India and Pakistan-- PQ vs IQ
The fun did not end there. His television channel interviewed the journalist and wanted him to psychoanalyse Mr. Vajpayee.
B Muralidhar Reddy
The PQ (patriotic quotient) of some of the Pakistani and Indian journalists who covered the recently concluded Non-Aligned Movement Summit meet at Kaula Lumpur, appeared to be rather high. Going by the accounts of these scribes NAM was all about the `clash` between Indian Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee and Pakistan President, Pervez Musharraf and of course behind the scene bouts between diplomats of the two sides to have a declaration of their choice. Other issues like Iraq also figured!
Political wrestling between Islamabad and New Delhi on the sidelines of the conference began well before the Summit and a section of the Pakistani media seemed to take the lead. "Indian bid to isolate Pakistan failed" and "New Delhi unsuccessful in equating freedom struggles with terrorism" were some of the headlines in a section of the Pak press.
The roll of honour for highest PQ undoubtedly goes to a television journalist from Pakistan who managed to `corner` Mr. Vajpayee minutes after his `spirited reply` to the earlier statement made by Gen. Musharraf. The intrepid journo had positioned himself so strategically that the Prime Minister simply could not avoid him. As soon as he sighted the Prime Minister he began shooting questions. "Why did you not refer in your speech to the situation in South Asia?". He kept on, even as Mr. Vajpayee kept walking away. "I am not giving any interview" were the only words from the Prime Minister even as the reporter kept firing question after question.
The fun did not end there. The television channel interviewed the journalist and wanted him to psychoanalyse Mr. Vajpayee. "Hindustan ki wazir kyon nahi aap ki sawalonka jawab diya"? asked an anchor from Islamabad. (Why did the Indian leader not answer your question?) The correspondent in Kaula Lumpur launched off into an instant analysis of all perceivable and conceivable reasons. "Hindustan Pakistan se koyi bath cheeth nahi chahi thi hi" was the punch line. (India does not want any dialogue with Pakistan.)
At least one scribe from India did the same to Gen. Musharraf. He was asked as to why he raked up Kashmir if he was genuinely interested in talks with India. Here are a few lines from a dispatch of an Indian correspondent on the press conference of Gen. Musharraf. "AFTER FAILING TO ELICIT ANY RESPONSE (emphasis added) from the Non-Aligned Movement on Kashmir, Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf today claimed he had not come to the Summit to seek support on the issue and ‘raise tempers’. But he was ready for a dialogue with India to resolve Kashmir and all outstanding matters".
Here are excerpts from another Indian correspondent on the speech made by Mr. Vajpayee at the Summit "PM today blasted Pakistan for vitiating the atmosphere at the NAM summit after President Pervez Musharraf predictably mentioned the K-word during his address to the multilateral forum. Putting Kashmir before the Palestine issue, Musharraf brought all the contentious bilateral issues with India into his speech and suggested that NAM should play a pivotal role in conflict resolution.
"However, unlike the UNGA meeting in September 2002, Vajpayee resorted to hook-for-cut diplomacy (what does it mean?) and vigorously responded to all the allegations made by Musharraf. This was not in the original Indian script. In fact, the text of Vajpayee`s original speech had been circulated beforehand to send Pakistan a signal. But, true to his form, the Pakistan President digressed from the main issue of revitalisation of NAM and took potshots at India, be it on permanent membership of Security Council, Kashmir or human right violations.
"Musharraf was so stung by Vajpayee`s counter-attack that he raised his hand seeking right of reply. To the Pakistani delegation`s embarrassment, Malaysia ignored this. Later, the Pakistanis went to the NAM secretariat to insist on a right to reply. There was more bad news for them. Malaysian foreign minister Syed Hamid Albar later said at a Press conference that the NAM charter did not allow raising of bilateral issues".
Here is a match from a Pakistani news agency to Mr. Vajpayee`s speech. These paras are part of the dispatch in its original form. "Pakistan will exercise its right of reply in writing today (Tuesday) against Indian PM`s rhetoric over cross border terrorism. The Indian Prime Minister mentioned it at NAM forum against the speech of a Head of a State and it is not dignified on President`s part to respond to Vajpayee`s rhetoric in the same manner.
"President Pervez Musharraf had mentioned Kashmir issue, along with the issue of Palestine, during his speech at the 13th NAM Summit on Monday. This made the Indian delegates, including Brajesh Mishra and Nambiar, to get the points of President`s speech written in the guests gallery of NAM Summit Hall and rushed to hand over it to Vajpayee.
"Before coming to podium the Indian Prime Minister chose to add three Pakistan or Musharraf-specified paragraphs, which depict Indian Prime Minister cannot control his nerves. The added paragraphs accused Pakistan of harbouring terrorism and raised question of "Pakistan`s territorial designs", etc.
"The Foreign Office Director General, Masood Khan lamented that the Indian Prime Minister was expected to uphold diplomatic norm but he did not. "President General Musharraf did a dignified thing and his was a very reserved statement on the issue of Kashmir, but Vajpayee got angry showing his inconsistency in matters", he added".
"They said the President was right in mentioning Kashmir issue because the focus of the NAM summit was on revitalization and end of war. "NAM should be voice of principle, not power", was the call given by General Musharraf, said Masood Khan. Tariq Osman Haider also pointed out various positive aspects of Monday`s NAM Summit. He said the President of Pakistan was given significant importance and was offered a seat in the front row".
Here is a gem from one of the dispatches of an Indian correspondent. "Apart from this bilateral spat, unilateralism in international affairs figured significantly in the proceedings". An Internet reader could not help but to say (posted in the discussion forum) this in response to the report of a newspaper correspondent on the famous clash between Gen. Musharraf and Mr. Vajpayee.
"Indian mainstream media, when it comes to Pakistan, starts using adjectives in its reporting that better belong to tabloids by way of etiquette and sophistication. The Pakistani media by and large refrains from such adjectives that their counterparts from India adopt, like "rakes up Kashmir", "General shoots off mouth", "utters the K-word again" etc. etc.
"The Pakistani media usually states the Indian position as a matter of fact e.g. it titled the Indian leaked plans of invading POK as "India planned offensive", or that "Vajpayee criticizes Pakistan/Musharraf". Also, please note that Kashmir exists as a part of India, only in Indian minds. The rest of the world recognizes it for it is: the world`s most bitterly disputed territory. So no point making a hue and cry over mentioning of what is the only truth on Kashmir, terrorism or military occupation being products of the dispute. Recognition is the first step to resolution.
"Not recognizing the Kashmir dispute as central to Indo-Pak problems is an ostrich-like approach. Musharraf has already stated that any solution unacceptable to either side will not be considered. So then what holds back India except hate, I wonder!"
The reader seems to have missed the patriotic fervour in some of the dispatches of the Pakistani correspondents. When it comes to India-Pakistan, a number of journalists on both sides appear to be swayed more by PQ than IQ.
B Muralidhar Reddy is the correspondent of the Hindu in Islamabad. Contact: hindibd@comsats.net.pk
