MEDIA REACTION: OBAMA PRESIDENCY, INDO-PAK

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000254 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: OBAMA PRESIDENCY, 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. -------------- OBAMA PRESIDENCY -------------- ¶1. "OBAMA GOES LOCAL," editorial in right-of-center Marathi daily, SAMANA: "President Obama is aware of America's waning power in the global context. And his effort to prevent the outsourcing of jobs is a reaction to the unfolding scenario. He is also aware that India, China and even Brazil are less affected by recession than the U.S. Of course, he is not aware that it will not be easy to do away with the support system that Indian IT talent provides to America at a fairly affordable price. Yes, let's see how he can do without falling back on the 'back office of the world." ¶2. "U.S. SURROUNDED WITH CHALLENGES," commentary in February 7 Hindi daily, RASHTRIYA SAHARA: "Ever since the economic recession gripped the U.S., its problems are compounding. The artificial devaluation of Chinese currency is affecting U.S. exports. The U.S. administration is considering the war option against the Taliban and Al-Qaida. War-expenditure will reach 300-billion dollars in Afghanistan and 684-billion dollars in Iraq this year. The U.S. is not in a position to bear the burden of another war. Why does the champion of peace Obama need war?" -------------- INDO-PAK RELATIONS -------------- ¶3. "MEANING OF THIS INVITATION," op-ed in February 7 Hindi daily, DAINIK JAGRAN: "India has taken its people aback by inviting Pakistan for the talks without having the latter bring the Mumbai perpetrators to justice. It is natural to suspect that U.S. pressure on India is behind this decision. The U.S. needs Pakistan's cooperation against the Taliban, but the way it is accepting Pakistan's conditions is worrisome for India. It is surprising that India is going for the talks, giving an upper hand to Pakistan and serving U.S. interests!" ¶4. "DIPLOMATIC FAILURE," editorial in February 6 Hindi daily, DAINIK JAGRAN: "India's proposal for talks with Pakistan shows that our foreign policy is not in the right hands, and that we have bowed to international (read American) pressure. India should be telling Pakistan and the U.S. that these talks will not solve the problem until there is mutual trust. Pakistan uses terrorism as a tool, but the U.S. turns a blind eye to it. India should shed its defensive attitude on the Kashmir issue. If it doesn't, it will always face international pressure." NEW DELHI 00000254 002 OF 002 ¶5. "PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE TIES COME FIRST, NOT POLITICS," editorial in February 6 Hindi daily, NAVBHARAT TIMES: "Talks are the only way out of the current deadlock. Maybe another reason for India's stand is the realization that the people of Pakistan are not against India. Both nations need to build trust and not let the talks be derailed." ¶6. "CHIDAMBARAM'S PROPOSED VISIT TO PAKISTAN," editorial in February 5 right-of-center Urdu daily, SIASAT: "India's Home Minister Chidambaram is going to Pakistan on February 26 to participate in a conference of SAARC countries. There are indications that bilateral talks with Pakistan will also be held. Better bilateral relations are in the interest of both the countries." ¶7. "WELCOME INITIATIVE," editorial in February 6 independent Kolkata Bengali daily, ANANDABAZAR PATRIKA: "Shutting communication channels with a neighboring country is not prudent. Moreover, it has not diminished anti-India jihad activism in Pakistan. Maintaining political stability and peace in the subcontinent is also necessary for the sake of economic progress in the region." ¶8. "INDIA'S FICKLE PAKISTAN POLICY," editorial in February 7 centrist Gujarati daily, GUJARATMITRA: "India's complete volte-face on its policy -- of not having any dialogue with Pakistan until the later takes credible action against the perpetrators of Mumbai terrorist attacks -- smacks of India's unstable approach. Doesn't India realize the outcome of any talks? Is India under American pressure to start talks?" ¶9. "INDIA-PAKISTAN TALKS MUST CONTINUE," editorial in February 6 centrist Marathi daily, LOKMAT: "However fragile the relations between India and Pakistan may be, it is advisable for India to continue to hold peace talks with Pakistan. India's peace and stability, the investigation of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks and prevention of further such assaults depend on the bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan." ROEMER