VZCZCXRO6296
PP RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHNEH
DE RUEHNE #2433/01 3371228
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 031228Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8792
INFO RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RHHJJPI/PACOM IDHS HONOLULU HI
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO 2149
RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 5360
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 4570
RUEHNEH/AMCONSUL HYDERABAD 1163
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 2544
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 6482
RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU 2990
RUEHKP/AMCONSUL KARACHI 9826
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 4388
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 7055
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 8702
RHOVVKG/COMSEVENTHFLT
RHMCSUU/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 NEW DELHI 002433 
 
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 -- COVERAGE OF POTUS AF- 
PAK SPEECH IN INDIAN MEDIA -- Part II (continued) 
 
SUMMARY: President Obama's speech on the way forward in 
Afghanistan and Pakistan received extensive coverage 
throughout India today.  Indian media highlighted the 
continued commitment of the U.S. in Afghanistan and 
mentioned repeatedly that the GOI was "not complaining" 
at being left out of a specific mention in the 
President's speech.  Ambassador Roemer's statement 
amplifying and localizing the message was widely 
quoted, with particular focus on his comment that India 
is a key U.S. partner in the region.  Many Indian 
commentators speculated that the President's strategy 
was largely dictated by domestic political compulsions. 
They concurred with Indian officials and security 
analysts that the "cancer" of extremism originated in 
Pakistan, not Afghanistan.  Editorials broadly showed 
an understanding -- even appreciation -- of the U.S. 
decision to first augment, then shrink U.S. troop 
levels, but there was palpable disappointment at the 
strategy's perceived silence on Pakistan.  And while 
there was divergence of opinion on whether the 
President's new policy announcement will ultimately 
bear fruit, there was complete unanimity that declaring 
a withdrawal timeline to the enemy is a grave 
misjudgment. Indians expressed concern that the 
withdrawal of the U.S. from Afghanistan would encourage 
terror groups to play the waiting game. End summary 
 
-------------------------------- 
INDIA WELCOMES U.S. ANNOUNCEMENT 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶1. India said it was not "complaining" about not being 
mentioned in President Obama's speech. Instead, India 
welcomed Washington's continued commitment in 
Afghanistan, saying it was "very pleased" that pressure 
on al Qaeda and the Taliban would not be eased. 
Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor 
was widely reported saying, "India is not complaining 
at all. What you are overlooking is that our Prime 
Minister has just been there. He received a pretty 
thorough exposition of the US's views on the issue and 
President Obama called him up in Delhi yesterday to 
brief him further before his public speech." 
 
¶2. THE TIMES OF INDIA said the speech was remarkable 
for its gloss over the fundamental fact that the 
extremist "cancer" originates in Pakistan, not 
Afghanistan. The paper quoted Indian officials and 
analysts saying Pakistan is the real problem, because 
both al Qaida and Taliban originate from and are 
nurtured there. The paper reported that President 
Obama's decision to send more troops to Afghanistan 
while at the same time announcing a deadline for their 
withdrawal has left the Indian security establishment 
racking their brains. While some feel that Obama needed 
to pander to his party and domestic constituency, 
others believe that the July 2011 deadline for troop 
withdrawal will encourage terror groups, including 
India-specific outfits like LeT and JeM, to play the 
waiting game. 
 
 
NEW DELHI 00002433  002 OF 005 
 
 
------------------------------- 
EDITORIALS IN THE ENGLISH PRESS 
------------------------------- 
 
¶3. "THE ROAD AHEAD," editorial in centrist English 
daily, THE TIMES OF INDIA:  "Obama has probably made 
the best of a bad situation. If Islamabad allows 
militants safe havens, all the American efforts will be 
wasted. New Delhi must not cavil if large amounts of 
civilian aid flow into Pakistan, since that would shore 
up anti-militancy forces. It must, on the contrary, 
stay closely engaged with Washington and with Kabul and 
keep reminding Washington and other international 
capitals of the urgency of the task of turning 
Afghanistan around, and itself remain ready to help." 
 
¶4. "LIMITS OF THE AFGHAN SURGE," editorial in left- 
influenced English daily, THE HINDU: "By far the 
biggest weakness of the new Af-Pak policy is Mr. 
Obama's inability to craft an effective strategy to 
deal with the Pakistani side of the equation. In his 
speech on Tuesday, the U.S. president spoke of a cancer 
that has spread on both sides of the Durand Line. If he 
stopped short of identifying where the malignancy was 
worst, it was not for lack of information. Rather he 
hopes to cajole or even threaten Islamabad into taking 
action against the Taliban and other extremist groups 
which operate from its territory. The only problem is 
the 2011 exit date that Mr. Obama announced. Rawalpindi 
might well be tempted to instruct the Taliban to lie 
low till the appointed hour only to emerge triumphant 
once U.S. troops begin to leave." 
 
¶5. "SURGE, EXIT," editorial in centrist English daily, 
THE INDIAN EXPRESS: "The world cannot object to Obama's 
choice -- to end America's costly war in Afghanistan. 
The exit strategy might encourage the Taliban and its 
mentors to simply sit it out. Many will be downright 
skeptical about the president's plans to entice 
Pakistan to confront America's enemies by offering it a 
solid strategic partnership. After all, some of 
America's enemies are among the best friends of the 
Pakistan army. For its part, Delhi should wish Obama 
well, because our interests are the same: oust Al Qaeda 
from the subcontinent, prevent the extremists from 
returning to power in Kabul, persuade the Pakistan army 
to dissociate itself from all terrorist groups 
including the Lashkar-e-Toiba, and encourage Islamabad 
to build normal neighborly relations with Kabul and 
Delhi. At the same time Delhi must also prepare for 
potential US failure in Afghanistan and a reduced 
American commitment to Afghanistan from the middle of 
2011." 
 
¶6. "MR OBAMA GOES TO WAR," editorial in centrist 
English daily, THE HINDUSTAN TIMES: "Mr Obama's 
timeline is relatively open-ended, but this sop to the 
left-wing of his party ensures that the Taliban will 
continue to believe they need only wait. The only thing 
likely to change this mindset will be bullets and 
bodies." 
 
NEW DELHI 00002433  003 OF 005 
 
 
 
¶7. "HEADED FOR DISASTER: OBAMA'S NEW AFPAK POLICY WON'T 
WORK," editorial in right-of-center, pro-BJP English 
daily, THE PIONEER: "Given Mr. Obama's dithering and 
his by now established inability to grasp the dynamics 
of the South Asian region, there really is nothing 
surprising about his 'new' initiative. If at all there 
is something that merits attention is his attempt to 
lay the blame at Afghanistan's door while absolving 
Pakistan -- he has lashed out at the victim of 
Islamabad-sponsored terrorism while praising the 
criminal state of Pakistan." 
 
¶8. "US POLICY WILL DISTRACT INDIA," op-ed by diplomatic 
editor Shobori Ganguli in right-of-center, pro-BJP 
English daily, THE PIONEER: "After the Americans exit 
the region and if China emerges as the Asian moderator, 
it will use every trick in the trade to needle India, 
all in the name of 'encouraging' peace and stability in 
Asia." 
 
¶9. "OBAMA COMPOUNDS FOLLY," op-ed in right-of-center, 
pro-BJP English daily, THE PIONEER: "The new Af-Pak 
policy reflects Barack Obama's inability to grasp a 
simple fact: The US cannot hope to defeat jihadi 
terrorism by pampering Pakistan which sponsors jihad. 
Like AfPak-1, the new policy is bound to fail, despite 
his promise of bringing the war to a 'successful 
conclusion.' Obama's AfPak Policy-2...is marked by 
critical words for the Government of Afghanistan and 
soft words for the rulers of Pakistan - as if evils 
such as corruption, poor governance, narcotics 
production and lack of accountability are confined only 
to Afghanistan and one does not find these evils in 
Pakistan.... Seeking partnership with a state perpetrator 
of terrorism is not the way of ending it. That is what 
Mr. Obama has done in his address." 
 
¶10. "PAK FIRST AND ONLY THEN AFGHANISTAN," op-ed by 
strategic editor Manoj Joshi in centrist English daily, 
MAIL TODAY:  "India needs to focus sharply on the 
source of our greatest danger -- Pakistan. New Delhi 
needs to ensure that any new Afghan initiative is 
carefully calibrated to deliver positive outcomes in 
Pakistan. New Delhi must be a part of the Afghan 
solution and a major player in the Afghan game. It must 
play to win." 
 
¶11. "THE SPEECH WITHIN THE SPEECH," op-ed in centrist 
English daily, THE INDIAN EXPRESS: "Obama strategy 
appears to be to promise Pakistan long term 
partnership, at the same time compel it to act against 
all terrorist groups and build an Afghan army which 
will be able to defend Afghanistan against the Taliban. 
Though the speech at West Point appears soft on 
Pakistan, it is clear that the focus of the strategy is 
raising the Afghan force to enable responsible 
transition of US forces out of Afghanistan, warning on 
Pakistan's ambiguous relationship with terrorist 
organizations, and outlining the continuing threat to 
the US homeland. The Obama strategy is a challenge to 
 
NEW DELHI 00002433  004 OF 005 
 
 
the Pakistani Army and its Inter-Services 
Intelligence." 
 
¶12. "AFGHANISTAN IS NOW OBAMA'S WAR," op-ed in centrist 
English daily, BUSINESS STANDARD: "Obama's plan could 
provide an equal satisfaction to the Taliban, who now 
know exactly when their enemy plans to leave. Is Obama 
being too optimistic in saying that Pakistani public 
opinion had turned against extremism and that Islamabad 
was now genuinely on the side of America?" 
 
¶13. "AFGHAN: INDIA IN NEED OF A RETHINK," editorial in 
December 3, 2009 independent English daily, DECCAN 
CHRONICLE: "More than any other country, and longer 
than any, India has known the meaning of Pakistan- 
nurtured terrorism, and the geography is not about to 
change. The Taliban and Pakistan's ISI are likely to be 
heartened with the Obama announcement, although no 
timetable has been laid down." 
 
¶14. "NOT QUITE NEW," editorial in centrist Kolkata 
English daily, THE TELEGRAPH: "Why Mr. Obama commits 
himself to a time frame is obvious. With 55 per cent of 
the domestic population and a sizeable section within 
his own party having turned against the Afghanistan 
war, the initiation of the countdown had become a 
necessary rider to an announcement of a troop surge, 
without which Mr. Obama runs the chance of losing 
whatever has been gained in eight years of fighting. 
With the pious announcement of withdrawal, without the 
groundwork complete, Mr. Obama may be giving time to 
his adversaries in Afghanistan to work out their plot. 
Meanwhile, he may be losing his own." 
 
---------------------------------- 
EDITORIALS IN THE VERNACULAR PRESS 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶15.  "OBAMA GOES FOR OSAMA," editorial in December 3 
AMAR UJALA Hindi daily: "Obama has realized and 
admitted that the Af-Pak region is the epicenter of 
international terror. That's what India has been saying 
all along! In that sense, there is an Indian stamp on 
his newly announced policy. While the Af-Pak strategy 
looks fine, from India's standpoint America is erring 
in its high reliance on Pakistan. Of course it is a 
compulsion for the U.S. to go with Pakistan, but 
America needs to understand that Pakistan is where the 
terrorism stems from!" 
 
¶16. "AMERICAN DUPLICITY," editorial in December 3 AMAR 
UJALA Hindi daily: "There is nothing new in President 
Obama's Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy. It is another 
duplicitous U.S. attempt to placate its supporters by 
announcing 30,000 more troops, and pacify those 
domestic constituents who want a pullout of U.S. 
forces. How does Obama hope to end the Afghan war in 18 
months, when the last eight years have only seen the 
strengthening of the Taliban and the failure of the 
western forces? Obama's Afghan plans do not seem likely 
to work out by 2011." 
 
NEW DELHI 00002433  005 OF 005 
 
 
 
¶17. "OBAMA'S AFGHAN POLICY," editorial in December 3, 
2009 Urdu daily, THE SIASAT DAILY: "President Obama's 
new policy for Afghanistan seems to be weak toward 
Taliban. The truth is that America is not prepared to 
accept its defeat against Taliban." 
 
¶18. "OBAMA COMES DOWN HEAVILY ON PAKISTAN WHILE 
DECLARING THE AF-PAK POLICY," editorial in left-of- 
center Marathi daily, APLA MAHANAGAR: "Not mincing any 
words, U.S. President Barack Obama has confirmed that 
Pakistan is a confirmed breeding ground of extremism 
and sectarianism of every hue. Thankfully he has used 
strong words asking Pakistan to act against Jihadi 
outfits that threaten America and its allies from their 
bases in Pakistan. This gesture is welcome." 
 
¶19. "WITHDRAWAL SYMPTOMS," editorial in centrist 
Marathi daily, PRAHAR:  "President Obama is fearful of 
angered reactions from the American people. Americans 
have failed to appreciate the necessity of U.S. 
presence in Afghanistan. The timetable for withdrawal 
is specifically directed at Americans who are fiercely 
against aggression in Afghanistan." 
 
¶20. "MORE FORCES TO AFGHANISTAN," editorial in December 
03, Bangalore-based, left-of-center Kannada daily 
PRAJAVANI:  "After announcing Afghan policy, U.S. 
President Obama spoke to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh 
and India should not take this telecon casually.  India 
just wants to put an end to Pakistan-sponsored 
terrorism.  It would be suicidal if India gets into the 
Afghan muddle created by America.  Now, India should 
take cautious steps, in wake of changed U.S. policy 
towards Afghanistan." 
ROEMER