Gushing over Mr Aiyar’s peace pipe

BY darius| IN Opinion | 13/02/2005

You don’t say!

Darius Nakhoonwala

Of the many nightmares that editors suffer from, a prominent one is the absence of any one big piece of news to comment on. That is perhaps why, fed up with the tension, the editor of Financial Express abolished the edit page some years ago on the sensible ground "who cares about your views (or mine) for that matter?"

His successor revived it, however.

Thus, scores of pieces of ‘small’ news are looked upon with dread by editors. Like a pauper dreaming of a lottery, they dream of a time that will bring day after day after day of editorialisable news. 

But although no editor will admit it, there is an even worse fate they dread than not having something obvious to comment on. This is when something big happens and they make a wrong judgment that it doesn’t merit comment. (Woe betide the news editor who fails to recognize a Page One story and puts on page 9 along with last week’s holdovers from stringers in the sticks).

This happened last week. Very few newspapers took note of the new phase in India’s energy diplomacy. Of the major ones, only three did: The Indian Express, The Hindu and the Business Standard.

All of them went gaga, differing only in degree. The Hindu, as is its wont these days, only stopped just short of simpering with delight. "The Manmohan Singh government`s "decision to examine favourably the possibility of transporting Iranian natural gas to India via a pipeline traversing Pakistani territory represents the welcome triumph of sound economics over dubious diplomacy." "Favourably the possibility?" Talk of cheerleaders. Only the high-kicks and flashing thighs were missing.

The paper blamed the MEA entirely for the lack of progress till now. "Although the proposal had obvious economic benefits for India, the question that preoccupied South Block mandarins was why the Pakistanis were willing to make an exception to their own stand that there could be no movement in economic relations unless there was matching progress in resolving the `core issue` of Jammu and Kashmir." Ouch!

Then it took a swipe at the Vajpayee government, forgetting that Vajpayee did more for Indo-Pak amity than any other government. "When the Vajpayee government was in office, this line of reasoning produced two responses, both negative. First, if India went ahead, Pakistan would use the estimated $ 600-800 million in transit fees to shore up its `near bankrupt` economy and finance terrorism against India. Secondly, Pakistan would hold India`s energy security to ransom by shutting down the pipeline at will."

The Business Standard also smiled with quiet satisfaction, and made a more accurate statement. "Petroleum Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar has done well to get oil diplomacy so firmly on the front burner that the Cabinet has actually authorised him to begin bilateral and multilateral negotiations with countries like Iran, Turkmenistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar to get gas from these countries and, of course, Pakistan, through which the gas from the first two countries will have to flow."

Then it lapsed into some dubious detail -- the current demand for gas in India is around 150 million metric standard cubic metres per day (mmscmd), supplies are only around half this level -- which is a standard editorial writing technique when you are not sure how loudly to clap.

Having got rid of a few words, it came back to the main point: the larger concern about any gas that passes through Pakistan and iron-clad guarantees about assured supply. But again, perhaps fearful of sounding like a party-pooper, it lapsed into senseless detail and did not pursue the core issue: can we really trust Pakistan as long as the Army is the State?

The Indian Express had a nice title (Mr Aiyar’s Peace Pipe) but that is all, in my view. It did the jig, saying Mr Aiyar had "done the impossible by liberating India’s regional energy diplomacy from the clutches of an obdurate bureaucracy."

It then went on and on and on about how awful the Indian Foreign Service was. But the current editor of the Express has an unenviable record of getting things wrong about Pakistan. For instance when the IFS was warning Vajpayee against going to Lahore in that bus, when after the attack on the J&K Asembly in October 2002 the MEA was pleading to get really tough, and  finally over Operation Parakram in 2002. The professionals were arguing for one thing, the government did the opposite and the Express supported the government.

 

Feedback on this column may be sent to editor@thehoot.org