VZCZCXRO1054
PP RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHNEH
DE RUEHNE #0745/01 1060437
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 160437Z APR 09
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6182
INFO RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RHHJJPI/PACOM IDHS HONOLULU HI
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO 1681
RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 4569
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 3781
RUEHNEH/AMCONSUL HYDERABAD 0457
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 2072
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 5960
RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU 2522
RUEHKP/AMCONSUL KARACHI 9431
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 3608
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 6217
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 7865
RHOVVKG/COMSEVENTHFLT
RHMFISS/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 10 NEW DELHI 000745 
 
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: SPECIAL MEDIA REPORT: INDIAN MEDIA COVERAGE OF 
POTUS PRAGUE REMARKS ON NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION IN 
PRAGUE 
 
SUMMARY: Indian media were generally positive in their 
assessment of the President's Prague remarks on nuclear 
nonproliferation.  The TELEGRAPH reported that President 
Barack Obama's April 5 address in Prague was received 
with relief in New Delhi. "It reflected the President's 
realization that cooperation, not confrontation, with 
India is what he needs," the paper said. Washington 
correspondent K.P. Nayar reported that the Prague 
declaration borrows heavily from an Indian "working 
paper" to the UN General Assembly in 2006. Arundhati 
Ghose, former Indian ambassador and arms control expert, 
told HINDUSTAN TIMES: "I don't see why today's India 
should object to signing the Treaty if the U.S. and China 
ratify it." Strategic guru C. Raja Mohan wrote in THE 
INDIAN EXPRESS: "As a nation that has long championed the 
abolition of nuclear weapons, India has every reason to 
welcome the new disarmament framework unveiled by US 
President Barack Obama in Prague." THE HINDU 
editorialized, "The Obama package represents a definite 
move forward from the insular and unilateral approach of 
the Bush administration on proliferation matters, even if 
the counterproductive use of threatening language remains 
the same." THE DAILY NEWS & ANALYSIS opined that 
"President Obama has signaled a strategic shift in global 
thinking and India can and should play a role in this new 
environment." The ANANDA BAZAR PATRIKA Bengali daily 
welcomed America's "less belligerent" tone on nuclear 
issues. Meanwhile, the media also reported Foreign 
Minister Pranab Mukherjee's related statement in New 
Delhi the same day that India was committed to non- 
proliferation, but it will not sign the NPT as it is 
discriminatory. END SUMMARY. 
 
-- "RELIEF IN DELHI AS US SIGNALS SHIFT ON NUKE RED RAG" 
- THE TELEGRAPH 
 
¶1. Following is the full text of another report in April 
8 independent, centrist Eastern India based English 
language daily THE TELEGRAPH by Washington correspondent 
K.P. Nayar: 
 
¶2. (BEGIN TEXT): Washington, April 7: The speech was 
delivered in Prague. But its echoes are being felt in New 
Delhi. In his declaration to lead a global effort to 
eliminate all nuclear weapons, US President Barack Obama 
has signaled that he intends to deal with India with 
sensitivity and that a bilateral relationship cherished 
by his predecessors Bill Clinton and George W. Bush will 
not be squandered for any ideology. Obama said on Sunday 
that "my administration will immediately and aggressively 
pursue US ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban 
Treaty", but for New Delhi, his remarks on the red rag of 
CTBT were significant for the President's own words 
earlier that he ate in Prague's Hradany Square before a 
20,000-plus crowd. 
 
¶3. In a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh before 
occupying the White House, Obama had explicitly said: "I 
will work with the US Senate to secure ratification of 
the international treaty banning nuclear weapons testing 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  002 OF 010 
 
 
at the earliest practical day, and then launch a major 
diplomatic initiative to ensure its entry into force." 
Significantly missing from his speech in Prague were any 
references to "a major diplomatic initiative" - of which 
India would have been an obvious target - and efforts "to 
ensure its entry into force". 
 
¶4. The CTBT cannot enter into force until India and a few 
other nuclear-capable countries accede to the treaty. 
There is relief on Raisina Hill, the seat of power in New 
Delhi that Obama has gone back on his threat in the 
letter to Singh to make an example of India in his 
efforts to promote nuclear non-proliferation. In his 
letter, Obama had actually lectured Singh on India's 
nuclear ambitions. "With the benefits of nuclear co- 
operation come real responsibilities - and that should 
include steps to restrain nuclear weapons programs and 
pursuing effective disarmament when others do so", one 
portion of the letter read. 
 
¶5. For these reasons, the Indian government, which 
excitedly rushes to the media even when there is a short 
phone call from the White House or the State Department, 
had suppressed Obama's letter. The sensitivity shown by 
the US President in Prague in not being a bully on CTBT 
also reflects a realization after coming to power that 
cooperation - not confrontation - with India is what he 
needs if Obama's goal of universal nuclear disarmament is 
to be advanced. 
 
¶6. In the light of what Obama said and did not say in 
Prague on Sunday, his personnel choices on non- 
proliferation now make sense. The White House was to have 
chosen Robert Einhorn, often described here as an 
"ayatollah" of non-proliferation, to be the under- 
secretary of state for arms control and international 
security. But the President and the secretary of state, 
Hillary Clinton, changed their minds and chose Ellen 
Tauscher, a Democratic Congresswoman from California, for 
the post some three weeks ago. 
 
¶7. Like Einhorn, Tauscher also opposed the Indo-US 
nuclear deal and in the Congress, she voted against the 
so-called 123 Agreement enabling the deal and for 
amendments to the Agreement that were aimed at curbing 
India's nuclear programs. It is now clear that while the 
Obama administration had to choose someone who had a 
record of having actively worked to advance non- 
proliferation, Tauscher was chosen because she was a 
politician who could be flexible unlike Einhorn, a 
stubborn strategic thinker. 
 
¶8. Like Obama in Prague, the California politician can be 
expected to show flexibility in dealings with India under 
political direction from Obama and Clinton. A lot, of 
course, depends on India. Notwithstanding Obama's 
realpolitik in handling New Delhi, the Indians will get 
nothing from the US administration's guardians of non- 
proliferation unless they put their foot down in future 
nuclear negotiations and are ready to fight. 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  003 OF 010 
 
 
 
¶9. A big challenge will unfold almost immediately after 
the new government is sworn in after the Lok Sabha 
elections. 
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is due to come up 
for review at the UN next year. Obama said on Sunday that 
"together, we will strengthen the Nuclear Non- 
Proliferation Treaty as a basis for cooperation". The 
next government will have to quickly decide on what its 
attitude towards the global NPT review will be. 
Especially since India will have no presence at the 
review conference since it is not a signatory to the 
treaty. 
 
"INDIA ECHO IN OBAMA N-THUNDER" - THE TELEGRAPH 
 
¶10. Following is an excerpt from a report in April 6 THE 
TELEGRAPH by Washington correspondent K.P. Nayar: (BEGIN 
EXCERPT) Washington, April 5 -- US President Barack 
Obama's landmark declaration in Prague today to lead the 
world into a future without nuclear weapons borrows 
heavily from an Indian "working paper" to the UN General 
Assembly in 2006 calling for exactly the same goal. In 
the most ambitious foreign policy initiative yet of his 
presidency that is still short of 100 days, Obama set a 
new milestone in the history of global nuclear 
disarmament by promising to make civilian nuclear co- 
operation not just India-specific, but a pillar of US 
foreign policy. 
 
¶11. Obama's populist speech outlining his 
administration's approach to nuclear issues before a 
cheering, flag-waving crowd of 20,000 plus in 12 degrees 
temperature in the picturesque Czech capital swept clean 
by light early morning showers, revived memories of 
Jawaharlal Nehru's similarly raucous visit to Josip Broz 
Tito's Belgrade in 1961 where India made a historic call 
to the world to stop all testing of nuclear weapons. 
 
¶12. Obama's speech in Prague left the clear impression 
that his nascent administration and the Indian government 
had discussed nuclear disarmament both at Prime Minister 
Manmohan Singh's meeting with the US President and during 
other recent occasions when New Delhi and Washington 
engaged each other. But Indian officials would not 
comment on this, obviously not wanting to steal Obama's 
nuclear thunder today and because of the UPA government's 
reluctance to inject the US or the controversial nuclear 
deal into the election campaign any more than they have 
to. 
 
¶13. At the first encounter -- albeit informal and part of 
a large gathering -- between India and the Obama 
administration in Munich exactly 24 days after the new US 
president was sworn in, national security adviser M.K. 
Narayanan spoke extensively on the subject: "The future 
of nuclear weapons: is zero possible?" 
 
¶14. Narayanan's speech at the 45th Munich Security 
Conference on February 13 received little attention in 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  004 OF 010 
 
 
India because the subject appeared esoteric. Narayanan, 
in fact, was privately criticized in South Block for 
having wasted an opportunity offered by the highly-rated 
conference to make out India's case against cross-border 
terrorism when the attack on Mumbai in November was still 
fresh in the minds of the Munich audience. The Obama 
administration and Capitol Hill were represented in 
Munich at very high levels and it is clear from Obama's 
speech that Narayanan's inputs in Munich were noted in 
Washington... (END EXCERPTS) 
 
-- "INDIA A PARTNER IN OBAMA'S N-EFFORTS?" - THE 
HINDUSTAN TIMES 
 
¶15. Following is the full text of a report in April 6 
independent, centrist national English language daily THE 
HINDUSTAN TIMES by foreign editor Amit Baruah: 
 
¶16. (BEGIN TEXT) If US President Barack Obama is serious 
about reducing nuclear weapons, putting in place a global 
nuclear test ban and ending the production of fissile 
material to produce more nuclear weapons, then India will 
necessarily be in the frontline of such efforts. Speaking 
in Prague, Obama said, "...I state clearly and with 
conviction America's commitment to seek peace and 
security of a world without nuclear weapons..." 
 
¶17. "To put an end to Cold War thinking, we will reduce 
the role of nuclear weapons in our national security 
strategy... we will negotiate a new Strategic Arms 
Reduction Treaty with the Russians this year." The US 
President also said his administration would "immediately 
and aggressively" pursue the ratification of the 
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was rejected 
by the US Senate in 1999. 
 
¶18. India, which has still to sign and ratify the CTBT, 
having acquired de facto nuclear weapon status in 1998, 
would have little choice but to sign the Treaty if the 
Senate ratifies it. "I don't see why today's India should 
object to signing the Treaty if the US and China ratify 
it," Arundhati Ghose, former Indian ambassador and arms 
control expert, told HT. Ghose, however, was skeptical 
about Obama's efforts to reduce global nuclear weapons. 
"I think he's forgotten that the (presidential) campaign 
is over. He is President of the US, which is in dire 
straits," she argued. 
 
¶19. Another key area of interest is a new treaty to end 
the production of fissile material. "If we are serious 
about stopping the spread of these weapons, then we 
should put an end to the dedicated production of weapons- 
grade materials that create them," Obama said. "The basic 
bargain is sound: Countries with nuclear weapons will 
move towards disarmament, countries without nuclear 
weapons will not acquire them, and all countries can 
access peaceful nuclear energy...," he underlined. 
 
¶20. Radha Kumar, trustee at the Delhi Policy Group, said 
the world would have to deal with the issue of unequal 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  005 OF 010 
 
 
levels of fissile material in the possession of nuclear 
weapon states. On CTBT, Kumar said: "The logic is there 
for India to sign CTBT. But it remains to be seen what 
government takes power in Delhi." (END TEXT) 
 
"WELCOMING OBAMA'S NUKE INITIATIVE" - INDIAN EXPRESS 
 
¶21. Following is the full text of an op-ed by strategic 
affairs specialist C. Raja Mohan in April 6 independent, 
centrist THE INDIAN EXPRESS English daily: 
 
¶22. (BEGIN TEXT) As a nation that has long championed the 
abolition of nuclear weapons, India has every reason to 
welcome the new disarmament framework unveiled by US 
President Barack Obama in Prague on Sunday. President 
Obama's nuclear initiative is not too different from the 
vision articulated by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi two 
decades ago. There is one big difference, however, 
between Rajiv's nuclear action plan outlined at the 
United Nations in 1988, and Obama's Prague nuclear 
design. In the past, India was an 'outsider' demanding a 
voice in shaping the global nuclear rules; now New Delhi 
joins the debate as an 'insider' and a responsible 
nuclear weapon power. 
 
¶23. The changed relationship between India and the global 
order is indeed the principal benefit from the Indo-US 
nuclear deal that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh conceived 
and implemented along with the US President George W. 
Bush during 2005-08 against great political odds. In 
recent months, there has been some concern in New Delhi 
that the Obama Administration might seek to reverse the 
gains of the nuclear deal and return to a non- 
proliferation agenda that could once again divide India 
and the United States. 
 
¶24. As it awaits a detailed briefing from Washington on 
the president's nuclear plan, the first look at Obama' 
plan suggests that there may be the basis for significant 
Indo-U.S. cooperation on nuclear arms control and non- 
proliferation. India has always supported the three 
enduring traditional elements of this framework 
reaffirmed by Obama in Prague: responsibility of the 
United States and Russia for massive nuclear cuts, ending 
all nuclear testing, and a ban on the production of 
nuclear weapons material. 
 
¶25. To be sure, the CTBT (the Comprehensive Test Ban 
Treaty banning all nuclear explosions) and the FMCT (the 
Fissile Materials Cut-off Treaty that caps the size of 
global stockpile of nuclear material) have acquired 
negative connotations in India in recent years. India 
never objected to the essence of the two treaties that it 
has championed since the middle of the last century. New 
Delhi wants to make sure they don't discriminate against 
India. As Indo-US differences on these treaties narrow, 
India will be free to mobilize international support on 
the one new challenge that concerns it most--nuclear 
terrorism. 
 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  006 OF 010 
 
 
¶26. As it confronts on its western borders the epicenter 
of international terrorism, the Wal-Mart of illicit 
nuclear trade, and the prospect of a failed state armed 
with nuclear weapons, India has every incentive to work 
with the United States in strengthening international 
cooperation to prevent extremist groups from acquiring 
atomic materials and weapons. India can be even more 
enthusiastic in supporting Obama's ideas on promoting the 
use of civil nuclear energy to mitigate the threat of 
global warming, providing fuel supply assurances to those 
nations that play by the rules, and creating new 
international institutions that reduce the risk of 
nuclear weapons proliferation. (END TEXT) 
 
"OBAMA AND A NUCLEAR-FREE WORLD" - THE HINDU 
 
¶27. Following is the full text of an editorial in April 7 
Leftist-influenced South India based English daily THE 
HINDU: 
 
¶28. (BEGIN TEXT) The headline of a nuclear-free world was 
so catchy that few who followed Barack Obama's speech in 
Prague on Sunday would have paid attention to the 
American President's disclaimer that such a goal was 
probably not achievable in his lifetime. Mr. Obama is not 
even 50 yet. Life expectancy being what it is these days, 
his prediction effectively means the world can forget 
about the United States military ending its dependence on 
weapons of mass destruction for at least the next half 
century. 
 
¶29. For the interim, however, Mr. Obama made three 
promises. First, he would reduce the role of nuclear 
weapons in U.S. national security strategy. Secondly, he 
was committed to the "immediate and aggressive pursuit" 
of Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban 
Treaty as the first step towards pushing for the CTBT's 
entry into force. Thirdly, a verifiable ban on the 
dedicated production of fissile material for the 
manufacture of nuclear weapons would be a top priority. A 
few days earlier, Mr. Obama and his Russian counterpart, 
Dmitry Medvedev, announced their intention of negotiating 
a new strategic arms reduction treaty. 
 
¶30. At Prague, the U.S. President also said he would 
press other nuclear weapon states to make cuts in their 
arsenals. In exchange for these commitments or 
announcements, none of which is necessarily new, he laid 
down that the rules governing proliferation had to be 
tightened. He added, in the context of North Korea's 
satellite launch that countries which refused to play by 
the rules would have to be punished. 
 
¶31. Taken together, the Obama package represents a 
definite move forward from the insular and unilateral 
approach of the Bush administration on proliferation 
matters, even if the counterproductive use of threatening 
language remains the same. American ratification of the 
CTBT would be a step forward but this step would be 
meaningful only if Washington were to end all work on the 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  007 OF 010 
 
 
design and refinement of new nuclear weapons, whether of 
the "mini nuke" or the Reliable Replacement Warhead 
variety. India, which will find itself under pressure on 
the CTBT front sooner or later, needs to be proactive in 
emphasizing the crucial importance of nuclear 
disarmament. The basic argument for possessing nuclear 
weapons is provided by deterrence theory - a dangerous 
and false doctrine. 
 
¶32. The stark truth is that the possessor of nuclear 
weapons stands committed to threatening to perform, and 
to actually performing, under certain extreme 
circumstances, insane genocidal actions that must never 
be countenanced. Even if abolition will take time, there 
is no reason why all nuclear weapon states cannot sign a 
treaty banning the use, or at least the first use, of 
this genocidal instrument of war. Such an agreement would 
do more to prevent their use than the promise of 
abolishing nuclear weapons by the middle of this century. 
If he is serious about his stated goal, Mr. Obama should 
be thinking of the time horizon of his present elected 
tenure, not of a lifetime. (END TEXT) 
 
"NUCLEAR SHIFT" -- DAILY NEWS & ANALYSIS (DNA): 
 
¶32. Following is an excerpt from an editorial in April 6 
centrist, independent Mumbai-based English daily DAILY 
NEWS & ANALYSIS (DNA): 
 
¶33. (BEGIN EXCERPT) It is an ironic coincidence indeed 
that the North Korea test-fired their long range missile 
-- though Pyongyang claimed that it was just a satellite 
launch vehicle -- which splashed into the sea off Japan 
just around the time US president Barack Obama was 
declaring in Prague that he would like to get the world 
rid of nuclear weapons. 
 
¶34. Obama's statement is not just one more glimpse of the 
new leader's idealism though it is that too. There are 
strategic compulsions as well. The American strategic 
thinkers seem to be veering round to the view that it is 
difficult to maintain a credible nuclear non- 
proliferation treaty (NPT) regime with rogue states like 
North Korea refusing to play by the rules.... This kind of 
a potentially unstable situation emphasizes the need for 
more urgency on the debate on nuclear disarmament, which 
had become dormant for some time. Obama realizes that 
this is not an achievable goal during his presidential 
term or even after that. He said it may not even happen 
in his lifetime. The important fact is that this radical 
shift in perception has occurred and it can now be taken 
forward. It will be years before it will be accepted by 
all but it is still a welcome change.... 
 
¶35. In the last 18 years or so, India's principled stance 
over nuclear disarmament has been thrown out of the 
window in favor of thinking more attuned to hard global 
realities. There ought not to be any contradictions 
between the two. This would also help India to strengthen 
India-US strategic relationship on the peace axis. Obama 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  008 OF 010 
 
 
has signaled a strategic shift in global thinking and 
India can and should play a role in this new environment. 
(END EXCERPT) 
 
"NOT A WEAPON OF CHOICE" - OP-ED IN THE TIMES OF INDIA 
 
¶36. Following is the full text of an op-ed article in 
April 9 centrist, independent, national English daily THE 
TIMES OF INDIA by political columnist Ramesh Thakur: 
 
¶37. (BEGIN TEXT) On Sunday, North Korea launched a long- 
range missile which Pyongyang described as a success but 
US experts said had been a failure. Of greater historical 
significance was the speech delivered the same day in 
Prague by US president Barack Obama. During the 
Democratic primary campaign last year, Hillary Clinton 
famously declared that both Senator John McCain and she 
had actual job experience to qualify to be commander-in- 
chief. All that Obama had done, by contrast, was to 
deliver one speech in Chicago opposing the Iraq war. 
 
¶38. As we know, Clinton fatally underestimated the power 
of speech. Obama at his best combines linguistic 
eloquence and powerful oratory with substance and 
gravitas. On Sunday, he addressed one of the most 
critically important topics of our day that literally has 
life and death implications for all of us, wherever we 
may be. The dream of a world free of nuclear weapons is 
an old one. It is written into the Nuclear Non- 
proliferation Treaty (NPT), which balances the 
prohibition on non-nuclear states acquiring these weapons 
with the demand on the five NPT-licit nuclear powers 
Britain, China, France, Russia and the US (N5) to 
eliminate their nuclear arsenals through good-faith 
negotiations. 
 
¶39. Considering that the NPT was signed in 1968 and came 
into effect in 1970, the N5 have not lived up to their 
bargain. The dream has been kept alive by many NGOs, a 
coalition of like-minded countries and a plethora of 
international blue ribbon commissions. A major difficulty 
is that the abundant "zero nuclear weapons" initiatives 
have been stillborn because of zero follow-up and a 
failure to address real security concerns. 
 
¶40. If we examine the geo-strategic circumstances of the 
existing nuclear powers, the two with the least zero 
security justification for holding on to any nuclear 
weapons are Britain and France. Nor can North Korea 
justify nuclear weapons on national security grounds. It 
seems to play a nuclear hand as a bargaining chip, the 
only one it has. Israel's security environment is harsh 
enough with many in its neighborhood committed to its 
destruction to make its reliance on nuclear weapons 
understandable. Pakistan will not give up its nuclear 
weapons while India still has them. India's main security 
benchmark is not Pakistan but China. Neither China nor 
Russia will contemplate giving them up for fear of the 
US. This is why the circuit-breaker in the global nuclear 
weapons chain is the US. 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  009 OF 010 
 
 
 
¶41. Obama's speech acknowledged this. The US cannot 
achieve the dream on its own, he said, but it is prepared 
to lead based on the acknowledgement of its special moral 
responsibility flowing from being the only power to have 
used atomic weapons. He thus lays down the challenge to 
others to follow. And he outlines concrete follow-up 
steps that are practical, measurable and achievable. 
Obama's strategy is to map out a vision and then outline 
the roadmap to achieve it. These include ratification of 
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty negotiated way back in 
1997; a new treaty banning fissile material; reducing the 
role of nuclear weapons in US national security strategy; 
and a new strategic arms reduction treaty with Russia 
that is bold and legally binding. Washington will also 
host a global summit on nuclear security within one year. 
 
¶42. Such measures by the N5 must be matched by robust 
action against the proliferation threat. At the very 
least, Obama reclaims the moral high ground for 
Washington to pursue a vigorous and robust non- and 
counter-proliferation strategy. More resources and 
authority for institutions like the International Atomic 
Energy Agency and the Proliferation Security Initiative 
will be provided. Countries leaving or breaking the NPT 
must face real and immediate consequences. An 
international fuel bank could be created to assure supply 
to countries whose interest is limited to peaceful uses 
of nuclear energy. All vulnerable nuclear material around 
the world for example, loose nukes in Russia will be 
secured within four years. Black markets like A Q Khan's 
will be broken up, trade in nuclear materials detected 
and intercepted in transit, and financial tools used to 
disrupt dangerous trade. 
 
¶43. Obama is right in saying that reaching the goal will 
require patience and persistence. But he may be wrong in 
saying that it may not be achieved in his lifetime. He 
should set down the marker for achieving it by the end of 
his second term if re-elected. Without a deadline, no one 
will work to make it happen; rather, they will retreat 
into the vague formula of "yes, some day, eventually". 
 
¶44. Obama may also be mistaken in pinning faith on the 
global regime centered on the NPT which, he said, "could 
reach the point where the centre cannot hold". The NPT is 
already a broken reed, with far too many flaws, 
anomalies, gaps and outright contradictions. For example, 
the promise that those who break the rules must be 
punished cannot be enforced against India. The India-US 
civil nuclear agreement, however justified and necessary, 
breaks NPT rules. A new clean nuclear weapons convention 
might be a better goal to pursue. That's a minor quibble. 
More important is the broad sweep of Obama's commitment, 
based on national interest and personal conviction, to 
freeing us from the fear of nuclear weapons. 
 
-- COMMENTARY IN LANGUAGE PRESS 
 
¶45. "OBAMA'S DREAM," editorial in April 9 Chennai-based 
 
NEW DELHI 00000745  010 OF 010 
 
 
Tamil daily DINAKARAN: "President Obama, during his tour 
of Europe, advocated that international pressure may be 
applied to change the mindset of countries engaged in 
nuclear weapon production. He reached out to the Muslim 
world with his goodwill message and his comforting 
approach came as a great relief to the international 
community that had witnessed threats from his predecessor 
George Bush in similar situations. Obama also seems to be 
giving priority to developing new technologies to counter 
terrorism, rather than spending money on warships or 
aircrafts. This is an indication that Obama has initiated 
steps towards realizing his dream." 
 
¶46. "A WEAPON-FREE WORLD?" editorial in April 7 
independent Bengali daily ANANDABAZAR PATRIKA: "Obama's 
remarks, clearly pointing out new U.S. thinking on the 
nuclear issue, are totally different from those of Bush 
the warmonger. The tone carries no threat, browbeating, 
or intimidation... his nuclear policy is reflective of his 
goodwill in building multifaceted and multilateral 
relations with several countries, and it shows that he is 
not merely led by Pentagon advisors." 
 
"INDIA WILL NOT SIGN NPT IN PRESENT FORMAT" - NEWS 
REPORTS 
 
¶47. On April 5, India's External Affairs Minister Pranab 
Mukherjee spelled out India's stand on the Nuclear Non- 
Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Following is a news report in 
THE HINDU April 6: 
 
¶48. (BEGIN TEXT) NEW DELHI: External Affairs Minister 
Pranab Mukherjee has reiterated India's commitment to 
non-proliferation but said New Delhi would not sign the 
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in its present 
format as it is discriminatory and in favor of the 
nuclear weapon states. "Our position is very clear. We 
are totally in agreement that those who are signatories 
to the NPT, they must fulfill their treaty obligations. 
Because of this discriminatory nature, we are not 
signatories, but with the objectives of non- 
proliferation, we are with the rest of the world," he 
told journalists here on Sunday. 
 
¶50. "We are second to none in propagating non- 
proliferation but we did not sign the NPT and we do not 
have any intention of signing the NPT because we disagree 
with the objective. We disagree with the gross 
discrimination which these treaties make between nuclear 
weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states," he added. 
He said nobody else other than the International Atomic 
Energy Agency (IAEA) could judge whether the NPT 
signatories were fulfilling their treaty obligations. 
"IAEA is the appropriate watchdog body in this area," he 
said. 
BURLEIGH