatred for Israel.

Some of this raw anger has spilled over in the form of the most repugnant anti-Semitism, and in truth, Zionists have not helped their cause - nor have they considered it important to do so - by their brutal treatment of Palestinians and their repeated and contemptuous dismissal of world opinion. In this they have been aided and abetted by a United States that has, for various domestic political considerations, put its support for Israel above its foreign policy interests. At least one U.S. president has referred to this open-ended support as a 'moral imperative'.

In Pakistan, this knee-jerk, all-consuming hatred for Israel has been the centrepiece of public and private thinking about the Middle East. It is sad but true that each suicide bombing involving Israeli deaths has been greeted with at least subdued cheers. It is equally sad but true that the killing of Palestinians has been similarly welcomed by a majority of Israelis and many of their American backers. This mutual satisfaction over the slaughter of the innocent on both sides of the divide is a measure of the bitterness the conflict has generated. To a great extent, the bloodshed has brutalized both sides, and by their loss of common humanity, we are all diminished.

Over the years, in this and other publications, I have supported the Palestinian quest for their own state while condemning Israel for its ruthlessly expansionist policies. But I have never suggested that the Jewish homeland established with the UN's blessings in 1948 be destroyed. Although planting a foreign entity in the heart of Palestine was a historical injustice to the Palestinians, the fact is that the Jews have suffered more than their share of injustice over the centuries.

A talented, resilient people, they have made a disproportional contribution to the arts, philosophy and the sciences. Unfortunately, those Jews who live in Israel have developed a siege mentality that drives them to support reactionary thugs like Sharon. They have travelled a long distance from their liberal roots and have morphed from the oppressed to the oppressors.

We are all much too familiar with the rights and wrongs of the Palestinian question to revisit them here. But when President Musharraf recently invited a debate on the question of the recognition of Israel, it was clearly high time to examine the pros and cons of the issue in the light of recent developments. Although the Pakistani president was probably prodded by George Bush during their recent meeting in Camp David, an airing of views on such matters is a healthy thing.

In Pakistan, both the religious right and the liberal left are united in their rejection of Israel as a fit member to join the world community. To this day, millions of millions are convinced that the Jewish state was behind 9/11, and most setbacks to the Muslim world are ascribed to Mossad and the Zionist lobby in the United States.

It is certainly true that Israel has taken a pro-active, pre-emptive view of its own defence. Being a small country, it has decided that if wars have to be fought, they should be on Arab soil. Thus in 1967 it launched a lightning strike that destroyed enemy air forces on the ground, giving the Israeli defence force a relatively easy victory on the ground.

That single devastating military action has dictated policies and attitudes towards Israel across the Muslim world. Although Egypt has come to a separate peace with Israel, the average Egyptian continues to nurse a sense of hatred. Nevertheless, Egypt has not only regained its lost territory, it has been the second biggest recipient of American aid since President Sadat signed the peace treaty with Israel.

The basic question to ask while we debate issue of the recognition of Israel is what prevents us from doing so? After all, we have far more serious differences with India, having fought three wars with it, than with Israel. And recognition certainly does not mean approval of a country's policies. At the creation of Israel, the Arab world jointly decided to withhold recognition in view of its resistance to the idea of the newly created state. But gradually, for their own perfectly sound reasons, both Egypt and Jordan exchanged embassies with Israel, although both nations had fought (and lost) wars with the Jewish state.

Currently, India is purchasing high-tech weapons systems from Israel, and has also entered into informal military ties with Tel Aviv. Turkey has long had close diplomatic and military links with Israel. Clearly, pragmatism demands that we reconsider our long-held but illogical position. The religious parties will undoubtedly be up in arms; indeed, they have already threatened to bring down the government if it takes such a step. Equally, states like Saudi Arabia and Syria will be critical. However, we need to decide what is best for us, and after 55 years of hatred, we should try and explore other options.

Engaging with Israel might produce better results than animosity has. Granted that Sharon will not change his policies if Pakistan and some other Muslim countries accord their recognition. However, diplomatic and perhaps commercial interaction will, over time, bring about a change in Israel's siege mentality that will make it less insecure and therefore more apt to seek a genuine peace with its Palestinian neighbours. As long as it feels threatened by a possible coalition of Muslim countries, its policies will be solely dictated by security concerns. But once it enters into a web of relationships with a number of countries it views as hostile, its actions will be tempered by a greater concern for international opinion than it has shown so far.

It is high time the Muslim world realised that like it or not, Israel is here to stay. Its own military strength is sufficient to ensure its survival against any combination of Muslim armies. Add open-ended American support and we have a military power that cannot be budged from its chosen course of action. Non-recognition of this reality is simply an ostrich-like approach that has failed to yield any results in half a century. The time has come to re-evaluate past attitudes and policies and join the real world.