Author:
Publication: Bharatiya Pragna
Date: July 2002
The panel consisted of Ambassador
Dennis Kux, a senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center of International
Scholars, Selig Harrison, a journalist turned scholar and Director of National
Security at the Center for International Policy, Professsor Romesh Diwan
of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Professor Chandrakant Panse, Director,
Media Watch group of Friends of India Society International, and Dr. Rita
Frenchman, Governing Body Member, American Association of Physicians of
India (AAPI). Representative Frank Pallone, D-NJ, who was to participate
in the panel discussion could not make to the event, but sent a three-page
statement instead. "In this time of overwhelming grief and reparation in
the US, there are at least 53,000 families in India that can comprehend
the great suffering caused by terrorism in Kashmir. Many communities, including
Muslims, Sikhs and Pandits, have been tormented by Pakistan-backed Islamic
militants for decades. These terrorist acts by Islamic militants in Kashmir
have resulted in overwhelming numbers of cold blooded murders in an efforts
to eliminate non-Muslims from Kashmir."
In his introductory remarks, Singh
said that although terrorism is being debated in the media as if it is
a term that needs a lot of explanation, it has very simple meaning terrorizing
people to promote a cause. "If terrorism is opposed, it can not be justified
by a cause." He pointed out several myths about terrorism, such as terrorism
is result of poverty, springs from the lack of democracy, or breeds in
territorial disputes. There are many examples of such situations (Tibet,
Taiwan, China, Koreas, etc) where terrorism is not resorted to solve the
problems.
Singh also asserted that "terrorism
is not, religion specific. There are people of various religion who are
involved in terrorism all over the world. The only difference being that
there are some religions which sanction, or are at least being used, and
that should be distinguished".
Selig Harrison, a veteran journalist
who is well versed with India and Pakistan said that the good news was
that the American press had finally discovered the ISI (Inter-Services
Intelligence - the Pakistani spy agency), particularly, the activities
of the ISI in the last stages of Soviet occupation of Afghan areas, providing
active support in bringing jehadis from all over the world and help them
to train as terrorists.
He pointed out that American media
did not really follow up even when the Indian airliner was hijacked a few
years ago, and all the evidence clearly pointed to the involvement of groups
supported by ISI. Harrison thought that the American angle to the ISI activities
was brought forth when the case of Daniel Pearl came up. "Even so, the
nature of activities which ISI is carrying out in Kashmir has not been
the focus of the American media." Ambassador Dennis Kux, who has had diplomatic
assignments both in India and Pakistan, thought the coverage of South Asia
in some national newspapers is pretty good. "I think it is reasonably good,
and when you have a big event as 9/11, the coverage on Afghanistan, Pakistan
and Middle East, was terrific. There was more reporting of Pakistan through
the media than the state department. There were more journalists there.
At that point they started going below the surface and get to know about
the ISI."
Dr. Rita Frenchman, a physician
by profession but active in Indian community issues, however, thought that
the US media has never been honest in its coverage of India. "It tries
to find everything negative it can about India." She thought media in the
rest of the world, such as BBC, provides impartial and fairer coverage.
Dr. Frenchman believes that news agencies like CNN, Fox News, have to echo
US foreign policy. "But in the long-run it is only going to harm the India-US
relations." She felt that both US and India should work together as "both
countries have the same common enemy, Islamic fundamentalism." The role
of media in the effective sustenance of a society was emphasized.
Singh pointed out that "media is
on the three pillars in a modem functioning democracy." He said that media
has been institutionalized in the democratic system of governance. "Of
course, that gives a lot of power, but a lot of responsibility also. One
of the requirements of such responsibility is for them to be fair, balanced,
factual and truthful." In this regard, Harrison retorted: "I am afraid
to say that the American media (December 13 attack on the Indian parliament)
did not reflect the magnitude of that event. Particularly, I have been
distressed by the fact that the way in which this was covered did not define
the fact that Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, which were identified
by India as the groups responsible for carrying out this event, groups
which are primarily composed of Pakistanis." Harrison thought the nature
of the acuteness and seriousness of that event was not accurately conveyed
and more broadcast was needed.
Professor Chandrakant Panse, Director,
Media Watch project of Friends of India Society International, reminded
everyone of late Daniel Pearl, an adventurous, careful journalist who lost
his life to ISI, while discovering the role of the Pakistani agency in
terrorism. He cited New York Times and Boston Globe to point out that 4,000
Pakistani army officers were manning Kashmir desk of ISI. These officers
are reportedly being shifted, and media is not questioning as to what were
they doing for all these years? According to Panse the role of ISI in terrorism
is crystal clear. Professor Diwan suggested that media could play both
positive and negative roles. He thought that even though there are some
good people in media, something is missing somewhere when a story is picked
up, and only part of the information is presented.
Diwan theorized that terrorism has
two two parties; terrorist and the victim. Terrorists have an intent for
their action but carry it out in a sneaky way, whereas antiterrorism action
is done openly. In his opinion, media must work hard to distinguish the
two action. Even though it is easier to report on the antiterrorist action,
media must go deeper in reporting evil designs of terrorists, their network,
and their ideology of hatred. "Media must not help terrorists by helping
them create the terror."
In case of India and Pakistan, Professor
Diwan thought, a distinction must be made between a free and democratic
society of India and a parochial and dictatorial society of Pakistan. He
pointed out a systematic terrorism in Pakistan practiced since its creation
in 1947. He cited ethnic cleansing as an evidence of this practice, as
the minority (Christian. Hindus and Sikhs) population in Pakistan has been
reduced from 23% in 1947 to 2% in about 50 years. He emphasized that Pakistan
has wiped out the entire minority population and the media has not informed
the public about it.
In Ambssador Kux's opinion though
there is a fair coverage of current events of terrorism in India and Pakistan
at least in major, national newspapers (New York Times, Washington Post,
Los Angeles Times) of the US. He explained that the local media in US does
not cover anything beyond their local events. In the modern era of internet,
he thought anyone can get to read newspapers from all over the world, so
whether US media sources cover world's largest democracy or not should
not bother the Indian American community too much. He was also critical
of the TV culture of 10-second news spots which lack substantial discussion.
He challenged the Indian American community to play a role in the education
system of this country, "because if you look at the curriculum in the high
schools and colleges, where does Asia fit in? You do not have much coverage
in social science, or history, or geography." He thought that lack the
basic of knowledge about India exists not in general but in the school
system.
Professor Singh in his remarks emphasized
that India should not be considered just another country, especially in
the United States which has been leader of the free world for several decades.
India has played a major role in promoting freedom and pluralism for several
thousands of years, and still is a continuously living culture. "The media
should examine India historically, geographically, and socially in all
possible ways." The evidence of India's importance is in the fact that
India is the only country in the whole history of the world that has an
ocean named after it. Even British who at one time had such a vast empire
that there was no sunset in their kingdom, but could not have an ocean
named after them.
Singh exhorted the media, especially
the Indian media, to present India's values of pluralism, tolerance, and
human rights, which resonate so well with those of the US, to the rest
of the world, not for the sake of India alone but for the sake of peace
in the entire world.
This Panel Discussion at the National
Press Club attracted print and electronic media, scores of Indian American
community members, and diplomats from both India and Pakistan, including
the Indian Ambassador a large, Honorable BK Agnihotri, who is based in
New York city.