MEDIA REACTION: G20 MEETING, NPT ISSUES,

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 002008

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: G20 MEETING, NPT ISSUES,
PAKISTAN, AFGHANISTAN-PAKISTAN; 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.

--------------
G20 MEETING
--------------


1. "EXPANDING HORIZONS: GROWING FROM 8 TO 20,"
editorial in September 28 centrist Marathi daily,
SAKAAL: "Rather late in the day but the G8 nations,
including the U.S., have ultimately realized the need
to bring developing nations like India to the
negotiating table. Following the G20 official
announcement in Pittsburgh, the White House announced
that the G20 leaders had reached a historic agreement
to put the G20 at the center of its efforts to work
together to build a durable recovery from a global
economic recession. It is a major win for the
developing nations that have pushed hard for the
broader body to reflect the shift in power to the
developing world."


2. "G-20: AGENDA IS INCOMPLETE," editorial in September
29 right-of-center Gujarati daily, MUMBAI
SAMACHAR: "While many important decisions, like
monitoring and control of black money and tax evasion,
have been taken at the G20 meeting, much needs to be
done in terms of setting up mechanisms to counter
terrorist financing. Besides, the industrialized
nations' arrogance is on display when it comes to
tackling global warming. These industrialized nations
have conveniently put the onus on developing nations as
if they are singularly responsible for climate
change. Until the leading nations share a greater
responsibility to solve world's major problems,
meetings like G20 will not yield much."

--------------
NPT ISSUES
--------------


3. "NPT'S CIRCLE," editorial in September 27 right-of-
center Hindi daily, DAINIK JAGRAN: "If the UN Security
Council's resolution on NPT was not directed at India,
then why was it presented at all? Iran's secret nuclear
program should make U.S. and its allies realize the
insignificance of this flawed treaty. This treaty is
biased and ineffective. For India, just refusing to
sign the NPT is not enough. It should push the agenda
of world disarmament. India cannot be compared with
Pakistan and North Korea. Why does the U.S. never
mention Israel in this context? It is meaningless to
expect India to sign the NPT also because the NSG has
recognized India as a nuclear state."

--------------
PAKISTAN
--------------


NEW DELHI 00002008 002 OF 003



4. "PAKISTAN'S DECEPTIVE STANCE ON DIALOGUE WON'T WORK
ANYMORE," editorial in September 29 centrist Gujarati
daily, DIVYA BHASKAR: "Indian Foreign Minister S.M.
Krishna's blunt 'no' to Pakistan's request for back-
channel resumption of dialogue with India is a welcome
sign. Krishna very rightly mentioned that such
dialogues are meaningless unless Pakistan takes action
against terrorists and dismantles their infrastructure.
This is India's course correction after the Sharm-el-
sheik blunder which gave Pakistan an edge. Besides,
nations like America are not serious about rooting out
terrorism. America is only interested in crushing the
terrorism that is against its interests."


5. "AMERICA RAISES INDIA'S DANGER BY INCREASING
ASSISTANCE TO PAKISTAN," editorial in September 27
Bengali BARTAMAN: "When Obama took oath as the 44th
president of the U.S., he asserted that America's non-
military assistance to Pakistan would be conditional.
Has there been any change in the situation in the last
eight months in Pakistan? Have the Pakistani rulers
ever been found sincere in curbing terrorism? Is there
any doubt about Pakistan's implication in the Mumbai
terror attack? Are not the American leaders able to see
Pakistan's chicanery involving the Mumbai attack master
mind Saeed? Even the controversial Pakistani scientist
AQ Khan is admitting that it was Pakistan which helped
Iran and Libya in their nuclear program. Can then any
U.S. decision to raise the amount of assistance for
Pakistan be called prudent? At the very least, this
will not help in wiping out terrorism, and this will
mean more danger for India."

--------------
AFGHANISTAN-PAKISTAN
--------------


6. "NEW STRATEGY IN AFGHANISTAN," op-ed in September 27
right-of-center Hindi daily, DAINIK JAGRAN: "US
commander in Afghanistan General Stanley A. McChrystal
believes that while more resources will not win the
Afghanistan war, under-resourcing could lose it. He
said so in a report now under review by President
Barack Obama. Many Congressmen are opposed to sending
more troops to Afghanistan, and want U.S. to support
more self-governance in Afghanistan. Against this
backdrop, Obama's new strategy will have to be decided.
The question for the US is -- can Pakistan tackle Al-
Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban if it is adequately
funded? Pakistan knows if the threat of terrorism goes,
then it will not get any U.S. financial support."


7. "PAKISTANI NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION," op-ed in
September 26 right-of-center Hindi daily, DAINIK
JAGRAN: "A.Q. Khan's revelations have shocked the
world. America is the most surprised because Pakistan's
government and military had until now claimed they had
no role in the proliferation of nuclear technology to
other countries. Pakistan is adept at feigning
innocence. Former Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf
recently admitted that Pakistan used US military aid to

NEW DELHI 00002008 003 OF 003


strengthen defenses against India. What more evidence
does Mr. Obama want to come down hard on Pakistan? The
U.S. actually fears that if Pakistan is not paid, it
will not fight Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Recently the
Obama administration gave several million dollars to
Pakistan again, but it does not know where that money
is being spent."
ROEMER