The most damning part of the press statement is in the second paragraph. “The Indian JVs have informed the embassy that they have been approached by such media houses for release of advertisements and are being threatened with negative publicity if those requests are not met.”

Then the embassy provided us some background info on Indo-Nepal relationship telling us how much importance the JVs have in that.

“These Indian Joint Ventures make a substantial contribution to the Nepalese economy, employment, revenue to the Government and exports from Nepal. They maintain the highest standards of quality, which is proved by the fact that exports of their products are accepted across the globe. These companies are the pride of Nepal and a symbol of close relations between India and Nepal.” Then the embassy adds: “The baseless adverse publicity against the products of such joint ventures will not only hit the Nepalese economy and exports but will also deter new foreign direct investments into Nepal.”

Last, but not least, the embassy says: “We hope that concerned authorities will take suitable action against such unethical practices.”

Anything wrong with the statement? Nothing, had that been issued by a commercial company with business interests in Nepal. But the fact that it was issued by the official representative of the Republic of India in the Democratic Federal Republic of Nepal is troubling. The Indian embassy, under the able leadership of Rakesh Sood, in Nepal is not the East Nepal Company. Therefore it shouldn’t behave in a way that reminds us the East India Company. [Nepalis didn't experience that, by the way, as they were never colonized by the British.] The embassy should have told the complaining JVs something like this: “This seems purely a commercial issue. You guys, being multinational companies, should know how to sort this out.”

But the embassy didn’t say that. It acted like the publicity wing of Dabur Nepal, the Indian company in Nepal, whose product- Real juice- got bad publicity because worm was reportedly found in its tetra pack.

The funniest thing is the company in question, Dabur Nepal, didn’t send letters or rebuttals to the media outlets that reported about its product.

The embassy’s views are highly exaggerated when it says the Indian JVs “are the pride of Nepal.” NO, they are NOT. Are Toyota, Coca Cola and Blackberry the pride of India? But yes Dabur, Nepal Unilever and Asian Paints in Nepal symbolize business relations (not close ties though) between our two nations. Dabur or Unilever are not in Nepal because they wanted to strengthen the relationship between the two countries. Profit is THE priority and that is paramount. We Nepalis do understand that and we are perfectly fine with that…as long as the companies abide by the rules, sell quality products and refrain from neglecting and compromising on quality. If Dabur goes, another company will soon come to sell us juice and hazmolas before we get thirsty and face problems with digestion. They are not distributing their products for free by bringing them from India. We also know that Nepal-India relationship is not based on such shaky foundations that rely on tetra-packs juices. We also know that if a company sells something substandard they are often reported in the free presses of the world. Nepal is no North Korea and no Myanmar (Burma) whose dictator General gets red carpet welcome in India. We have a free press, vibrant and very much functional, far more responsible than the Indian press DESPITE the fact that we are only two decades old. We are vibrant, responsible and functional especially when we are compared to some Indian papers that have more than 15 decades of history and experience. [The report of worm found in Real juice was first published by Naya Patrika, a daily tabloid. It was also carried by Sagarmatha TV, a news channel. Kantipur TV, not newspapers from Kantipur Publications, broadcasted a report on that on it's late night news show, not regular and prime time news bulletins.]

It’s not unusual, though, for governments to lobby for the companies of their home country in foreign lands. That’s normal. Embassies are there to promote their country’s interests, including business interests, in the host nation. BUT that responsibility is not fulfilled by issuing statements with veiled threats. The Canadian High Commission in New Delhi didn’t issue such threatening statements against Indian media that wrote recently that Blackberry should abide by the Indian laws. Nor did the Chinese embassy in New Delhi threaten the Indian media for reporting about substandard Chinese toys in India. Diplomacy is not done by issuing statements. But Indian embassy in Kathmandu opted for a different path, the path of intimidation and highhandedness.

Thus the objection to the Indian embassy statement by a group of Nepali media on Sunday (29^th Aug):

“Nepali media are free to choose their content and have fully utilised this right. We caution the embassy to respect diplomatic norms and values of press freedom,” said the media group in a statement. The signatories of the statement were: Nepal Media Society (print), Television Broadcasters, Broadcasting Association of Nepal (commercial radio) and Association of Community Radio Broadcasters Nepal (the umbrella organisation for community radio broadcasters). They cautioned the Indian Embassy not to “overstep its boundary.” The statement also reminded the embassy that the Nepali media operate under the laws of sovereign Nepal. The statement accused the embassy of libel. “To make sweeping comments on the Nepali media on the basis of news published about food products with corroboration from the investigation of Nepali government agencies is objectionable,” the statement said.

“On behalf of all the media outlets in Nepal, we deplore this objectionable interference of the embassy.” The joint statement has also cautioned the embassy from repeating similar “mistakes” and asked the embassy to issue an apology. The media organisations have also called on the government to issue a rebuttal immediately.

Then the Indian Embassy issued anther statement on the same day (29^th):

The spokesperson of Indian embassy said the embassy was surprised by “the reaction by some media associations to genuine concerns expressed by it at attempts to elicit advertising revenue from Indian joint ventures by a few media organisations”. “At no point did the embassy refer to the media in Nepal in general. The reaction by these media associations would have been credible if backed by a condemnation of such unethical practices and an offer to discuss how to address the issue with concerned companies,” said the spokesperson in response to media queries according to Himalayan Times, the English-language Indian newspaper published from Kathmandu.

Then, on Monday (30^th) some newspapers, including Kantipur, responded with editorials and interviews from various citizens of Nepal who condemned the undiplomatic act of the Indian embassy.

[While reading this one shouldn't forget the recent tensions between the Indian embassy and Kantipur Publications that saw the former holding newsprint imported by the later at Kolkata port.]

One of India’s ‘greatest newspapers’, The Lies of India (sometimes known as the Times of India) reacted to the incident on its website yesterday reminding us the ‘great’ Joseph Goebbels. This is exactly the reason why I said earlier Nepali media are far more responsible and mature than some Indian newspapers that are shame to journalism. Let’s not talk about ethics to these morons who sell news space to corporate. Their ‘reports’ are full of mistakes, they don’t know how to spell names of people from Nepal they are mentioning in their reports and don’t know when the incident they are writing about took place.

“Six years ago, a section of Nepal’s media showed its dark side when it falsely attributed anti-Nepal statements to Bollywood star Hritik Roshan, triggering anti-India riots in the Himalayan kingdom,” the Lies of India (known occasionally as Times of India) wrote yesterday. The moron who wrote this completely forgot that the Hritik Roshan incident happened ten years ago, not six. Though the false statement wrongly attributed to Roshan was carried first by a fringe newspaper coming out from Chitwan, to say that the riots were triggered by the media is same as saying that Indira Gandhi was killed by coverage of Emergency by the Indian Express. [Sorry Express for naming you in the same paragraph with the Lies of India.]

The LOI further writes about Kantipur: “Smarting under falling circulation and dwindling revenue…” Now, this moron is acting as Audit Bureau of Circulation for Nepalis newspapers. But revenue COULD be decreasing because the Indian embassy has threatened the Indian JVs in Nepal not to give advertisements to Kantipur group. Dabur officials are already complaining privately that their product Real is losing market share to Rio by Nepal’s Chaudhary Group because they are not being allowed to advertise on Kantipur. The officials at the Pepsi were heard cursing His Excellency Rakesh Sood, the able ambassador of India in Nepal, for not allowing them to do business freely in Nepal and holding them ransom to fulfil His Excellency’s personal ego.

The LOI further says: “The campaign is an echo of similar hate campaigns in the past. In 2003-4, when a new media organisation announced the launch of a Nepali daily, the group led a similar smear campaign.”

The thick-head moron has no idea that the daily s/she is talking about is the Himalayan Times, an Indian newspaper run by Indians in Kathmandu, that wrote Buddha was born in India. I think even LOI would feel hesitant to print such lie regarding Buddha’s birthplace and the THT was condemned for such untruthful reports and backdoor entry of Indian investment in Nepali newspaper industry.

It would be childish to expect fair coverage from LOI so I am not asking why the LOI didn’t think it was necessary to put other side (Kantipur)’s view on a news report.

Finally, here’s a report in yesterday’s Hindustan Times about what our great democratic neighbour is planning. While reading this you will have to keep this fact in mind that NO Nepali newspaper is allowed to be circulated in Indian cities like Delhi and Mumbai where as almost every Indian media outlet from Delhi have physical or virtual presence in Kathmandu and other parts of Nepal. Despite such uneven relationship (in terms of media presence) India still thinks commercially run Nepali radios are threat to its security. What can you do to those who see things through distorted looking glass of their own paranoia?

[Indian] Govt to counter Nepali, Pak TV & radio

By Nandini R Iyer

New Delhi: The government will shortly set up FM radio services at the India-Nepal border in Bihar to counter the popularity Nepali channels enjoy in the region.

This comes soon after it moved to buttress the strength of Indian radio and television signals along the India-Pakistan border in Jammu and Kashmir.

The government last week cleared a proposal to set up FM radio relay centres in Bihar’s border districts of Bettiah, Motihari and Madhubani.

Nepali FM radio is very popular in the villages of these districts. “People are not able to tune in to Indian radio stations, but they are able to connect to Nepalese radio stations easily,” explained an official.

Security agencies have twice warned the government that Nepali FM stations could be misused by Maoists — or even Pak militants — for anti-India propaganda.

The information and broadcasting ministry recently approved expenditure of R100 crore to strengthen Indian transmission signals at the J&K border. “We need to be sure our signals are strong enough, and that they are stronger than anything beamed from the other side,” said a ministry official.

Apart from improving transmission and transformer capacity at the border, the ministry has also asked Doordarshan and AIR officials to plan and mount programmes on a regular basis to counter any foreign misinformation campaign, a senior intelligence official said.

By creating quality institutions like the SAU and reviving old ones like Nalanda (below) India is trying to establish itself as regional hub of excellence.

By Dinesh Wagle
Wagle Street Journal

All the chaos surrounding sloppy preparations for the Commonwealth Games to be held in New Delhi in October may give an impression that India has a long way to go to become a global power. One may cite the overflowing Yamuna running into residential areas of Delhi as a proof that India is still an improvised third-world country that has million of hungry stomachs to feed. True. But make no mistake. India is not watching this all quietly with its hands folded. There are so many progressive activities happening in India today that it is sometime difficult to keep track of all of them. Highways are being expanded all over the country, for example, and competition among foreign companies to open shops in India has only intensified. Take, for example, the two incidents on Thursday which offer an insight into India’s preparations to become an advanced nation with global influence.

Nalanda University India. Ruins

The Indian parliament passed a bill that authorises the government to revive an ancient university in Nalanda, Bihar. Nalanda University will be an Indian answer to Oxfords and Cambridges of the West, said parliamentarians across the political spectrum before ditching their ideological differences to vote unanimously for the bill. Lawmakers were full of praise for the Indian heritage that once produced universities like Nalanda, Vikramsila and Pushpagiri centuries ago that, as centers of excellence, attracted students from foreign countries.

On the same day, in a quiet corner of the mammoth campus of Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, the South Asian University began its first ever academic session without much fanfare.

In Nalanda and the SAU one could see an India of future: a country that rises to the leadership role while closely working in cooperation with nations of its immediate and extended neighborhood. The SAU, in fact, is a joint effort of the eight South Asian nations that are also the members of the SAARC with India at its helm. Nalanda, on the other hand, is a joint effort of India and the South East Asian countries, with the former as the host and initiator.

Kathmandu Post 29.08.10

Though the SAU in appearance is a SAARC effort, it would be untruthful to say that all eight countries are equally involved in it. It is the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who actually floated the idea of such an international institution of higher learning in 2005 SAARC summit. In the past five years since introducing the idea of the SAU, India has successfully brought together all SAARC nations on board to make the idea a reality. Apart from constructing a campus in 100 acre land in South Delhi for the SAU on its own, India will contribute more money than any other SAARC nation for the operation of the university. The university can also be considered a litmus test for India’s leadership capability in the region. If the university fails to become what India wants it to be (a world class institution) its neighbours will no doubt question its capacity to lead the region. The SAU should not be another JNU which by the way is a great institution on its own right. But it’s still an Indian institution. Students coming to the SAU from outside India expect it to be truly an international institution, reflecting the true essence of South Asia, not just another version of JNU.

SAARC has been heavily criticised for its ineffectiveness since its inception. It has largely become a forum to assemble annually to deliver empty talks, promises and photo opportunities for the leaders of the region. People of the SAARC region haven’t got any real fruits from this forum. Some commentators have said that the SAU could very well be the ‘first real fruit’ of SAARC. We know that success of everything related to SAARC depends on India’s attitude and cooperation towards it. Because of its geographic and economic size Indian apathy means the failure of everything. But in the case of the SAU, India is the most enthusiastic party. Take for example an incident a few months ago when representatives of SAARC nations met to finalise the payment for the faculties of the SAU. “While India was keen on ‘world class’ salaries in order to attract the best of faculty—including those of South Asian origin currently teaching at Ivy League universities—the Maldives was the only country to back New Delhi on this,” the Indian Express reported in April.

“Sources present at the meeting said Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Pakistan were the most vociferous in their opposition, arguing that they weren’t opposed to the high salaries but it had to be kept in mind that pay in the US and UK was linked to the high cost of living there.” With the running costs to be borne by all countries brought down from US $102 million to US $64 million, faculty salaries may be cut by up to one-third, the Express wrote.

I believe other SAARC countries should let India take a lead on this: it’s always good if it spends money for the betterment of the region. A world-class university is certainly a step towards that.

But it seems same tepidness will not be shown by India’s South East Asian partners while constructing Nalanda university. During his visit to India a few weeks ago Singaporean foreign minister promised US $40 million for the library alone. The total cost of the university is estimated to be more than US $1 billion. While the SAU will mainly want to enroll south Asian students (up to 10 percent seats are allotted for non-SAARC students) Nalanda is expected to invite students from a much wider region.

By creating these quality institutions India is trying to establish itself as regional hub of excellence. Such efforts will increase its soft power at the world stage. By bringing in students from other nations and providing them knowledge on its land India will definitely be sending a message of different kind to the world. Certainly a good preparation to become a global power, I would say.

This article first appeared in yesterday’s Kathmandu Post