MEDIA REACTION: SECSTATE INDIA VISIT, INDO-PAK

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 NEW DELHI 001501 SIPDIS STATE FOR NP, AC, PM STATE FOR INR/MR STATE FOR SCA/INS, PM/CBM, PM/PRO STATE FOR SCA/PPD, PA/RRU STATE FOR AID/APRE-A USDOC FOR 4530/IEP/ANESA/OSA FOR BILL MURPHY E.O. 12958:N/A TAGS: KMDR KPAO PGOV PREL IN SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: SECSTATE INDIA VISIT, INDO-PAK RELATIONS, NAM SUMMIT; NEW DELHI. This countrywide cable reports on relevant media reaction/opinion from India's large non-English press. The Mission reports on English-language media via email through the daily "Early Edition" summary. -------------- SECSTATE INDIA VISIT -------------- ¶1. "RELATIONS WITH U.S. IN NEW ERA," op-ed in July 19 DAINIK JAGRAN Hindi daily by strategic analyst K. Subrahmanyam: "Hillary Clinton is very popular among the Indian community in the U.S. No previous secretary of state was in a better position than her to strengthen the U.S.-India relations.... India's objection is correct that Pakistan is fighting against the Taliban terrorist within its territory, but not doing anything against the Al-Qaida and the Taliban terrorists active in Afghanistan... India should give the top priority to this issue in the talks with Ms. Clinton." ¶2. "EXPECTATIONS FROM HILLARY," editorial in July 19 Hindi daily, AMAR UJALA: "We, perhaps, have very high expectations from Hillary Clinton's India-visit. It is not unreasonable either. She has been a very close supporter of India and has always backed India in Congress. Despite all this, she can only influence foreign policy, not change it.... Unlike her predecessors she has shown the courage to not link her visit to Pakistan. She will not go from here to Pakistan, but Thailand.... We can still not be totally sure about the U.S.' Kashmir-policy because it has always been tilted towards Pakistan. And the Obama Administration's policy is not very different either." ¶3. "SHE CAME, SHE SAW, SHE...," editorial in July 20 centrist Marathi daily NAVASHAKTI: "Hillary Clinton's Mumbai stop in her five-day India visit did create headlines, but not a long-lasting positive impact. Her decision to stay at the Taj hotel, a target of Pakistani terrorism few months ago, sent the right message. But is that all that India can expect from the U.S.? The U.S. and its Secretary of State continue to evade its basic accountability in the context of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. This evasive attitude shows in ways more than one. The U.S. aid to Pakistan �00A;does not stop despite Pakistan's remorseless notoriety. In the sole press conference in which Hillary Clinton spoke to Mumbai press, she allowed a mere five to six questions. And her answers to the three questions on Pakistan were quite sketchy and hurried. Instead of clarifying the U.S. position on Pakistan, her responses have added to the confusion." ¶4. "HILLARY'S MUMBAI VISIT" editorial in July 20 left- of-center Marathi daily, AAPLA MAHANAGAR: "Hillary's Mumbai visit was particularly disappointing in the context of her stance with regards to Pakistan. Considering the climate of hope and trust built up well in advance of her arrival, it was expected that she NEW DELHI 00001501 002 OF 004 would take Pakistan to task and make a few remarks without mincing words. But the lady just stated Pakistan's action against the masterminds of 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. Most of her lines were just plain political rhetoric, which left the main issue unaddressed: what is the U.S. going to do about Pakistan?" ¶5. "JUST BEWARE, MADAME HILLARY!" editorial in July 20 right-of-center Marathi daily, SAAMNA: "There are major discrepancies in the various statements made by U.S. spokespersons (in the context of Pakistan) at different points in time. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continued that legacy of doublespeak in her latest visit to Mumbai. She said Kashmir should be on the agenda in any bilateral peace talks between India and Pakistan. Who is she to announce the agenda? It would be nice if she spares India with such advice, especially when she knows how integral Kashmir is to India's sovereignty." ¶6. "HILLARY IMPACT'S," editorial in July 20 centrist Marathi daily, LOKMAT: "It is very welcome that Hillary Clinton actually spelled out the need for action against the perpetrators and masterminds of the Mumbai terror attacks. She also articulated the need for quicker trials of those accused of the heinous crime. She named Lashkar-e-toiba as one of the perpetrators of terrorism from Pakistan's soil... and she said reining in such outfits serves Pakistan's interests as well." ¶7. "MADAME HILLARY'S LECTURE," editorial in July 20 left-of-center Marathi daily, LOKSATTA: "Hillary Clinton spoke of some of the very basic education- related issues at St. Xavier's in Mumbai. The reforms she suggested in the formal education process, especially the out-of-the-box thinking needed in teaching faculty, make a lot of sense to Indians who are themselves wrestling with the `rights' and `wrongs' of imparting values and education to impressionable minds. Ms Clinton is the right person to speak on education, for she has conducted several positive experiments in America, as a First Lady and also a New York senator." ¶8. "HILLARY'S TUTORIAL," editorial in July 20 centrist Marathi daily, SAKAAL: "Hillary Clinton did give some unwarranted advice to India on how and why Kashmir should be part of India-Pakistan dialogue, to the extent of telling India to seek a referendum from the Kashmiri people. Her tuition did not limit itself to politics. She advised Indian industrialists not to repeat the mistakes that U.S. committed while achieving industrial growth. Having played with environmental regulations to achieve industrial growth, the U.S. is now free to advise emerging economies." ¶9. "HILLARY'S PICNIC," editorial in July 20 right-of- center Marathi daily, VRITTAMANAS: "There was nothing substantially impactful in Hillary Clinton's much-hyped Mumbai visit. Not a single statement inspired optimism NEW DELHI 00001501 003 OF 004 in the U.S.-India bilateral relations. It was a nice picnic for her, with the necessary feel-good factor. But she hurt quite a few Indian hearts in her mention of Kashmir as an `integral part of Indo-Pak dialogue'." ¶10. "HILLARY'S MISSION INDIA: PAKISTAN, ECONOMY, NPT," editorial in July 20 centrist Gujarati daily, DIVYA BHASKAR: "Hillary Clinton's statements clearly indicate America's hidden agenda. Her advice that disputes between India and Pakistan should be looked at with "fresh eyes" and that Kashmir should "certainly" be on the agenda of discussions between the two countries smacks of American foreign policy's double standards. Besides, America's approach in asking the G8 nations to ban the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) items to countries which have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, including India, effectively negates the promise of "full" civil nuclear cooperation lying at the heart of the 2005 India-U.S. nuclear agreement. Also, America's stand on issues such as climate change, trade agreements, etc. reflect America's self-centered approach." ¶11. "TIME TO CELEBRATE INDO-U.S. CAMARADERIE," editorial in July 18 right-of-center Gujarati daily, JANMABHOOMI: "Assistant Secretary Robert Blake's assurances that America remains committed to fully implement the Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear deal is a welcome statement on eve of U.S. Secretary State Hillary Clinton's visit to India. Earlier, the Indian think-tank was taken by surprise at the recent G8 decision to ban the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) items to countries which have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. India is a non signatory to the NPT. Clinton has stated that defense cooperation, foreign policy, healthcare, education, agriculture, and the economy are wide ranging areas that are at the core of Indo-U.S. bilateral relationship. Clinton's visit will certainly provide a new direction to New Delhi and Washington to further broaden and deepen the bilateral relationship." ¶12. "COMMITMENT OF PAKISTAN," editorial in July 20, Bangalore edition of Manipal-based independent Kannada daily UDAYAVANI: "U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's observation that Pakistan is committed to root out terrorism may be seen as her own opinion and it may not be true in the case of Pakistan. Pakistan is yet to prove its commitment to eliminate terrorism emanating from its own soil. Ms. Clinton's observation, which could project a positive image of Pakistan-quite contradictory to its real image-might be part of a political strategy... If Pakistan is truly committed to weed out terrorism, the process of eliminating terror bases from its own soil should have started long ago." ¶13. "INDO-PAK JOINT STATEMENT," editorial in July 20, Bangalore-based independent Kannada daily KANNADA PRABHA: "India has not understood the serious implications of the term-"unrest in Baluchistan-" being mentioned in the Indo-Pak joint statement. The very NEW DELHI 00001501 004 OF 004 mention of the term in the joint statement subtly tells that India is behind that unrest. It is hard to believe Ms. Clinton's statement in Mumbai that the U.S. did not pressurize India and Pakistan to issue a joint statement. On Saturday itself, Pakistan has ordered appropriate action against the five conspirators, conceding to the fact that the 26/11 terror plot was hatched on its own soil." -------------- INDO-PAK RELATIONS -------------- ¶14. "Improve relations with a caution," editorial in July 18, Bangalore-based independent Kannada daily VIJAYKARNATAKA: "There is tremendous pressure on Pakistan from the U.S. to initiate dialogue with India. Pakistan is also anxious to have talks without losing its own ground. India has been a victim of the evil designs of its neighbor. One more terror attack on India will destroy everything. India has created a cordial atmosphere by agreeing to hold talks, but adequate caution should be exercised." -------------- NAM SUMMIT -------------- ¶15. "Change of stand is not right," editorial in July 20, Bangalore-based left-of-center Kannada daily PRAJAVANI: "The Indo-Pak joint statement issued during NAM summit gives an impression that India is behind the unrest in Baluchistan and that is considered as diplomatic victory for Pakistan. Such wordings could have been avoided. India can restart the dialogue with Pakistan only if it takes strict action against terrorists and the perpetrators of 26/11." ROEMER