MEDIA REACTION: SECSTATE VISIT TO INDIA, INDO-

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 001547

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 VISIT TO INDIA, INDO-
PAK RELATIONS; 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 VISIT TO INDIA
--------------


1. "U.S.-INDIA RELATIONSHIP: IS IT A REAL FRIENDSHIP?"
article in centrist Marathi daily, LOKMAT: "The U.S.
Secretary of State received an extraordinarily warm
welcome in India. However, the overwhelming media
coverage is not an indication of the nature of
bilateral bonds between India and the U.S. The truth is
that the U.S. continues to play the Big Brother,
especially in two specific contexts. At one point,
India had decided to discontinue diplomatic talks with
Pakistan, since the latter was not showing any
willingness to charge the offenders in the 26/11 Mumbai
attacks. Pakistan continues its obstinate ways, but
India has started the round of peace talks, as if
Pakistani terrorism is just an inconsequential clause
that can be sorted out later. Why has India changed its
stance? Obviously because of U.S. pressure. Secondly,
there is apparent pressure on India to sign the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty. India is not a signatory yet,
but it is more than obvious that India cannot conduct a
nuclear test if it wants nuclear energy and technology
from the two American companies which have recently
entered into a contract with India."


2. "UNNECESSARY CONTROVERSY ON U.S. SURVEILLANCE," op-
ed in July 26 right-of-center Hindi daily, DAINIK
JAGRAN: "There is no precedence of any U.S. Secretary
of State spending three full days in India, during
which only half a day was devoted to official meetings
and the rest in engaging primarily with the Indian
civil society. Hillary Clinton's India visit shows
U.S.-India relations have moved to a special category -
- people to people contact. This is the difference
between US ties with India and its ties with China. The
opposition parties have strongly condemned the end-use
monitoring pact, but they are overlooking that this
kind of obligation has always been a part of the U.S.
law. The U.S. sells much higher technology and more
advanced equipments than any other country. Thus, it
puts conditions for surveillance. There is no
compulsion that India has to purchase defense equipment
only from the U.S. In fact, the present government has
succeeded in striking a better deal because, unlike in
the past, now the U.S. cannot unilaterally decide the
time and place for assessments."

--------------
INDO-PAK RELATIONS
--------------


3. "INDO-PAK JOINT DECLARATION: MIGHT COST INDIA
DEARLY," editorial in July 26 centrist Gujarati daily,
GUJARATMITRA: "The India-Pakistan joint declaration in

NEW DELHI 00001547 002 OF 002


Egypt has created a political ruckus in
India. References on two crucial issues in the
declaration might prove inimical to India's interests
in the long term. First, it has been agreed that
terrorism will not be allowed to derail the India-
Pakistan dialogue process. Second, the inclusion of the
Baluchistan issue gives Pakistan an opportunity to
level the bizarre charge that Indian agencies also use
terror. This ill-conceived joint statement between the
two countries has "reversed" India's long-standing
policy on terror [i.e., no dialogue until Pakistan
dismantles all anti-India terrorist infrastructure from
its soil]. This also proves that India has the
capability of combating enemies in the battlefield but
lacks the acumen to conduct successful diplomacy."
ROEMER