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
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