MEDIA REACTION: PRESIDENT OBAMA'S PAKISTAN

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 NEW DELHI 000211 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: PRESIDENT OBAMA'S PAKISTAN POLICY, U.S. ECONOMY, INDIA/PAKISTAN RELATIONS, WAR AGAINST TERROR; 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. -------------- PRESIDENT OBAMA'S PAKISTAN POLICY -------------- ¶1. "OBAMA'S POSSIBLE PAKISTAN POLICY," editorial in January 16 centrist Cuttack Oriya daily SAMAJA. "Diplomatic conjecture about President Obama's possible Pakistan policy points to the fact that Pakistan is useful in safeguarding America's interest in the Indian sub-continent. True, America has strengthened its ties with India but its 'special approach' to Pakistan has not declined. Pakistan is a nuclear power and that causes the U.S. a bad headache. If the civilian government goes due to its inability to fight terrorism, it is possible that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal will pass into the hands of Jihadis. Pakistan has explained to the U.S. that its nuclear weapons are meant only for India. If it passes into the hands of fundamentalists it will be a threat to America as well. President Obama knows this and this will determine how he chooses to deal with Islamabad." ¶2. "PAKISTAN'S N-ARSENAL," editorial in January 15 pro- BJP Bhubaneswar Oriya daily SAMAYA. America is concerned, and with good reason, that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is a threat to world safety. In fact, more than the world, it is a threat to India. Under Gen. Musharraf, Pakistan did launch attacks on the fundamentalists. As a result, al Qaida, Taliban, and the Lashkar-e-Toiba indulged in large scale violence in Pakistan. Now, with the civilian government in power, the fundamentalist threat seems to be on the rise. It is feared that if the civilian government fails to govern and fundamentalists wrest power, then with the nuclear arsenal they may create havoc in the world. That's why the U.S. and global diplomacy must see to it that the civilian government stays in power in Islamabad." ¶3. "BARACK OBAMA AND INDIA" op-ed by Dr. Rashmi Bhure, Professor in the February 3, 2009, Mumbai edition of 
centrist Marathi daily SAKAL. "Carrying a huge weight of expectations, Barack Obama has started working immediately after his inauguration. In the war against terror, the Obama administration's firm stand on Pakistan's role has been welcomed by India. Obama has said in the past that there should be a special representative for South Asia. However, in actuality he has appointed a special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is a positive step for India as India was against having a special envoy for South Asia. It felt that America had intentions of playing the role of a 'Big Brother' in the region. It also felt that the U.S. wanted to play the role of a neutral broker in the resolution of the Kashmir conflict, which would amount to America's policing in the region. Obama's South Asia experts seem to have made Obama aware of the implications of the move NEW DELHI 00000211 002 OF 004 to 'police' South Asia. It is for this very reason Obama has avoided offending Delhi and has appointed former Ambassador Richard Holbrooke for the job. Obama has called India a natural ally. He also has the immense influence of Mahatma Gandhi on him. So it is probable that all this combined will lead to the improvement of Indo-U.S. ties during his tenure." -------------- U.S. ECONOMY -------------- ¶4. "LAVISHNESS IN RECESSION," editorial in February 2 centrist HINDUSTAN Hindi daily: "In the wake of the deepest and swiftest financial downturn in U.S. history, some companies which are complaining of record losses and the need for a financial bailout continue to hand out massive bonuses to executives. One company is even purchasing a plane worth $50 million for the comfortable journey of its executives. U.S. President Barack Obama has called this lavishness in this deep crisis shameful. This is the time to cut down on all luxuries, save money and use it correctly. Despite the crucial economic downturn, finance companies have not changed their attitude. They expect bailouts from the government, but do not want to change their attitude. Such thinking will not let them and, perhaps, anybody emerge from recession." ¶5. "I'M YOUR MAN," editorial in the February 2 independent Kolkata Bengali daily, ANANDABAZAR PATRIKA. "The U.S. Government could have objected in the boardroom itself while the decision was being made to offer huge bonuses to corporate executives. There might be a different objective behind making a public statement. Many people are now jobless in the U.S. and some have fallen victims of debt. Under this circumstance, the President's popularity will naturally increase if he censures top corporate executives for their fabulous earnings. A sentiment like 'victory of the poor' must have worked behind Obama's electoral win. It is not unexpected that Obama will try to fan his popularity wave this way. But he should remain cautious against confusing economic reasoning while making political calculations." ¶6. "OBAMA'S ANGER: LARGESSE IN RECESSION" editorial in the February 2, 2009 Mumbai-based centrist Gujarati evening daily JANMABHOOMI. "U.S. President Barack Obama has succeeded in getting approval for the stimulus package he promised during his election campaign. While this is his first major success after assuming office, Obama has an uphill task of explaining to American consumers the need to get rid of the habit of uncontrolled expenditure. Besides, at a time when he is making serious efforts to put the economy back on track, the news about the top executives on Wall Street giving themselves fat bonuses has rightly angered Obama. He has described this as 'shameful' and 'irresponsible.' The need of the hour for the United States and economies around the world is to adopt a frugal way of life, NEW DELHI 00000211 003 OF 004 controlling savings and expenses. President Obama has shown the way. Even India needs to take a cue from this to further strengthen its economy." -------------- INDIA/PAKISTAN RELATIONS -------------- ¶7. "UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOUR," editorial in February 2 nationalist RASHTRIYA SAHARA Hindi daily: "The claim by the Pakistan High Commissioner in the U.K. that investigations had revealed that Pakistani soil was not used for planning the Mumbai terror attacks is objectionable. Pakistan Prime Minister Gilani later condemned it, but his own statement is also different from the Foreign Minister Kureshi's statement. How can a diplomatic mission give such detailed statements without consulting its Foreign Ministry? Pranab Mukherjee's reaction is appropriate: that the Pakistan Government should not talk through the media. India should be prepared for rejection of evidence provided to Pakistan. Pakistan agreed to cooperate with India only under U.S. pressure. Thus, we should start our preparations based on the Pakistan High Commissioner's statement. If Pakistan denies the report sent to it we should take action. Gilani's commitment in Davos to not let Pakistan's soil be used for terrorism is meaningless as long as no action is taken against the culprits of the Mumbai attacks." ¶8. "DIPLOMATIC BANKRUPTCY," editorial in February 3 independent Kolkata Bengali daily ANANDABAZAR PATRIKA. "Since the beginning Delhi has set its tone on a shrill pitch and threatened to start war against Islamabad unless the latter cooperates. But in reality, when Pakistan does not show even a semblance of cooperation it appears that beginning a war is not easy. Not keeping an option open for a middle path exposes India's extreme diplomatic weakness. Efficient diplomacy demands that there must be some provision for a middle path, especially in the case of India and Pakistan. This does not enhance India's image in the international arena." ¶9. "BRING LIAR PAKISTAN'S SENSE TO ORDER" editorial in the February 2, 2009 Mumbai-based centrist Gujarati evening daily JANMABHOOMI. "Pakistan's behavior is a good example of the saying that to tell one lie one has to tell 100. Pakistan's flip-flop on the Mumbai terrorist attacks last year shows that it is not serious in bringing the guilty to justice. It is not only India that faces risk from Al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiyba; even America faces danger from such terrorist outfits. This has also been articulated by prominent U.S. policy adviser Ashley Tellis, who recently said that India is acting as a 'sponge' between America and terrorist elements in Pakistan. If Pakistan doesn't take steps then India needs to explore 'other options' and take concrete steps to nail Pakistan." -------------- NEW DELHI 00000211 004 OF 004 WAR AGAINST TERROR -------------- ¶10. "WHY SHOULD THERE BE ONLY DIPLOMATIC OBSTACLES?" editorial in the February 2 CPI (M) Bengali Organ GANASHAKTI. "Three months have passed since the Mumbai terror attacks... but Pakistani politicians have been making contradictory statements. At any rate, they should hunt down the conspirators wherever they are. They should be arrested from Pakistan or from anywhere else and given exemplary punishment. Protracted dialogues will only encourage terrorists to organize further attacks. Diplomatic obstacles and arguments should not stand in the way of combating terrorism." ¶11. "JOINT ACTION NEEDED AGAINST TERROR" op-ed by Praful Bidwai in the February 3, 2009, Mumbai edition of centrist Marathi daily LOKMAT. "Social groups in India were successful in quelling the war jingoism in India after the terror attacks. The organizations demanded that both nations should desist from war and instead punish the perpetrators of terror. But what amazed these groups was Pakistan's constant denial in recognizing the perpetrators. Everyone knows that if Pakistan starts a war, its impact will be significant and can even expand into a full blown war where nuclear weapons may be used. A recent report stated that if 10 atom bombs are dropped on five Pakistani and five Indian cities, it could lead to the death of 2 million civilians and injure 1.5 million more. If 24 nuclear missiles are fired then the resulting radiation could affect more than 200 million people and a million would have fatal injuries. With such grave consequences at stake, Pakistan must fight determinedly against terrorism. India also should break the walls of conflict and work towards mutual cooperation. This would send America's new president Barack Obama the right signals to re-design his policies towards South Asia." MULFORD