ROLE OF MEDIA IN PAKISTAN-INDIA PEACE PROCESS: 2000...

ROLE OF MEDIA IN PAKISTAN-INDIA

PEACE PROCESS: 2000-2010

PH.D THESIS

Submitted by

Muhammad Sajjad (Sajjad Malik)

Reg. No. NDU-PCS/PhD/S-11/012

Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Department of Peace and Conflict Studies

This Dissertation is submitted to National Defence University, Islamabad in partial

fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Peace and Conflict Studies

Faculty of Contemporary Studies

National Defence University

Islamabad

2015

http://www.ndu.edu.pk/

i

SUPERVISOR’S DECLARATION

This is to certify that Ph.D. dissertation submitted by Muhammad Sajjad titled “Role of

Media in Pakistan-India Peace Process: 2000-2010” is supervised by me, and is

submitted to meet the requirements of Ph.D. degree.

Date: ____________ Dr. Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Supervisor

ii

STUDENT’S DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the thesis submitted by me titled “Role of Media in Pakistan-India

Peace Process: 2000-2010” is based on my own research work and has not been

submitted to any another institution for any other degree.

Date: __________________ Muhammad Sajjad

Ph.D Scholar

iii

ABSTRACT

The relations between Pakistan and India have been mostly hostile since independence in

1947. The animosity is reflected in policy statements of officials which appear in the

national media of the two countries. Theoretically, media can affect foreign policy

through its agenda setting, agenda reflecting and agenda building policies. In case of

Pakistan and India, the role of media has been less debated and this study makes an

endeavor to fill this research gap. The dissertation investigates the role of media during

2000-2010 by evaluating media coverage in both countries around five major events,

including Agra Summit, Indian Parliament Attack, Military Standoff of 2002, Composite

Dialogue and Mumbai Attacks. A methodology based on content analysis and elite

interviews has been used for the study. The results show that media through partisan

coverage of relations of Pakistan and India creates hurdles in the way of peace. The

survey of contents of selected media of both states depicts that over 62 per cent news

stories project the negative side of the ties. Also, most of the materials published or aired

come through official sources, which indicate that the narrative of Pak-India political and

strategic ties is controlled by the state authorities. Same results have been observed

during interviews of experts which reinforce the fact that negativity about each other runs

deep. News coverage spurred by the state officials also raises serious questions about the

neutrality of media on both sides. The key conclusion is that media in Pakistan and India

instead of playing a role of an independent watchdog follows the official narrative of

relations, which is mostly jingoistic and anti-peace. It has been termed in the study as the

“official truth” which is so dominant that occasional saner voices in media, highlighting

the importance of peaceful relations, fail to register any meaningful impact.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am using this opportunity to express gratitude for everyone who directly or indirectly

helped to complete the research. I am grateful to journalists M. Ziauddin, Rahimullah

Yusufzai, Javed Siddiq, Karan Thapar, Suhasini Haidar and Syed Shujaat Bukhari for

their interviews, and Rezaul Laskar and Snehesh Alex Philip, PTI Correspondents , for

help to arrange some of the interviews. I also thank Nasir Zaidi at the Institute of

Regional Studies for help to get clippings of old Indian newspapers. I thank PID to let me

use the resource center, which is a unique place to find old newspapers. I owe special

thanks to the staff at the NDU library, the PCS department and the Dean’s office for

support. I also thank all teachers who helped reach at this point.

I express warm thanks to researcher Abdul Rauf Iqbal, editors Imran Naeem Ahmad and

Usman Naeem, and English language expert Irfan Afzal for reading relevant parts of the

study and helping to improve the final draft.

I am hugely indebted to my supervisor Dr. Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema. He is a wonderful

person and it was pleasure to work under his supervision. The research could not have

been completed without his guidance.

I owe special thanks to my family, especially my wife, for total support to let me

concentrate on this research.

Sajjad

v

DEDICATION

Dedicated to my family and all others who cared for me in life.

vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AFP: Agence France-Presse

AJK: Azad Jammu and Kashmir

AP: Associated Press

APHC: All Parties Hurriyat Conference

APP: Associated Press of Pakistan

ARD: Alliance of Restoration of Democracy

AS: Anonymous Source

ATM: Automatic Teller Machine

BBC: British Broadcasting Corporation

BJP: Bhartiya Janta Party

BSF: Border Security Force

CBMs: Confidence Building Measures

CCS: Cabinet Committee on Security

CENTCOM: Central Command

CIA: Central Intelligence Agency

CICA: Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia

CNN: Cable News Network

CNN-IBN: Cable News Network- Indian Broadcasting Network

CPC: Countries of Particular Concern

CPI (M): Communist Party of India (Marxist)

CSIS: Centre for Strategic and International Studies

CSM: Christian Science Monitor

DC: Deccan Herald

DGMO: Director General Military Operations

DPA: Deutsche Presse-Agentur

DT: Daily Times

EN: Extremely Negative

EP: Extremely Positive

ESUP: English Speaking Union of Pakistan

EU: European Union

FATA: Federally Administered Tribal Areas

FO: Foreign Office

FOB: Forward Operating Basis

FM: Foreign Minister

FP: Frontier Post

FS: Foreign Secretary

GHQ: General Headquarters

HRW: Human Rights Watch

HT: Hindustan Times

vii

IAEA: International Atomic Energy Agency

IAF: Indian Air Force

IANS: Indo-Asian News Service

IB: International Border

ICSSR: Indian Council of Social Sciences Research

IHK: Indian Held Kashmir

IM: Indian Mujahideen

INDO: India

IPA: Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan

IPI: Iran-Pakistan-India

ISI: Inter-Services Intelligence

ISPR: Inter Services Public Relations

ISSRA: Institute for Strategic Studies, Research and Analysis

ITV: Infotainment Television

JBC: Joint Business Council

JCSC: Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee

JeM: Jaish-e-Muhammad

JIBs: Journalist Information Bureaux

JKLF: Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front

JKNF: Jammu and Kashmir National Front

JUI-F: Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam Fazl

Let: Lashkar-e-Taiba

LoC: Line of Control

Lt. Gen.: Lieutenant General

Maj. Gen.: Major General

MEA: Ministry of External Affairs

MFN: Most-Favoured Nation

MMA: Mutahida Majlis-e-Aml

MQM: Muttahida Qaumi Movement

MS: Mixed Source

NATO: North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NCCI: National Council of Churches in India

NDA: National Democratic Alliance

NDA: National Democratic Alliance

NDTV: New Delhi Television

NDU: National Defence University

NNI: Network-to-Network Interface

NSC: National Security Council

OIC: Organization of the Islamic Conference

OS: Official Source

viii

OUP: Oxford University Press

PAF: Pakistan Air Force

PAK: Pakistan

PIPFPD: Pakistan-India People's Forum for Peace and Democracy

PoK: Pakistan-occupied Kashmir

POTO: Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance

POW: Prisoners of War

PPC: Pakistan Peace Coalition

PPI: Press Pakistan International

PPP: Pakistan People’s Party

PTI: Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf

PTI: Press Trust of India

RAW: Research and Analysis Wing

RFE: Radio Free Europe

RSS: Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh

SAARC: South Asian Association of Regional Countries

SAFMA: South Asia Free Media Association

SAFTA: South Asia Free Trade Agreement

SDI: Strategic Defence Initiative

SEATO: South-East Asian Treaty Organization

SN: Slightly Negative

SP: Slightly Positive

SRC: Sindh Regimental Centre

TIE: The Indian Express

TN: The Nation

TNN: Times News Network

TOI: Times of India

TT: The Telegraph

ULFA: United Liberation Front of Assam

UNSC: United Nations Security Council

USCIRF: United States Commission on International Religious Freedom

USSR: Union of Soviet Socialist Republic

VHP: Vishwa Hindu Parishad

VOA: Voice of America

WWW: World Wide Web

ix

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

DEDICATION v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi

LIST OF TABLES xiii

LIST OF FIGURES xxi

INTRODUCTION 1

1: Theoretical Framework 20

1.1- Media Evolution 20

1.2- Characteristics of Modern Media 23

1.3- Media and Agenda 29

1.4- Media and Foreign Policy 32

1.5- Theoretical Framework for Research 38

2: Pakistan-India Relations: An Appraisal 41

2.1- From Independence to Dismemberment: 1947-1971 42

2.2- From Simla to Kargil: 1972-1999 45

2.3- Post-Kargil Decade: 2000-2010 50

2.4- Overview of Peace Efforts 50

2.5- Agra Summit: July 15-16, 2001 52

2.6- Attack on Indian Parliament: December 13, 2001 54

2.7- Military Standoff: 2002 55

2.8- Composite Dialogue: 2004-2008 58

2.9- Mumbai Terror Attack: November 26, 2008 60

3- Pakistan Media: An Evaluation 62

x

3.1- Print Media and Agra Summit 63

3.1.1- Dawn 63

3.1.2- The Nation 80

3.2- Electronic Media and Agra Summit 97

3.3- Print Media and Parliament Attack 101

3.3.1- Dawn 101

3.3.2- The News 107

3.4- Electronic Media and Parliament Attack 114

3.5- Print Media and Military Standoff 116

3.5.1- Dawn 117

3.5.2- The Frontier Post 132

3.5.3- Daily Times 138

3.6- Electronic Media and Military Standoff 145

3.7- Print Media and Composite Dialogue 147

3.7.1- Dawn 147

3.7.2- The Nation 161

3.7.3- The Frontier Post 166

3.7.4- Daily Times 169

3.8- Electronic Media and Composite Dialogue 171

3.9- Print Media and Mumbai Attack 172

3.9.1- Dawn 172

3.9.2- The News 181

3.10- Electronic Media and Mumbai Attack 192

4- Indian Media: An Assessment 194

4.1- Print Media and Agra Summit 195

xi

4.1.1- The Hindu 195

4.1.2- Hindustan Times 216

4.2- Electronic Media and Agra Summit 228

4.3- Print Media and Parliament Attack 232


4.3.2- The Times of India 241

4.4- Electronic Media and Parliament Attack 254

4.5- Print Media and Military Standoff 256


4.5.2- The Tribune 267

4.6- Electronic Media and Military Standoff 281

4.7- Print Media and Composite Dialogue 283


4.7.2- The Indian Express 292

4.7.3- The Telegraph 296

4.7.4- Deccan Herald 299

4.8- Electronic Media and Composite Dialogue 302

4.9- Print Media and Mumbai Attack 304


4.9.2- The Times of India 313

4.10- Electronic Media and Mumbai Attack 326

5: Analysis and Findings 329

5.1- Analysis 329

5.1.1- The Agra Summit 329

5.1.2- Parliament Attack 336

xii

5.1.3- Military Standoff 342

5.1.4- Composite Dialogue 347

5.1.5- Mumbai Attack 353

5.1.6- Comparison of Pak-Indian Media 359

5.2- Findings 363

5.2.1- Media as Stakeholder 363

5.2.2- Horizontal Outreach 365

5.2.3- Media and Agenda 365

5.2.4- Dependency Syndrome 366

5.2.5- Highlighting Conflict 368

5.2.6- Impact on Peace Process 368

5.2.7- Jingoistic Overtone 370

5.2.8- Media of ‘Official Truth’ 371

CONCLUSION 373

BIBLIOGRAPHY 379

APPENDICES 390

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

No Title Page

3.1 Coverage in Pakistani Newspapers 62

3.2 Dawn Coverage on July 8 63











3.13 Dawn Coverage on July19 77




3.17 The Nation Coverage on July 8 80















3.32 Dawn Coverage on December 6 101






xiv







3.44 The News Coverage on December 7 107












3.56 Dawn Coverage on January 1 117





3.61 Dawn Coverage on June 1 125





3.66 Dawn Coverage on October 1 129





3.71 The Frontier Post Coverage on January 1 132





3.76 Daily Times Coverage on June 1 138


xv




3.81 Daily Times Coverage on October 1 143








3.89 Dawn Coverage on April 15 153










3.99 The Nation Coverage on January 3 161





3.104 The Frontier Post Coverage on April 15 166





3.109 Daily Times Coverage on July 9 169




3.113 Dawn Coverage on November 19 172





xvi









3.126 The News Coverage on November 19 181













4.1 Coverage in India Newspapers 194

4.2 The Hindu Coverage on July 8 195















4.17 The Hindustan Times Coverage on July 8 216

4.18 The Hindustan Times Coverage on July 10 217

4.19 Hindustan Times Coverage on July 11 218

xvii












4.31 The Hindu Coverage on December 8 232












4.43 The Times of India Coverage on December 6 241















4.58 The Hindu Coverage on January 1 256


xviii




4.63 The Hindu Coverage on June 1 261





4.68 The Hindu Coverage on October 1 265




4.72 The Tribune Coverage on January 1 267





4.77 The Tribune Coverage on June 1 275





4.82 The Tribune Coverage on October 1 279








4.90 The Hindu Coverage on April 15 286







4.97 The Indian Express Coverage on January 3 292



xix



4.102 The Telegraph Coverage on April 15 296





4.107 Deccan Herald Coverage on July 10 300




4.111 The Hindu Coverage on November 19 304













4.124 The Times of India Coverage on November 19 313















5.1 Dawn Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit 329

xx

5.2 The Nation Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit 331

5.3 The Hindu Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit 332

5.4 Hindustan Times Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit 333

5.5 Total Coverage of Agra Summit 334

5.6 Dawn Coverage (Dec. 6-20, 2001) of Parliament Attack 336

5.7 The News Coverage (Dec. 6-20, 2001) of Parliament Attack 337

5.8 The Hindu Coverage (Dec. 6-20, 2001) of Parliament Attack 338

5.9 The Times of India Coverage (Dec. 6-20, 2001) of Parliament Attack 339

5.10 Total Coverage of Parliament Attack 340

5.11 Dawn Coverage (Jan. 1-5, June 1-5, Oct, 1-5, 2002) of Military Standoff 342

5.12 The Frontier Post and Daily Times Coverage of Military Standoff 343

513 The Hindu Coverage (Jan. 1-5, June 1-5, Oct, 1-5, 2002) of Standoff 344

514 The Tribune Coverage (Jan. 1-5, June 1-5, Oct, 1-5, 2002) of Standoff 345

5.15 Total Coverage of Military Standoff 346

5.16 Dawn Coverage of Composite Dialogue 348

5.17 The Nation, FP and DT Coverage of Composite Dialogue 349

5.18 The Hindu Coverage of Composite Dialogue 349

5.19 The Indian Express,e Telegraph, Deccan Herald on Composite Dialogue 350

5.20 Total Coverage of Composite Dialogue 351

5.21 Dawn Coverage (Nov 19-Dec 3, 2008) of Mumbai Attack 353

5.22 The News Coverage (Nov 19-Dec 3, 2008) of Mumbai Attack 354

5.23 The Hindu Coverage (Nov 19-Dec 3, 2008) of Mumbai Attack 355

5.24 The Times of India Coverage (Nov 19-Dec 3, 2008) of Mumbai Attack 356

5.25 Total Coverage of Mumbai Attack 356

5.26 Total Coverage in Pakistan Newspapers 360

5.27 Total Coverage in Indian Newspapers 361

5.28 Total Coverage by Pak-India Newspapers 363

xxi

LIST OF CHARTS/FIGURES

No Title Page

5.1 Pakistan Media Coverage of Five Events 359

5.2 Indian Media Coverage of Five Events 361

5.3 Coverage in Pak-India Media 364

5.4 Origin of News Stories 365

5.5 Percentage of Byline 366

5.6 Sourcing of News Stories 367

5.7 Ratio of Peace, Conflict and Neutral Stories 368

5.8 Negative-Positive Impact of Media on Relations 369

1

INTRODUCTION

Relations between Pakistan and India have been marred by suspicions and violence since

independence in 1947. Efforts made for peace, like launching of the composite dialogue

in 2004, failed due to various reasons. As Jasjit Singh says, “If there is one single factor

that appears to have remained consistently prominent in the Indo-Pak relations over the

years, it has been mutual mistrust and the politics that have supported it.”1

The animosity about each other runs deep and is reflected in official statements appearing

in the media, which is considered as a stakeholder in the efforts for peace or war.

Resultantly, media in both countries have become intrusive and partisan, and its coverage

of relations is often dictated by nationalism than factual reporting.

Theoretically, modern media plays role of both highlighting the government policies and

reflecting public opinions about the policies. For example, the American media put

pressure on the Bush administration to take action against Saddam Hussein for having

weapons of mass destruction. Due to the ruthless coverage of pro-attack policy of the

government, “almost three quarters of the US public supported the invasion of Iraq.”2

Several years earlier, media coverage of the Vietnam War had put pressure on the

government to withdraw the American soldiers.

But in case of Pakistan and India, media houses and journalists often tend to operate on

nationalistic lines and even the ordinary diplomatic interactions and sports events are

portrayed as matters of national honour. It seems that media in the two countries have not

been affected by the events at the turn of the 20th century, when old rivalries gave way to

the new alignments. Contrarily, media in both states have failed to see the bilateral

relations free from the influence of traditional foreign policy constraints. Hence, every

slight deviation from the decades-old official path is pitched by media as sell-out of the

national prestige and surrender of interests, which brings pressure on the officials who in

return often harden their positions.

1 Jasjit Singh, “Politics of Mistrust and Confidence Building”, in India and Pakistan: Crisis relationship,

ed. Jasjit Singh (New Delhi: Lancer Publishing Pvt. Ltd, 1990), 100. 2 Tobby Miller, “US Journalism: Servant of the Nation, Scourge of the Truth”, in Conflict, Terrorism and

The Media in Asia, ed. Benjamin Cole (London: Routledge, 2006), 5.

2

In this premise, this study investigates the relation of Pakistan and India through the

coverage of media during 2000 to 2010.

This period is interesting for several reasons. It follows the Kargil War of 1999, which

brought the two nuclear-armed countries at the brink of a nuclear conflagration. Also,

comprehensive peace efforts were made through the Agra Summit and the Composite

Dialogue during this era. Additionally, some of the worst moments in the bilateral

relations, like the military standoff of 2002 and the Mumbai attack fall in this period.

Problem Statement

The relationship between different countries can be assessed through the media of

respective states. Media is important and through its coverage can portray a particular

relationship as “good” or “bad” and thus, it reinforces the public opinion about a country.

The role of media in determining the relationship between Pakistan and India is a case in

hand. Since the relationship between the two states has remained critical throughout their

history, therefore media reporting and projection of the bilateral relationship is part of an

interesting discourse. In this connection, there is a need to evaluate the role of media i.e.

whether it is working for peace or increasing conflicts between the two countries.

Objectives

The study looks into the media coverage around some of the important events from 2000

to 2010. It traces whether and how media in both countries factors in the bilateral efforts

to resolve issues and make progress to improve relations. Apropos, the main objective is

to investigate whether the coverage of relations in the mainstream media of the two states

had been positive or negative for the peace efforts in the selected period. For this

objective, the study evaluates the coverage of print and electronic media of Pakistan and

India. It also looks at the issues of dateline and byline, respectively dealing with the

origin of the stories and their contributors. The research questions identified in this regard

are as under:

1- What is the role of media in determining Pak-India relationship?

2- What is the source of news stories?

3

3- How the issue of dateline has been treated?

4- How the issue of byline has been treated?

Hypothesis

Pakistan-India media through partisan and jingoistic coverage of relations creates

hurdles for peace between the two countries than facilitating peace process.

Literature Review

Press is considered as the fourth estate due to its significance in the politics and policies.

One of the key influences of media has been in the realm of foreign policy. Such role

becomes more pronounced if a country was trying to resolve important issues with

another country. The efforts of Pakistan and India to sort out outstanding issues are

relevant to quote as an example, as their domestic media often swayed the sentiments

along the nationalistic lines. A number of books written on the topic have taken into stock

the relations between Pakistan and India and their efforts to create peace. Some writers

have also highlighted the role of media but there is lack of in-depth analysis of media and

its impact on relationship. The literature review helps to understand it.

“Negotiating in the Public Eye” by Marc Genest has traced the impact of media on the

intermediate range nuclear force negotiations between the US and former USSR from

1981 to 1987 when both sides signed agreements to resolve the matter. The book has

good theoretical background and empirical data to show how media viewed the talks and

their results. It also gives three theories: agenda-setting, agenda-reflecting and agenda-

building. The writer says that all three can be traced in the media coverage of

international relations. “The relationship between reporting, government policymakers,

and public response is by no means a fixed quantity. The issue involved, how it is

presented, and official reaction all contribute to both the relationship and the eventual

outcome.”3

Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman in “The Press Effect” capture the overall

effect of media on various contours of political life. “Journalists help mold public

3 Marc A Genest, Negotiating in the Public Eye, (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 162.

4

understanding and opinion by deciding what is important and what may be ignored, what

is subject to debate and what is beyond question, and what is true and false,” wrote the

authors.4 They show the patriotic aspect of media.

“The Political Impact of Mass Media” by Colin Seymour-Ure is about the inter-

relationship between society and all forms of communication media. It is divided in two

parts: first dealing with general political communication and effects of mass media, while

the second part deals with case studies to highlight the effects of media. “Communication

is necessary social activity. Without communication there can be no society- only a

collection of individuals,” the writer asserts.5 “Since communication is so pervasive we

should expect communication media to be a major determinant of the nature of the social

system; and since politics is a form of social activity we can expect the same to be true

for the political system.”6

“The Media of Conflict” edited by Tim Allen and Jean Seaton shows the role of media in

ethnic conflicts. It is quite diverse and 14 different essays by different writers give a

detailed view of press coverage of different nine case studies of conflicts including the

Gulf War of 1990/91 and ethnic war in Uganda, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Liberia, Rwanda

and Ethiopia. Talking about the role of media, the editors said that media plays a complex

part in the conduct of new emergencies. “But the media also act as agents of war and the

press and the broadcasting increasingly have become the institutions that accord wars

legitimacy, and judge their outcome.”7

Media’s role in conflict oscillates in various directions, depending on the level of

coercion, personal association of media professionals and broader policy of media

outlets. L Brent Bozel III in “Weapons of Mass Distortion” has accused the American

mainstream media of “liberal bias” and espousing the cause of liberal politics at the cost

of impartiality during Bill Clinton’s Monika Lewinsky scandal and 2000 presidential

elections. “Media caused Florida imbroglio,” he has charged, referring to close contest in

4 Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman, “Introduction,” in The Press Effect, (New York: OUP, 2003),

xiii. 5 Colin Semour-Ure, The Political Impact of Mass Media, (London: Constable & Co Ltd, 1974), 15. 6 Semour-Ure, Political Impact, 16. 7 Tim Allen and Jean Seaton, The Media of Conflict, (London: Zed Books, 1999), 44.

5

Florida between George Bush and Al Gore.8 Sometimes media actually attempts to

dictate the national agenda to influence the course of events rather than simply report on

what happens, he further says. The book shows the importance of agenda-setting media.

Pakistan-India conflict can also be understood in the context of “Political Contest Model”

expounded by Gadi Wolfsfeld in his book titled “Media and Political Conflict”, which

presents a theoretical framework about the use of media by the adversaries to win public

support. The thrust of the model is that the best way to understand the role of media in

politics is to view the competition over the news media as part of a larger and more

significant contest among the political antagonists for political control.9

Eric Louw in “The Media & Political Conflict” has given a detailed analysis of media-

ized and Pr-ized warfare and political process. It is helpful in framing the general

discourse about the role of media but obviously the specific Pakistan-India related details

are missing. He says the media is a mirror but “the mainstream model of liberal

journalism does acknowledge that an accurate portrayal of ‘reality’ is not always

achieved.” He clearly shows that media is managed to deliver required images. But he

also explains the CNN-effect thesis due to its role in the gulf war of 1990 that foreign

relations in the modern times are largely shaped by media.10

Philip M Taylor in “Global Communications, International Affairs and Media since

1945” says that modern media constitutes the fourth level of interaction between the

states, in addition to traditional diplomatic, political and military interactions. “That is

what may be termed as the psychological and informational dimension, which involves

the gathering and communication of information, idea, perceptions and messages,” he

says.11The writer highlights various aspects of mass media influences and helps to build

the general framework of the study. Though, it lacks the Indo-Pak context which the

researcher has focused.

8 L. Brent Bozell III, Weapons of Mass Distortion, (New York: Three Rivers Press, 2005), 186. 9 Gadi Wolfsfeld, Media and Political Conflict, (Cambridge: University Press, 1997), 3. 10 Eric Louw, The Media & Political Process, 2nd ed. (London: Sage, 2010), 4. 11 Louw, Media and Process, 180.

6

As far as the peace efforts between Pakistan and India are concerned, a number of experts

have written about it.

In “Pakistan-India Peace Process: The way Forward” co-edited by Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema,

Rashid Khan and Khalid Hussain, the authors have taken into stock the peace efforts by

Pakistan and India. It brings forth the developments between the two countries since the

launch of composite dialogue but the book is silent about the role of media.

“The Role of Mediation in Resolving India-Pakistan Conflict: Parameters and

Possibilities” by Amit Dholakia highlights the phenomenon of third party role and its

effect on India-Pakistan conflict. Major General (Retired) Mahmud Ali Durrani in his

“India and Pakistan: The Cost of Conflict and Benefits of Peace” has talked about the

cost of the conflict. He has also mentioned the importance of Track II diplomacy in

easing tension between India and Pakistan.

Zulfiqar Khan’s “India-Pakistan Nuclear Rivalry: Perceptions, Misperceptions and

Mutual Deterrence” says that Pakistan and India should emphasize on Track II diplomacy

to increase exchanges but it failed to count the substantial contribution of the unofficial

efforts. Manjrika Sewak in “Multi-track Diplomacy between India and Pakistan: A

Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Security” has said that the conflict between India

and Pakistan can be transformed only if the peace process is multi-layered, multi-

disciplinary and include diverse actors.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema and Imtiaz H. Bokhari in “Conflict Resolution and Regional

Cooperation in South Asia” said that the Track II diplomacy in South Asia had been

important to improve the strained relation between Pakistan and India. “The Arab-Israeli

Peace Process: Lessons for India and Pakistan” by Moonis Ahmer has traced the negative

attitude of the elites of India and Pakistan who, he said, have consistently impeded

conflict management, through Track II diplomacy of building trust and goodwill.

P. R. Chari, Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema and Stephen Cohen who jointly authorized

“Perception, Politics and Security in South Asia” have said that some people advocate

that private, high-level unofficial Track II diplomacy could be helpful in building

physical links between the territories that now comprise India and Pakistan. These three

7

authors in another book titled “Four Crises and a Peace Process: American Engagement

in South Asia” highlight the media coverage of Siachen issue, Brasstack crisis, Kargil

conflict and the military buildup in 2002. The book is helpful but obviously it does not

cover the entire period proposed in this study.

In “India and Pakistan” edited by Jasgit Singh, various aspects of relations with Pakistan

have been highlighted through Indian perspective but none of the articles is about media

and its impact on the relations. Similarly, in “Armed Conflict in South Asia” edited by D.

Suba Chandra and P. R. Chari, there are good articles on Pakistan and problems in South

Asian countries but none about press and related issues.

Pakistan’s former ambassador Shahid Amin’s book titled “Pakistan’s Foreign Policy: A

Reappraisal” is instructive in foreign policy matters and relations with India but it is more

of official narrative and silent about the role of media in relations.

A number of research article have also been written on India and Pakistan relations.

Some of them also touched upon the role of media. Nasim Zehra in an article titled as

Role of Media in Conflict Resolution, which appeared in a book called “Conflict

Resolution and Regional Cooperation” says that power of media became evident soon

after the independence when media in “both countries played an important role in

enhancing tension.” It forced their prime minister to sign a joint communiqué on Sep 20,

1947, which pointed out that “certain newspapers were giving publicity to completely

false reports and writing editorial matters of highly inflammatory nature, likely to lead to

a deterioration of the existing situation.”12 Her article is informative but by no means

exhaustive on the issue of role of media in the Indo-Pak peace process.

Muhammad Akram in his research article titled as Role of Media in Resumption of Peace

Talks between Pakistan and India has tried to show the role of media but failed to

highlight the broader impact of press on bilateral relations. The paper published by

ISSRA of NDU (ISSRA Paper 2010) rather talks about the side issues instead of the real

matter. Ershad Mehmud in Pak-India Peace Process: An Appraisal, appearing in Policy

12 Nasim Zehra, “Role of Media in Conflict Resolution”, in Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema and Imtiaz H Bokhari

ed., Conflict Resolution and Regional Cooperation in South Asia, (IPRI Islamabad: Asia Printers, 2004),

167.

8

Perspective of July 1997 says that peace process is slow but it can be considered a good

omen as it is going on steadily. The study, however, does not highlight the role of media

in the peace process.13

Piers Robinson in his article titled “The CNN Effect: Can the New Media drive Foreign

Policy,” published in Review of International Studies talks about the impact of media and

foreign policy with special reference to America broadcaster the CNN.14 David Altheide

investigates the impact of television on social policy making in his article “The Impact of

Television News Formats on Social Policy", in Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic

Media.15 Stuart N. Soroka investigates the role media in building public opinion and then

its impact on foreign policy.16

David Weaver in an article titles “Thoughts on Agenda Setting, Framing, and Priming,"

published in Journal of Communication researched the role of media on agenda setting

and framing which means that media usually picks and chooses its contents with

implications on other aspects of political life.17

Shanto Iyengar documents three types of media effects that operated on public opinion

during the Persian Gulf crisis and war. “In conclusion, it is suggested that these effects, in

combination with the nature of the media's information sources, were conducive to

legitimizing the administration's perspective on the crisis.”18 Robert Entman in "Framing

bias: Media in the Distribution of Power," published by Journal of communication says

that media coverage has implications for political power and democracy.19

13 Ershad Mehmud, “Pak-India Peace Process: An Appraisal”, in Policy Perspective, July 2007, Vol. 4, No

2. 14 Piers Robinson, “The CNN effect: Can the New Media Drive Foreign Policy?” in Review of

International Studies, 1999, Vol 25, No 2, 301-305. 15 David L. Altheide, "The Impact of Television News Formats on Social Policy", in Journal of

Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 1991, Vol 35, No 1, 3-6. 16 Stuart N. Soroka, "Media, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy," in The International Journal of

Press/Politics, 2003, Vol 8, No 1, 27-28. 17 David H. Weaver, "Thoughts on Agenda Setting, Framing, and Priming", Journal of Communication,

2004, Vol 57, No 1, 142–143. 18 Shanto Iyengar, "News Coverage of the Gulf Crisis and Public Opinion," in Communication Research,

1993, Vol 20, No 3, 365-370. 19 Robert M. Entman,"Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power," in Journal of communication,

2007, Vol 57, No 1, 163-165.

9

Stefaan Walgrave, Stuart Soroka, and Michiel Nuytemans in a joint article titled "The

Mass Media’s Political Agenda-Setting Power: A Longitudinal Analysis of Media,

Parliament, and Government in Belgium (1993 to 2000) explore the power of media to

influence political agenda in context of Belgium. They conclude that though Belgium

follows a closed political system but still media to some degree had an impact on its

parliament and government.20

Daniel C. Hallin in an article deals with the issue of the relation between media and

political authority through a critique of television coverage of Vietnam. He comes up

with the conclusion that critical news contents have increased since the Vietnam

conflict.21 Maxwell E. McCombs and Donald L. Shaw in their article titled “The Agenda-

Setting Function of Mass Media” argue that media plays a role in shaping a political

reality, and helps determine issues and sets agenda for a political campaign.22

The literature review shows that role of media has been one of the focus of attention all

over the world in the perspective of various issues and conflict, and related efforts to

resolve the outstanding problems. There is no dearth of philosophical and empirical

evidence to show that press is playing role in transforming the status of relations between

the adversaries at domestic, national and international levels.

The review also confirms that the researchers generally ignored the impact of media on

the relations between Pakistan and India since independence and particularly during

2000-2010. The lack of proper research into the topic of this study makes the proposed

undertaking more desirable and noteworthy.

20 Stefaan Walgrave, Stuart Soroka, and Michiel Nuytemans, "The Mass Media’s Political Agenda-Setting

Power: A Longitudinal Analysis of Media, Parliament, and Government in Belgium (1993 to 2000)," in

Comparative Political Studies, 2007, Vol 41, No 6, 814-815. 21 Daniel C. Hallin, "The Media, the War in Vietnam, and Political Support: A Critique of the Thesis of an

Oppositional Media," in The Journal of Politics, Cambridge University Press, 1984, Vol. 46, No. 1, 2-5.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130432. 22 Maxwell E. McCombs and Donald L. Shaw, “The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media,” in The

Public Opinion Quarterly, OUP: 1972, Vol. 36, No. 2, 176-180.

10

Scope and Limitations

The study covers the period from 2000 to 2010. It uses the technique of scanning the

period through important events. The following five events during this period are focus of

the coverage:

1. Agra Summit (July 2001)

2. Indian Parliament Attack (December 2001)

3. Military Standoff (January to October 2002)

4. Composite Dialogue (January 2004 to November 2008)

5. Mumbai Attacks (November 2008)

Two newspapers have been chosen from each country as the main anchors to see the

coverage pattern around the five events. They are Dawn from Pakistan and The Hindu

from India. A second newspaper has also been used, but it was changed for each event to

get a wider representative sample. From India the second newspapers include: Times of

India, Hindustan Times, The Tribune, The Indian Express, The Telegraph and Deccan

Herald. The second Pakistani papers are: The Nation, The News, Daily Times and The

Frontier Post.

The criteria used for the selection of the newspapers include mass circulation,

geographical location and popularity. Dawn, The Nation, The Hindu and Hindustan

Times have been used for the Agra summit; Dawn, The News, The Hindu and Times of

India for parliament attack; Dawn, The Frontier Post, Daily Times, The Hindu and The

Tribune for the military standoff; Dawn, The Nation, The Frontier Post, Daily Times, The

Hindu, The Indian Express, The Daily Telegraph and Deccan Herald for the composite

dialogue; and Dawn, The News, The Hindu and Times of India for the Mumbai attack.

The coverage period consists of 15-day for each events. In case of the first two and the

fifth events, seven days each before and after the event have been covered. The military

faceoff was almost ten-month long affair, so its coverage has been changed to five days

of different three months. Similarly, the composite dialogue was a continuous process, so

it has been divided into five days for three different years to make it more representative.

The following dates will help to understand the days of coverage period.

11

Pakistan Newspapers

1) July 9 to 23, 2001 (Agra Summit): Dawn and The Nation

2) December 6 to20, 2001 (Parliament Attack): Dawn and The News

3) January 1 to 5, 2002 (Escalation): Dawn and The News

4) June 1 to 5, 2002 (Escalation on Peak): Dawn and Daily Times

5) October 1 to 5, 2002 (De-escalation): Dawn and Daily Times

6) January 3 to 7, 2004 (Launch of Dialogue): Dawn and The Nation

7) April 15 to 19, 2005 (Mid-term Review around Musharraf’s Visit to India on April

17): Dawn and The Frontier Post

8) July 9 to 13, 2006 (Final Review around Mumbai Train Attacks on July 11): Dawn and

Daily Times

9) Nov 19 to Dec 3, 2008 (Mumbai Attack): Dawn and The News

Indian Newspapers

1) July 9 to 23, 2001 (Agra Summit): The Hindu and Hindustan Times

2) December 6 to 20, 2001 (Parliament Attack): The Hindu and The Times of India

3) January 1 to 5, 2002 (Escalation): The Hindu and The Tribune

4) June 1 to 5, 2002 (Escalation on Peak): The Hindu and The Tribune

5) October 1 to 5, 2002 (De-escalation): The Hindu and The Tribune

6) January 3 to 7, 2004 (Launch of Dialogue): The Hindu and The Indian Express

7) April 15 to 19, 2005 (Mid-term Review around Musharraf’s Visit to India on April

17): The Hindu and The Telegraph

12

8) July 9 to 13, 2006 (Final Review around Mumbai Train Attacks on July 11): The

Hindu and Deccan Herald

9) Nov 19 to Dec 3, 2008 (Mumbai Attack): The Hindu and The Times of India

The second component of coverage is the electronic media. The initial plan was to scan

the coverage of two Pakistani and two Indian television channels, including Geo and

ARY from Pakistan and Aaj Tak and NDTV from India. It was devised on the 15-day

coverage as above discussed for the print media, and the researcher had prepared a

methodology to analyze the prime time news bulletin and one talk show of the selected

channels during the 15 days around the above five events.

But the researcher faced several insurmountable hurdles to access the contents of the

private TV channels. It has been observed that unlike the newspapers, none of the

televisions maintained a proper archive. The efforts to directly get recorded material from

the channels failed. Similarly, efforts to get recorded material from the national

institutions like Radio Pakistan and PTV, research institutions, and even from the defence

institutions were not successful. Efforts to visit India were not materialized due to

different reasons.

Thus, in consultation with the supervisor, the technique for the study of electronic media

of the two countries was shifted from the content analysis to the elite interviews. It is

pertinent to say that interview is in no way a substitute of the content analysis but it was

used to get at least some glimpses of the coverage in the electronic media, and thus add

value to the research. At the end, the researcher got a fairly balanced report from the

interviews, which helped to formulate and strengthen the findings.

For this, three journalists each from Pakistan and India were interviewed with the help of

questionnaires. (The questionnaires are attached as annexure).

Those interviewed are: Muhammad Ziauddin, Rahimullah Yusufzai and Javed Siddiq

from Pakistan; and Karan Thapar, Suhasini Haidar and Syed Shujaat Bukhari from India.

The choice is not random but part of a plan. (Details in methodology below)

13

The social media is not part of scheme of the research as it is still in nascent stage and

quite disorganized.

Methodology

Two techniques dominate the study: Content analysis and interviews. The first has been

used for the print media and the second for the electronic media. The first helped to carry

out the quantitative analysis and the second facilitated to conduct the qualitative analysis.

The study also uses already published materials to understand the role of media in

Pakistan-India ties. For this purpose, various books, magazines, newspapers and the

online materials were scanned. The understanding gained through the review of literature

has been used for the deeper and detailed content analysis and interviews. It also helps to

formulate a theoretical framework.

As the entire period of 2000 to 2010 cannot be analyzed on day-to-day basis, a rational

choice was made to use the key events during the period. As mentioned above, five

events including the Agra summit, the parliament attack, the military standoff, the

composite dialogue and the Mumbai attack were chosen, and a plan devised to see the

media coverage around them.

After the selection of the key milestones, the next crucial question was selection of the

newspapers. As dozens of newspapers are published in both countries, it was natural that

the entire population could not be taken for the study. Hence a rational choice has been

made, and two newspapers each from Pakistan and India selected for the study. (The

details are already given above). The next stage was how many days of coverage would

be enough. In consultation with the supervisor, it was decided that15-day for each events

was enough. (The details are given above).

The coverage time has been carefully selected. The normal pattern shows that the

newspapers will be scanned on the day of an incident and seven days before and seven

days after the incident. It has been done to see if the pattern of coverage changed due to a

particular event. But for the composite dialogue and the military standoff, the coverage

has been split into three phases as mentioned above.

14

The front, back and national pages have been scanned. Only political, security and mutual

relation related stories have been picked for analysis. Each story has been analyzed

through the headline, lead and the body of the news item. The sources of the news,

dateline and byline have been considered. The sources have been divided into three

groups:

Official Sources (OS): It includes all official on the records sources like press briefings,

statements, etc.

Anonymous Sources (AS): It includes all un-named sources.

Mixed Sources (MS): They are combination of various news sources.

Each news story has been checked for the slant by categorizing it like this:

1- Peace (P)

2- Conflict (C)

3- Neutral (N)

All stories trying to break the existing tiers of ties and exploring new ground for peace

have been clubbed as peace stories. Those news items which contribute or reinforce the

existing biases have termed as conflict stories. And all those news which portray the true

picture of ties without taking sides have been called as neutral pieces.

For the sake of further analysis these news articles on mutual relations have been

categorized as positive or negative. The positive ones try to improve the ties and the

negative stories tend to damages the relationship. But since some stories have multiple

shades of meanings, the positive and negative have been further divided into three

categories each like this:

1- Extremely Positive (EP)

2- Positive (P)

3- Slightly Positive (SP)

4- Extremely Negative (EN)

5- Negative (N)

15

6- Slightly Negative (SN)

A clear benchmark was applied to brand a story as positive, negative etc. The often-used

code system was avoided due to variety of subject matter involved. The headline, the

byline, the lead paragraph and the next two paragraphs were carefully scanned. The

technique is based on these steps:

Step 1: The headline was seen for positive or negative formulation of relations. Apart

from the words like war, peace, anti, enmity etc., the overall meanings of a headline was

branded as positive or negative. The meanings were interpreted as negative if they

highlighted negativity of any aspect of bilateral relations. For example, “India terms

invitation to APHC an irritant”, headlined by Dawn on July 8, 2001was branded as

negative. But “Offer to reopen Rajasthan route”, by the same paper on July 10, 2001 was

termed as positive. Each headline was assigned 30 positive or negative points depending

on the branding.

Step 2: The name of a news-item writer was also examined. If it was bylined or proper

credit was given to the known news agencies, then it was allotted 10 positive points,

otherwise 10 negative points.

Step 3: The intro of a story was examined for three things: First, words like war, peace,

enmity, bashing, etc., second for the overall positive or negative meanings, and third for

its source. The story was accordingly branded positive or negative 30 points. Another 10

negative points were given if the source was official and the intro was negative, while 10

positive points awarded if it was positive regardless of the kind of source.

Step 4: The next two paragraphs were give 20 points each on the basis of carrying the

negative or positive meaning.

Step 5: All news stories awarded more than 80 points were extremely positive or

extremely negative, those with 50-79 points were positive or negative, and all below 50

were slightly positive or slightly negative.

The researcher candidly accepts that despite rule-based system, the marking was not

entirely free of subjectivity. Hence, margin of 2-5 percent of possible errors.

16

Also, it should be mentioned that all peace stories are regarded as positive and all conflict

stories are considered as negative. Whereas, most of the neutral stories have been treated

as slightly positive or positive but some of them have also been branded as negative.

While the technique of content analysis was used for the print media, a different method

of elite interview was employed for the electronic media. The questionnaires (attached at

the end) were carefully prepared in consultation with the supervisor. Three

journalists/media experts each from Pakistan and India were interviewed. The three

Pakistani journalists represent three oldest and respected media houses: The Jang group,

The Herald group and The Nawa-e-Waqt group.

Ziauddin is a Pakistan journalist who was associated with the leading Dawn newspaper

for several years. He retired in 2014 as Group Editor of The Express group of

publications. He was in India at the time of the Agra Summit and closely observed it. He

frequently writes about various issues between Pakistan and India. He was also

associated with South Asia Free Media Association (Safma), working for freedom of

expression and good ties among the media professionals in the South Asia.

Rahimullah Yusufzai is a veteran journalist who started his professional career in 1975.

He has been associated with the largest Jang/Geo media group. He is based in Peshawar

and is Resident Editor of The News International. He was also associated with the BBC

since 1985. He writes for several international news outlets and has been awarded two

civilian awards, Tamgha-e-Imtiaz and Sitara-e-Shujaat, by the government of Pakistan

for his services in the field of journalism. He is directly linked with Pakistan-India peace

overtures as member of Neemrana Track II peace process and Aman ki Asha peace

initiative, a joint peace effort by the News and The Times of India. He is the only

journalist who interviewed Osama bin Laden twice in May and December of 1998 and

interviewed Taliban leader Mullah Omar for eight times. He was the first to interview

Omar in 1995 and also the last to interview him in 2001.

Javed Siddiq is a senior journalist and Resident Editor of daily Urdu newspaper Nawa-e-

Waqt in Islamabad. The paper is part of Nawa-e-Waqt group which owns an English

17

language newspaper The Nation and a news channel called Waqt. The group is important

as being a well-known right-wing ideologue.

Coming to the Indian experts, Karan Thapar is a well-known Indian journalist who

worked for ten years in the electronic media outside India.23 He started journalism with

The Times in Lagos, Nigeria, where he worked till 1981 when he joined London

Weekend Television. He returned to India in 1991 and has worked with various leading

media outlets. He was associated with the CNN-IBN and hosted The Devil's Advocate

and The Last Word. He left the channel to join Headlines Today television in 2014,

where he hosted the show To the Point. He is famous for intrusive questioning and made

headlines for interviewing people like Narendra Modi, Manmohan Singh, General Pervez

Musharraf, Benazir Bhutto, former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the

Dalai Lama. Modi had left the interview in the middle because of the harsh questions

posed by Thapar. Thapar belongs to a military family and is the youngest child of former

Chief of the Army Staff General Pran Nath Thapar, who was army chief during the 1962

war with China, which India lost.

Suhasini Haidar is a well-known Indian journalist who worked for the CNN-IBN as

foreign affairs editor and also hosted a weekly international affairs show. She also

worked for CNN International as writer and producer. Haidar has been covering Pakistan

since 1996. She covered the elections in 1997, 2008 and in 2013. She is a frequent visitor

to Pakistan.

Syed Shujaat Bukhari is a journalist and writer based in Srinagar. He has been a journalist

for over 22 years. He started working as journalist from the Kashmir Times, a respected

regional newspaper. He had been associated with The Hindu for 15 years and also wrote

for The Frontline, a news magazine. Currently, he is the editor of Rising Kashmir, a

leading regional newspaper. His group also publishes one each Urdu and Kashmiri

newspapers.

23 “Karan Thapar”, http://itv.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1:karan-

thapar&catid=1:about-us&Itemid=10, accessed August 7, 2014, 4:15 pm.

http://itv.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1:karan-thapar&catid=1:about-us&Itemid=10


18

The exact geographical or opinionated categorization of Indian media is highly difficult.

The researcher tried to follow a different path by mixing, gender, religion, local and

foreign media experiences, print and electronic media shades, etc. for a broader experts’

opinion. Karan Thapar represents hard-core Indian opinion about Pakistan. Suhasini,

brought up as a Hindu and married to Muslim (she is daughter-in-law of former foreign

secretary Salman Haidar) is voice of liberal and secular India. Bukhari has an impeccable

record as an independent journalist but also represents the Muslims and minority opinion

in the Indian media. Being a Kashmiri, he helps to unveil the complexity of Indian media

vis-à-vis Pakistan with a different perspective.

Interviews of Suhasini Haidar and Syed Shujaat Bukhari and the three Pakistani

journalists were recorded, while interview of Karan Thapar was arranged through email.

(Record of all interviews is available with the researcher). They were asked open-ended

and close-ended questions about the role of media. Some questions were specifically built

around the five main events of the period under study, while others were about overall

performance of media within the context of bilateral relations and peace efforts.

The results drawn from the content analysis and interviews were analyzed. The data

gathered was used to juxtapose the reliance of media on the official sources and its

promotion of negativity through the coverage. The final observations are based on the

scientific analysis of available material. It not only confirms the hypothesis but also

offers new angles to the topic under study, which helps to understand the role of media in

the peace process between Pakistan and India.

Organization of Study

The thesis consists of an introduction, five chapters, a conclusion, bibliography and

appendices.

Chapter 1 discusses the theoretical framework on which the research is based. It

highlights various theories about the role of media in policy making and its impact on

relations with other nations. Marc Genest agenda model, Gadi Wolfsfeld’s political

contest model, Eric Louw’s discussion on media and foreign policy, and Edward Herman

and Noam Chomsky’s concept of manufacturing consent have been used for the study.

19

Chapter 2 deals with the history of Pakistan-India relations, including major conflicts

and efforts so far made for the peaceful resolution of disputes. It also describes the main

events during 2000-2010, which is central to the research.

Chapter 3 focuses on the coverage of the Pakistani media of the five events identified for

the study during 2000-2010. Day-to-day coverage and interviews of the Pakistani experts

are part of the chapter.

Chapter 4 evaluates the Indian media and its coverage of the five events during the

research period. The selected newspapers and interviews of the experts are included in it.

Chapter 5 is analytical and built on the previous chapters. It analyses the coverage of

media in both countries and presents the findings. It also shows that the hypothesis is

vindicated and affirmed.

Conclusion gives the final findings of the research.

At the end, the study is documented with a Bibliography and also has Appendixes (1 and

2).

20

Chapter 1

Theoretical Framework

Media plays an important part in providing information to the people about everyday

happenings. Hardly anyone escapes the all-pervasive media networks of press, radio,

television and the online communications that sometimes seem ruthless in their job of

collecting news and convey them to the people sitting in their homes. The media creates

awareness and reinforces the opinion and attitudes of the readers, listeners, and viewers.24

Media has become so inextricably intertwined in every aspect of “domestic and foreign

policy” that (US) Senator Richard Lugar, a Republican from Indiana, refers to the new

power game as “medialism”, and David Green, who served US presidents Ford and

Reagan as a director of communication, terms it “teledemocracy”.25

1.1- Media Evolution

The word media is plural form of medium and can be used both with singular or plural

verb. It is popularly employed to denote some sort of communication from one end to

another through written word and symbols or oral traditions. Hence, television,

newspapers, radio, internet, smartphones, books, hoardings, billboards etc. are considered

as kinds of media. The Free Dictionary’s online edition in one of definitions of media

says that it is “the means of communication that reach a large number of people such as

television, newspapers and radio.”26 The term mass media is most often used invariably

in the place of media, which actually means more than just ‘media’; it stands for the

media which reaches a large segment of society in relatively shorter span of time. Also,

the mass media means more than just news, because it may involve entertainment and

propaganda or can be used for public service and educational purposes.

24 Sripada K. S. Raju, S. K. Jagadeswari, and Wimal Dissanayake. "Treating the Indo-Pakistan Conflict:

The Role of Indian Newspapers and Magazines," in News Media in National and International Conflict,

(London: Bowker 1984), 106. 25 Marvin Kalb, “Forward”, in The Media and Foreign Policy, ed. Simon Serfaty, (London: MacMillan,

1990), xiii-xiv. 26 “Communication,” http://www.the freedictionary.com/media, accessed Feb 4, 2012, 7.12 pm.

21

Media evolved gradually through the millennia. The art of hieroglyphics perfected by

Egyptians in around 3300 BC was a crude form of media. Then the Semites introduced

alphabets with consonants in around 1500 BC and the Greeks came up with vowels in

800 BC. The rudimentary media grew through the invention of papers by the Chinese in

105 AD27, and that of printing machine by a German goldsmith Johannes Gutenberg in

1400 AD - the former revolutionizing the art of writing and the latter the publishing

industry. The newspapers emerged around 1600 AD. The first printed newspaper was

The Relations, published in 1605 from Antwerp in modern Belgium, but the industry

flourished in the 19th century. The press was followed by the broadcast media. Radio was

invented by Guglielmo Marcony in 1894 and it became popular after 1910 and was

effectively used during the First World War. Meanwhile, John Logie Baird invented

television in 1925 but it took more than 25 years to become a source of popular media.

The real information revolution occurred towards the end of second millennium and the

start of the 21st century. It was due to the introduction of World Wide Web (WWW) in

1990 by Tim Berners-Lee and later on by the introduction of smart phones by different

companies with the internet facility and other features. The emails and text messages

have virtually transformed the world into a global town. But newspapers remain leading

media despite the rise of broadcast media in the 20th and online communication system in

the 21st century.28

Media can be classified into different ways as under:

1-Print media: It uses physical objects for communication and comprises newspapers,

newswires magazines, books, brochures, leaflets, pamphlets etc.

2-Broadcast/electronic media: It includes television, radio, movies, CDs, DVDs, cameras,

videos, cassettes, gramophone records, etc.

3-Online/social media: It consists of online sources like emails, websites, blogging,

micro-blogging, e-papers, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other social websites.

27 Keith Ray, “Chinese Inventions,” Eye Magazine, Spring 2004, http://www.sacu.org/greatinventions.html,

accessed on April 22, 2013, 1:40 pm. 28 “History of Mass Media,” http://www.buzzle.com/articles/history-of-mass-media.html,

accessed on February 12, 2013, 8.00 pm.

http://www.sacu.org/greatinventions.html

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/history-of-mass-media.html

22

4-Outdoor media: It is visual media and includes billboards, signs, placards, flying

billboards, blimps and sky writing.

Despite the multiplying ways of communication, newspapers and televisions are

considered the most potent tools for both media professionals and top state functionaries,

who try to use media for political ends or national interests.

Media and state authorities have an intricate relationship. When radio emerged as a

reliable source of information, which everyone could use without any demand of literacy

that newspapers readers needed, the officials thought it as a handy tool for propaganda.

After initial success in the First World War, it was used by many countries and groups

throughout the 20th century to influence the public opinions. At the global level the best

use of radio technology was made by the rival capitalist and communist blocs when the

Cold War was at its peak. Several radio networks sprung up to broadcast in various

languages. Most of them were financed or supported by Voice of America (VOA), set up

in 1942 to spearhead propaganda against the then USSR. It was followed by Radio Free

Europe (RFE) and Radio Liberation (later Liberty) which aimed at reaching the people in

the Eastern Europe. In terms of trust and respect, the British-owned BBC had been far

ahead of others, both in Asia and Africa. Despite its closeness with the government, BBC

is more respected than the VOA or other media groups.

Unlike radio, the television in its initial years was restricted to domestic audience and

was used to build national consensus on various foreign policy issues. “Television.... was

initially viewed in much more parochial terms; even during the first half of the Cold War,

its role still was confined to domestic consensus-building....and therefore not really an

issue in international affairs until the satellite age.”29

The Vietnam War is considered as a watershed in the history of media. Television and

press were able to do more intrusive and graphic coverage, thanks to the developments in

the television technology, especially after the arrival of portable videotape camera that

made it easier to capture horrific images and show them to the people back home. Since

29 Phillip Taylor, Global Communication, International Affairs and the Media since 1945, (London:

Routledge, 1997), 65.

23

then television has been increasing its hold on public ideas and thinking, and is now

considered as a key tool to influence the masses and the governments. “Since 1970s, it

has been axiomatic that television constitutes an independent force in international

affairs.”30 The First Iraq War was the first real-time media coverage coup as fighting was

taken to the drawing rooms with all brutal details. It had its down side also, as the time-

tested journalistic standards were trampled underfoot by the carpet bombing, which killed

soldiers and civilians and media was largely conspicuous by its absence or unwillingness

to report on human sufferings. The First Iraq War took media-state ties to new heights, as

truth and neutral reporting was cast aside for the sake of patriotic considerations and even

those professional journalists who felt choked at the official control over reporting, were

given cold comfort for helping the victory at the minimum cost of life and material

resources. The latest example of impact of media on political system was the fledging

role of online media and the changes it brought in countries like Tunisia, Egypt and

Yemen during the Arab Spring of revolutions.

1.2- Characteristics of Modern Media

Most of the modern media are commercial entities owned by private entrepreneurs who

run them like any other profit-making industry. The search for influence and profit

actually defines the role of media in the highly globalised world, where boundaries

between politics and economy are being redefined by concepts of political economy and

interest-based policies of leading international players. As the competition to monopolize

ever-depleting natural resources increases, the importance of information, about who

owns what, and how various competitors can lay hands on major chunk of global wealth,

becomes more important. In this context, media as a leading distributer of information

has been put in a unique position to manipulate, interfere, inform, (even misinform) and

float ideas that can change the power game and the international policies.

The commercial news media plays with the information. Culture, society, politics,

foreign affairs and economic matters are now becoming inseparable due to the

overarching role of communication media to make them available for the public scrutiny.

30 David R. Gergen, “Diplomacy in a television age: The dangers of Teledemocracy”, in The Media and

foreign policy, ed. Simon Serfaty (London: MacMillan, 1990), 47.

24

The media also prepares a framework for politicians, diplomats and servicemen to

operate and conduct their business. It has taken the centre stage and has become the

prime movers of actions and reactions in the world. As its role in the international politics

increases, it becomes more difficult to judge who controls whom, as in some cases

journalists are working as the mouthpiece of the state and thus, greatly helping the

officials to promote their propaganda in the garb of news and information. Talking about

the role of media in the Gulf War, Phillip Taylor said that journalists became the part of

the conflict, subjectively, working no more as independent observers to inform the people

about what was happening on the battlefield. “For the most part, journalists uncritically

regurgitated what they were told”31

The unchecked growth of digital communication superhighways has given birth to the

phenomenon of ‘breaking news’, which is more like a mad rush to flash the news first,

ignoring norms of professional care by and large. As more and more schools offering

specialized courses and programmes in media studies or mass communication are

opening up doors for young men and women, the ratio of so-called media qualified

people seeking jobs in media industry is increasing. It has led to the dearth of hardcore

old hands with rich personal knowledge and expertise of reporting on issues like wars and

conflicts. There are today more young and good looking reporters trudging the minefield

of journalism with leisure of backpacks, like the tourists going for outing among the

mountains instead of covering the internecine warfare. They are easy victims for the

officials, trained in dishing out selective information to highlight their mission and extol

their ‘virtues’. There is also increasing collusion between the rich bosses of media outlets

and corrupt officials as both enjoy at the cost of the people who are given the sweet doses

of (mis)information in the name of news and entertainment, also called infotainment. The

contextualized coverage which was considered important to let the people understand

news has been replaced by erratic information, usually given in bullet form. It distorts

image and creates stereotypes. As all information passed on in different shapes to others

usually impacts them in certain ways, it is a key that contents of communication should

be improved and they should not distort the reality for the benefit of any nation or group.

31 Taylor, Global Communication, xii.

25

As more media networks become operational, competition becomes intense and pressure

mounts on the officials to react to the day-to-day happenings without consulting their

advisors and specialists. It often results in creating media savvy sound bites and not the

sound policies needed to address some of the toughest challenges faced by the world.

Officials’ tendency to give spin to the news for the benefit of the government adds to the

difficulty and people sometime get a very hazy picture of the incidents. Thus, media has

become a mixed blessing: it informs as well as distorts information due to expediency or

naivety. There is increasing consensus on its influence on decision making and policy

formulation on foreign relation issues. Marc Genest says that as an elite interest group,

media has the power to influence both policy-making and the political agenda.32

The modern media has been infected with the vices of corporate culture. Now the

business executives make decisions about the ‘news’ than the editior-in-charge,

assignment heads or editors. It has led to the changes in communication which is more

focused on spot coverage. Compared with the few-seconds-news-splash, a lengthy

analysis takes more money and time to produce and could potentially annoy many people

in the power corridors and industry. It further intensifies the perceptions that media is

playing the role of a cheer-leader than eye, ear and tongue of the human conscious. It was

the reason that while dominating the airwaves during the First Iraq War and creating war

hysteria, media failed to move the people immediately against the ruthless killings in

former Yugoslavia, despite a lot of coverage. The distrust towards media continued in

coming years and it took media a lot of time to regain the trust of the people. Ultimately a

tragedy like 9/11 persuaded the people to turn to the television and newspapers.

Experts are not united on the exact amount of impact created by a particular news and a

TV image on the readers and viewers, but there remains the possibility of some sort of

impression, positive or negative, created. It is also believed that apart from propaganda,

there is an alarmist media which pushes the audience to the edge of the seats by

foretelling some crisis or predicting some disaster which may never fall. But it is not

always like this: there are cases where media starts dictating agenda, forcing officials to

behave in a certain way. It happens as the media proliferation goes unchecked, making it

32 Genest, Public Eye, 11.

26

almost impossible for the state machinery to control its contents. The 21st century is

proving to be the century of communication and information, as predicted by Alvin

Toffler in the book, The Third Wave, published in 1980. “The gathering, process,

evaluation and presentation of information about the world in which we live forms the

basis of this third wave now-making its way to the shorelines of many countries.”33

Toffler said that pace of change is increasing and states as well as individuals are finding

hard to adapt to it. Philip Taylor feels this accelerating pace has been affecting the

international relations since 1945 and “the ripples created by the introduction of new

communication technologies are influencing the way decisions about war and peace are

not just made but are also perceived through the media.”34 He says that the perception is

usually a flawed construct created by “distortion, compression and manipulations” due to

information technology and its excessive information.

As both the speed and quantity of the communication goes up, the mix of information and

misinformation will somehow try to change the political, social, economic and military

landscape of the world. Already media has changed the way the states used to interact

and conduct their relations. Taylor says that traditionally countries deal with each other in

four ways: through diplomacy, economy, military and intelligence. The fourth dimension

based on gathering of information about others has already given way what is called as

“psychological or informational dimension, which involves the gathering and

communication of information, ideas, perceptions and messages.”35 The last aspect

operates within the other three but it dominates them as it becomes the eyes and ears for

them.

Another aspect of modern media is the role of government officials in the manipulation

of information. Most important news which are of “make or break” category are not

found easily unless some crafty official or politician decided to “leak” them to a pliant

reporter, who they know will run it without any compunction. Major news are announced

in thoughtfully choreographed press conferences to dozens of journalists to maximize the

33 Taylor, Global Communication, 11. 34 Taylor, Global Communication, 12. 35 Taylor, Global Communication, 21.

27

coverage. President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI), also termed as

‘Star wars’ is one of many examples when media was kept in complete ignorance about it

till the President announced it in his ‘famous March 1983’ speech. “The story of the

selling of SDI, then, provides a telling answer to one of this volume’s central question-

who sets the national news agenda?”36

There were other several occasions when governments used media for their own agenda.

The issue of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction, as fed by the Bush administration

before the Iraq War in 2003, is a case in point. “The government, not the news media,

dominates the national news agenda. More often than not, the president (of US) and his

administration can determine when something becomes news, how long it stays in the

news.”37

It does not mean that media is just the mouthpiece of the government, a mute transmitters

of information, no matter how much cooked it was. There are many reasons to believe

that all media and all journalists cannot be manipulated by official strong arm tactics, nor

by many temptations which money and power can offer. Such professionals had been the

guiding spirit for generations of journalists and stood for what independent professional

reporting business means. But more has happened than this: the sheer numerical growth

of media and its branches has made it virtually impossible for state organs to control each

one of media or its practitioners. “The phenomenon of ‘medialism’ produces ever larger

streams of less and less filtered information that cross national boundaries...The effect is

to introduce new and often unpredictable forces into the policy process.”38

It brings us to another aspect of media that is based on its power which is derived from

information that media possess. It is termed as ‘information power’ which like any other

form of power is ability to exercise control on the actions of others, as also renowned

scholar Hans Morgenthau defines power as the ‘man’s control over mind and actions of

36 Phillip L. Geyelin, “The strategic defence initiative: The president’s Story,” in The Media and Foreign

policy, ed. Simon Serfaty (London: MacMillan, 1990), 19. 37 R. Gregory Nokes, “Libya: A government story,” in The Media and foreign policy, ed. Simon Serfaty

(London: Macmillan, 1990), 33. 38 Simon Serfaty, “The Media and foreign policy,” in The media and foreign policy, ed. Simon Serfaty

(London: Macmillan, 1990), 6.

28

others’, as ‘a psychological relations between those who exercise it and those over whom

it is exercised’.39

The new relation between the press corps and officialdom is determined by the

technology which is not under control of anyone. Apart from technology, also news

consumption pattern have changed, with people demanding more short and crispy pieces

than lengthy in-depth analysis. The merger and acquisitions and multiple ownership have

further complicated the role of media. Despite the proliferation of media, the big Western

organisations exercise full monopoly over news gathering and distribution. Though, there

are hundreds of newswires but no one can compete with AP, Reuters and AFP for

extensive network of reporters all over the world or BBC for global audience which had

around 140 million viewers in the mid-1990s.40

The above discussion helps to formulate a few basic characteristics of modern media.

First, media is a power in its own right and its power is based on the information that it

carries and conveys. This is modern equivalent of old saying that 'knowledge is power’.

Second, media usually works in coordination with government but the nature of relation

is ambivalent and may swing in either extreme, depending on several factors. Third,

media is an important tool to influence public opinions and prepares a ground for some of

the difficult decisions which the officials take. Fourth, the independence of media is

relative and may vary from issue to issue and government to government.

Fifth, the policy making process is influenced by media through commentaries, analyses,

talk shows, blogs and social media inputs. Sixth, media, whether operating independently

or not, relies a lot on the goodwill of government of the day for information. Seventh,

though new forms of media are emerging but press including newspapers, newswires,

news magazines and electronic media, primarily television, enjoys the status of

mainstream media with maximum outreach. Eighth, media has the role of a watchdog

than setting agenda for the states, but since there is no fixed rule for media coverage and

39 Taylor, Global Communication, 25. 40 Taylor, Global Communication, 72.

29

operations, it can adopt any role easily. That is why it starts dictating terms to weaker

rulers and start performing role of agenda-setting agency.

Ninth, most of the international media is nationalistic and majority of news coverage is

slanted along the ethnic and national lines, which at times complicates the reality and

thus, the unbiased information is lost in the maze of patriotic jargons.

1.3- Media and Agenda

How effective media is in setting the agenda for policies and actions of various states is

difficult to adjudge. It is not easy to say whether media controls the policy makers or vice

versa. Different schools of thoughts on the impact of media on policy making in general

and foreign policy in particular are divided to the point of confusion. There are examples

where media forcefully set the agenda on a particular issue, but the same print or

electronic media was towing the official line unhesitatingly on a different matter of equal

importance. Still more, it may stir up public anger on some matter to force the

government to fine-tune the policy for accommodating the popular perspective and hence

build the agenda. Not only to find a consensus on the role of media in determining the

relations between the states is elusive but also it is still a big challenge for academicians

and intellectuals as well as for the policy makers to find the exact impact of media in the

foreign policy domain.

Most of time media plays by the basic rule of what will increase its appeal or what will be

financially beneficial. After all it is the modern corporate news media run by the rich

businessmen who at the end of the day have to pay salaries and run the organisations. A

lot of principles are abandoned by media for the earthy issues, prompting the government

- the most powerful agency in a country - to pressure it to give front page and prime time

coverage to its opinion even when most journalists would never like it.

In addition to how media figures in the agenda setting, it is important to determine who

decides the editorial contents or the front and back pages lead items or who blows an

ordinary story out of proportion for the news bulletin? There is no single answer to these

questions, as a number of people including editors, marketing men and owners decide

about the inclusion and placement of news items. But a linked question with all the above

30

key issues is: Who makes the news? A lot of people may believe that some adventurous

reporter in sheer audacity of professional commitment delves deep into the treasure trove

of information and brings a news item to the editor who with a childlike fantasy chisels it

into flawless copy for the front page four column cracking news with a shrieking

headline. It may be correct in one of many cases but it is not always true, rather most of

the time. Hence, it is important to know the relationship between media and official

agenda and if media has any influence on the agenda formulation.

Marc A Genest in his book titled Negotiating in the Public Eye has classified the media

into three categories, according to its role in defining agenda for governments:

1-Agenda-setting media

2-Agenda-building media

3-Agenda- reflecting media

The agenda-setting press is the strongest exponent of free media and mostly depends on

private sources for news. It has its own agenda and governments are forced to follow it as

it is not dependent on the officials for news stories and resources. Austin Ranney in his

book, Channels of Power: The Impact of Television on American Politics, argues that

“the media not only sets the agenda but also creates a ‘fast-forward’ effect in politics”,

whereas Martin Linsky while recognizing the fast-forwarding role of press says that “it

put additional pressure on official to act quickly.”41

Media according to agenda-setting school performs these functions:

1- Sorts out issues

2- Sets priority for the governments

3- Sets agenda for official policy makers

4- Fast-forwards the decision and implementation process

5- Makes the officials accountable for failures


31

The agenda-building media stands mid-way between extreme freedom and extreme

dependence, as it relies both on the government and private sources for news materials. It

helps governments to build agenda but with its own streak of opinions and views. While

getting the primary information from the official sources, it twists it according to its

priority for public consumption. According to Lang and Lang, as quoted by Marc Genest,

agenda-building is the most accurate description for the impact of the press on the

decision-making process. It shows that press is one of many influences for shaping up a

particular policy.42 The role of media according to agenda-building school can be

classified as follows:

1- Mostly government selects the issue

2- Media using government and non-government sources analyses the issue

3- Crystallizes the issue for public debate by providing context

4- Builds public opinion around official agenda

5- May initiate changes, improvements, rectifications in the official agenda

The agenda-reflecting media is totally reliant on the officials. The latest concept of

“embedding journalism” as well as media in the autocratic regimes falls in this category.

In this case, the government controls the information and is in the classic position of “he

who commands information, sets the agenda”. Reporters many times are used by the

officials who in the garb of classified information dish out selected agenda of the

government in bits and parts and the journalists having no other option but to just happily

feed on it and transmit it, thinking that they were part of the small group getting the

information. This role makes media as a mouthpiece of the official propaganda, though

not always unknowingly, as the corporate media may extract a price for it. Thus, the

agenda-reflecting press only follows and seldom leads, as it reacts to the newsy events

created by the government. Its main characteristics are:

1- Depends on government


32

2- Just explains the official policy and propaganda

3- Prepares ground for acceptance of official version of truth

4- Uses unnamed sources or officials for news

5- No in-depth analysis of policies

1.4- Media and Foreign Policy

Lawrence Eagleburger, US Secretary of State when troops were sent to Somalia, said “if

there hadn’t been television and the reporting on the mess in Somalia we would never

have done it (sent troops), absolutely correct.”43 If George H.W. Bush was moved to

launch troops after TV images of starving children in Somalia in 1992, his successor Bill

Clinton, was forced to pull out the same troops a year later when the body of a US soldier

was shown being dragged in the streets of Mogadishu. “Judy woodruff, the CNN anchor,

suggested one measure of the power of television pictures when she said that soldier’s

body had been seen in CNN’s report for only two and a half second.”44 It shows the

power of media as a player in the international politics.

Media has earned the honorific of the ‘fourth estate’, as it provides the states with a vital

tool to deal with the enemies through the propaganda warfare and psyops or

psychological operations. Modern states deal with others in four distinct ways:

diplomacy, economic power, military might or coercion and intelligence or psyops or

information. The fourth dimension is based on media.45

Media and politics are entwined. The contest among various players to dominate news

media is part of all national and international conflicts. The efforts are not just for the

coverage but also for the more crucial objective of establishing political control. One of

the best examples is this respect is the control exercised by the US over media during the

Gulf War, when media was carefully fed with what Pentagon wanted. Journalists were

left with no option but use the official version of the war and by the time they realized

43 Stephen Hess and Marvin Kalb, ed., The media and the war on terrorisms, (Karachi: OUP, 2004), 9. 44 Hess and Kalb, Media and War, 9. 45 Taylor, Global Communication, 21.

33

that the US officials were narrating a pre-war-scripted version of events, many of them

were frustrated. Gadi Wolfsfeld says that the American media experts had decided how to

control media much before the actual war started. “The journalists were extremely

frustrated by their lack of independence but there was little they could do about it.”46 He

says all the contacts with the media were centralised through Journalist Information

Bureaux (JIBs) and they were briefed in Dhahran and Riyadh in Saudi Arabia, far away

from the theatre of fighting. All reports and pictures were first approved by the army and

then released. This kind of strict censorship was made possible by the ‘national interest

theory’, forcing everyone to follow the controlled coverage without questioning the

rationale of depriving the people of their right to the right information. As the patriotism

during the war with a foreign enemy demanded support for the American military action,

so everyone was silent, even Congress, though President Bush got very narrow support in

the Senate for war. The vote on January 13 - 52 for and 47 against the war - showed a lot

of reservations. Once the war began, the ‘elite consensus’ was forged, and media lost

even those who had opposed the war in Congress.

However, the strict censor could not hold for a long period.When the ground offensive

defeated the Iraqis, the horrors of the conflict were fully known. The events like bombing

of an Iraqi baby milk factory and stories about the ‘Highway of Death’ in which about

1000 Iraqi military vehicles were destroyed, did help change the one-way narrative of the

Gulf war.47

But it was late and the media had played its ‘role’ the way the allied forces wanted. It

also shows that media cannot be held hostage for an indefinite period and its perception

of international events changes over a period of time, besides its impact on the foreign

policy issues.

It helps to understand about the role of media in the formulation of policy. Though, it is

frequently said that “prior to the advent of the mass media, diplomacy was the sport of

kings and, as such, it had little or nothing to do with public opinion”,48 but changes have

46 Gadi Wolfsfeld, Media and Political Conflict, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 133-134. 47 Wolfsfeld, Media and Conflict, 136. 48 Taylor, Global Communication, 59.

34

occurred in the way foreign relations are conducted today. Though, media solely is not

responsible for it. Most of the openness in the realm of foreign relations occurred when

the international community discarded the concept of ‘secret diplomacy’ which was

responsible for a lot of troubles. It is believed that the First World War was caused by

secret agreements and alliance system that divided the major powers into two groups.

Also the induction of nuclear weapons has obliterated the distance between the “public

and private” in terms of war and now the decision of the rulers about foreign policy

issues not only affect them personally but in cases of conflict, common people are easily

dragged into them. So the foreign policy is no more ‘foreign’ as it used to be some

decades ago.

It has also created some sort of friction between media and government and the

cooperative relations enjoyed by the two in the most part of the 20th century, due to the

East-West rivalry, are gradually decreasing. The new media-government relationship is

defined by a thick array of rivalry over information and rising competition to collect news

and transmit them for the general consumption. It does not mean that media has become

totally free of state control, but things are changing.

The nature of relations is also dependent on the kind of media. Traditionally, newspapers

have been freer and more critical of governments and the broadcast media have been

more submissive. One of the reasons is that it is easier to control and stifle it. The growth

of the broadcast media had been in different circumstances. Television was used to “serve

as an instrument of national mobilization” because “it is a medium whose patriotism can

seldom be challenged”.49 Similarly, radio worked as a tool for propaganda for the most

part of the last century.

Media’s impact on policy making not only flows from its power to extract information

and spread it all over the world, but also to channelize public opinion about national and

international matters of importance. Foreign policy may be totally divorced of any moral

moorings but it cannot simply ignore the popular sentiments. Media through

commentaries, news analyses, features, letters to editors, talk shows, telephone calls,

49 Elie Abel, “Television in International Conflicts,” in The New Media in National and International

Conflicts, ed. Andrew Arno and Wimal Dissanayake (Boulder; Westview press, 1984), 69.

35

interactive discussions and background information amplifies the critical views of the

masses and help mould the policies. It is two-way traffic: government tries to sway

people according to its desires on national issues but there are always groups and

individuals who carry a personal opinion and express it also. Media acts as a conduit for

this two-way transfer of views. Since media thrives on conflicts, unlike diplomacy that

aims at conflict-resolution, hence once “CNN (media) is on the story, the media

drumbeats begins, public opinion is engaged and a diplomat’s option recede.”50

Tim Allen and Jean Seaton are more categorical about the role of media in war and

peace. “Wars are partly what the media make them....To a large extent the term ‘war’ is

ascribed to situations by journalists in such a way as to accord them a degree of status.”51

Talking about the causes of conflicts, they say that “wars are not product of natural

differences, but of social processes”52 and that ethnic issues do not have any biological

basis. It shows that media and communications perpetuate conflicting attitudes which are

reflected in war like behaviours.

Television has become a game-changer. It is common saying that ‘if you want to stir the

government or any official, engage television.’ The television coverage from the Gulf

War to Somalia conflict, war in Bosnia, attack on Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq had

been spectacularly engaging. In Pakistan, a video of Taliban whipping a woman in

northwestern Swat region was repeatedly shown on television in 2009, mounting pressure

on military elite to take strict action against the militants. An operation was launched in

the same year, which forced the rebels to flee.

In most recent times, the long March by anti-government cleric Tahirul Qadri from

Lahore to Islamabad in January 2013 was mostly media-ized affair. Much before his

return from Canada where he had been living for more than five years, he was catapulted

to uneven heights by the local private channels. His special interviews were arranged to

magnify the protest. Consequently, the man whose ‘patriotism’ was questioned by his

opponenets due to being a dual national was transformed into a hero overnight, forcing an

50 Taylor, Global Communication, 75. 51 Allen and Seaton, Media of Conflict, 3. 52 Allen and Seaton, Media of Conflict, 2.

36

elected government to hold talks with him though he did not have a single elected person

from his party to the parliament. Obviously media, especially television channels, made it

possible.

How media forces the change? There is no precise science to evaluate and quantify the

exact impact of television viewing or newspaper reading on the viewers and readers but

communion with the images and words may initiate positive or negative reactions. The

stunning footages and headlines can create fear, anxiety, hatred, love, sympathy and

various other feelings that cannot be calculated perfectly. Over a long period of time and

for a greater number of audiences, these set of feelings evolve into utterances and actions,

forcing a chain reaction of changes. Phillip Taylor says "just we do not yet know

precisely how to measure media effects does not mean that those effects do not exist.”53

It becomes even more interesting if analyzed in the light of views of Israeli Prime

Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who invoked the Heisenberg Principle to explain that

television tries to change things. "Television is no longer a spectator.... We now have the

Heisenberg physics of politics. As you observe phenomenon with television, instantly

you modify it somehow.”54 Media also derives its impact from being the first to give the

information. In many times, not only it provides information to the common people but

also it is first to inform the officials and sovereigns or their staff. George Bush reportedly

once said: "I learn more from CNN that I do from the CIA.”55 The phenomenon of being

the first point of contact also influences the people.

The power of media to force government change its foreign policy was first time

demonstrated when negative coverage of the Vietnam War made it very unpopular

among the American citizens. It was the failure of US media policy, as “Vietnam became

a communication disaster for the US military."56 A large number of Americans turned

against their government, as its failure on the battlefield was reflected in the media,

which the officials had failed to control.

53 Taylor, Global Communication, 92. 54 Taylor, Global Communication, 92. 55 Taylor, Global Communication, 93-94. 56 Louw, Media and Process, 149.

37

Expert Eric Louw’s book, The Media and Political Process, which has given detailed

analysis of media-ized and PR-ized warfare and political process, shows how sometimes

the officials start dictating the media. He suggests that the people should be skeptical of

the news media and ask critical questions about who constructs the televised images. “In

essence, we must not accept these televisual representations at face value.”57 It shows that

state institutions still enjoy a lot of sway over media when it comes to key issues of

foreign policy but they need media for convincing masses about the utility of the polices,

which may be even detrimental to the public. For example, people fund the big wars

through taxes but the same people never question the waste of huge resources in wars as

their opinions have already been manipulated through media. Louw also supports

constructivists approach to the media coverage, which he says is “well suited to

understand the process of media-ized communication”. (Constructivism is a way of

seeing and understanding the world based on the premise that as human beings we

experience the world mentally-i.e. we relate to the world through our mind. Hence,

'knowing' becomes an 'internal’ (cognitive) process).

Louw also rejects that media is like mirror and just shows what is happening around us.

He says that it is more like ‘Plato’s prisoner in the cave’ situation but the artificial

shadow in the ‘cave’ used to create images for the prisoners have been replaced by the

television screen. Louw’s observations are important as he rejects the most hyped

concept of media that it is ‘free’ and provides a window to understand the world in an

objective way. He says that a news report goes through numerous stages before being

printed or flashed, so the end product can seldom be objective and free from biases. He

has painted possible scenarios about media impact on foreign policy and concluded that it

was not static and the role of media vis-a-vis policy formulation and decisions related to

matters of national interest varies, depending on the nature of the government and the

‘elite consensus’. If the policy makers are united on an issue and have ready policy, then

media cannot influence the policy making. But it can play its role in policy

implementation stage, which will be more of a watchdog. Media becomes important if

the elite are divided over an issue or do not have readymade policy. In that case, they take

57 Louw, Media and Process, 6.

38

help from the media to ‘manufacture consent’ by involving the public opinion and the

intelligentsia in the policy making process.

1.5- Theoretical Framework for Research

After going through various aspects of media and its impact on policies, the discussion

has come to the point of formulating a framework for the study. By using the background

information and academic knowledge, the researcher has built a theoretical base,

reflecting how media in Pakistan and India play a role in their bilateral relations and

peace process.

According to Colin Semour-Ure media is central to all communication and an important

determinant of the social activity and political system. During the process of

communication, media initiates primary and secondary reactions or changes in the

attitudes or behavior of the people.58 The research is based on the premise that conduct of

the foreign relations and formulation of foreign policy are also communications that

initiate some effects. As the media has become a source of international communication

and posturing, it is important to first understand various approaches to the international

communication.

According to Hamid Mowlana four basic approaches cover the international

communication. The idealistic-humanistic approach says that international

communication is a means to bring people and nations together. The second approach

called as political proselytization identifies the international communication with

propaganda and ideological confrontation. The third approach views information as a tool

for economic power which uses aid, development projects and business ventures to

dominate the weaker countries. The fourth approach characterizes information in the

international arena as a subtle method for the political power. It says that news, data and

58 Semour-Ure, Political Impact, 22.

39

entertainment provided freely through media is loaded with political overtones.59 Most of

the time, the last three approaches to communications are used by various countries.

The relations between Pakistan and India are complex and cannot be tackled through a

single theoretical model. The three models by Genest help to define the broader outline of

the thesis for the role of media in India-Pakistan ties. The media in the two countries uses

all three models, depending on the issues but the general framework of the study is based

on the agenda-building media approach. However, the agenda-setting and agenda-

reflecting frameworks have also been used depending on the nature of news media.

The researcher has also used the ‘political contest model’ of Gadi Wolfsfeld, who in his

book, Media and Political Conflicts, presents a theoretical framework about the use of

media by the adversaries to win public support. The model has limited application in the

research because it mostly deals with conflicts where a rebel group challenges the

established authority and hence, it cannot be fully applicable to foreign policy issues. His

‘political contest model’ is based on five principles. The third principle says that “role of

news media in political conflicts varies over time and circumstances” 60 and it has been

useful for the study.

The researcher has also used Eric Louw’s discussion about media and foreign policy,

which helps to understand the role of media in policy making. Manufacturing Consent by

Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky has also helped to formulate the framework. The

two authors in the book argue that mass media in the US is a powerful institution and

works in support of the prevalent system by manufacturing artificial consensus on

issues.61

Based on the opinions of these experts, a theoretical framework has been evolved to

study the role of media in the relations between Pakistan and India. The researcher has

kept in mind the side issues like the kind of media, its relations with the government,

official media policy, the relative freedom of expression and level of professionalism.

59 Hamid Mowlana, “Communication, World Power, and Human Potential: Towards an Ethical

Framework,” in The New Media and Foreign Relations: A Multifaceted Perspective, A Malek eds.,

(Norwood, NJ: Ablex), 1998, 27-28. 60 Wolfsfeld, Media and Conflict, 2. 61 Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1988), 306.

40

The application of the theoretical framework and theoretical findings will be presented in

the coming chapters. The final principles will be part of conclusion at the end.

41

Chapter 2

Pakistan-India Relations: An Appraisal

The relation between the two states of Pakistan and India, created by dividing the British

India into Muslim and Hindu majority countries in 1947, started on a sour note. Hundreds

of thousands of Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs left their centuries-old abodes and migrated

across the border, as an unprecedented exchange of population, to settle either in Pakistan

or India. The disorderly movements caused huge consternations among the people and

riots and mutual killings were outcome of the chaotic situation. Thus, the joint

independence is the event that set stage for rivalry.62

In the initial weeks and months of division, thousands of innocent people were killed in

the name of religious rivalry and communal frenzy, while thousands others including

women and children went missing. The senseless massacre set the tone for Pak-India ties

in the foreseeable future. J.N. Dixit says that there are few examples in the history of

relations where two states have stagnated in a confrontationist mode, despite their civil

societies having intense and wide-ranging commonalities. “India and Pakistan, from their

very inception as independent countries, have been stuck in an adversarial predicament

owing to a number of reasons.”63

There have been wars, limited conflicts, border skirmishes, intrusions, warlike situations

and confrontations. “The bloodbath of secession in the name of Partition of the Indian

empire, four wars in fifty years, the intractable question of Kashmir, a climate of

suspicion and continual accusation: the history of relations between Pakistan and India is

a history of failure”.64

But amidst war and fighting, the two countries also frequently tried to solve the bilateral

issues through talks, diplomacy, third party mediations and trade conferences, though

with limited success to solve the thorny issues.

62 Thazha V. Paul, ed., The India-Pakistan Conflict: An Enduring Rivalry, (Cambridge; Cambridge

University Press, 2005), 33. 63 J.N. Dixit, India-Pakistan in War and Peace, (London: Routledge, 2002), 10. 64 Christophe Jaffrelot, ed. A History of Pakistan and its Origins, trans. Gillian Beaumont (London:

Anthem press, 2008), 112.

42

2.1- From Independence to Dismemberment: 1947-1971

While the two nations were still suffering the pangs of partition, the first conflict started

in October 1947 over the Himalayan region of Kashmir65, which was one of the hundreds

of princely states in British India. It had Muslim majority but was ruled by a Hindu ruler.

The states of India were allowed by the British to either accede to Pakistan or India

keeping in view the sentiments of the people and geographical realities. While the

Muslims in Kashmir were apparently inclined to join Pakistan and had started an armed

struggle to force the ruler decide in their favour, its Hindu ruler signed an accession deed

with India on 26 October 1947. India sent army in Kashmir following the accession and

started operation against the armed Muslims, already fighting the disorganized troops of

the former ruler, also called as the Maharaja. There was a lot of pressure on Pakistan and

finally it retaliated by sending troops in May 194866 and the first ever hostilities between

the newly independent states started.

The first war (1948-49) ended on January 1, 1949 after the UN intervened. A ceasefire

was announced as the two sides agreed through a UN resolution of 9 January 1949 to

decide the fate of the region through a fair plebiscite.

The uneasy truce in Kashmir had seeds of further conflicts as it was divided into two

parts, each one controlled by Pakistan and India. The two countries refused to accept each

other’s claim on Kashmir and termed rival control over other half as ‘occupation’. India

announced that the ground realities had changed after Pakistan in May 1954 signed

Mutual Defence Agreement67 with the US to counter the former USSR. Pakistan

meanwhile also joined the US sponsored security arrangements – South-East Asia Treaty

Organisation (SEATO) in 1954 and Baghdad Pact in 1955, renamed as Central Treaty

Organisation in1958 - following which Washington provided massive military aid to

equip Pakistan. “Pakistan has room for the western states and especially for the United

65 Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in conflict: India, Pakistan and the unending war, (IB Tauris, 2000), 22. 66 Jaffrelot ed., Beaumont trns., History of Pakistan Origins, 120. 67 Lawrence Ziring, Pakistan: The Enigma of Political Development, (Kent: Dawson Westview, 1980), 221.

43

States because it required leverage with which to combat India, it became the recipient of

significant stores of relative modern military equipment”.68

India responded by refusing to hold referendum in Kashmir and introduced a number of

changes in its legal status which culminated in merger of Kashmir into Indian union in

1956.

Kashmir has been termed in official Pakistani narrative as ‘jugular vein’ as its all major

rivers originate from Kashmir. The agricultural prosperity of the country is dependent on

the waters of these rivers. Hence, the Himalayan region is considered as vital for the

country.

Pakistan’s Kashmir policy from 1947 to 1971 can be divided into two phases. After the

first war on Kashmir, the country tried its best to get the issue resolved through the

mediation of the UN and the western countries. But such efforts failed. By 1960, Pakistan

was convinced that India will not accept any third party role for the resolution of the

issue. In this second phase of post-1960 period, Pakistanis seriously searched for other

options including a military solution like the 1965 war, also called the second Kashmir

war.

The regional situation dramatically changed after the brief Sino-India war of 1962. The

West was perturbed at the defeat of India by communist China and started giving it

military aid to bolster its defence. Pakistan being part of the western security pacts was

agitated as it considered India as an adversary. The failure to stop rearming of its

neighbour forced Pakistan to start mending relations with China. Also, the situation in

Kashmir was deteriorating due to the alleged interference of India. Meanwhile, Indian

founding leader Nehru had died in 1964, leaving the country in the hands of weaker

leaders. Indian political weakness after Nehru, humiliation by the Chinese and resentment

in Kashmir was in the mind of Pakistani military junta that had taken control of the

country in 1958 after sending home the civilian government. There was also a brief

encounter with Indian army in Rann of Kutch, a low-lying marshy region between Sindh

68 Ziring, Enigma of Development, 222.

44

province and Gujarat state of India, in April 1965, with Pakistan having upper hand over

India. The incident further emboldened the military planners in Pakistan.

As the situation in Kashmir deteriorated, Pakistani military leadership, already

disillusioned with the failure of UN and the West to help resolve the issue, went ahead to

intervene. The idea was to foment rebellion by tapping anti-Indian sentiments and

sending armed military men into the region to help popular uprising. The operation plan

was prepared by Major General Akhtar Husain Malik and was code named as

“Gibraltar”. “It was based on three assumptions - people in Kashmir would rise to

support the guerillas, a large scale Indian offensive against Azad Kashmir (controlled by

Pakistan) was unlikely. And the possibility of attack across the international border could

be ruled out.”69

The operation went wrong from the beginning. Unlike Pakistani expectations, the unrest

in Kashmir could not be transformed into popular uprising and soon the conflict spiraled

into full scale war when India crossed the international border on September 6, 1965. The

result was the major conflict involving the two armies. The war was a brief affair and the

two sides agreed to ceasefire through a UN resolution on 22 September. The hostilities

were terminated a few months later when the two signed Tashkent Agreement in January

1966.

The war had far-reaching consequences as the trade between the two sides was stopped

which has not properly started as yet, even after several rounds of trade talks. The

cultural ties suffered as the exhibition of Indian movies was also banned by Pakistan70,

and the travel restrictions imposed by the two sides had a long term impact on the people-

to-people relations.

Tashkent peace was arranged through the good offices of the Soviet Union but it failed to

address the real cause of the war - the unresolved issue of Kashmir. The two countries

ended hostilities without changing hostile attitudes. It only provided a temporary relief.

69 Abdul Sattar, Pakistan’s Foreign Policy: 1947-2005, (Karachi: OUP, 2007), 94. 70 Kavita Amarnani, “Beating the ban on Bollywood,” The Guardian, February 4, 2008,

http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2008/feb/04/beatingthebanonbollywood, accessed May 25,

2015, 3.50 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2008/feb/04/beatingthebanonbollywood

45

Meanwhile, the domestic political situation took a sharp turn in Pakistan when some of

the politicians termed the Tashkent agreement as a sell-out to India in order to defame the

military ruler and President Ayub Khan.

A movement started and Khan resigned in 1969 by handing over the power to army chief

General Yahya Khan who organised elections in 1970. The outcome was unexpected, as

separatist-minded Awami League party emerged as the single largest in the country as

well as the sole party in East Pakistan (Now Bangladesh). As the ruling military-civil

elite refused to hand over the power to Awami League leader Majeeb ur Rehman, a

rebellion started in East Pakistan in early 1971. Instead of sorting out the issues through

talks, the military launched an operation and tried to suppress the popular sentiments by

force. The situation went out of control, giving India a chance to intervene in December.

The result was the third Pakistan-India War. As the army was not well prepared to deal

with the onslaught, it had to suffer a humiliating surrender on December 16, 1971 and

East Pakistan was declared as an independent country - Bangladesh.

This phase of the Indo-Pakistan ties started and ended with a conflict. It was marked by

hostilities and deepened the mistrust, alienation and enmity.

2.2- From Simla to Kargil: 1972-1999

The 1971 debacle was a multifaceted disaster for Pakistan. The loss of half the country or

the Eastern arm as it was called was morale-sapping. The defeat for the military was even

worse as 90,000 soldiers were taken POWs by India and transferred to camps inside

India. At this critical moment Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, (whose Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)

had won majority in rest of Pakistan in the 1970 elections), took over as civilian martial

law administrator as General Yahya Khan was forced to resign due to military defeat.

Bhutto had a huge task ahead of him. He needed to set up a democratic government and

settle several foreign policy issues, including talks with India to bring back captured

troops.

To address this and other issues, Bhutto started talks with Indian Prime Minister Indira

Gandhi at Simla, a summer resort in India. The two finally signed the Simla agreement

on 3 July 1972. It was an important step in relations between the two nations as both

46

sides agreed to solve all outstanding issues including Kashmir through bilateral

discussions.71

The rest of 1970s was uneventful except that India carried out its first nuclear tests in

1974, stimulating an urge in Pakistan to follow the same route to ensure security against a

mighty neighbour. It embarked on a clandestine nuclear programme and through luck and

management of international concerns, finally emerged as a nuclear state many years

later in 1998.

The dynamics of relations changed in the 80s, as Pakistan slowly nursed itself back from

the humiliation of 1971. The country was helped by the events in Afghanistan. Also,

Indira Gandhi had lost the charisma and the power she enjoyed a decade ago. Her

emergency rule from 1975 to 1977, mishandling of Sikh insurgency and occupation of

Golden Temple in 1984 were only redeemed to some extent by her tragic killing. The

Indian officials and press blamed Pakistan for exploiting the internal Indian situation by

providing support to Sikh rebels who wanted to create a separate country Khalistan.72

Kashmir was forgotten for some time but it sprang back in the Indo-Pak equation in1984

when India surprised Pakistan, despite its internal problems, by sending troops and

occupying the Siachen glacier in Kashmir. Pakistan had no option but to deploy soldiers

on the freezing heights at the altitude of 6000 meters, the highest battlefield in the world,

where more deaths occurred due to extreme weather than actual combat.

In 1984 Pakistan was also seized with the fear of Indian rumored plan to attack its nuclear

facility in Kahuta near Islamabad. “Pakistan received a number of intelligence reports

during 1983-85 that India was preparing an air attack on its uranium enrichment plant at

Kahuta.”73 It was further reported that India planned to carry out surgical strikes with

the help of Israel or Soviet installed regime in Kabul. The US stepped in to allay

Islamabad’s apprehension and duly informed the military rulers after checking with Israel

that the reports were not true. India was also informed by Pakistan that any such act

71 Jaffrelot ed., Beaumont trns., History of Pakistan Origins, 124. 72 Inderjit Badhwar and Tavleen Singh, "Sikh terrorists: The Pakistan hand", India Today, May 15, 1986,

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/pakistan-involvement-in-sikh-terrorism-in-punjab-based-on-solid-

evidence-india/1/348451.html, accessed May 25, 2015, 4.40 pm. 73 Sattar, Pakistan Foreign Policy, 193.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/pakistan-involvement-in-sikh-terrorism-in-punjab-based-on-solid-evidence-india/1/348451.html


47

would be treated as ‘aggression’. The situation normalized to some extent after both sides

agreed informally in December 1985 that they will not attack each other’s nuclear

facilities.74

Soon after this false nuclear alarm, another crisis brewed, this time due to huge military

exercise Brasstacks by India in the winter of 1986-87. The exercise launched in

November near the Pakistani border sparked a three-month crisis.75 Pakistan fearing

Indian “pincer” attack moved its troops near the Indian border of Punjab. The crisis

peaked in January 1987 but ended next month when the two sides signed an agreement in

February to deactivate the forward air bases and sector by sector pull back of troops.76

Once again the two sides were brought back from the brink but as no mechanism was in

place to deal with decades old problems, the de-escalation proved temporary.

The situation in Indian held Kashmir sharply deteriorated in 1989. The people were

alienated by Indian political manipulation after death of Sheikh Abdullah in 1982. The

grievances were already there but the blatant fraud in the elections of 1987 set a wave of

violent reactions in motion. People took to the streets and riots began. India used familiar

tactics of brutal crackdown to subdue the mobsters. The situation was tailor-made for

Pakistan which was on the lookout for a “popular uprising” against “Indian occupation”.

It is said that Pakistan exploited the situation in Kashmir by covertly supporting militant

activities. Thus, there started a new phase of struggle in Kashmir, allegedly supported by

infiltrations from Pakistani Kashmir.

The rebellion also coincided with the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan

where hundreds of hardcore jihadists were out of “job”. It is said that Pakistan diverted

some of them to Kashmir.77 Indians were greatly perturbed with Pakistan’s new strategy

in Kashmir and it led to the buildup of a crisis by the spring of 1990. “Trading

74 Sattar, Pakistan Foreign Policy, 193. 75 P.R. Chari et al, Four crises and a Peace Process (New Delhi: Harper Collins Publishers, 2008), 39. 76 Sattar, Pakistan Foreign Policy, 185. 77 Sushant Sareen, The Jihad Factory: Pakistan’s Islamic Revolution in the Making, (New Delhi: Har-

Anand Publication, 2005), 105-107.

48

accusations and threats, India and Pakistan spent February, March and April of 1990

seemingly preparing for war.”78

India alleged that Kashmir unrest was created by Pakistan and reportedly started planning

some sort of punitive action against militants in Pakistani part of Kashmir. America

promptly moved in to cool tempers by sending then assistant for national security Robert

Gates, later defence secretary, to both countries in May 1990 and the situation was

brought under control. Another potential conflict in the sub-continent was avoided by

timely interference of a third party, but as in the past, the real festering wound in the

relations was not healed, leaving a lot of space for future wars and tensions.

The relations remained hostage to Kashmir in the most part of the 1990s. A number of

freelance militant outfits sprang up to wage “jihad” against India in Kashmir. Meanwhile,

the two sides detonated nuclear devices in 1998, giving a new dimension to the crisis-

ridden relations.

But there were also good times in the 90s, as the two sides tried to mend ties through

talks. Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif met Indian leader Inder Kumar Gujral on

different occasions and the two agreed on talks. Later, Prime Minister Atal Bihari

Vajpayee visited Lahore in 1999. Just when the relations were moving slowly towards a

positive direction, a new crisis erupted and the Kargil war brought the two nuclear armed

neighbours on the verge of disaster.

The border conflict in the Kargil sector on the line of control (LoC) in Jammu and

Kashmir was the fifth large scale confrontation and lasted from 6 May to roughly the end

of July 1999.79 The fighting has been termed as a “small war”, but it attracted a lot of

international attentions.80 The occupation of strategic peaks was a brilliant military idea.

It was based on a plan to sneak troops to the Kargil heights in the winter when Indian

soldiers traditionally withdrew as part of annual exercise to save themselves from

extreme frost.

78 Chari et al, Four Crises, 80. 79 Dixit, India-Pakistan, 25. 80 Chari et al, Four Crises, 118.

49

But the Pakistan military planners had failed to provide for a political exit in case the

adventure went awry, as it did in the end. For Pakistan, once again the situation was

saved by the US when President Bill Clinton received Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for

an emergency meeting on Saturday, 4 July – the US Independence Day. After talking to

Indian leader Vajpayee on telephone, Clinton prepared the two sides to end the

hostilities.81 The crisis ended when Pakistan pulled back its troops on July 16.

“Nevertheless, the Kargil war was shock for India, which after the constructive talks at

Lahore, saw it an act of treachery by Pakistan.”82

Former Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar said that Sharif’s dash to Washington could be

compared to the request by former military leader Yahya Khan to the US for help to

come out of 1971 war, prompting Henry Kissinger to say that America was not in the

take-off but was asked to be in crash landing. “If Pakistan was mercifully spared by the

biting sarcasm this time, it was partly because all that it asked was the proverbial fig leaf

to cover retreat from an impulsive adventure undertaken without forethought.”83

Kargil was a disaster for the relations and it reversed all the gains of several diplomatic

engagements during the 90s that culminated with visit of Indian prime minister on

February 20-21, 1999. It also damaged the Kashmir cause as international attention was

diverted from Indian repressions to infiltrations from Pakistan. For domestic politics of

Pakistan, the difference between civilian government and military resulted in army

takeover in October. After a bloodless coup, General Pervez Musharraf faced isolation

for packing home a democratic government and his role in the Kargil war. He spent more

than a year fighting on the domestic front to set a number of legal matters straight. There

was little movement on the external front, especially in the relations with India as the

Kargil episode hung large over the relations.

At the turn of the millennium, Pakistan was under dictatorship, isolated and at daggers

drawn with its most important neighbour. As far as resolution of Kashmir was concerned,

81 Sattar, Foreign Policy, 231-232. 82 Jaffrelot ed., Beaumont trans., History of Pakistan Origins, 129. 83 Sattar, Foreign Policy, 232.

50

there was no silver lining. Pakistan and India were miles away and the worst part was that

all peace overtures were frozen.

2.3- Post-Kargil Decade: 2000-2010

The first 10 years of the 21st century were full of action in Pakistan-India relations. The

decade generated a lot of hope for improvement in ties but every time the two sides

moved forward for resolution of issues, some unseen forces intervened to set them back

to square one. From Pakistan's perspective, the tug of war in ties coincided with the

media getting freer and proliferation of TV channels and newspapers. The decade started

with Agra Summit and ended with the two sides standing ripped apart by the bitterness

over the Mumbai terror attacks in 2008 which killed at least 166 people. This period is

unique as for the first time the most concerted peace effort was launched, pursued for

over five years and then halted. The action-packed period is central to this thesis, which

explores role of media in relation to the two countries during these 10 years.

Some of the defining milestones of the period are:

1. Agra Summit: July 2001

2. Attack on Indian Parliament: December 2001

3. Military Standoff: 2002

4. Start of Composite Dialogue: January 2004

5. Mumbai Attacks: November 2008

These important events are key links in the chain of research on role of media in

Pakistan-India relations from 2000 to2010 but let us first traverse the brief history of

peace overtures and some successful stages in the relations.

2.4- Overview of Peace Efforts

The history of peace efforts between Pakistan and India is as old as their enmity. It shows

that both sides have shown tendency to sit together by their own efforts or third party

prodding to solve disputes through peaceful means.

51

The First War on Kashmir was followed by the agreement at the UN to resolve the matter

peacefully. The UN resolutions of 1948-49 provided detailed mechanism to settle the

issue. The first bilateral peace milestone was Nehru-Liaquat pact of 1950 which settles

the issue of religious minorities. In 1953, Prime Minister Mohammad Ali Bogra held

talks with Prime Minister Nehru on Kashmir. After a meeting in Delhi in August 1953,

the two sides agreed to solve it but the situation changed when India called off peace

efforts after Pakistan accepted military aid from the US. In 1958, Nehru and Prime

Minister Feroze Noon agreed to settle the eastern border of the two countries. In 1960,

the historic water accord called Indus Water Treaty was signed due to good offices of the

World Bank which settled the most important issue of sharing water between the two

countries, sparing the coming generations from tensions and possible armed conflicts

over water.

Encouraged by the success of this agreement on water, both countries made first

concerted bilateral effort to settle the Kashmir issue, when from December 1962 to May

1963, Foreign Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and his counterpart Sawaran Singh held six

rounds of talks on Kashmir.84 In April 1965 the two armies briefly clashed in the Rann of

Kutch region but the matter was resolved through arbitration by a tribunal. Britain had

taken keen interest in the peaceful resolution of the problem and both sides also

cooperated. A few months later the Second War over Kashmir (in September 1965)

ended through the Tashkent Agreement in January 1966. This time USSR played the role

of a mediator. After the 1971 war, the Simla Agreement in July 1972 was a major success

to settle matters of war and peace through bilateral means.

In the 1980s, there were recurrent tensions - in 1984, due to Pakistani apprehensions that

India was planning attack at its nuclear site near Islamabad; in 1986-87, due to India's

massive exercise close to the Pakistan border; and in 1989-90, due to Kashmir uprising.

Chari, Cheema and Cohen in their book Four Crises and a Peace Process have said that

US intervened because Washington has an “abiding interest” in preventing conflicts

between Pakistan and India. “The United States was drawn in South Asia crisis because

of its anti-proliferation policies, but also because of its larger geostrategic interests in the

84 Sattar, Foreign Policy, 272.

52

region.”85 Another major issue was the start of war on Siachen Glacier in 1984, which

remains unresolved despite several peace rounds. Though, Pakistan maintains that a draft

agreement was agreed in 1989 but India backed out. “Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto and

Rajiv Gandhi approved the agreement at their meeting in Islamabad in July 1989, but it

had not been implemented.”86

Apart from the bilateral issues and peace efforts, an important decision was the

agreement to set up South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation in 1985 – a useful

regional arrangement to promote economic cooperation and provide key forum to discuss

contentious bilateral matters on the sidelines. “In 1985, India and Pakistan became

members of the new South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation, which seemed to

promise a better future for the whole region,”87

The two countries returned to intensive diplomacy in the 1990s due to disturbance in

Kashmir. Several meetings between the diplomats culminated into the February 1999

visit of Vajpayee to Lahore, and the two countries agreed to resolve all outstanding issues

through dialogue. The 1990s was also important as it unleashed several Track II

diplomacy initiatives like Neemrana process of 1991 which has endured till today. But all

hard work of the decade was washed away by the Kargil conflict in 1999, leaving the

nuclear armed neighbours to remain in conflict mode for many years that followed.

With this background on peace ties, the discussion has reached to the 2000-2010 phase,

which is topic of the research and is discussed in detail.

2.5- Agra Summit: July 15-16, 2001

Kargil dealt a severe blow to the mutual trust between Pakistan and India but it also

highlighted that the endless military adventures cannot be a substitute for peace and

development. “There is nothing new about that, for behind the story of conflict related

above we must examine a parallel history of dialogue between India and Pakistan.”88

85 Chari et al., Four Crises, 218. 86 Sattar, Foreign Policy, 190. 87 Jaffrelot ed., Beaumont trans., History of Pakistan Origins, 130. 88 Jaffrelot ed., Beaumont trans., History of Pakistan Origins, 129.

53

After a temporary freeze of over a year since Kargil, both sides realized that time had

come to move forward. The beginning was made by India when Vajpayee wrote an

article on New Year Day 2001, emphasizing that India needed to address Kashmir issue.

“The prime minister of India had specially made a promising statement on January 1,

2001 [in his “Kashmir Musings”] when he said that he looked forward to meeting

between representatives of the two countries even at the highest level.”89

After expressing openly through media, the Indian leader took about four months to issue

invitation to President Musharraf to meet in Agra.90 The initiative materialized in July

when Musharraf went to India and the two leaders held formal talks on July 15-16.

According to former Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar, Agra meetings were basically one-

on-one with one note taker on each side.91

The negotiations went through many ups and downs. There was a lot of enthusiasm in

Pakistan as most of the media reports, especially TV coverage painted a rosy picture

about the positive outcome of talks. The optimism was mostly misplaced and the key

issue of Kashmir stalled the possible breakthrough. But progress was made and once the

two sides were poised to sign a joint declaration the Indian side refused to ink the

agreement at the last minutes.92

Analysts give different reasons for the failure of Agra Summit, including a breakfast

meeting of Musharraf with Indian media on July 16 where he effectively highlighted the

importance of settlement of Kashmir for normalization of ties. The unsigned draft

declaration says: “Progress towards settlement of Jammu and Kashmir issue would be

conductive towards normalization and will further the establishment of a cooperative

relationship in a mutually reinforcing manner”.93

Experts also believe that summit was hastily convened and proper homework was not

done to make it a success. “The Agra Summit was fiasco, largely because of inadequate

89 A. G. Noorani, “War Benefits Neither Sides,” Frontline, Vol 19, 1ssue 01, January 05-18, 2002,

http://www.flonnet.com/f11901/19010040.htm, accessed March 29, 2013, 3:30 pm 90 Sattar, Foreign Policy, 236. 91 Noorani, War Benefits 92 Sattar, Foreign Policy, 236-238. 93 Sattar, Foreign Policy, 317.

http://www.flonnet.com/f11901/19010040.htm

54

preparation (the talks did not even have a settled agenda) and the private skepticism of

key policymakers on both sides.”94

2.6- Attack on Indian Parliament: December 13, 2001

The attack on Indian Parliament on 13 December 2001 did to Agra Summit what Kargil

war had done to Vajpayee’s visit to Lahore. The attack was carried out at around

11:40am when Indian parliament was “in an uproar” due to a report about emergency

purchases during Kargil war.95 The terrorist attack was reportedly carried out by Lashkar-

e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad - the two Pakistani groups involved in fighting in

Kashmir, and it was termed as an assault on Indian democracy.

The five gunmen in military-style fatigues used fake stickers to enter through the security

check points before reaching the building. The attack led to a firefight with the security

guards which went on for some hours. The attackers failed to kill any politician or take

anyone hostage. Six security personnel, one civilian gardener and five attackers died in

the fight, which was shown live by local media.

There was incandescent fury in India after the attack and pressure mounted on the

government to respond in kind to the provocation. Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee

addressed the nation on television soon after the attack: “This was not just an attack on

the building, it was a warning to the entire nation,” he said. “We accept the challenge,”

reported the BBC.96 The attack was made hardly two months after a similar attack on

state parliament in Srinagar, Kashmir, in which 38 people were killed.

No group claimed responsibility of the December attack but the fingers were pointed at

Pakistan. India’s hardliner home minister L K Advani made a blistering speech in the

parliament the following day, accusing Lashkar and Jaish for the attack. He said these

94 Chari et al, Four Crises, 150. 95 Chari et al, Four Crises, 149. 96 “Suicide attack on Indian parliament,”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/13/newsid_3695000/3695057.stm, accessed

March 30, 2013, 12:41 pm.

55

organisations and their “mentors” were trying to kill the entire political leadership of

India. He promised to “liquidate” the terrorists along with their sponsors.97

Initially, police arrested Abdul Rehman Geelani, an Arabic lecturer of Delhi University,

Muhammad Afzal Guru, his cousin Shaukat Guru and wife of Shaukat, Navjot Sandhu

alias Afsana. A year later in December 2002, an Indian court sentenced Afzal, Shaukat

and Geelani to death. But Geelani was acquitted in October 2003 and Shaukat’s sentence

was changed to 10-year imprisonment in August 2005.

The death sentence of Afzal was however, maintained. The sad saga closed when more

than 10 years after the attack, Muhammad Afzal Guru was hanged in Tihar Jail in Delhi

in February 2013. He was a former fruit seller and his death reverberated heavily in

native Kashmir. Though the attack was blamed on Pakistan, the people arrested and tried

were Indians or Kashmiris, belonging to what Pakistan writers call Indian Occupied

Kashmir or IoK.

India’s ruling right wing Bhartiya Janta Party was under pressure from radical Hindu

groups which wanted tough action to forestall any future attacks. The war hysteria took

hold of the popular imagination and after some initial delay and discussions, India

mobilized its military.

Pakistan also responded in kind. Thus, the attack brought Pakistan and India on the verge

of another war. It was once again averted as good sense prevailed in the end. The military

buildup crisis will be discussed in detail under the next heading.

2.7- Military Standoff: 2002

After the Kargil war the Indian policy-makers thought that a limited conventional war

within nuclear environment was possible. Defence Minister George Fernandes addressing

a seminar by the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses in 2000 said that nuclear

weapons did not make war obsolete.98 The attack on parliament provided opportunity to

97 Peter Symond, “Attack on Indian parliament heightens danger of Indo-Pakistan war,”

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2001/12/ind-d20.html, accessed March 30, 2013, 1:32 pm. 98 Arpit Rajain, Nuclear Deterrence in South Asia: China, India and Pakistan, (New Delhi: SAGE

Publication Ltd, 2005), 369.

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2001/12/ind-d20.html

56

put the doctrine of limited warfare under nuclear regime into practice. According to

Zulfiqar Khan, the Indian leadership like old Soviet Union developed “a dangerous

misperception regarding winning a nuclear war against Pakistan, especially during the

military standoff of 2001-2002.”99

The military standoff started soon after the parliament attack when “Operation Parakram

(valour) was launched on December 18, 2001.100 Nearly one million troops were moved

by the two nations in the largest military buildup after the Second World War. Passions

ran high. From Indian side the decision to mobilize forces was unanimous, according to

national security advisor Brajesh Mishra. “There was a unanimous decision to let

Pakistan know this kind of thing would not be tolerated. A unanimous decision to

mobilize. A unanimous decision to cross the Line of Control and the border.”101

Mishra said in an interview in 2006 that India postponed action after Musharraf in his

January 12 speech criticised terrorism in the name of Kashmir. Mishra also said that they

were on the verge of launching war. “Whether surgical strikes or this or that - it would

have been a part of the campaign.... it would have been all out war.”102

Jaswant Singh, India's external affairs minister that time rejected the idea that war was

imminent. “I know there wasn’t even a risk of a full-fledged war or crossing the boundary

or the Line of Control.”103

It is difficult to judge due to contradictory statements by Indian leaders about the threat of

war. What is clear is that neither Pakistan was ready for a war nor the international

community led by the US could afford a crisis soon after the launch of war in

Afghanistan.

Musharraf being a military leader who had usurped power was still looking for local and

international legitimacy. From a military perspective, his security forces were involved in

99 Zulfiqar Khan, India-Pakistan Nuclear Rivalry: Perceptions, Misperceptions, and Mutual Deterrence,"

(Islamabad:Asia Printers, 2005), 80. 100 Chari et al, Four Crises, 153. 101 Alex Stolar, “To the Brink: Indian Decision-Making and the 2001-2002 Standoff,”

http://www.stimson.org/spotlight/to-the-brink-indian-decision-making-and-the-2001-2002-

standoff/,accessed April 2, 2012. 4:05 pm. 102 Ibid. 103 Ibid.

http://www.stimson.org/spotlight/to-the-brink-indian-decision-making-and-the-2001-2002-standoff/,accessed

http://www.stimson.org/spotlight/to-the-brink-indian-decision-making-and-the-2001-2002-standoff/,accessed

57

the war on terror and already the troops were deployed on the volatile north-western

border. In case of actual war, he would have been forced to redeploy the soldiers from

western to eastern border to face India. The international community could not allow this

to happen when they needed Pakistan’s full attention towards the Afghan border. The

world was also horrified at the possibility of nuclear attack. Tactically, India was slow to

mobilize and lost the advantage. By the time it was ready to strike, Pakistani troops were

ready to respond.

It is believed that the nuclear threat was the defining factor to stop the Indian side to cross

the border or carry out limited strikes. Pakistan had made clear that any hostile action by

India will be considered as war and Islamabad will respond with full force, which was a

veiled threat of nuclear war. Alastair Campbell in his diaries serialized in The Guardian

narrates his meeting with two senior Pakistani generals, during which he was asked to tell

India that Pakistan can strike its rival with nuclear weapons within eight seconds. “When

the time came to leave, the livelier of the two generals asked me to remind the Indians: ‘it

takes us eight seconds to get the missiles over’, then flashed a toothy grin.”104 The threat

worked and the idea of nuclear confrontation was taken seriously by the British

government and the Western world.

At the start of standoff, Musharraf made a speech on January 12 and promised to stop

cross border intrusions as India alleged that Pakistan-based militants were sneaking into

its part of Kashmir to commit acts of terror. He also banned a number of militants and

sectarian organisations.105 The speech had a calming impact. (Mishra also noted as

mentioned above that war was postponed after the speech).

Amid tension and diplomacy, the militants launched attack at an army camp in Kashmir

on May 14, in which at least 30 soldiers and civilians were killed. India blamed Pakistan

for it and the situation looked grim. There was intense exchange of fire on the LoC but

the fight was confined to Kashmir. America, already involved in peace diplomacy,

104 Nicholas Watt, “Pakistan boasted of nuclear strike in India within eight seconds,”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/15/pakistan-boasted-nuclear-sstrike-pakistan, accessed April 2,

2013, 5:25pm. 105 Pervez Musharraf Address on Pakistan Television, January 12, 2001,

http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/pakistan/document/papers/2002Jan12.htm, accessed May 25, 2015,

4.30pm.

http://www.guardian/

http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/pakistan/document/papers/2002Jan12.htm

58

realising that the situation might spiral out of control, sent Deputy Secretary of State

Richard Armitage to the region in May to persuade the two sides to pull back troops. The

visit worked and things began to improve. The de-escalation started a month later after

June and by the end of October 2002, the situation to a greater extent turned normal.

The cost for the 10-month confrontation was huge for India as it lost nearly 2000 soldiers

as compared to Pakistan’s less than three dozen deaths. “The number of army personnel

killed or wounded in Jammu and Kashmir and the western sector during the mobilization,

Operation Parakram, from December 19, 2001 to October 16, 2002, was 1,874,” said

Defence Minister George Fernandes.106 Pakistan suffered around 34 deaths and 10

injured. The buildup cost India nearly 4-billion dollars as compared to Pakistan’s 1.4

billion dollars.107

India’s adventure didn’t produce required results as it failed to carry out strikes or force

Pakistan to stop helping Kashmiris. It only got a vague commitment from Musharraf that

infiltrations will be stopped.

2.8- Composite Dialogue: 2004-2008

The roots of the composite peace process can be traced back to May 1997 when Indian

Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral and his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif agreed on

the sidelines of the SAARC Summit in Maldives, to institute a structural dialogue

process.108 The core of the new process was that no preconditions will be demanded by

the two countries. Also, they agreed to accommodate each other’s key concerns: India

agreed to include Kashmir in the list of issues in return for Pakistan agreeing to talk on

terrorism. Initially, two rounds were held in October and November of 1998. Later,

Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee visited Lahore to boost it but these efforts collapsed due

to Kargil in1999. Another top level effort also failed when Agra Summit remained

unfruitful. The attack on Indian parliament and following military confrontations were

106 “India faced an embarrassing defeat during Indo-Pak standoff 2000-2001: The Times of India reveals,”

http;//www.induspress.com//p=786, accessed April 2, 2013, 6:55 pm. 107 Ibid. 108 Sajad Paddar, “The Composite Dialogue Process between India and Pakistan: Structure, Process and

Agency,” Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics, South Asia Institute, Department of

Political Science, Heidelberg University, Working Paper No 65, February 2012, 2.

59

disastrous for the previous peace efforts. But the military face-off had a number of

lessons for the two countries, as it was obvious that without solution of key problems,

they will be locked in mortal conflicts or cold war mode of confrontation.

Musharraf was keen to start positive rearrangements with India. At the height of tensions,

he extended a hand of friendship towards India when during the SAARC Summit in

Kathmandu in January 2002, he walked across the podium to shake hands with Indian

Prime Minister Vajpayee, but it was too early to start negotiations and it took more than a

year before the two sides could think of talks.

The new process of engagements started in 2003, through what India termed as “step by

step” process.109 The positive statements and backdoor efforts bore fruit in November

2003 when the two sides agreed on a ceasefire in Kashmir. With full diplomatic activities

and transport links already restored, the time had come for a more sustained peace effort.

With this, the composite dialogue process was launched in January 2004, when Vajpayee

visited Pakistan for the SAARC Summit. It was the first comprehensive effort to resolve

all problems through sustained and multi-layered talks. The main issues were divided into

eight baskets or groups and assigned to officials and experts to sort them out.

The eight groups include: 1-Peace and Security including CBMs; 2-Jammu and Kashmir;

3-Siachin; 4- Wullar Barrage/Tulbul Navigation Project; 5- Sir Creek; 6- Economic and

Commercial Cooperation; 7- Terrorism and Drug Trafficking; and 8-Promotion of

friendly exchanges.110

The first meeting between foreign secretaries of the two countries was held in New Delhi

in June 2004, followed by five rounds of talks on each of the eight baskets of contentious

issues. Each round was formally closed by the foreign ministers who also launched the

next cycle of negotiations. Progress was reported on all matters. The process generated a

lot of optimism: the dialogue was termed as irreversible and some of the disputes like

Siachen and Sir Creek were declared ripe for solution. The two sides had already agreed

for the sixth round and some of the meetings were also fixed when militants attacked

109 Paddar, The Composite Dialogue. 2. 110 Ibid.

60

Indian financial hub of Mumbai. India blamed Pakistan-based militants and suspended all

peace engagements.

The peace process had created hope but it was “brittle and ephemeral” and there were

concerns that a single act of terror may reverse the gains.111 The Mumbai incident

confirmed the fears. The positive side of the five-year peace process was that the two

neighbours made the first determined effort to resolve issues. Its key achievement was a

number of CBMs (Confidence Building Measures) agreed in conventional and non-

conventional sectors which helped to improve the mutual trust.112

2.9- Mumbai Terror Attack: November 26, 2008

The Mumbai terror attack was launched on November 26, 2008 by a group of 10 gunmen

voyaging from Pakistan’s southern port city of Karachi. “It is believed that the terrorists

commandeered a small fishing vessel at sea and subsequently used a dinghy to come

ashore in the Cuffe Parade area, following which they took separate taxis to their

individual destinations.”113

They killed at least 166 people over three days in a string of assaults at luxury hotels, a

railway station, popular cafes and a Jewish center. One of the attackers, Ajmal Amir

Kasab, was captured alive whose whereabouts were traced to Pakistan. With Kasab in

custody, India for the first time had the strongest evidence that its neighbour was

involved in terrorist activities deep inside its territory. Kasab’s link was established with

Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group, a Pakistani outfit active in Indian occupied Kashmir,

forcing Pakistan to arrest some other alleged operatives of the group, including the

suspected mastermind Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, from Azad Kashmir.

There was massive reaction in India and the relations deteriorated rapidly. The reaction

was partly due to arrest of Kasab as testimony of Pakistani involvement and partly due to

killing of around 26 foreign nationals including US citizens. On November 28, 2007, a

hoax call from India threatened Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari of war. Army was put

111 Chari et al, Four Crises, 212. 112 Paddar, The Composite Dialogue, 19. 113 Samarjit Ghosh, “Mumbai Terror Attacks: An Analysis, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies,”

http://www.ipcs.org/pdf_file/issue/SR66-Samarjit-Final. Pdf, accessed April 15, 2013, 7:05 pm.

61

on high alert and warplanes with live weapons were scrambled over the skies of the

capital and garrison city of Rawalpindi, where army’s headquarters are located.

Pakistan condemned the attacks and offered help. Initially, media reported that the

government was thinking of sending the head of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to India

but it did not materialize, apparently due to opposition from the military. Indian media

was more aggressive than the officials and from the outset blamed Pakistan. Delhi took

time to involve Islamabad, but once they had Kasab, the scenario changed. Pakistan was

put on the defensive as the international community rallied behind India in support of

demanding Pakistan to take decisive action against militants.

The immediate result of the incident was suspension of over five-year old composite

dialogue which had been termed as “irreversible”. Both countries had worked on the

peace process, hoping that at least some of the thorny issues might be settled. Mumbai

incident swept away the investment made to build mutual trust. For the next two years,

the two sides were once again locked in blame game and controversies as to who was

responsible for the attacks and to what degree, and how the perpetrators be punished.

The attack came just three days after President Asif Ali Zardari had said at a leadership

summit in India through satellite link that his country will not be the first to use nuclear

weapons against India.114 Zardari’s statement was not out of blue but part of the goodwill

generated by the peace process. The ambience of friendly ties evaporated at the first shot

by militants in Mumbai. Once on square one, fresh initiatives were made to re-engage.

Finally, the two sides agreed to resume talks when Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and

Yusuf Raza Gilani, met in April 2010 on the side-lines of the SAARC Summit in Bhutan.

The history of relations shows several ups and downs. The good part is the tendency to

return to the table after each setback. The chief hurdles are lack of institutional

mechanism to deal with problems and deep distrust towards each other.

114 Vinod Sharma and Zia Haq, “There is a bit of India in every Pakistani: Zardari,”

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Nwes-Feed/India/There-is-a-bit-of-India-in-every- Pakistan-

Zardari/Article 1-353488.aspx, accessed on April 15, 2013, 7:34 pm.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Nwes-Feed/India/There-is-a-bit-of-India-in-every-%20Pakistan-zardary/Article%201-353488.aspx


62

Chapter 3

Pakistan Media: An Evaluation

Pakistan enjoys a vibrant print and electronic media. There are dozens of newspapers and

TV channels. It was quite a task to pick and choose. As mentioned in the introduction,

two newspapers each have been used to gauge coverage around the five selected events.

Dawn is the main newspaper for all events but an additional newspaper has been used for

every period under coverage. The following table helps to understand the coverage

schedule.

Table 3.1: Coverage in Pakistani Newspapers

Sr

No.

Events First

Newspaper

Second

Newspaper

Coverage (15

days)

1 Agra Summit: 2001 Dawn The Nation July 8-22

2 Parliament Attack: 2001 Dawn The News Dec 6-20

3 Military

Standoff:

2002

Escalation Dawn The Frontier

Post

Jan 1-5

Escalation

on Peak

Dawn Daily Times June 1-5

De-

escalation

Dawn Daily Times Oct 1-5

4 Composite

Dialogue:

2004-8

Launch of

Dialogue

Dawn The Nation Jan 3-7

Mid-term

Review

Dawn The Frontier

Post

April 15-19

Final

Review

Dawn Daily Times July 9-13

5 Mumbai Attack: 2008 Dawn The News Nov 19- Dec

3

As far as electronic media is concerned, the original plan to scan two TV channels (Geo

and ARY) for 15-day on the pattern of the print media was dropped due to unavailability

of TV contents. It was decided in consultation with the supervisor to study the overall

impact of the electronic media on ties with India. For this, elite interviews were

conducted with three media professionals, including M. Ziauddin, Rahimullah Yusufzai

and Javed Siddiq. Interview with Ziauddin was conducted in Islamabad on July 24, 2014.

63

The telephonic interview with Rahimullah was done on Aug 5, 2014. Siddiq interview

was recorded on Aug 7, 2014. (The recorded copies are available with the researcher.)

In the following pages, the evaluation of Pakistan media coverage is given. First, the

detailed day-to-day coverage of the selected newspapers is presented. It is followed by

the interviews of the experts.

3.1- Print Media and Agra Summit

Dawn and The Nation have been used for Agra Summit coverage.

3.1.1- Dawn

The 15-day coverage in Dawn is presented.

July 8

The paper published 10 stories related to India.

Table 3.2: Dawn Coverage on July 8

Sr

No

Dateline Byline Headline Source Slant Impact

1 Islamabad Staff Report No solution expected

at first meeting

OS C SN

2 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Musharraf consults

experts, ex-generals

MS N SP

3 Islamabad Syed Talat

Hussain

Talks success

Islamabad’s prime

concern

MS C N

4 Islamabad APP No Indian proposal on

security talks yet

OS C N

5 Srinagar Reuters 10 killed in Kashmir OS C EN

6 Islamabad Monitoring

Desk

India terms invitation

to APHC an irritant

MS C N

7 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Wali optimistic about

talks

OS P SP

8 New Delhi NNI Advani suggests

confederation

OS C N

9 New Delhi Monitoring

Desk

Indian PM convenes

all-party moot

MS N SP

10 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

New Delhi assured of

gas pipeline security

OS P SP

64

OS: Official Source

MS: Mixed Source

C: Conflict

P: Peace

N: Neutral

SP: Slightly Positive

P: Positive


SN: Slightly Negative

N: Negative


In the front page headline the paper reported that no solution of any major issue between

Pakistan and India was expected at the Agra Summit. It reported Musharraf met experts

to evolve a strategy for his India visit. Talat Hussain reported that Pakistan was insisting

over a meeting with the APHC leaders. APP quoted FO spokesman that no proposal

about security talks was received from India. Reuters reported that 10 militants were

killed by Indian forces in Kashmir. On its back page the paper reported that India

informed Pakistan that invitation to APHC for high tea at High Commission will vitiate

the atmosphere. It also reported that veteran politician Wali Khan expressed optimism

about the outcome of talks between Pakistan and India. NNI reported that L.K. Advani

said he was optimistic that South Asian countries will form a confederation including

Pakistan and India. The monitoring desk of the paper said that Indian PM had convened a

meeting of all parties to consult for talks with Pakistan. On a different note, Petroleum

Minister Usman Aminuddin told media that Pakistan was ready to provide security for

IPI gas pipeline.

65

July 9

There were eight stories linked to India-Pakistan relations.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Reuters/AFP Talks with India on

security tomorrow

AS P P


Hussain

Kashmir will get

disputed status, hopes

CE

AS C N

3 New Delhi AFP Delhi may relax visa

rules

MS P P


Desk

Islamabad, New

Delhi experts meet

today

MS N SP

5 Srinagar Monitoring

Desk

Pakistan woman

freed, faces another

ordeal

MS N EP

6 New Delhi NNI Tight Security for

Musharraf

MS N SP

7 Srinagar AFP Hizb calls for steps to

bring peace

OS P SP

8 Dubai Our Corresp. Summit not to

provide relief to

Kashmiris

OS C N

AS: Anonymous Source

In the front page headline the paper carried a report by Reuters and AFP that India

DGMO Lt. Gen. G.S. Sihota was likely to visit Pakistan. Talat Hussain reported that

Musharraf will discuss Kashmir during his visit. AFP reported that India may relax visa

rules for Pakistanis ahead of the summit. On its back page the paper said that experts

from the two countries were to meet in New Delhi under the auspices of Indian Council

of Social Sciences Research to discuss peace. There was moving story of a Pakistani

woman from Kashmir who crossed inadvertently to Indian Kashmir in 1994 and was

imprisoned. When she was freed in 2001, Pakistan rangers refused to let her back due to

lack of papers. She was reportedly raped in India and gave birth to a child and faced

bleak future on both sides of the border. NNI reported that elaborate security measures

66

were being taken by India for safety of Musharraf. Hizbul Mujahidin was reported by

AFP as saying that both countries should work for peace in Kashmir. The paper also

reported former premier Benazir Bhutto saying that Agra Summit will not bring peace.

July 10

The coverage was down as compared to the previous days.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Offer to reopen

Rajasthan route

OS P EP

2 New Delhi M. Ziauddin No meeting, no

regret, says Bhat

OS N SP

3 New Delhi AFP Summit not to focus

on Kashmir

OS C N

4 New Delhi Reuters Pakistan, India traders

optimistic

MS P P

5 New Delhi AFP Delhi seeks dialogue

on nuclear issue

OS P SP

6 Islamabad Reuters Islamabad rejects

border talks proposal

OS C N

Jawed Naqvi reported from India that Vajpayee was ready to give major push to peace

talks by offering an old route from Rajasthan to Sindh, revive roads links between

Kashmir and relax visas for Pakistanis. Ziauddin wrote from New Delhi that APHC

leader Abdul Ghani Bhat said he will not be disappointed if not allowed by India to meet

Musharraf but said that both countries would have to let people from Kashmir to become

part of the talks. The paper had a lead in the pack page that Vajpayee told all parties

conference that Kashmir will not be focus of talks with Pakistan. Reuters reported that

traders from both countries wanted trade facilitation agreements. AFP reported India also

wanted talks on the nuclear issues. Indian MPs including deputy chairperson of Rajya

Sabah Najma Heptullah said that it was easier to be friends than enemies and urged talks

to end problems. Reuters said that Pakistan rejected Indian offer for meeting of military

officials by saying that it was only possible after the Agra Summit.

67

July 11

The paper published 10 stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Ihtasham ul

Haq

Summit to focus on

Kashmir dispute

OS C N


Desk

APHC leaders to

meet Musharraf

MS C N

3 Islamabad Faraz

Hashmi

Peace depends on

talks success: CE

OS N SP

4 Srinagar AFP BSF claims

thwarting bomb plot

AS C N

5 Muzaffarabad Tariq Naqash Lashkar terms peace

process a conspiracy

OS C N

6 New York Masood

Haidar

No Indian POWs in

jails: Moin

OS C N


Desk

Delhi rally seeks

release of prisoners

MS C N

8 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Indi mum on divided

Kashmiris’

citizenship

MS C N

9 Srinagar Reuters APHC call for strike

on 13th

OS C N

10 Srinagar Reuters Five troops among

26 killed in valley

MS C EN

The paper in its lead said that the summit with India will focus on Kashmir. “A number

of issues will would come up for discussion but Kashmir will be the focus of two-day

discussion,” Musharraf’s press secretary Maj. Gen. Rashid Qureshi said.115 In the second

major front page news it was reported that APHC leaders will meet Musharraf. Faraz

Hashmi reported Musharraf saying that peace in the region was linked with the talks

between Pakistan and India. AFP reported that BSF had claimed thwarting a bombing

attempt to coincide with the summit. On its back page the paper carried the lead on a

statement by LeT chief Hafiz Saeed who termed the peace efforts with India as a

conspiracy against the people of Kashmir. Interior minister Moinuddin Haider, who was

115 Ihtasham ul Haq, “Summit to focus on Kashmir Dispute,” Dawn, July 11, 2001.

68

in US, said that there were no Indian POWs in Pakistan. The paper also reported a protest

by relatives of 54 missing Indian soldiers who alleged that they were taken as PoWs in

1971 war. Jawed Naqvi reported that India was not sure how to treat people of Azad

Kashmir, as India citizen or Pakistanis for their travels. Reuters reported that APHC had

called for strike on July 13 to remember the martyrs of Kashmir. The same news agency

also reported that 26 people including five soldiers were killed in the “held Kashmir”

violence.

July 12

Nine stories were published on the day.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Faraz

Hashmi

Musharraf says no

bargain on Kashmir

OS C N

2 New Delhi Reuters Vajpayee seeks

parties’ support

OS N SP

3 New Delhi AFP Coalition partners to

boycott high tea

OS C N

4 New Delhi Jawed

Naqvi

India regrets

Pakistan’s invitation

to APHC

OS C N

5 Washington Tahir Mirza Summit vital to US,

says official

OS N P

6 New Delhi APP Experts agree on

points to improve

security

MS N SP

7 Agra AFP VHP holds

demonstration

OS C N

8 Srinagar AFP 16 killed in valley MS C N

9 Washington APP Pakistan, India closer

than ever to Kashmir

solution

MS N SP

Faraz Hashmi in the main lead reported that Musharraf has made it clear that there will be

no bargain on Kashmir. In the second major front page story, Vajpayee was reported as

seeking support of parties for the summit. Indian coalition partners had decided to skip

69

the high tea by Pakistan’s High Commissioner where APHC leaders were also invited.

Jawed Naqvi reported that India formally regretted the invitation given to the APHC.

Tahir Mirza reported that a US official had termed the meeting between Pakistan and

India as important. Separately, private experts from the two countries agreed on a 10-

point agenda at a conference in India to improve security environment. There was a news

item on the back page that VHP had protested at the venue of the summit, demanding

apology from Musharraf for Kargil. AFP reported that 16 people were killed in clashes in

held Kashmir. APP quoted an interview of Kashmir leader Abdul Ghani Lone that the

Agra Summit had brought Pakistan and India closer to a solution of Kashmir.

July 13

There were nine stories about Pak-India relations.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi UN resolutions not

enforceable

OS C N

2 New Delhi M. Ziauddin Vajpayee wants talks

to continue

OS N SP

3 Srinagar AFP 21 die in Kashmir

struggle

MS C N

4 New York Masood

Haider

Kashmiri leader seeks

negotiated settlement

OS P P

5 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Easy visa procedure

for media people

demanded

OS N SP

6 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Congress hopes for

summit success

OS P P

7 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Commanders back

CE’s peace efforts

OS P SP

8 Dubai Reuters Permanent LoC can’t

be accepted:

Musharraf

MS C N

9 New Delhi AFP Indian police warning AS C N

70

Indian External Affair Minister Jaswant Singh told media that UN resolutions were not

enforceable as Kashmir was not the core issue but core of Indian nationalism.116 Ziauddin

held exclusive interview with Vajpayee who wanted the talks to continue. AFP reported

that 21 people had died in Kashmir due to violence. On the back page lead, the paper

reported from New York where APHC leader Maulvi Omar Farooq said that they wanted

Kashmir issue should be solved through talks. Separately, the security experts at the end

of two day conference in New Delhi urged for easy visa regime for media persons.

Opposition Congress party said it wants solution of problems with Pakistan and success

for the summit. Musharraf chaired a crucial meeting of Corps Commanders who

supported his peace initiative. Separately, the Gulf News quoted Musharraf saying that

the LoC cannot be accepted as permanent border. AFP reported that Indian police feared

a suicide attack on Musharraf by Kashmiri fighters.

July 14

Nine seemed the magic number, as once again the paper published nine stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Shadow of hardliners

hangs over summit

MS C SN

2 New Delhi AFP Hurriyat chief

expects role at a later

stage

OS N SP


Hussain

Composition of team

sums up Pakistan’s

position

MS C N

4 New Delhi AFP Kargil must not

affect talks, says

Vajpayee

OS P SP

5 Karachi Monitoring

Desk

Itinerary of

Musharraf’s stay in

India

MS N SP

6 Srinagar AFP Strike paralyzes

valley

MS C N

7 Muzaffarabad Tariq Naqash Mid-term travel offer MS C N

116 Jawed Naqvi, “UN resolution not enforceable,” Dawn, July 13, 2001.

71

as a ploy

8 New Delhi Reuters Summit: security

agencies put on alert

AS C N

9 New Delhi Reuters/AFP Pakistan to propose

Mandela for Kashmir

mediation

MS N SP

In the front page lead the paper said that as Musharraf prepared to fly to India on July 14,

both sides were under pressure from the extremists and hawks who wanted to continue

the fiery rhetoric. APHC chief Ghani Bhat was reported as saying that it was better to

include representatives from Kashmir in talks but he would be happy if it is also done at a

later stage. Talat Hussain analyzed the composition of Pakistan delegation and concluded

that Musharraf will only focus on Kashmir. AFP reported Vajpayee that Kargil should be

left behind and it should not affect the summit. There was another story by AFP about a

strike in “held Kashmir”. The paper had a story on the back page about Kashmir, terming

the offer by India to relax travel as a ploy to weaken the freedom struggle. Reuters

reported that Indian security agencies were on high alert ahead of Musharraf’s visit.

There was a story based on reports of AFP and Reuters that Pakistan was planning to

nominate Nelson Mandela for mediation on Kashmir.

July 15

The paper published 12 stories on the first day of the summit.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi M. Ziauddin Narayanan,

Musharraf promise

better ties

OS P P

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Musharraf meets

APHC leaders,

pledges support

OS C EN

3 New Delhi Corresp. President gets

warm welcome

MS P P

4 Jammu AFP India begins partial

pullout

AS P P

5 New Delhi AFP/dpa Neharwali Haveli

welcomes

MS N P

72

Musharraf


Desk

Advani suggests

extradition treaty

AS C N


Desk

Sonia Gandhi

meets Musharraf

AS P SP


Desk

CE keen on

gurduwaras’

upkeep

OS N SP

9 New Delhi Reuters India seeks

Ibrahim’s

extradition

OS C N

10 Srinagar AFP Troops trade fire

under LoC

AS C EN

11 New York Masood

Haider

HR Watch urges

civil liberties in

Valley

OS N SP

12 New Delhi APP Substantive talks

expected at Agra:

foreign secretary

OS P SP

Ziauddin reported that Indian President K.R. Narayanan hosted banquet for visiting

Pakistani leader Musharraf. During the brief speeches at the banquet, both leaders

referred to the founding fathers who wanted their countries to live in peace. Jawed Naqvi

reported that Musharraf met the APHC leaders invited at the tea party by Pakistan High

Commission, and promised “continued moral and political support” to their struggle for

freedom.117 The paper also reported that warm welcome was accorded to Pakistan leader

by India. As Musharraf was having peace talks, AFP reported from Jammu that India

started withdrawing about 20,000 troops from Kashmir. Officials told the newswire that

10,000 troops will be withdrawn within a week and the remaining 10,000 over the next

month.

On the back page, the paper reported that Musharraf made nostalgic visit to the house

where his family lived before partition. Advani held 25-minute meeting with Musharraf

and suggested a treaty for the extradition of criminals. He also said peace cannot be held

hostage to a single point agenda. In a meeting with Congress top leader Sonia Gandhi

who told Musharraf that there should be flexibility on both sides. Tarlochan Singh, a

member of minority commission, met Musharraf and they discussed how to improve the

117 Jawed Naqvi, “Musharraf meets APHC leaders, pledges support,” Dawn, July 15, 2001.

73

upkeep of gurduwaras. India spokeswoman Nirupma Rao said that they asked Musharraf

to extradite Dawood Ibrahim who allegedly was living in Karachi and was needed for

role in bombings. Despite goodwill generated by Musharraf during his visit, the LoC was

tense and an Indian defense spokesman was quoted by AFP that the two sides traded fire.

Masood Haider reported from New York that Human Right Watch asked Pakistan and

India to restore and respect basic rights of people in Kashmir. The paper on its national

pages carried a report by APP which quoted Pakistan Foreign Secretary Inamul Haq that

they hoped for substantive talks at Agra between the two countries.

July 16

The key report was by AFP that Indian army spokesman denied reports about troops’

pullout from Kashmir.


Sr

No


1 Agra M. Ziauddin Differences force

third round

AS C SN

2 Agra Jawed Naqvi Talks termed frank

and constructive

OS P P

3 Islamabad dpa Pakistan denies

hosting Ibrahim

OS C N

4 Srinagar Agencies 49 killed in Kashmir

fighting

MS C EN

5 Agra Reuters/AFP Musharraf, Sehba

visit Taj Mahal

OS N P

6 Fatehpur

Sikri

Monitoring

Desk

Sehba visits tomb of

Salim Chisti

MS N P

7 Srinagar AFP India army denied

troops pullout

OS C N

8 Agra Reuters Plows: protestors

arrested in Agra

OS C N

9 Muzaffarabad APP Talks welcomed OS P SP

10 Muzaffarabad Tariq Naqash Kashmiris anxious

for summit success

MS P SP

11 Agra Monitoring

Desk

Sehba asks for

Indian food’s recipe

MS N SP

74

The headline on front page started with a teaser that joint declaration was delayed. The

paper said there were differences over the joint statement and the leaders will meet one-

on-one for 10 minutes the next day to sort out the differences.118 Jawed Naqvi reported

that the two sides termed the talks as constructive, as the two leaders made efforts to end

differences over Kashmir and other issues. German dpa reported that Pakistan interior

secretary rejected allegations that Dawood Ibrahim was hiding in the country. There was

a report by agencies that 38 Mujahedeen and 11 India soldiers were killed in occupied

Kashmir due to fighting.

The back page had a report about Musharraf’s visit to Taj Mahal with his wife Sheba who

also visited tomb of Salim Chisti in Fatehpur Sikri. She reportedly prayed for success of

the summit. AFP reported that Indian military spokesman in Srinagar said that there was

no plan to pullout the troops. From Agra, there was a report that police arrested about a

dozen men for protesting in Agra over alleged POWs in Pakistan. APP reported that

Hizbul Mujahedeen chief Syed Salahuddin welcomed the peace talks. Tariq Naqash

reported from Azad Kashmir that people were anxious for the success of the summit. The

paper also reported that Sehba was so impressed with food at Amar villas hotel in Agra

that she sought recipes of Mulligatawny soup, Nalli Gosht and Murg ke Parchey.

July 17

The end of summit was hailed with 10 stories.


Sr

No


1 Agra Jawed Naqvi Summit fails,

Musharraf back home

MS C EN

2 Agra Corresp.

Reporter

Kashmir central to

amity with India:

President

OS C EN

3 Srinagar AFP Five soldiers among

42 killed in Valley

OS C EN

4 Mumbai Monitoring

Desk

Delhi seeks

assurances on gas

OS N SN

118 M. Ziauddin, “Differences force third round,” Dawn, July 16, 2001.

75

supply

5 Islamabad Reuters Mujahedeen vow to

continue struggle

OS C EN

6 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Search begins for

Indian POWs

AS C N

7 Agra Dpa Dialogue lasted for

eight hours

MS N SP

8 Agra Reuters Minister claims

drown on Kashmir

omission

OS P SP

9 Ajmer AFP Musharraf cancels

visit to shrine

OS C SN


Desk

NDA parties react

cautiously

OS P SP

The front page screaming headline noted that peace talk had failed and Musharraf flew

home empty handed. The paper had offered good short analysis that Indian were feed up

with Musharraf doing the loud talks through media against “deafening silence” by

Vajpayee. So they sent him off without granting a press conference or a joint declaration.

The paper also reported the breakfast meeting with the Indian editors where Musharraf’s

insistence on Kashmir angered India and contributed to the failure of the talks. AFP

reported that in the continued violence in held Kashmir, five soldiers and 42 people,

mostly militants, were killed. The paper reported from Mumbai that India sought security

on the Iran gas pipeline issue.

The paper on its back page had the lead based on an interview of Syed Salahauddin with

Reuters who said that the armed struggle will continue. Quoting officials, the paper said

that Pakistan was combing its jails to ascertain if any India POW was held as alleged by

relatives of soldiers missing since 1971 war. German dpa reported that peace dialogue in

Agra lasted for eight hours. Reuters reported that Indian Information Minister Sushma

Swaraj said that her failure to not mention Kashmir in the briefing was not intentional.

Pakistan was angered that she did not point out that Kashmir was discussed on the first

day of the summit. There was news that Musharraf called off his planned visit to Ajmer.

The paper also reported that coalition partners of ruling NDA were cautious to react to

the failure of the summit.

76

July 18

The coverage was going down as eight stories were published on the day.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad/

New Delhi

Hassan

Akhatar &

Jawed Naqvi

Pakistan, India pledge

to continue talks

OS P P

2 Washington Tahir Mirza US satisfied with

Agra dialogue

OS N SP

3 Agra Corresp. Vajpayee to continue

talks with Musharraf

AS P P

4 New Delhi Reuters BJP hopeful of new

peace move

OS P P

5 New York Dpa Dialogue should

continue, says UN

chief

OS N P

6 Srinagar AFP Mujahideen want role

in talks

OS C N

7 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Summit’s failure was

expected: politicians

MS C N


Hussain

Indian media has

mixed views about

Agra meeting

outcome

MS N SP

The talked had failed to produce any result but the two sides were not ready to blame

each other. Rather, Foreign Ministers Abdul Sattar and Jaswant Singh in separate press

conferences said that peace talks will continue.119 Tahir Mirza reported that the US was

satisfied with the Agra talks and happy that neither side termed it as a failure. The paper

on the back page lead quoted an Indian official saying that Prime Minister Vajpayee was

looking forward to continue talks with Pakistan. Reuters reported that ruling BJP said that

the two countries still could bridge the difference despite failure of the summit. The UN

chief was quoted as saying by dpa that talks should continue. AFP reported from Srinagar

that Kashmiri militants wanted a role in the talks. The paper quoted Pakistan politicians

saying that they expected the failure as it was not possible to solve Kashmir in one

119 Hasan Akhatar and Jawed Naqvi, “Pakistan, India pledge to continue talks,” Dawn, July 18, 2001.

77

sitting. Talat Hussain in a review of Indian media said that they did not broadly blame

Pakistan for the failure.

July 19

There was further dip in the coverage as only six stories appeared in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Ihtashamul

Haque &

Faraz

Hashmi

No deadlock in talks:

Musharraf

OS P P

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Vajpayee wins

support of Pakistan

visit

OS P P


Hussain

Both leaders worked

to save summit

AS P EP

4 Bombay AFP Thackeray opposes

Vajpayee’s visit

OS C N

5 Jeddah Online Riyadh hails summit OS N SP

6 New York Corresp. Pakistan, India can

build on ‘faltering

start’: report

MS P P

The headline was about Musharraf briefing the National Security Council and Cabinet

that there was no deadlock in talks and the two sides had agreed to continue the dialogue.

Jawed Naqvi reported that Vajpayee won support of cabinet to visit Pakistan despite

pressure from the hawks. Talat Hussain reported through sources that both Musharraf and

Vajpayee tried to save the summit and didn’t blame each other for the failure. On the

back page, AFP reported that hardline Shiv Sena leader in his party mouthpiece Saamna

opposed any plan by Vajpayee to visit Pakistan. The Online reported that Saudi Arabia

hailed the summit. On its national page, the paper quoted a report by New York Times

that the two sides can build on the Agra Summit to promote peace.

78

July 20

The honeymoon period was over and the blame-game started.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Reuters/AFP India asked to fulfill

summit pledges

OS C N

2 Brussels Corresp. EU wants dialogue to

continue

OS N SP


Desk

Musharraf may remit

sentences of 25

Indians

MS P SP

4 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

No Indian POWs in

Pakistan, says govt

OS C N

5 New Delhi AFP Jaswant Singh to visit

Pakistan

OS P P

6 Washington Staff Corresp. Summit a cause for

optimism, says US

OS P P

Dawn in a front page news blamed India for the failure to fulfill the promises at the Agra

Summit. The EU said it wanted the two sides to continue talks. The paper reported a

news by IANS that Musharraf was planning to remit sentences of 25 Indian prisoners

who have less than one year to serve in the jails. The paper also reported that Pakistan

had said that there was no Indian POW in its jails. AFP quoted India MEA spokesperson

that Foreign Minister Jaswant will visit Pakistan. The US assistant secretary of state

Christian Rocca said she considered the summit a success.

July 21

The paper published six stories.


Sr

No



Haque and

Faraz

Hashmi

People want peace,

hawks can be ignored

OS P P

79


Desk

Vajpayee for better

ties

OS P SP

3 New Delhi AFP New Delhi rejects

Islamabad’s stance

OS C N

4 London Monitoring

Desk

UK hopeful of talks

resumption

OS P SP

5 Srinagar Reuters Three Indian soldiers

killed along LoC

AS C EN

6 Islamabad PPI Pakistan to protect

gas pipeline

OS P SP

The headline was about Musharraf saying that hawks were everywhere but he appealed to

the moderates in Pakistan and India for peace talks. On the other side of the border,

Indian PM also expressed desire for better ties with Pakistan. PTI reported that Vajpayee

was talking to BJP leaders. The paper on the back page said that India rejected Pakistan

allegation that it had gone back on the promises as no agreement was reached at Agra.

UK said it was hopeful that the two sides may resume talks. Reuters said that three Indian

soldiers were killed on the LoC. PPI reported that Foreign Secretary Riaz Muhammad

Khan said Pakistan will provide security to the proposed IPI gas pipeline.

July 22

The coverage period ended with five stories in the newspaper.


Sr

No


1 New York Masood

Haider

US offers to remove

differences

OS C SN

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Kashmiris’ will was

main condition

MS C N


Desk

Indian govt to come

under fire on summit

MS C N

4 Srinagar AFP Fire exchanged along

LoC

OS C N

5 Islamabad AFP LoC firing: Pakistan

to retaliate, says

Qureshi

OS C EN

80

Masood Haider reported about US Secretary of State Colin Powell telling reporters that

his country was willing to help mitigate the differences between Pakistan and India.

Jawed Naqvi reported that an Indian editor had revealed the copy of joint declaration

agreed between Musharraf and Vajpayee. The draft put Kashmir at center and that it

should be solved according to wishes of people of Kashmir. The paper also reported that

Indian ruling party came under fire from Congress for alleged bungling at Agra. AFP had

two reports about firing on the LoC and Pakistan military spokesman said their troops

will respond to any provocation by India.

3.1.2- The Nation

The Nation is one of the mainstream papers. It is center-to-right paper and usually critical

of India. Its coverage helps to gauge the attitude of rightwing media towards India. The

coverage period is from July 8 to 22, 2001.

July 8

The paper published six stories on the first day of the coverage period.

Table 3.17: The Nation Coverage on July 8

Sr

No


1 Rawalpindi Monitoring

Desk

Musharraf welcomes

Indian military talks

offer

MS P SP

2 Islamabad Rana Qaisar Intellectual extend

support to President

MS P SP

3 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

No proposal received

for DGMO visit: FO

OS C SN

4 London Brian

Cloughley

Kashmir, Kuldip

Nayar and Jawaharlal

Nehru

MS C SN

5 New Delhi NNI Sonia opposes

Musharraf-APHC

meeting

OS C N

6 Agra AFP HR group asks

Pakistan to free

Indians

OS N SN

The Nation published a VoA story as lead on the front page that Musharraf told

journalists at his residence in Rawalpindi that he welcomed the Indian offer to hold

81

DGMOs meeting to stabilize the situation at the LoC. Rana Qaisar reported that

Musharraf’s told a group of writers that he would not compromise the traditional position

on Kashmir during talks. As Musharraf welcomed Indian military talks offer, FO said no

such proposal was received. Brian Cloughley wrote about an interview with the famous

Indian journalist Kuldip Nayar who said that Nehru had changed his mind about

plebiscite in Kashmir after Pakistan signed defence pacts with the US. On the back page,

the paper carried an NNI report that Congress leader Sonia Gandhi had opposed any

meeting between Musharraf and APHC, while Pehchan human right group demanded

Pakistan to release all Indian prisoners and also asked Musharraf to apologize over Kargil

episode.

July 9

Ten stories were carried by the paper.


Sr

No



Desk

Indian DGMO due

tomorrow

MS P P

2 New Delhi AFP Indian likely to relax

visa for Pakistanis

MS P P

3 Islamabad NNI Summit fate hinges

on Indian attitude

OS C N

4 Karachi AFP Businessmen want

Pak-India trade

OS P P

5 Lahore Nadeem

Syed

Arab world support

vital

MS C SN

6 Srinagar AFP 14 killed in held

Kashmir violence

MS C EN

7 Srinagar AFP Hizb urges India,

Pakistan to fulfill

dream of peace

OS P SP

8 New Delhi APP Indo-Pak summit a

right step: Samajwadi

party

OS P P

9 Islamabad Report FO briefs media men

covering summit

OS N SP

10 Rawalpindi Abrar Saeed Progress in N-tech

forced India to talk

OS C N

82

The headline was based on a report by Radio Tehran that Indian DGMO was coming to

Pakistan for a visit. AFP report was published as box item within the headline that India

may relax visas for Pakistan. Single column news was published parallel to the lead in

which Musharraf was quoted saying that success of the summit would depend on attitude

of India. There was a weird story that Arab world support was vital for the summit.

There were five news stories on the back page. At the lower half was an AFP story that

14 people, including nine Mujahideen, two soldiers and three civilians were killed in

Kashmir. The same newswire reported that Hizbul Mujahideen asked Pakistan and India

to deliver peace in Kashmir. APP reported the Smajwadhi Party in India welcomed the

summit while Pakistan FO briefed media about the summit. There was news about

nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan saying that India was forced to talk with Pakistan

due to progress in the nuclear technology.

July 10

The coverage was still in higher mode with eight stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Iftikhar

Gilani

India to issue visas to

Pakistanis at border

OS P P

2 Islamabad Rana Qaisar Islamabad declines

pre-summit mily talks

OS C N

3 Islamabad NNI Third option not to be

discussed, says ISPR

OS C N

4 New Delhi APP Busy schedule awaits

Musharraf in India

MS N SP

5 New Delhi Corresp. Vajpayee gets

opposition backing

MS P SP

6 Lahore Mubashir

Hasan

Vajpayee enjoys

majority’s

overwhelming support

MS P SP

7 Srinagar AFP 14 killed in fresh held

Kashmir clashes

MS C EN


Gilani

Indian DGMO rings

Pakistan counterpart

AS P SP

83

A report by Iftikhar Gilani from India was the lead. It quoted MEA spokeswoman

Nirupma Rao that India was making travel easier for Pakistanis by opening of points at

the LoC and issuing visas at border. Rana Qaisar reported that Pakistan refused to hold

DGMO meeting, saying “India has been informed that discussion on military issues

related to the Line of Control (LoC) will flow from the forthcoming summit rather than

precede it,” said an ISPR statement.120 Separately, both presidential spokesman Rashid

Qureshi and secretary information Syed Anwar Mahmood said that talks will focus on

Kashmir which should be solved as per UN resolutions.

APP reported about the hectic schedule of Musharraf in India. The paper also carried a

report that Vajpayee had won crucial support of all opposition parties for the summit.

There was a report based on the interview of veteran peacenik Mubashir Hasan who said

the summit is different from 1999 meeting between Vajpayee and Nawaz Sharif as

Vajpayee has full support of establishment and political parties. As violence continued in

Kashmir, AFP reported that 13 Kashmiris and one Indian soldier were killed in clashes.

Iftikhar Gilani reported that Indian DGMO Lt-Gen G.S. Sihota telephoned his

counterpart Maj-Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and requested for an early meeting.

July 11



Sr

No


1 Islamabad Rana Qaisar India must realize

need to solve Kashmir

OS C N

2 Islamabad Zamir

Hiader

First Kashmir, then

trade, says Dawood

OS C N

3 Islamabad Corresp Pakistan to discuss

CBMs after summit

OS C N

4 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

DGMO meeting after

summit

OS C N

5 Islamabad Staff India recognizes OS C N

120 Rana Qaisar, “Islamabad declines pre-summit mily talks,” The Nation, July 10, 2001.

84

Reporter Kashmir a dispute:

ISPR

6 Colombo AFP Mily ties with India

not at Pakistan cost:

US

OS N SN

7 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

NSC discusses

summit strategy today

MS N SN

8 Islamabad PPI Pak-India ties to grow

in future, hopes

France

OS N SP

9 Srinagar AFP 18 Mujahideen among

25 killed in Kashmir

MS C EN

10 Srinagar AFP JKLF to boycott

Musharraf ‘tea party’

OS C SN

11 Srinagar AFP India claims summit-

eve bomb plot

thwarted

AS C N

12 New Delhi NNI OIC promises funds

for Kashmir

rehabilitation

OS C SN


Gilani

Musharraf to hold

‘closed-door’ meeting

with Hurriyat

AS C N

14 Lahore Corresp. Israr for Kashmir

solution according to

partition plan

OS C N

15 Islamabad Online Imran not hopeful

about summit

OS C N

Rana Qaisar reported Musharraf telling a group of religious minorities and students that

India should first resolve Kashmir as “an unresolved Kashmir issue remains a stumbling

block in the way of peace and prosperity of the South Asian region”. Pakistan Commerce

Minister said first Kashmir should be solved then trade will be normalized. The paper had

two reports about linking the CBMs and visit of DGMOs to the results of the summit.

ISPR spokesman was quoted as saying that India has understanding with Pakistan that

Kashmir was an issue. The Commander of US Pacific Fleet, Admiral Denis Blair, was

quoted as saying that US was deepening ties with India but it will not be done at cost of

Pakistan. The paper also reported about the meeting of NSC which it said was expected

to decide that Kashmir will be central and also decide how much flexibility Pakistan can

show on it.

85

On the back page, the paper reported ambassador of France in Pakistan, Yannick Gerrard,

saying that success of the summit will pave way for better ties between Pakistan and

India. The paper published three reports by AFP. First report said that 18 Mujahideen and

three soldiers were among 25 people killed in Kashmir while pro-independence JKLF

had refused to be part of tea party organized by Pakistan high commission. It also quoted

a BSF official saying that a high intensity bomb was deactivated in Srinagar. On the

national pages, the paper reported Iftikhar Gilani as stating that Musharraf will hold a

close-door meeting with APHC leaders. Separately, well known Islamic scholar Dr Israr

Ahmad said that Kashmir should be solved according to partition plan. In another news

item, Online reported that Imran Khan was not hopeful about success of the summit.

July 12

There were nine stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Rana Qaisar Compromise on

Kashmir ruled out

AS C EN

2 New Delhi M.A Niazi Killing two birds with

one stone

MS C N

3 New Delhi AFP Delhi willing to

discuss all issues at

summit

OS P P

4 New Delhi AFP India ruling coalition

to boycott tea party

OS C N

5 Islamabad Sartaj Aziz Kashmir: a historical

perspective

MS C N

6 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

President seeks Arab

leaders support, sends

message to Rongji

MS C SN

7 Islamabad Waseem

Abbasi

Govt’s preparation for

summit raising

concerns: Ahsan

OS C SN

8 Islamabad NNI Full cooperation to

India on gas line: FO

OS P SP

9 Karachi AFP Fishermen pin hope

on summit

MS N P

86

Rana Qaisar reported that NSC meeting ruled out any compromise on Kashmir. M.A.

Niazi in his report opined that the Indian decision to relax visas and opening up of the

LoC was an effort to dilute focus on Kashmir. AFP reported MEA spokeswoman

Nirupma Rao saying that India was ready to discuss all issues including Kashmir. It also

reported the ruling Indian NDA will boycott the tea party due to the invitation to APHC.

Sartaj Aziz wrote on the front page that Kashmir was historically a disputed region. The

main story in the back page was about FO assuring India of full security over the

proposed Iran gas pipeline. AFP wrote that fishermen caught in disputed waters were

hoping that success of the summit may end their ordeal. Opposition leader Ahsan Iqbal

said government may compromise the national interests in the talks.

July 13

Twelve stories were published about Pak-India ties.


Sr

No


1 Rawalpindi Online Pakistan, India now

closer to peace

OS P P

2 Islamabad Rana Qaisar Commanders’ go-

ahead to Musharraf

for Kashmir talks

AS C SN

3 New Delhi APP Vajpayee for seeking

ways to address entire

relationships

OS C SN

4 New Delhi AFP Jaswant rules out

tripartite talks…

OS C N

5 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Jehadis to stand by

‘positive’

breakthrough

AS C SN

6 Srinagar AFP 25 killed in Kashmir

ahead of summit

AS C EN

7 Lahore Humayun

Gauhar

2001: Taj Odyssey MS C N

8 Islamabad Waseem

Abbasi

Kashmir Jehad must

continue, says

Tressler

OS C N

9 Islamabad AFP Most Pakistanis see

no benefit from

OS C N

87

summit: Poll

10 Srinagar AFP Hurriyat bemused by

storm over tea party

MS C SN

11 New Delhi M.A. Niazi Expecting any

progress on Kashmir

simplistic: Gujral

OS C SN

12 Islamabad AFP Pakistan-India may

discuss Siachen

MS N SP

Online reported that Musharraf in an interview with India Today said that it was historic

moment as the region was never so close to peace.121 Rana Qaisar said the Corps

Commanders met for five hours in the Rawalpindi Headquarters and finally gave powers

to Musharraf for “Kashmir talks”. APP held exclusive interview with Vajpayee who

promised to build peaceful ties. Jaswant Singh rejected tripartite talks including

Kashmiris and AFP reported killing of 25 people including two militants and two

soldiers. Humayun Gauhar wrote a highly negative article published on the front page.

He said the talks were a decoy to humiliate Musharraf for launching Kargil. There was

another story which said militants hoped that India will recognize Kashmir as core issue.

The paper on its back page reported that minister for culture and sports S.K. Tressler said

that jehad in Kashmir must continue. AFP reported a Gallup poll that majority 53 percent

respondents said that the summit will not bring peace while another 16 percent feared that

the situation will deteriorate after the summit. AFP said that APHC enjoyed the

controversy over the tea party. M.A. Niazi’s dispatch from India was published on the

national page. He interviewed former premier I.K. Gujral who said that he did not expect

a breakthrough on Kashmir. AFP reported that the two sides may discuss Siachen issue.

July 14

One day before the start of the summit, eight stories were carried by the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi M.A. Niazi Musharraf embarks on

historic summit today

MS N SP

2 Lahore Arif Nizami Core issue is sore MS C N

121 “Pakistan, India now closer to peace,” The Nation, July 13, 2001.

88

issue for Indian

3 Islamabad Absar Alam Pakistan, India look

set to ink ‘Agra

Agreement’

AS P P

4 New Delhi AFP India urges Pakistan

to bury the past

MS C SN

5 Dubai NNI Musharraf may extend

stay in New Delhi

AS P SP

6 Srinagar Ghulam

Nabi Khayal

Complete strike in

IHK

MS C N

7 New Delhi NNI Govt withdraws

APHC leaders

passport

AS C N

8 Bombay AFP Thackeray warns PM OS C N

M.A. Niazi filed lead from India that Musharraf was launching a historic process. It was a

rare positive story by the paper. Arif Nizami wrote on the front page box item that India

already refused to discuss Kashmir as core issue which dims the possibility of success.

Absar Alam quoted officials that draft agreement was ready for signing and Musharraf

might extend the stay to help clinch a deal. There was also a report about complete strike

in Kashmir to observe martyr day. There was an NNI report that Indian government had

withdrawn passports of APHC leaders while AFP reported from Mumbai that Shiv Sena

leader Ball Thackeray warned Indian PM for holding the summit.

July 15

On the first day of the summit, the paper published 13 stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Corresp. No military solution to

Kashmir: Musharraf

OS P SP

2 New Delhi M.A. Niazi Psychological

advantage ahead of

talks

MS C SN

3 Jammu AFP India begins troops

pullout from Kashmir

today

AS P P

4 New Delhi Agencies CE warmly received at

President House

MS N SP

89

5 Srinagar AFP Pak, India troops

exchange fire along

LoC

AS C EN

6 New Delhi AFP Pakistan, India agree

to look forward

OS P P

7 New Delhi M.A. Niazi Pak-India substantive

talks in Agra today

MS N P


Gilani

Musharraf visits

childhood home

OS N P

9 New Delhi AFP Live coverage of

airport ceremony

blocked

MS N SN

10 New Delhi Correp. President meets

APHC leaders, assures

support

MS C N

11 New Delhi AFP Musharraf pays

homage to Mahatma

Gandhi

OS P P

12 Agra AFP Hindu burn Pakistani

flag at summit venue

MS C N

13 New Delhi APP Sehba urges women

role for regional peace

OS N SP

The front page was full of summit related news. The paper in the lead quoted Musharraf

that Kashmir cannot be solved through army. It also talked about Pakistan having some

edge over India ahead of talks as India failed to get any advantage in the pre-summit

period. AFP reported that India was pulling 20,000 troops from Kashmir, as the two sides

looked forward for positive engagements. Musharraf also visited his old family home

where he was born before partition. The substantive talks were planned in Agra where the

two leaders headed after ceremonial interactions in New Delhi on July 14 after Musharraf

reached. He also met Kashmiri leaders invited for the controversial tea party. On the back

page there were three stories. Musharraf visited memorial of Gandhi as symbolic gesture.

His wife visited India Habitat Center and talked about the role of women in regional

peace and development. Separately, the Hindu activists protested in Agra and burnt a

Pakistani flag.

90

July 16

Thirteen stories were published on the second day of the summit.


Sr

No


1 Agra Corresp. Summit talks

extended

MS P P

2 Agra Corresp. Kashmir focus of talk

s

OS C N

3 Agra AFP Vajpayee to visit

Pakistan

AS P P

4 Agra M.A. Niazi Kashmir remains a

stumbling block

MS C N

5 Agra AFP Musharraf tours

monument to live

OS N SP

6 Srinagar AFP Indian army deny

pullout

OS C N

7 Srinagar AFP Troops kill 38 in held

Kashmir

MS C EN

8 Agra APP Protestors clash with

police in Agra

MS C SN

9 New Delhi NNI Musharraf misses out

the Gita

MS N SN

10 New Delhi AFP Hindu purify Gandhi

memorial

MS C N

11 Fatehpur

Sikri

NNI Sehba Musharraf

prays for summit

success

OS P SP

12 Agra PPI PM decision to visit

Pak shows progress

OS P SP

13 New Delhi AFP Indian press sees new

warmth

MS N SP

The front page lead was about extension of the summit. Pakistan Information Secretary

Anwar Mahmood told media that Kashmir was the focus of talks. A major success on the

first day of talks was that Vajpayee had agreed to visit Pakistan. M.A. Niazi wrote that

Kashmir was the main hurdle. After the heated parleys, Musharraf visited Taj Mahal with

his wife. AFP reported that Indian military had denied any plan to pullout of the valley,

while army also claimed that they had killed 38 militants in the held region. The paper

91

also carried an article of Benazir Bhutto on the front page in which she doubted about any

success of the talks.122

On the back page, there was an interesting report that Indian PM had planned to gift Urdu

version of Bhagwad Gita to Musharraf at the high tea but since Vajpayee missed it due to

APHC issue, the gift was undelivered. AFP reported that four Hindus were arrested as

they were trying to wash the Gandhi memorial after visit of Musharraf. Sehba visited

shrine of Saleem Chisti and prayed for success of the summit. President spokesman

Rashid Qureshi termed the decision of Vajpayee to visit Pakistan as a success of the

summit. AFP gave an overview of Indian press about the first day of the summit and said

that it had mixed views about the success, with hopes that tension will be reduced.

July 17

The end of summit was greeted with 14 stories about relations with India.


Sr

No


1 Agra M.A Niazi Summit breaks down MS C EN

2 Islamabad Corresp. President back home OS C N

3 Agra AFP Mush wake-up call to

India on Kashmir

MS C N


violence

MS C EN

5 Agra AFP Vajpayee insists on

cross border terrorism

OS C N

6 Ajmer AFP Musharraf cancels

Ajmer visit

OS C N

7 Islamabad PPI Kashmir was included

in talks: Shushma

OS C SN

8 Islamabad Maqbool

Malik

Mixed reaction to

Agra talks breakdown

MS C N

9 Washington Afzal Khan US exudes optimism

from the Agra summit

OS P SP

10 Islamabad Ayesha

Haroon

Not even agreeing to

disagree

MS C N

11 Agra AFP Agra hotel gets top OS N SP

122 Benazir Bhutto, “The Agra Summit,” The Nation, July 16, 2001.

92

marks from

Musharraf

12 Srinagar PPI 3,000 Kashmiris

missing in custody in

11 yeas

MS C EN

13 Srinagar AFP India claims to have

foiled bomb attack

AS C N

14 Lahore Latif Rana Vajpayee

stubbornness slated

OS C N

The headline said that the summit had failed123 and Musharraf came back to Pakistan

even without visiting the Ajmer shrine. AFP said Vajpayee insisted on cross border

terrorism and Pakistan Information Secretary Anwar Mahmood told BBC that frequent

change of mind by the Indians forced the president to go back without any agreement.

Ayesha Haroon in an article said that failure to agree on a joint declaration was a major

disappointment. As the talks faltered, AFP reported that violence in Kashmir killed at

least 42 people. APP’s Afzal Khan reported from Washington that the US expressed

optimism over the talks despite failure to achieve any success. There was a report by AFP

on the back page that Musharraf lavished praise at the hotel where he stayed in Agra. PPI

reported that 3,000 Kashmiris went missing from police custody since 1990. The paper

also quoted Jamaat-i-Islami chief Qazi Hussain Ahmad that the summit failed due to

stubbornness of Vajpayee.

July 18

The coverage was still high in terms of number as 11 news items were published.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Correp. Talks inconclusive,

not a failure, says

Sattar

OS P P

2 Agra Corresp. Talks a step towards

lasting peace: Jaswant

OS P P

3 Rawalpindi Abrar Saeed Mujahideen vow to

continue jehad

OS C N

123 “Summit breaks down,” The Nation, July 17, 2001.

93

4 Srinagar Ghulam

Nabi Khayal

Kashmiris scared,

disappointed

MS C N

5 Srinagar AFP Mujahideen demand

to be part of future

talks

OS C N

6 New Delhi AFP Congress criticizes

govt handling of

summit

OS C N

7 Islamabad NNI Musharraf empty

handed return not

unexpected: PPP

OS C N

8 Islamabad Staff Report President briefs on

summit today

AS N SP

9 Islamabad APP CE given full protocol

at Agra airport: FO

OS P SP

10 London PPI ‘Kashmir key issue

between Pak, India’

MS C N

11 Agra NNI ‘Sushma created

tension, caused the

damage’

MS C N

The euphoria had already ended and post-summit posturing started. The initial attitude of

the two sides was positive and their foreign ministers Abdul Sattar and Jaswant Singh

told media in their respective capitals that talks were not a failure. But militants in

Kashmir were getting restive and announced that fighting will continue, while 17 more

civilians were killed in Kashmir in clashes. As expected, opposition parties in both

countries criticised their leaders. Congress took the government to task for “mishandling”

the summit and PPP said Musharraf failed to convince India about centrality of Kashmir.

There were three summit related stories on the back page. FO rejected reports that

Musharraf was not given full protocol at Agra airport while NNI said that press

conference of Sushma Swaraj caused failure as she did not mention Kashmir while

briefing media. From London there was a report that British daily The Telegraph said

Kashmir was the main issue between Pakistan and India.

94

July 19

The coverage went down as the summit failed.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Rana Qaisar Musharraf optimistic

about talks continuity

OS P P

2 Srinagar Nabbi

Khayal

Hawks in India played

havoc

AS C N


Gilani

India won’t pick

threads from Agra

OS C N

4 New Delhi Corresp. Comprehensive

agreement soon: says

Vajpayee

MS P P

5 Islamabad Absar Alam Indian blocked joint

statement

AS C N

6 Srinagar AFP Center for memory of

disappeared

Kashmiris

MS C N

7 Muzaffarabad NNI No cross-border

terror: Harkat chief

OS C N

The lead was based on Musharraf’s meeting with NSC. He sought to avoid blaming India

and hoped that talks will continue.124 On the other side of the border, Vajpayee was also

positive and The Asian Age reported that he termed his meeting with Musharraf as

successful. Absar Alam quoted sources that India went back on its position and blocked

joint statement. India was showing teeth as there was a report that it will not start the next

round of talks. The paper also carried a report from Srinagar that Indian hawkish lobby

scuttled the talks. AFP reported that families of the missing persons in Kashmir had

decided to build a center in the memory of the people who disappeared. The chief of

Harkatul Mujahideen group said that there was no cross border terrorism in held

Kashmir.

124 Rana Qaisar, “Musharraf optimistic about talks’ continuity,” The Nation, July 19, 2001.

95

July 20

The paper published seven stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi AFP Jaswant wants to visit

Pakistan

OS P P

2 Rome AFP G8, EU hope

Pakistan, India to

continue talks

OS N SP

3 Islamabad Afzal Bajwa Kashmiris observe

‘accession to Pakistan

Day’

MS C N

4 Srinagar AFP 13 more killed in IHK

violence

AS C EN

5 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Pakistan asks India to

avoid mistrust

OS C SN

6 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Japan hoped Agra

summit to be basis of

future dialogue

OS N SP


Gilani

Some Indian ministers

accused of sabotaging

Agra summit

OS C N

The number of stories was going down but there was a positive story as MEA

spokesperson said that Jaswant Singh had received invitation from Pakistani counterpart

for a visit. Pakistan urged India to avoid statements which create mistrust. Violence

continued in Kashmir as 13 more people were killed. AFP reported from Rome that the

foreign ministers of developed countries hoped that Pakistan and India will continue the

talks. Japan also hoped that the summit will result in more talks. Iftikhar Gilani reported

that the sacked chief of Indian Council for Social Science Research accused some Indian

ministers of deliberately destroying the summit.

96

July 21

The coverage went further down as there were only six stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Rana

Qaisar

Peace process cannot be

stopped, says Musharraf

OS P EP

2 Islamabad Absar

Alam

Peace needs

compromises:Musharraf

OS P P

3 Islamabad M.A. Niazi Post-Agra cycle ends MS N SN

4 New Delhi AFP India rejects Pak claim

of stepping back…

OS C N

5 Taxila Rana

Qaisar

Peace not at cost of

country’s security

OS C SN

6 Islamabad PPI No Indian POW in

Pakistani jails

OS C SN

In his first proper post-Agra media interaction, Musharraf said that he had returned empty

handed but was not disappointed. He also insisted that Kashmir was the central issue. He

conceded that there should be give and take to end conflicts.125 MEA rejected allegations

by Pakistan that India backtracked from a commitment to sign the joint declaration. M.A.

Niazi wrote that post-Agra cycle of formalities had ended. It was visible from

Musharraf’s address to a ceremony to include first batch of homemade Al-Khalid tanks

when he said that there will be no compromise on security. Pakistan said after searching

jails that there was no Indian POW in any of its prisons.

July 22

The coverage period ended with five stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad AFP Pakistan to retaliate

any fire across LoC

OS C EN

2 Islamabad NNI Formal invitation to AS P P

125 Absar Alam, “Peace needs compromises, says Musharraf,” The Nation, July 21, 2001.

97

Vajpayee next week

3 Srinagar AFP 46 killed in IHK

blasts, encounters

MS C EN

4 Washington Afzal Khan US offers help on

Kashmir

OS C SN


Gilani

Indian opposition

braces for showdown

on Agra talks

MS C SN

It seems that things were moving fast to pre-summit days, as in the main story military

spokesman Rashid Qureshi said Pakistan will respond to any provocation on the LoC.

There was a sobering news item on the front page that Pakistan will extend formal

invitation to Vajpayee for talks in Islamabad. AFP reported about mass violence in

Kashmir where bombings and clashes killed at least 46 people, including 18 Hindu

pilgrims. Afzal Khan reported that the US was ready to help in Kashmir talks. Iftikhar

Gilani reported that Indian government and opposition were preparing for a tough

parliament session which was to discuss the Agra Summit.

3.2- Electronic Media and Agra Summit

The electronic media coverage of the summit is based on the interviews with three senior

journalists and media experts.

Ziauddin remembered the goodwill in the Indian media about Pakistan during and before

the Agra Summit. He said the Indian media was generous to publish pro-Pakistan stories

and at one time it looked that the Indian government was trying to get across the Indian

viewers to explain about Pakistan position on the Indo-Pak talks, because throughout that

period no responsible Indian journalist or Indian politician ever came on TV and talked

against Pakistan. He said every channel gave proper time to the Pakistani journalists to

speak out their mind on the issues and it appeared that the Indian government was

consciously letting Pakistan journalists to reach the Indian people. He was appreciative of

the Indian media about the coverage and said the “coverage of the summit did not play a

role in the failure of the summit.”126

126 M. Ziauddin, Interview by Researcher, Islamabad, July 24, 2014.

98

Ziauddin held Musharraf responsible for the overall failure of the summit but said that his

breakfast meeting with media was not directly responsible for it, though it contributed to

the process as the tough stance taken by the general led to the failure. “I don’t think it

(breakfast meeting) has any direct role in the failure. The failure was due to Musharraf.

The briefing was a victory for Musharraf but after this Pakistan lost a sympathetic Indian

media.” Ziauddin was also generally happy about the role of Pakistan media during the

Agra Summit. “I would say that it (Pakistan media) was playing a responsible role” but

suggested that the stories filed from Agra and Delhi could be more positive and

favourable to the talks. He said the stories related to Musharraf’s remarks that he was

ready to go beyond the stated positions were not received well by Pakistani media.

He said Pakistan media played no role in the failure of the summit, as the major cause of

failure was Musharraf. He said the Indians wanted Musharraf to denounce militancy in

Kashmir which he refused to commit. “The Indians were on the back foot as they were

feeling the impact of jihad in Kashmir - Pakistani sponsored jihad in Kashmir - and the

Indians were tired of the bloodshed. They wanted some sort of lessening of tension and

lessening of bloodshed…That was the reason that Mr. Vajpayee had invited

Musharraf.”127

Ziauddin said Musharraf was invited despite doubts about him due to the Kargil war and

his role in sabotaging the Lahore visit because the Indian purpose was to decrease the

tension in Kashmir. But the 9/11 had not happened and the situation was still in favor of

Pakistan, prompting Musharraf to think that since India was on the back foot, it was time

to push it closer to the wall. “So Musharraf refused to renounce militancy and it was the

major cause of failure.”128

Rahimullah Yusufzai said that Musharraf’s media talk was not the prime reason for the

failure of the Agra Summit as Musharraf by nature was very outspoken and media often

accepted his aggressive posture, as “he was not a politician and had that forthright style.”

But it was possible that he would annoy the people. “It could be reason that due to

127 Ziauddin, interview. 128 Ziauddin, interview.

99

Musharraf’s openness, some issues were created,” said Yusufzai talking about media

coverage of his breakfast meeting.129

He also said that the Agra Summit failed due to Indian reluctance to cooperate with

Musharraf. Indian government faced some internal issues related to the invitation

extended to Musharraf. The government was divided between the hawks and doves and

could not come up with a single-point agenda. He said it does not mean that Pakistan was

not responsible for the failure because there were problems on both sides. “A lot of

expectations from Agra didn’t work out because of these reasons…So, because of the

high expectations and whatever happened there (during the talks), actually led to the

failure of the summit and we cannot blame one side as it was responsibility of both

sides.”130 He said in case of India-Pakistan conflicts, expectation shouldn’t be kept too

high because of the difficult nature of relations.

Talking about the role of media during the summit, he said, “The basic problem is that in

the context of India-Pakistan relations, media is very partial. It also becomes very

patriotic, nationalistic and sometimes even jingoistic.” Pakistan media was trying to say

that Musharraf was right and it was carrying the statements issued by the officials. At the

same time, the Indian media was supporting the Indian government. “There was no

objectivity, I must say, on both sides and I cannot really expect objectivity by media in

both countries on India-Pakistan relations,” he said.

Another issue highlighted by Yusufzai was that the Pakistani media felt that it needed to

respond equally and aggressively to the Indian media. It was also true for the Indian

media, as both sides indulge in point scoring. When the Agra Summit was held,

electronic media in Pakistan was quite young and still in the learning stage. The Indian

media was older and more established due to democracy. “We were still learning but

what about the Indians; they should have been more objective,” said Yusufzai131

Javed Siddiq took a comprehensive view of the electronic media coverage of Musharraf’s

visit to Agra and said that being a high-profile engagement after Kargil incident of 1999,

129 Rahimullah Yusufzai, Interview by Researcher, Islamabad, August 5, 2014. 130 Yusufzai, interview. 131 Yusufzai, interview.

100

Musharraf’s every move was watched on the television and analysed. When he decided to

talk to the Indian editors, it was known that it will be taken up by the electronic media

and shown to the people of India. He said before the media interaction by Musharraf, the

talks were progressing and the understanding was being promoted on both sides that

Musharraf and Vajpayee would reach on some kind of understanding to resolve the major

differences including Kashmir. But things changed after the breakfast meeting, as

Musharraf told the Indian media that Kashmir is the core issue between the two countries

and without it the other issues cannot be resolved, and the normal relations between the

two countries is not possible. “It was taken by the Indian hawks in the government and

the cabinet as inflexible position of the Pakistani government and the military…Indian

construed his remarks as it was the key thinking of Musharraf government with regard to

relations with India.”132

He said Musharraf’s remarks (during media interaction) played vital role in spoiling the

atmosphere and subsequently the Indian took a very strong position on Kashmir and other

issues. He also said that the damage done by Musharraf was further compounded by the

statement of Indian Information Minister Sushma Swaraj. “So I think that Musharraf’s

remarks with Indian media played a role in derailing the peace process.”133

Talking about the electronic media role in the failure of the summit, he said when

General Musharraf went to India, there were hopes and expectations in Pakistan that

things will move forward and Musharraf will be able to build an era of peace with India.

Pakistan media was looking at the Agra Summit as an important event that could lead to a

conducive atmosphere between India and Pakistan to address the key issues like Kashmir,

Siachen, Sir Creek and others. Hence, the media coverage in Pakistan was positive and (it

was same in India also), barring a few papers which always take a very harsh line on

relations between India and Pakistan, he said.

He said the rightwing press and particularly the Nawa-e-Waqt Group of newspapers and

couple of other papers were not very optimistic about the visit of Musharraf. “They also

132 Javed Siddiq, Interview by Researcher, Islamabad, August 7, 2014. 133 Siddiq, interview.

101

criticised this (Agra) meeting and they thought that it was futile to meet the Indian

leadership, as the meetings in the past were fruitless.”134

Siddiq said some other media outlets in Pakistan criticised the visit because they believed

that Musharraf was undertaking the trip due to pressure from the West and the

Americans. They thought that the visit will undermine Pakistan’s position on the core

issue of Kashmir. “But majority of media was in favour of the dialogue and it was

hopeful that something positive will come out of it.”135

3.3- Print Media and Parliament Attack

The attack on Indian parliament was a major incident in the period under study (2000 to

2010). Dawn and The News have been used to examine its coverage. First, coverage in

the Dawn is given.

3.3.1- Dawn

The coverage period is from December 6-20, 2001.

December 6

The paper published only one story, a dpa report that 10 people were killed in Indian

Kashmir.

Table 3.32: Dawn Coverage on December 6

Sr

No


1 Srinagar Dpa 10 killed in Kashmir AS C EN

December 7

There was only one report in the paper, based on an article by Pakistan High

Commissioner to India Ashraf Jehangir Qazi in which he urged Vajpayee to ignore the

hardliner elements and discuss the main issue of Kashmir.136

134 Siddiq, interview. 135 Siddiq, interview. 136 Jawed Naqvi, “Ignore hawks, Vajpayee told,” Dawn, December 7, 2001.

102


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Ignore hawks,

Vajpayee told

MS P P

December 8

There was only one story by AFP on the back page that five people were killed in

Kashmir.


Sr

No


1 Srinagar AFP Five killed in Kashmir AS C EN

December 9

It was another routine day of just one story. AFP said that at least nine people were killed

in Kashmir.


Sr

No


1 Srinagar AFP ‘Random shots’ kill 9

Kashmiris

AS C EN

December 10

The low coverage continued. The paper reported quoting PTI that India set up a special

committee to talk with APHC leaders.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi AFP/Reuters India to talks to

Kashmiris

MS P SP

103

December 11

After several days of one story per day, the paper did not publish any story about India.

December 12

FO spokesman Aziz Khan said Pakistan was ready for talks with India.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Hasan

Akhtar

Pakistan ready to hold

talks with India

OS P SP

December 13

The day of attack on parliament saw just one story about India. Reuters reported that

India had tested a long-range missile.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Reuters India tests long-range

version of Prithvi

OS C N

December 14

The coverage was still mute as only three relevant stories were published.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed

Naqvi

12 die as gunmen

storm Indian

parliament

OS C EN

2 Muzaffarabad Staff Report MJC denies

involvement

OS C N

3 Islamabad Hasan

Akhtar

Pakistan condemns

shootout

OS P SP

4 Srinagar AFP 61 blasts on LoC AS C N

104

There was the headline about attack on the Indian parliament and in the same headline a

small box item said that Kashmiri fighters were not involved. Hasan Akhtar reported that

Pakistan condemned the attack. AFP quoted the Indian army in Kashmir that there were

61 small blasts on the no man’s land on the LoC to disrupt the communication system.

December 15

The coverage picked up as there were four stories.


Sr

No



Haque

Pakistan forces put on

high alert

AS C EN

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Delhi blames Lashkar

for attack

AS C EN

3 Srinagar AFP 3 Hizb men among 12

killed in Kashmir

MS C EN

4 Hong Kong PPI India out to damage

Islamabad’s interests

MS C N

The lead was about Musharraf chairing a high level security meeting and a decision to

put the military on the high alert due to Indian threat following attack on its parliament.

Jawed Naqvi reported that India had blamed Pakistan based LeT for the attack. AFP

reported 12 deaths in Kashmir. PPI reported that Musharraf charged India for trying to

harm the interests of Pakistan in Afghanistan. He also denied involvement in cross border

militancy in Kashmir in an interview to the Far Eastern Economic Review.

December 16

The coverage was low and only three stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Agencies Pakistan will reply

with force, says CE

OS C N

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Saarc summit in

doubt as tempers rise

MS C N

3 Srinagar AFP 18 killed in Kashmir AS C EN

105

The lead was based on a TV interview by Musharraf in which he threatened to respond

with force to any misadventure by India. Jawed Naqvi reported that the SAARC Summit

was in jeopardy due to Pak-India tension. AFP reported that 18 people, mostly civilians,

were killed in the latest round of violence in Kashmir.

December 17

The paper published five stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi New Delhi warns of

‘hard-hitting response

MS C EN

2 Islamabad Faraz

Hashmi

Pakistan dismisses

Indian allegations

OS C SN

3 New York Masood

Haider

US stresses restraint OS N SP

4 New Delhi Dpa 10 killed in Kashmir AS C N

5 Srinagar APP Kashmir body sees

Indian agencies hand

in attack

OS C N

The paper in the second lead on the front page carried a report by Jawed Naqvi that

Indian leaders led by hardliners were talking about a hard hitting response to the

parliament attack for which Pakistan-based groups were blamed. On the same page, Faraz

Hashmi reported quoting government spokesman Rashid Qureshi that Indian allegations

about involvement of Pakistan were baseless. US Secretary of State Colin Powell termed

the situation as tense and urged restraint. Separately, dpa reported that nine fighters were

buried alive in an avalanche while another was killed by Indian forces in Kashmir. APP

reported that a small organization of Kashmir said that the Indian agencies were involved

in the attack.

December 18

No paper was published due to Eidul Fitr.

106

December 19

No paper published due to Eidul Fitr.

December 20

The coverage period ended with six stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Faraz

Hashmi

Pakistan denies troop

build-up

OS P SP

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Vajpayee slams party

hawks for war frenzy

OS P SP

3 Washington Tahir Mirza US opposes flare up

in region

OS N SP

4 United

Nations

Corresp. UN chief calls of

talks

OS P P

5 Brussels Reuters Low risk of war: US OS N SN

6 Bahawalpur Corresp. Jaish chief refutes

Indian allegations

OS C N

In the lead was based on a statement by FO and interview of Foreign Minister Abdul

Sattar, the paper reported that Pakistan denied building up troops and also said that so far

India had not provided any proof about involvement of LeT or JeM in the attack. Jawed

Naqvi reported that Vajpayee had criticised party hawks for creating a war like

atmosphere.137 Tahir Mirza reported from the US that State Department spokesman

Richard Boucher said India should first investigate and then take steps to protect its

people from terrorism. He said Pakistan should take action against the extremists. Kofi

Anan called for peace talks as US general Richard Myers saw only slim chance of a war

between Pakistan and India. The JeM chief reportedly told an Eid congregation that none

of his activists or from LeT was involved in the attacks on the Indian parliament.

137 Jawed Naqvi, “Vajpayee slams party hawks for war frenzy,” Dawn, December 20, 2001.

107

3.3.2- The News

The News is a leading paper of the country, owned by the biggest Jang media group. The

total coverage period is 15 days, starting from December 6 and ending on December 20.

December 6

No story about Pak-India ties appeared in the paper on the day.

December 7

There were two stories related to Pakistan-India ties.

Table 3.44: The News Coverage on December 7

Sr

No


1 Ayodhya Report Opposition asks

Advani to resign over

Babri issue

MS C N

2 Srinagar AFP Jaish calls for strike

against POTO today

OS C N

There was a report form Ayodhya that opposition had called on Advani to resign for his

alleged role in the demolition of the historic Babri Mosque in 1992. AFP reported that

JeM called for strike in IOK to protest against Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance

(POTO).

December 8

The paper published two stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Report Qanuni warns

Pakistan…

OS C N

2 Srinagar AFP 2 Indian agents among

5 killed in Valley

AS C N

108

There was a report from New Delhi that Afghan Interior Minister Yunus Qanuni told

media that Pakistan should not interfere in Afghanistan. AFP reported that two Indian

army intelligence officials were killed during protests against the controversial POTO

law.

December 9

There were three stories and all focused on the negative aspect of the ties.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad NNI Musharraf assures

support to Kashmiris

OS C SN

2 Srinagar AP 9 killed, 33 injured in

valley ambush

AS C N

3 New Delhi AFP Advani vows to push

on with POTO

OS C N

Musharraf met AJK premier Sikandar Hayat Khan and assured him that Pakistan would

continue support for the just struggle of the Kashmiris. AP reported that nine people were

killed and another 33 injured in Kashmir. Advani said at a public gathering that

government will enact POTO despite opposition.

December 10

The paper published just one story by Reuters.


Sr

No


1 Srinagar Reuters India kills 10 fighters

in Valley

OS C N

December 11

Two stories appeared on the back page of the paper.


Sr

No


1 Srinagar AFP APHC considers OS P P

109

India’s talks offer

2 Jammu AFP 5 fighters, BSF officer

killed in IOK

OS C N

AFP from Srinagar reported that APHC was considering a talk offer by India and

separately the same newswire reported that clashes in Kashmir left five militants and an

Indian solider dead.

December 12

There was just one story about India, and it was just a day before the Indian parliament

was attacked.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Nusrat

Javeed

India for high profile

presence in Kabul

MS C N

Nusrat Javeed reported that India was trying for high profile presence in Kabul and was

rushing special envoy S.K. Lambah there on the day Karzai was expected in the Afghan

capital. His visit was part of efforts to build links in the post-Taliban Afghanistan.

December 13

On the deadly day of attack, there were three stories in the paper about India.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi AP India successfully fires

Prithvi missile

OS C N

2 New Delhi AFP Afghan FM arrives in

India, reunited with

family

OS C N

3 Jammu AP Two top Mujahideen

killed in Kashmir

OS C N

110

AP reported that India test-fired Prithvi missile from some undisclosed location. AFP

reported from New Delhi that Afghan leader Abdullah Abdullah arrived in India where

he was received by the Indian officials. He was to meet Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh

and reunite with his wife and three children living in India. AP said two militants were

killed in gun battle in Doda district.

December 14

There were nine stories a day after the attack on the Indian parliament.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Agencies 12 killed in attack on

Indian parliament

MS C N

2 New Delhi Agencies Vajpayee vows do or

die battle

OS C N

3 Islamabad APP Musharraf

sympathizes with

Vajpayee

OS P P

4 Islamabad Mariana

Baabar

Pakistan strongly

condemns attack

OS P P

5 Srinagar AFP APHC condemns

attack, demands probe

OS P P

6 Islamabad Shakil

Shaikh

Pak forces on high

alert

AS C N

7 Occupied

Jammu

AP 61 mines exploded

along India-Pakistan

border

AS C N

8 New Delhi AFP Afghan FM designate

meets Indian PM

OS C SN

9 Islamabad PPI Germany for averting

Pak-India nuclear war

OS N SP

The lead was about the attack on the Indian parliament which killed 12. The identity of

gunmen was not known but Advani said there was evidence about conspiracy to

destabilize India.138 Vajpayee said the attack was not on the Indian parliament but on the

entire nation and promised “do or die” in the battle against terrorism. Musharraf said:

“My government strongly condemns the attack”. FO spokesman Aziz Khan also

138 “12 killed in attack on Indian parliament,” The News, December 14, 2001.

111

condemned it. AFP reported that pro-Pakistan APHC also condemned it and asked for

probe.

On a different note, the paper reported that the security forces of Pakistan were put on the

high alert after the attack. AP reported 61 explosions along border with India but no loss

was reported. Afghan new designate FM Abdullah Abdullah met the Indian Prime

Minister. The meeting was important in the context of future regional politics. Pakistan

news agency PPI reported that German Minister for Cooperation and Development, Mrs.

Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, said in Islamabad that India and Pakistan should resolve

differences to avoid a nuclear war.

December 15

There were ten stories. Most of them were anti-peace, which shows the tragedy of

relations between India and Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Shakil

Shaikh

India to pay price for

any misadventure

AS C EN

2 Islamabad AFP India using Kabul

against Pak interests:

Musharraf

OS C N

3 New Delhi Agencies New Delhi blames

Lashkar for attack

OS C EN

4 New Delhi Agencies India needs time to

response to attack:

Vajpayee

OS C N

5 Islamabad Mariana

Baabar

Pakistan rejects

Indian charge

OS C N

6 Peshawar Rahimullah

Yusufzai

Why NA ministers

visit India?

MS N SP

7 New Delhi AFP Parliament attack

same as Sept 11

strikes: US envoy

OS N SN

8 New Delhi AP Attackers made

mistakes: Delhi police

OS N SN

9 Islamabad APP India to get matching

response

OS C EN

112

10 Islamabad Nusrat

Javeed

Vajpayee preserves

his cool

MS N SP

The tone of coverage had become belligerent as the lead on the front page was an

anonymous story that “India would pay a heavy price for any misadventure, as Pakistan

Armed Forces are operationally ready to pay back the Indians in the same coin.”139 AFP

reported that Musharraf accused India for using the new government in Kabul against the

interests of Pakistan. Adding to the tension, Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh said

having evidence that the attack was handiwork of a terrorist organization based in

Pakistan. Pakistan Foreign Office rejected the charge. Vajpayee said that India needed

time to respond to the attack while Rahimullah Yusufzai reported that Northern Alliance

ministers were visiting India as they had their families there.

The US ambassador to India, Robert Blackwell, likened the attack on parliament with

9/11, a dangerous analogy for launching attacks on the country suspected of such attacks.

AP reported Indian police saying that the attackers made mistakes which reduced the

impact of the strike. APP reported military spokesman Rashid Qureshi saying that any

violation of Pakistan’s air space or territory will be responded to. Nusrat Javeed in an

analytical article concluded that Vajpayee was keeping cool and stonewalling the

hawkish din by rejecting immediate response to the attack on parliament.

December 16

There were four stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Shakil

Shaikh

India warned against

hasty action

OS C N

2 Calcutta Agencies India may cross LoC,

says Vajpayee

OS C EN

3 Srinagar AFP 18 killed in fresh held

Kashmir violence

MS C EN

4 Karachi AFP Govt tightens security OS C N

139 Shakil Shaikh, “India to pay price for any misadventure,” The News, December 15, 2001.

113

in Sindh

The paper quoted Musharraf as saying that India should avoid any hasty military action.

“I would like to warn against any precipitous action by Indian government against

Pakistan,” he said in a short televised interview.140 Vajpayee told a meeting of business

leaders that his country had come to a limit and cannot tolerate any more attacks.141

Violence broke out in occupied Kashmir where according to AFP 18 people, half of them

civilians, were killed. AFP quoted the Sindh police chief that security was tightened in

the province and its capital Karachi to check activities of Indian RAW agency which was

active in the area.

December 17

The paper published three stories about India.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi AP Indian probe blames

Pakistan for attack

OS C EN

2 Islamabad Shakil

Shaikh

Islamabad asks Delhi

to accept joint inquiry

offer

OS C N

3 Islamabad Report Islamabad to retaliate

if attacked: Qureshi

OS C N

The police commissioner of New Delhi, Ajay Raj Sharma, blamed Pakistan for attack.

“The ISI connection is very clear,” he said.142 Pakistan in response rejected the charges

and asked India for a joint probe to determine the attackers, while military spokesman

Rashid Qureshi warned of retaliation in case of any attack by India.

December 18

The paper was not published due to Eidul Fitr holidays.

December 19

140 Shakil Shaikh, “India warned against hasty action,” The News, December, 16, 2001. 141 “India may cross LoC, says Vajpayee,” The News, December 16, 2001. 142 “India probe blames Pakistan for attack,” The News, December 17, 2001.

114

The paper was not published due to Eidul Fitr holidays.

December 20

There were six stories related to India and its ties with Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Mariana

Baabar

FO summons Indian

diplomat

OS C N

2 New Delhi Report Vajpayee says war is

one option

OS C EN

3 Islamabad Report Pakistan rejects

Indian charge as self-

serving

OS C N

4 Islamabad AFP Pakistan was not

massing troops at

border

OS P SP

5 Srinagar AFP 13 killed in held

Kashmir clashes

MS C N

6 Tehran APP Iran offers mediation

in Pak-India row

OS N SP

Foreign Office summoned political consular of Indian High Commissioner and informed

that Pakistan was ready for a joint probe if India shared all relevant evidence. Vajpayee

told parliament that war was still an option to deal with Pakistan for its alleged links with

the attack on parliament. FO issued a statement rejecting the Indian charges about

supporting militancy and attackers of the parliament. AFP quoted ISPR spokesman that

Pakistan was building up troops at the border. There was a report by AP that 13 people

were killed in held Kashmir and APP reported Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi

that his country was ready to play role in reducing the tension between Pakistan and

India.

3.4- Electronic Media and Parliament Attack

Ziauddin was very candid in responding to the coverage of attack on the Indian

parliament in the Pakistani media. He said media had no independent position in

115

coverage of relations with India. “See, anything concerning about India-Pakistan conflict,

Pakistan media will go with the officially certified truth. The officially certified truth is

by the GHQ and by the ISI, and Pakistani media without any question would use that.”143

He said the attack on the Indian parliament came at a crucial juncture when the

international attitude towards militancy had changed due to the 9/11 incident. As India

blamed Pakistan-based militant groups, the officials in Pakistan blamed the Indian

agencies for it. Ziauddin said that it was stated that India wanted to implicate or malign

Pakistan and it could be the handiwork of RAW, which staged it. “In Indian parliament

attack, we thought we had no hand in it. Media took this position that somebody within

India was behind it,” he said.

He also explained the reasons behind the myopic view of the Indian society and politics

in Pakistan and said it was due to lack of information which forces the media to rely on

the second hand sources. He said Indian newspaper The Hindu and its news agency PTI

always had correspondents in Pakistan, whereas from Pakistan, APP and Radio Pakistan

had two reporters in India. But Pakistani reporters were not from the private media and

did not enjoy the liberty to file stories which the Indian media could file from Pakistan.

He said the Pakistani media could not develop an independent opinion about India and

remained dependent on the government. That is why in case of any big incident, the local

media have to get information from the anonymous official sources which are most of the

time skewed.

While talking about the emergence of electronic media, he said the private channels like

Geo were launched during this time. “Most of time the electronic media was focused on

our position- that was our denial (of any role in parliament attack).” The electronic media

was also upholding the official position, he said. About the mobilization of troops, he

said that the media supported the official position that though India mobilized the troops,

it would have to withdraw soon, which eventually happened.

Rahimullah Yusufzai said the media in Pakistan took the official line that the attack on

the parliament was stage-managed. It also blindly followed the government’s stated

143 Ziauddin, interview.

116

policy concerning Pak-India relations. No investigation was done (in Pakistan), he said. If

some people were aware that some Pakistani groups were involved, nobody was willing

to say that on camera or (on record) in print media. He said the Pakistan media feels that

it needed to portray the Pakistani official view point and not to challenge the country’s

position on security interest. “So when the Indians blamed Pakistan or Pakistani militants

group or state actors, there is a tendency to deny it, and to defend Pakistan’s position. It

was not surprising as it happens all the time.”144

He said later it became clear that some Pakistani groups were involved. But it did not

improve the coverage and later when things became clear, even then the media continued

to deny the facts. It is not just in Pakistan but it happens on both sides, according to

Rahimullah. He also said that the media coverage was not impartial after the parliament

attack.

Javed Siddiq said that Pakistani media was skeptical about the parliament attack because

soon after the attack, the blame was squarely placed on Pakistan government and its

agencies. The military was particularly blamed for this attack. He said the media in

Pakistan portrayed it as the expression of Indian traditional view point as it always held

that Pakistan military and establishment were playing militancy card in India by

infiltrating militants for carrying out attacks. “So the blame for the parliament attack was

placed on Pakistani government and Pakistani media was critical that why immediately

without any investigating and sufficient evidence, India was blaming Pakistan.”145

He also said Pakistan media was also not happy with India blaming military and its

controlled agencies for the attack. Pakistan media viewed the entire attack as “fabricated”

and an effort to “malign” Pakistan. The sense in Pakistan was that there was something

sinister behind it which would lead to the confrontation between the two countries.

3.5- Print Media and Military Standoff

The military confrontation of 2002 - Operation Parakram - resulted from the attack at the

Indian parliament on December 13, 2001. Its 15-day coverage has been divided into three

144 Yusufzai, interview. 145 Siddiq, interview.

117

phases. First five days of January, June and October - termed as Escalation, Escalation on

Peak and De-escalation - have been selected to scan the media coverage.

1- Escalation: Jan 1-5

2- Escalation on Peak: June 1-5

3- De-escalation: Oct 1-5

Dawn has been chosen as the main newspaper while Daily Times and The Frontier Post

selected as the second newspapers.

3.5.1- Dawn

First, coverage by the Dawn is presented for escalation: Jan 1-5

January 1

The paper published 15 stories on the first day of the coverage period.

Table 3.56: Dawn Coverage on January 1

Sr

No


1 Hyderabad Staff Report PPP leader slams

Indian war hysteria

OS C N

2 Swabi Paris Report War seems imminent,

says JI leader

OS C N

3 Washington Reuters Thaw seen in frosty

Pakistan, India ties

MS P SP

4 Kathmandu APP Islamabad will never

initiate action: FM

OS P SP

5 London Agencies UK media attention

shifted to South Asia

MS N SP

6 Muzaffarabad Report Boy injured in Indian

shelling

OS C N

7 Lahore Amjad

Mahmood

The train that

connected divided

families

MS N P

8 Lahore Report Health deptt

preparing for ‘war’

MS C N

9 Rawalpindi Staff Report Tension on border

leads to suspension of

AMTs

OS C N

10 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Crackdown signals

easing of tension:

New Delhi gives list

MS P SP

118

of ‘terrorists’ to

Islamabad

11 Crawford

(USA)

Reuters Bush hails action

against extremists

OS N SP

12 Rawalpindi Report Commanders review

border situation

MS C N

13 Islamabad Report Pakistan welcomes

Indian message

OS P P

14 Lahore Report Peace rally at Wagah

baton-charged

MS N SN

15 Islamabad dpa Musharraf satisfied

with PAF readiness

OS C N

As the war hysteria was slowly building up, PPP leader Qaim Ali Shah expressed

concerns over looming conflict and criticised India for whipping up the tensions. The

paper also reported that the provincial chief of right-wing Jamaat-i-Islami, Prof

Mohammad Ibrahim, told reporters that a war between Pakistan and India was imminent.

From Washington it was reported that US was hoping for a thaw after Pakistan detained

Hafiz Saeed of Lashkar-i-Taiba. Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar said in Kathmandu, where

the SAARC Summit was to begin, that Pakistan will not start the war. The paper reported

from London that UK media was focusing on the stand-off more than the issue

Afghanistan and for the first time in three months the news headlines were not about

combating terrorism but about the threat of war in South Asia.

There was a report from Azad Kashmir that a boy was injured and several houses

damaged in shelling by Indian troops. Amjad Mahmood reported from Lahore that

Samjhota train service between Pakistan and India faced closure due to tension after

about 25 years of service since its start in July 1976. As war threat continued, the Punjab

Health Department started preparations according to the ‘war book’, the paper reported.

Spokesman of Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), Brig. Saulat Raza, told Dawn that

ATMs operation in border areas faced suspension because of tension. Jawed Naqvi

reported India welcomed Pakistan’s actions against the militant groups and also decided

to send a list of wanted terrorists to Pakistan.

President Bush said it was a good sign that Pakistan was cracking down on the militants.

The Corps Commanders met in Rawalpindi with Vice Chief of Army Staff, General

119

Muhammad Yusaf Khan, in the chair to review the security situation. FO welcomed a

reconciliatory message from New Delhi which spoke of exhausting diplomatic channels

for defusing the tension. The paper also reported that a peace rally of various human right

groups led by Asma Jehangir was baton-charged at Wagah check post by the Pakistan

Rangers. Musharraf said he had “complete confidence” in the war-preparedness of the air

force.

January 2

It was another day of high coverage, with 10 stories.


Sr

No


1 Lahore Shujaat Ali

Khan

Conviction,

punishment of Indian

upheld

OS N SN

2 Lahore Report Ramay fears India

may occupy part of

AJK

OS C N

3 Islamabad Report Islamabad, Delhi

exchange lists on N-

facilities

OS N SP

4 Kathmandu Reuters India sees no peace

talks at Kathmandu

AS C N

5 Srinagar Reuters 15 killed in Kashmir

violence

MS C EN

6 Islamabad Report World leaders laud

Pakistan stance

MS N SN

7 Lahore Report Two buses to bring

stranded people

MS N SN

8 Islamabad AFP 100 LT, Jaish men

held

MS C N

9 Kathmandu APP Efforts on to defuse

tension: Sattar

OS C SN

10 Islamabad Report VCOAS visits LoC OS C N

Shujaat Ali Khan reported that a high court upheld conviction of Indian national Manjeet

Singh in a terrorism case. Ex-speaker Punjab Assembly, Hameef Ramay, said there was

no possibility of a war with India. Pakistan and India exchanged lists of nuclear

installations and facilities under a bilateral agreement. Reuters reported that a top-level

120

Indian official said that Vajpayee would not hold peace talks with Musharraf at the

regional SAARC Summit in Nepal. Reuters also reported from Srinagar that 15 people

were killed in the violence in held Kashmir. Dawn reported quoting an official that

Musharraf held telephonic conversation with the leaders of various countries, who

expressed their concern over the Indian military build-up.

India announced to run two buses to carry stranded Pakistanis to Wagah border.

Spokesmen of LeT and JeM told Dawn that Pakistan had arrested about 100 activists of

the two militant groups. Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar told PTV that Pakistan was

making all-out efforts to defuse the tension with India. “The President and the

Government of Pakistan are making their best efforts to de-escalate tension, preserve

peace and avert use of force,” Sattar said.146 The army said Vice Chief of Army Staff

General Yusuf Khan visited the LoC and the Corps Headquarters to review the defensive

and offensive plans.

January 3

Hyper coverage continued. The paper published 15 stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Dawn/LAT-

WP News

Service

Nuclear list

exchange eases

tension

MS N SP

2 Kathmandu AFP ‘Curse of the

summits’ haunts

SAARC heads

MS N SN

3 Sanghar Report Four RAW agents

arrested, says SSP

OS C N

4 Sialkot Report Two landmines

defused: Indian

shelling damages 25

houses

MS C N

5 Lahore Report ‘India can take legal

action’

MS C N

6 Islamabad APP Pakistan for stable

ties with India:

OS C N

146 “Efforts on to defuse tension: Sattar,” Dawn, January 2, 2002.

121

Musharraf

7 Muzaffarabad Report Legislators briefed

on situation along

LoC

MS C N

8 Islamabad Report Islamabad hopes

peace moves will

prevail: Any

aggression to be

repelled

OS C N


violence

MS C EN

10 New Delhi Report Deployment

completed, says

Delhi

OS C N

11 Islamabad Reuters Pakistan, China to

discuss stand-off:

Meeting before Saarc

moot today

MS N SN

12 Rawalpindi Report JCSC reviews

counter-strategy

OS C N

13 London Reuters/dpa Blair offers

mediation

OS N SP

14 New York New York

Times Report

Musharraf tells ISI to

stop backing

militants: report

AS C SN

15 Kathmandu Jawed Naqvi No thaw at

Kathmandu pre-

summit meeting

MS C N

The paper carried a news item which was published in The Washington Post that

exchange of the nuclear lists at the height of tension was a positive sign. An AFP feature

about the SAARC Summit termed it as a nightmare for the regional leaders. A senior

police officer told media that they have arrested four agents of Indian secret service RAW

in Sindh. In the conflict area of Sialkot, the paper reported that bomb disposal experts

defused two landmines. It reported that 114 cattle killed and 25 houses damaged in Indian

shelling. The paper also reported a meeting of the intellectuals and the writer in Lahore,

who called for a complete unity to meet the Indian challenge. APP reported that

Musharraf in an exclusive interview to Saudi Gazette and Okaz said Pakistan will

respond in case of the war imposed by India. There was a report about Azad Kashmir

122

Prime Minister Sikandar Hayat asking lawmakers to visit the border areas and “prepare

people to fight the possible aggression by India.”

The paper reported a press conference by Secretary Information Anwar Mahmood who

said Musharraf told National Security Council that Pakistan wanted peace with honor. He

refused to hand over any person to India but promised to take action if credible evidence

was provided. AFP reported that 18 people were killed in Kashmir violence. Indian

Defence Minister George Fernandes said India had completed their biggest-ever buildup

along the border.

Pakistan Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (JCSC) met in Rawalpindi and took briefings

on the Indian threat. Reuters and German Press Agency dpa reported that British Prime

Minister Tony Blair said he wanted to mediate in the Kashmir dispute. The paper also

carried a report published in the New York Times that Musharraf asked ISI to stop

backing militants. Jawed Naqvi reported from Kathmandu that no thaw was expected in

Nepal during the SAARC Summit.

January 4

There were 10 news stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Karachi Report Pakistan-India war

won’t benefit either

side: official

OS P SP

2 Beijing Reuters Beijing supports

Islamabad moves for

peace talks

OS C SN

3 Islamabad APP Musharraf visits

forward positions

MS C N

4 Lucknow AFP War not a necessity,

says Indian premier

OS P SP

5 Islamabad Report Pakistan backs talks

to resolve all issues

OS P SP

6 Kathmandu Jawed

Naqvi

Saarc leaders meet in

hope of peace

MS P SP

7 Kathmandu Report Pakistan seeks MS C SN

123

disputes debated at

forum

8 Washington Report Summit may ease

tension, hopes US

OS N SP

9 Dhaka Reuters Stand-off threatens

world peace: Blair

OS N SP

10 Muzaffarabad Report Woman dies, four

hurt in Indian troops’

shelling

AS C N

The paper reported that Director-General of Foreign Service Academy Mansoor Alam

said any war between Pakistan and India will damage both sides. Reuters reported that

Musharraf met Chinese premier Zhu Rongji in Beijing and told him that his country was

willing to ease the tension. APP reported that Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal

Mushhaf Ali Mir, visited PAF bases including the forward operating bases. AFP reported

that Vajpayee said war with Pakistan was not a “necessity” if diplomatic methods could

be applied to resolve the problems. The paper reported that FO expressed commitment to

resolve all outstanding disputes with India including the core issue of Kashmir through

peaceful means. Jawed Naqvi said from Kathmandu that the SAARC regional summit

will be held with hopes to find peace between Pakistan and India.

Dawn reported that SAARC must let member states discuss the contentious bilateral

issues. The US hoped that the summit will help ease tension. Reuters reported British

Prime Minister Tony Blair warned that the mounting tensions could boil over and create

“enormous problems” for the global stability. There was a story from Muzaffarabad that a

woman was killed when Indian troops shelled Kotli district.

January 5

The coverage period ended with 13 stories.


Sr

No


1 Hyderabad Report Sindh jawans leave

for LoC

OS C N

2 Muzaffarabad AFP Kashmiri refugees

yearn to return home

MS N P

124

3 Gilgit Report NALC members

briefed on Indian

designs

OS C N

4 Kathmandu AFP Musharraf, Vajpayee

dine with Saarc

leaders

AS P P

5 London APP Blair’s visit may

defuse tension, hopes

envoy

OS N SP

6 Muzaffarbad AFP Indian army shells

AJK village

AS C N

7 New Delhi AFP JKLF leader flays war

euphoria

OS N SP

8 Lahore Report Democracy deterrent

to war: Nawabzada

MS P SP

9 Kathmandu Jawed

Naqvi

Musharraf says India

has no interest in talks

OS C N

10 New Delhi Report Pakistan’s position on

Kashmir strong: Blair

OS N SP

11 Karachi APP Gen Aziz reviews PN

preparedness

MS C N

12 Washington AFP Powell hails

Musharraf’s move

against militants

OS N SP

13 Islamabad

APP 55 embassy staffers

due from India today

MS C N

A batch of around 200 newly trained army jawans of Sindh Regimental Centre (SRC),

Hyderabad, was sent to the LoC and the Sialkot sector. AFP feature about the sufferings

of Kashmir refugees in a camp in Pakistan was carried by the paper. A Pakistani military

official in a briefing in the Northern Areas (Gilgit-Baltistan) said that Pakistan took a

principled stand after the 9/11 which was unbearable to India and it blamed Pakistan for

the attack on its parliament.

AFP reported that Musharraf and Vajpayee dined together with five other South Asian

leaders at a banquet hosted by the king of Nepal. APP quoted Pakistan’s High

Commissioner to UK that visit of Tony Blair to South Asia may defuse the tension. AFP

reported heavy exchange of fire on the LoC and Indian shelling at villages in Azad

Kashmir. The AFP also reported from New Delhi that Jammu and Kashmir Liberation

125

Front (JKLF), Yasin Malik, called for “courage, vision and restraint” to avoid a war and

resolve the Kashmir issue.

The paper also reported a seminar where speakers including pro-democracy Nawabzada

Nasrullah Khan and pro-rights Asma Jehangir urged Pakistan military government to

start a democratic process in the country. Jawed Naqvi said the SAARC Summit was

delayed as Musharraf got late due to fog. Musharraf’s spokesman Maj-Gen Rashid

Qureshi told reporters that the situation on the border with India remained threatening.

Tony Blair, who arrived in India, said that Pakistan’s position on Kashmir was “strong”.

An APP report said that Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, General Muhammad

Aziz Khan, visited Pakistan Navy fleet units to review the operational preparedness. AFP

said Secretary of State Colin Powell praised Musharraf after Pakistani security forces

rounded up scores of Muslim activists accused of fomenting the tensions with India. APP

filed from India that 55 staff members of Pakistan High Commission will leave for

Islamabad due to the tension.

June 1

The paper published four stories.

Table 3.61: Dawn Coverage on June 1

Sr

No


1 Washington Agencies Foreigners urged to

leave India

MS C N

2 Paris Agencies France pursues phone

diplomacy

OS N SP

3 New Delhi Reuters Delhi to take up

‘incursion’ issue

OS C N

4 Islamabad APP India advised to grab

Almaty opportunity

OS P SP

The paper reported news agencies that different Western countries had asked for the

voluntary departure of non-essential diplomatic staffs and their dependents from India. It

also reported that France was trying to end the tension and Foreign Minister Dominique

de Villepin called his Indian and Pakistan counterparts. Reuters reported that Vajpayee

126

would raise the issue of cross border terrorism at a regional conference in Kazakhstan

where he and Musharraf were due with several world leaders. APP reported that

Information Minister Nisar Memon said India should grab opportunity to talk with

Pakistan on Kashmir in Almaty.

June 2

There were seven stories in the newspaper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Agencies UN orders evacuation

from Pakistan, India

MS C SN

2 Washington Agencies Nuclear war

unthinkable:

Musharraf

OS P SP

3 Moscow PPI Islamabad criticizes

Moscow

OS C SN

4 Muzaffarabad Agencies 4 more die as India

continues shelling

MS C EN

5 Singapore Reuters Fernandes rules out

attack

OS

P EP

6 Srinagar Reuters India will be

responsible for war,

says Ghani Bhat

OS C N

7 Almaty Agencies Speculation rife

about Pakistan, India

talks

MS P SP

The paper reported that the UN announced to evacuate dependents of its foreign staff in

Pakistan and India because of the fears of war. President Musharraf in an interview with

CNN said nuclear war with India was unthinkable. PPI reported that Pakistan criticised

Russia for giving uninterrupted defence supplies to India. The paper also had a story that

four people were killed in Kashmir due to the shelling by the Indian army. Indian

Defence Minister George Fernandes told reporters after talks with US Defence Secretary

Paul Wolfowitz on the eve of a regional summit in Singapore that there was no

127

immediate threat of war with Pakistan. The APHC chief Abdul Ghani Bhat said that India

would be responsible in case of war. The paper reported about speculations regarding

possible meeting of Musharraf and Vajpayee in Almaty.

June 3

Five stories related to the conflict were published.


Sr

No


1 Jeddah AFP OIC urges dialogue

on Kashmir issue

OS P SP

2 Singapore AFP ‘India under pressure

to attack terrorists’

OS C N

3 New Delhi Agencies Vajpayee to watch

steps against

terrorism

OS C SN

4 Muzaffarabad Agencies No let-up in Indian

shelling: six killed

AS C EN

5 Dushanbe APP Musharraf says onus

on India for talks:

Accord signed with

Tajikistan

OS C N

The paper reported that the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) asked India

and Pakistan to resolve their disputes and offered help to defuse tension. Indian Defence

Minister George Fernandes said in Singapore that India faced pressure to act against

Pakistan. Vajpayee was reported as saying that he would see what steps Pakistan takes to

eliminate militancy before any talks. His reaction came ahead of regional meeting in

Almaty where he was supposed to come face to face with Musharraf. The paper also

reported that there was no letup in shelling by the Indian forces in Kashmir which killed

at least six people. Musharraf stopped in Tajikistan for talks with its President Emomali

Rakhmnonov while on his way to Almaty, and told reporters that onus for the dialogue

was on India.

128

June 4

Another day of moderate coverage as the paper carried four stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi AFP/

Guardian

News

Service

Indian official says

attack plan ready:

Defence ministry

plays down report

OS C EN

2 Islamabad Reporter Pakistan to pay $1.8m

to India

MS C SN

3 Sialkot Agencies Nine more die in

border shelling

AS C EN

4 Almaty Reuters Musharraf ready for

unconditional talks

with India

MS P SP

The paper carried a story based on the contradictory statements by the Indian officials

regarding use of nuclear weapons in case of nuclear attack by Pakistan. The defence

ministry in a statement said that India does not believe in the use of nuclear weapons.

This statement came after comment by Defence Secretary Yogendra Narain that they

would retaliate with the nuclear weapons if Pakistan used its atomic arsenal, and that both

countries must be prepared for “mutual destruction.”147 It was reported that Pakistan will

pay India for providing data related to advance flood forecast. As the tension continued,

at least nine people were killed in Pakistan by Indian cross border shelling. Musharraf

told reporters in Almaty that he was ready for the “unconditional” dialogue with India.

June 5



Sr

No


1 Almaty AFP Vajpayee rejects talks

offer

OS C EN

2 Washington Agencies Armitage asks India MS N SP

147 “Indian official says attack plan ready: Defence ministry plays down report,” Dawn, June 4, 2002.

129

to behave responsibly

3 Islamabad Reuters Indian official

stopped

AS C N

4 Muzaffarabad Agencies Two die, 15 injured

in Indian shelling

MS C EN

5 Almaty Agencies Leaders agree on

using peaceful means

MS N SP

6 Sialkot Agencies 11 cattle killed in

Indian shelling

MS C N

Prime Minister Vajpayee lashed at Pakistan without naming it by saying that the

“epicenter of terrorism and religious extremism” was close to India’s borders. US Deputy

Secretary of State Richard Armitage was reported as telling India to behave in a

responsible manner. In another story Pakistan stopped an Indian embassy official,

accused of spying, from leaving the country. It was reported that two people died in

Pakistan due to the shelling by India. Leaders of both countries agreed to use peaceful

means to settle issues. Russian President Putin met Musharraf and Vajpayee. Another

interesting story was about the killing of 11 cattle in Pakistan due to the Indian firing.

October 1

There were only three stories.

Table 3.66: Dawn Coverage on October 1

Sr

No


1 Srinagar AFP Abdullah favours

dialogue

OS P SP

2 Islamabad Report Tension has not eased

much, says Inam

OS C N

3 Muzaffarabad Report Three die in Indian

shelling along LoC

AS C EN

AFP reported that Omar Abdullah, head of the occupied Kashmir’s ruling party, said he

supported talks with Pakistan over the fate of the divided region. Minister of State for

Foreign Affairs, Inamul Haque, said the tensions with India had of late lessened, but the

armed forces stood ready to meet any eventuality. The paper quoted police saying that

three people were killed and five injured in Kashmir due to the Indian shelling.

130

October 2

Another three stories were published on the second day of coverage.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad APP Japan asks Pakistan,

India to resume talks

OS N P

2 New Delhi AFP Pakistan termed

epicenter of terrorism

OS C N

3 Islamabad AFP Rocca calls for India,

Pakistan talks

AS P SP

APP reported that Japanese ambassador to Pakistan Sadaaki Numata addressing a

farewell reception said that India and Pakistan should resume dialogue. According to a

report by AFP Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani said Pakistan was hub of the global

terrorism. Another AFP story said US Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca met

President Musharraf and called for a dialogue with India.

October 3

The paper carried four stories.


Sr

No


1 Muzaffarabad Staff

Corresp.

Woman dies in

shelling

AS C EN


violence

MS C EN

3 Islamabad APP Indian forces told to

get ready for

exigencies

AS C N

4 New Delhi Jawed

Naqvi

War last option, says

India

OS P SP

The staff correspondent reported from Muzaffarabad that a woman was killed by the

Indian shelling. AFP reported from Srinagar that 15 people were killed in the violence.

131

APP said that the Indian government had asked its armed forces to be prepared for all

exigencies by the third week of October 2002. Jawed Naqvi reported that Foreign

Minister Yashwant Sinha said war with Pakistan was only the last option.

October 4

The coverage was in low zone.


Sr

No


1 Toronto Report LoC as Permanent

border opposed

OS C SN

2 Muzaffarabad Reuters Two killed in Indian

shelling

AS C EN

3 Srinagar Reuters Eight killed in

Kashmir

AS C EN

As Pakistan and India wrangled how to end the tension, a visiting parliamentary

delegation of Azad Kashmir to Canada strongly opposed the idea of converting the LoC

into permanent border. Reuter’s two stories about violence in Kashmir were also

published.

October 5

The coverage period for this slot ended with five stories.


Sr

No


1 Muzaffarabad Report One dies in Indian

shelling

AS C EN

2 New Delhi Reuters/AFP Kashmir vote won’t

pave way for talks

OS C N

3 New Delhi Report New Delhi test-fires

Akash missile

OS C N

4 Islamabad Report Pakistan fires Hatf OS C N

132

The paper reported that one person was killed in Azad Kashmir by the Indian firing. A

report by Reuters and AFP quoted Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal that successful

elections in the Indian Kashmir would not automatically pave the way for the resumption

of dialogue. “We have always maintained that Pakistan must end cross-border terrorism

to clear all obstacles for a dialogue,” he said.148 The paper had a story that India test-fired

its domestically-built, surface-to-air Akash missile. It reported that Pakistan also test-

fired a medium-range ballistic missile.

3.5.2- The Frontier Post

As mentioned above, the coverage has been divided into three phases. Daily Times is the

major second paper for the coverage. Since the paper was launched on April 8, 2002,

hence the Frontier Post has been used for the Escalation Period from January 1 to 5.

January 1

There were seven stories, mostly about the ongoing tension due to attack on the Indian

parliament.

Table 3.71: The Frontier Post Coverage on January 1

Sr

No


1 Islamabad Naveed

Miraj

Army in top

operational gear

AS C N

2 New Delhi Online India rules out talks

during Saarc summit

OS C N

3 Islamabad FP Report Pakistan open to

mediation, diplomacy

OS C N

4 Islamabad FP Report President briefed on

PAF preparedness

MS C N

5 Peshawar Online Indian traders not to

attend exhibition

MS C SN

6 Islamabad FP Report Pakistan-India war to

wreak havoc: JKLF

OS P P

7 Lahore PPI Indian court moved

for Kashmir freedom

MS N SN

148 “Kashmir vote won’t pave way for talks: India,” Dawn, October 5, 2010.

133

In the front page headline by Naveed Miraj, the paper reported that the army top

commanders met in Rawalpindi and reviewed the status of military preparedness in the

light of tension with India. Online agency reported that India ruled out any talks with

Pakistan during the SAARC Summit in Nepal. FO said Pakistan will not hand over any

person wanted in India. President Musharraf was briefed about the preparedness of the

Air Force. The paper also reported that the Indian traders refused to attend an

international exhibition in Peshawar. JKLF warned that any war between Pakistan and

India will bring disaster. There was a report from Lahore that Indian Supreme Court was

moved for production of thousands of Kashmiris confined in jails.

January 2

The paper published nine stories about ties and tension with India.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad FP Report Pakistan, India share

nuclear info

OS N SP

2 Islamabad Naveed

Miraj

Cabinet, NSC joint

meeting to discuss

border situation

MS C N

3 New Delhi FP Report Delhi says no talks

with Islamabad

OS C N

4 Islamabad Naveed

Miraj

Yusaf visits LoC OS N SN

5 Kathmandu NNI Saarc summit revives

hopes for peace in

region

MS P P

6 Dhrampur Online India deploys more

troops along Kashmir

border

AS C EN

7 Kathmandu NNI Saarc ministers laud

Pakistan’s restraint

policy

OS N SP

8 Lahore PPI India blamed for

violating Lahore-

Delhi bus deal

OS C N

9 Islamabad NNI Musharraf-Vajpayee

meeting possible at

Saarc summit: Niak

OS N SP

134

The main story was about annual exchange ritual when India and Pakistan under an

agreement share the lists of respective nuclear installations. Naveed Miraj reported about

a joint meeting of cabinet and National Security Council that discussed the border

situation. It was reported from India that it will not hold talks with Pakistan. Vice Army

Chief General Yusaf visited the LoC. Online reported that India was amassing troops on

the border.

There were two reports by NNI about the upcoming SAARC Summit that revived hopes

of regional peace. Pakistan Tourism Development Corporation slammed India for

violating the 1999 agreement to run the buses between the two countries for five years

but India stopped the traffic after the parliament attack. Though India had officially said

that no meeting with Pakistan will take place in Nepal but track two diplomacy guru Niaz

Niak said the meeting was still possible.

January 3

The paper carried 11 stories, including nine on the front page.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Naveed

Miraj

Aggressor to regret:

Musharraf

OS C EN

2 Islamabad FP Report Musharraf urges US

to restraint India

OS C N

3 Islamabad FP Report Pakistan seeks world

help to end tension

OS C N

4 New Delhi Agencies New Delhi hopes to

avert showdown

OS P SP

5 Islamabad Agencies Pakistan, India troops

trade fire

AS C EN

6 Kathmandu Agencies Sattar, Singh shake

hands

MS P SP

7 Islamabad FP Report JCSC review border

situation

AS C N

8 London Agencies Blair heads to India,

Pakistan amid tense

standoff

MS N SP

135

9 Srinagar Agencies 18 injured in held

valley grenade attack

MS C N

10 Washington Online US pushing for

Musharraf, Vajpayee

meeting

MS N P

11 Srinagar APP 8 Kashmiris killed, 14

houses burnt

MS C N

Naveed Miraj reported that Musharraf while presiding a joint meeting of the cabinet and

National Security Council warned that the aggressor will regret its attack on Pakistan.149

FO said the international community should play its role in easing the tension with India.

Indian defence minister George Fernandes said the Indian forces were not in battle

position as “efforts are being made to defuse the tension”.150 There was a negative

development as reports showed an exchange of fire between the troops of the two

countries in Kashmir.

On the positive side, foreign minister of two countries shook hands in Nepal. Another

good development was that British Prime Minister Tony Blair was coming to India and

Pakistan to help reduce the tension. Pakistan military discussed the border situation at the

JSCS meeting and news agencies reported that 18 people were killed in the held Kashmir.

Online agency reported that America was pushing for a meeting between Musharraf and

Vajpayee on the sidelines of the SAARC Summit. APP reported that Indian troops killed

eight people and burnt 14 houses in Kashmir.

January 4

The coverage was still in high mode and there were eight stories related to India.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad FP Report No policy shift on

Kashmir issue

OS C N

2 Lucknow Agencies Vajpayee speaks of

war

OS C EN

149 Naveed Miraj, “Aggressor to regret: Musharraf,” The Frontier Post, January 3, 2002. 150 “New Delhi hopes to avert showdown,” The Frontier Post, January 3, 2002.

136

3 Beijing Agencies Pakistan willing to

ease tension with

India: Musharraf

OS P SP

4 Dhaka Agencies Blair says India-

Pakistan row

threatens world

stability

OS N SP

5 Islamabad Agencies Militants says moving

into held Valley

AS C EN

6 Kathmandu Reuters India welcomes

Pakistan steps but

wants more

OS P SP

7 Srinagar Agencies 20 killed as Kashmir

violence escalates

MS C EN

8 Islamabad PPI Danger of Pakistan,

India war abated:

Mushahid

OS P SP

FO said there was no change in the policy on Kashmir and Pakistan was willing for the

direct talks with India. There were two contrasting scenario as Musharraf said in Beijing

that Pakistan was ready to reduce tension with India while Vajpayee said at Lucknow that

war will follow if Pakistan failed to stem terrorism.151 News agencies reported Blair said

in Dhaka that the tension between Pakistan and India could destabilize the world peace.

There was an interesting news item that after crackdown by Pakistan, the militants were

moving into the held Kashmir, where according to a separate report at least 20 people

were killed due to the violence. Reuters reported that India was happy at the steps taken

by Pakistan against the militants but it wanted more to completely end the threat of

militancy. Former minister Mushahid Hussain said that the danger of war had receded.

January 5

The last day of coverage saw nine stories.


Sr

No


1 Kathmandu Agencies India rejects talks

with Pakistan

MS C N

151 “Vajpayee speaks of war,” The Frontier Post, January 4, 2002.

137

2 Kathmandu NNI Pakistan wants to

defuse tension on

borders: Qureshi

OS P SP

3 Islamabad Naveed

Miraj

US, India in concert

over Pakistan?

AS C N

4 New Delhi Xinhua British PM arrives in

Bangalore

OS N SP

5 Karachi NNI 300 more held as

crackdown on Jihadis

continue

AS N SP

6 Islamabad APP Saarc summit can

help de-escalate

tension: Zaki

OS N SP

7 Karachi Online Pakistan ready to

meet aggression: Gen

Aziz

OS C N

8 Islamabad Online Pakistan not to use

nuclear weapons in

war; Moin

OS C EN

9 Islamabad FP Report India blamed for

sponsoring state

terrorism

MS C N

There was a major negative story on the front page that India was not willing for talks in

Kathmandu and that Pak-India leaders did not exchange a word at the dinner by the host

country. Military spokesman Rashid Qureshi said Pakistan wanted easing of tension on

the borders. Naveed Miraj reported that the US and India were in agreement to put

pressure on Pakistan on the issue of militancy. The British Prime Minister Tony Blair had

arrived in India to help reduce the tension and an important story was about crackdown

on militants in Pakistan. A former foreign secretary said the SAARC Summit can help to

end tension. Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Aziz Khan said they

were ready if war was imposed on the country. A former general and now minister for

interior Moinuddin Haider said Pakistan will not use nuclear weapons in case of a war.

Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz in a fact sheet said India was sponsoring terrorism.

138

3.5.3- Daily Times

Daily Times has been used for the rest of coverage of the period of military standoff. The

paper was launched in 2002 with progressive outlook. It has been supportive of peaceful

ties with neighbours and it is interesting to see its coverage during the 2002 crisis. The

10-day coverage during last two phases of military standoff is presented.

June 1

There were nine stories related to India and most of them were negative as they

highlighted conflict between the two countries.

Table 3.76: Daily Times Coverage on June 1

Sr

No


1 Singapore AFP/Reuters Border situation

stable: Fernandes

OS C N

2 Washington Khalid Hasan Western states allow

staff to leave India

OS C N

3 New Delhi Daily Times

Report

India planning 10-

day AJK assault

AS C EN

4 New Delhi PTI/NNI Unmanned Indian

plane crashes near

Pak border

AS C N

5 Muzaffarabad AFP/Reuters Two Pakistani

civilians, 2 Indian

soldiers dead in LoC

shelling

AS C EN

6 Washington AFP Indian nuke arsenal

dwarfs Pakistan’s

MS C N

7 Moscow NNI Pakistan raps

Russia’s arms supply

to India

OS C SN

8 New Delhi Reuters Weather a key factor

if India, Pakistan go

to war

MS N SN

9 Srinagar Reuters India responsible if

war erupts: APHC

chief

OS C N

139

The paper carried a story of news agencies that Indian Defense Minister George

Fernandes said that the border situation with Pakistan was tense but there was no threat of

war. Khalid Hasan reported from Washington that US State Department had alerted all

Americans living in India of voluntary departure due to the tension. The paper also

quoted Christian Science Monitor, which reported officials that India was planning a 10-

day “limited” assault in Kashmir if “infiltration did not significantly drop.” There was a

report about an unmanned Indian Air Force reconnaissance plane crashing near Pakistan

border. In the ongoing exchange of fire, two Pakistani civilians and two Indian soldiers

were killed in firing along the LoC.

The paper also published Jane’s defense publications story that India has up to 150

nuclear warheads while Pakistan had only a third of that total. NNI reported that

Pakistan’s ambassador to Russia Iftikhar Murshed was quoted as saying by the Interfax

news agency that Moscow’s support and arms supply to India had created problems.

Reuters in a feature said that weather will play key role in case of war between Pakistan

and India. Reuters from Srinagar reported that APHC chairman Abdul Ghani Bhat said

India would be responsible in case of eruption of war.

June 2

The paper published four stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Reuters/AFP Nuclear war

unthinkable, says

Musharraf

OS C SN

2 Washington Khalid Hasan End to infiltration no

guarantee India

won’t attack: CSIS

MS C N

3 Islamabad Shaukat

Piracha

Indian ‘spy’ nabbed

in capital, India

alleges ‘tit for tat’

response

AS C EN

4 Lahore Staff Report Qazi baiting govt to

act against India

OS C N

140

The paper reported Musharraf said in a CNN interview that no sane person can think of a

nuclear war. Khalid Hasan reported that according to the Centre for Strategic and

International Studies (CSIS) think-tank, any new terrorist attack in India could trigger an

Indian decision to take military action.152 Shaukat Piracha reported Pakistan nabbed an

Indian High Commission employee Kulwant Singh in Islamabad while he was receiving

“documents”. The arrest followed the detention of a Pakistani diplomat in New Delhi.

The paper said chief of Jamaat-e-Islami, Qazi Hussain Ahmed said Musharraf

government was endangering the Kashmir cause.

June 3

Four stories were published in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Moscow AFP Russia won’t recall

diplomats from

Pakistan

MS N SP

2 Singapore Reuters/AFP India under pressure

to attack ‘terrorists’

in AJK

OS C N

3 Dushanbe APP Onus on India to

open dialogue, says

Musharraf

OS C N

4 Sialkot AFP 4 more killed by

Indian shelling across

LoC

AS C EN

AFP reported quoting Interfax news agency that Russia will not pull out diplomatic

mission from Islamabad despite the tension with India. Indian Defence Minister George

Fernandes said his country would keep pressure on Pakistan for action against the

militants. He conceded that Delhi was under pressure to launch limited attacks at the

“camps” of terrorist in Kashmir. APP reported that Musharraf said at a joint press

conference with Tajikistan President Emomali Rahmanov in Dushanbe that Pakistan was

ready for talks with India “anytime, anywhere”. AFP in a report from the border city of

152 Khalid Hasan, “End to infiltration no guarantee India won’t attack: CSIS,” Daily Times, June 2, 2002.

141

Sialkot said that four Pakistanis and one Indian were killed in the exchange of firing on

the LoC.

June 4

There were five relevant stories.


Sr

No


1 Almaty Reuters/AFP Musharraf offers

‘unconditional’ talks

to India

OS N SP

2 Islamabad Agencies Pak counter-attack

leaves 35 Indian

soldiers dead or

wounded

MS C EN

3 Almaty Reuters/AFP India wants warning

to ‘terrorism’

sponsors

OS C N


Gilani

Defence Ministry

allowed Rs 3 billion

carte blanche

AS C N

5 Washington Reuters/AFP Rumsfeld leaves for

India, Pakistan today

AS N P

The paper carried a report that Musharraf said he was ready for the unconditional talks

with Vajpayee to solve the Kashmir issue. Newswires reported that Pakistan killed or

wounded at least 35 Indian soldiers in an offensive along the LoC. Vajpayee speaking at

a lunch hosted by Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev ahead of Conference on

Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA) said that the summit

should warn countries supporting terrorism. Iftikhar Gilani reported India was on an arms

shopping spree as Defence Ministry authorized to purchase weapons up to Rs 3 billion.

Reuters and AFP reported from Washington that Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld

was going on a trip that will include visits to India and Pakistan.

142

June 6

The coverage on June 5 was not available. Hence the coverage was extended to June 6.

The paper had five stories on the day related to the topic of the research.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Rana Qaisar Indo-Pak tension

reduced: Musharraf

OS P SP

2 Islamabad Staff Report India proposes,

Pakistan rejects joint

LoC patrols

AS C SN

3 Islamabad Staff Report Pakistan asks Indian

official to leave

MS C N

4 Washington Daily Times

Report

The India-Pakistan

war machine

MS C N

5 Berlin APP Germany asks India,

Pakistan to reduce

tension

OS N SP

Rana Qaisar reported Musharraf saying that the tension between Pakistan and India had

decreased. The paper published a report that India proposed joint border patrols but

Pakistan rejected the offer as unworkable. It reported that Pakistan declared Kulwant

Singh, an official of the Indian High Commission in Islamabad, persona non-grata and

asked him to leave the country within seven days. The paper reported about an editorial

in the Washington Post that a proposal by Russian President Putin to broker a peace

between Pakistan and India on the sidelines of the 15-nation summit in Almaty failed to

get positive response. The tension was so high that leaders of Pakistan and India even did

not shake hands despite present under the same roof. APP reported that German Foreign

Minister Fischer urged Pakistan and India to reduce tensions.

October 1

There was only one story on the first day of coverage for de-escalation period. Shaukat

Piracha reported that FO said Pakistan’s defence forces were fully aware of the ‘war-like’

preparations of India.

143

Table 3.81: Daily Times Coverage on October 1

Sr

No


1 Islamabad Shaukat

Piracha

Pakistan aware of

India’s warlike

preparations: FO

OS C N

October 2

The second day saw good coverage as there were five stories.


Sr

No


1 Srinagar Agencies Kashmiris shun polls’

3rd phase

MS C N

2 Washington Staff Report Pervez, Vajpayee can

resolve Kashmir:

Midways

OS N SP

3 New Delhi AFP India can sustain air

deployment for

another year’

OS C N

4 Washington Khalid

Hasan

India, Pakistan cited

for lack of religious

tolerance

MS N SN

5 Islamabad Khalid

Mustafa

India agrees to

discuss Bag liar

project

OS P P

The paper reported that most of the voters stayed away in the third phase of polls in

Indian Kashmir. Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani during a function of ‘Anti-

Terrorism Day’ organised by the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) termed Pakistan the ‘cradle

of global terrorism’. Large-scale violence marred elections in the Indian-held Kashmir,

claiming 21 lives. Pro-Pakistan Kashmir leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said in

Washington that Musharraf and Vajpayee can bring peace in Kashmir. Indian Air Chief

Marshal S Krishnaswamy said IAF can sustain its present level of deployment against

Pakistan for at least another year.

144

Khalid Hasan reported from Washington that US Commission on International Religious

Freedom has recommended that 12 countries, including India and Pakistan, should be

designated as “countries of particular concern” (CPCs). Khalid Mustafa said India had

agreed to discuss with Pakistan the issue of controversial 450-megawatt (MW) Baghliar

hydroelectric project.

October 3

No story related to the topic was carried on the day.

October 4

Again there was no story in the paper linked to the relations with India.

October 5

On the last day of this coverage slot, there were three relevant stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Mobarik

Virk

Pakistan, India test

missiles

OS C N

2 New Delhi AFP ‘IHK polls don’t

oblige India to begin

talks’

OS C N

3 Islamabad NNI India plans to disrupt

polls in Pakistan, says

Moin

OS C N

The paper reported tit-for-tit missile tests by Pakistan and India, showing that although

the border tension had been reduced but the two sides were still focused on the military

preparedness. AFP reported India saying that election in its part of Kashmir will not pave

way for talks with Pakistan. NNI news agency said that Interior Minister Moinuddin

Haider accused India of planning to disrupt the elections in Pakistan which were being

held on October 10.

145

3.6- Electronic Media and Military Standoff

Ziauddin’s position on the 2002 military standoff was not much different from his views

on the coverage of the parliament attack in the Pakistani media. He said Pakistan media

“took a position which was the position of the government.” After the parliament attack,

Indian mobilized its troops and Pakistan responded by mobilizing its forces towards the

border. They were in an eyeball-to-eyeball position. Media was with the troops at that

time and supported the mobilization. He said, “I don’t think Pakistan media played any

positive role at that time”. He recalled some of the editorials of Dawn which were urging

the two sides for peace otherwise the nationalistic mood overwhelmed the media.

According to Rahimullah Yusufzai, the 2002 standoff was decided by the government

and media had no role in the mobilization of troops. He said army wanted to mobilize the

force due to the Indian threat and deploy them on the border. “Army could have been

aware that it should be on the border as the Indian troops had been mobilized and that the

Indians were in an aggressive mood. I think they would have done that (mobilized) in any

case.”153 He also said that there is question of border security and no country can leave

the borders open. “That is why when Pakistan is fighting militants in tribal areas as part

of the war on terror, the border with India is well defended,” he said.

He criticised India for threatening Pakistan for one year that it will launch attack and

enter Pakistan to take the revenge for the parliament attack. He said it was mainly due to

the domestic compulsions in India and the government and army wanted to tell the people

that they were serious about it. “So, Pakistan had no choice but to defend. Media also

came into patriotic mood and there was a lot of display of patriotism in the media.”

He also said that the strange part of the standoff was that local media just wanted the

Pakistan army to defend the country and no one talked about the important issue of the

Indians that Pakistan-based militants could be involved in the attack on their parliament.

When asked about any talk-show or stories in media about the destruction which war can

cause, he said, “These were few and far between. There are some pacifists who do this

153 Yusufzai, interview.

146

but there are limited and their voices are not really heard.”154 He also complained that

there was no effective campaign to stop the war and projects like Aman ki Asha was

launched after the Mumbai attack. He also acknowledged that this joint initiative by Jang

group and Times of India has been criticised. He said that the occasional comments and

articles against war were mostly by the politicians and nationalists. Yusufzai said that

these pro-peace voices were weak.

Javed Siddiq criticised Pakistani electronic media for creating hype during the standoff.

He said the two militaries were arrayed against each other and the media thought that the

Indians might attack Pakistan or start a limited war. “So, Pakistani media was geared up

to promote a sentiment of patriotism in the country.”155 He said the two countries were

involved in the blame game like the past, and the establishment in Pakistan was “feeding”

the local media that the entire standoff issue was due to the Indian hardline attitude.

There was also a pervasive view in the media that Pakistan was under tremendous

pressure due to the war on terror and India wanted to extract some benefit out of its

predicament and exploit its strategic weakness due to its heavily involvement in the war

on terror. He said the local media believed that India wanted to punish Pakistan as it had

a tactical advantage over the Pakistan army. “There was no attempt to cool down the

situation as the media was busy in creating the hype”.156

Talking about the pro-peace efforts in media, he said there were a few positive steps and

some Indian journalists were invited to TV talk-shows. But it didn’t create any positive

impact as the rival participants often disagreed on the military standoff and exchanged

heated arguments. There were analyses and talk-shows to highlight the horrors of wars

but it lacked substance. “I think there was no somber, objective analysis done in the talk

shows, barring a few ones where restraint was advised to both India and Pakistan.” He

said some strategic experts on television urged the governments to control the situation

due to the nuclear threat. They said if war broke out even at limited level, it may result in

a nuclear showdown. “The prospect of nuclear war was very alarming,” he said.

154 Yusufzai, interview. 155 Siddiq, interview. 156 Siddiq, interview.

147

3.7- Print Media and Composite Dialogue

The launch of composite dialogue in 2004 was a comprehensive effort to find peace. The

process continued for about five years until it was suspended by India after Mumbai

terrorist attacks in 2008. Its coverage period has been divided into three parts:

1- Launch of Dialogue: January 3-7, 2004

2- Mid-term Review (Around Musharraf visit to India): April 15-19, 2005

3- Final Review (Around Mumbai Train attack): July 9-13, 2006

Dawn has been used as major paper to scan the coverage while three papers, including

The Nation, The Frontier Post and Daily Times, have been used as second papers. First,

coverage in Dawn is presented.

3.7.1- Dawn

The coverage for the launch of dialogue period is from 3 to 7 January, 2004.

January 3

The paper carried 11 stories about the relations with India.

Table 3.84: Dawn Coverage on Jan 3

Sr

No


1 New Delhi dpa Great expectations of

peace rest on Saarc

summit

OS P P

2 Islamabad Report Russia backs peace

moves between India,

Pakistan: envoy

OS N SP

3 Islamabad APP Pakistan, India urged

to resolve disputes

OS N SP

4 Rawalpindi Report/AFP Full-dress rehearsal

inspected: Special

device to move ahead

of Indian PM's

convoy

AS N SP

5 Karachi Report Jubilations as divided

families meet again:

Karachi-Mumbai

MS P P

148

flights

6 Srinagar AFP India stops Geelani

from Haj

OS C N

7 Islamabad Report Mishra's early arrival

raises hope for

bilateral meeting

AS P SP

8 Islamabad Reuters India ready to

consider gas pipeline

via Pakistan

OS P P

9 New Delhi Reuters Vajpayee seeks

change in Pakistan's

stance

OS C SN

10 Islamabad Report Islamabad summit to

be historic, says

Sinha

OS N SP

11 Islamabad Report Vajpayee due today MS P EP

German newswire dpa reported Vajpayee saying that the 12th SAARC Summit from

January 4-6 will provide an opportunity for the regional peace including better ties with

Pakistan. The paper reported that Russian ambassador to Pakistan, Edward Shevchenko,

said his country supported the peace efforts between Pakistan and India. APP reported

that Russian ambassador urged both countries to resolve differences. There was a news

story that Indian security officials were bringing a special device to Pakistan to boost

security for their prime minister during the SAARC Summit. The device known as

"Initiator" can detect and detonate any explosive device before time. The paper also

reported about the start of flights between Mumbai and Karachi.

AFP reported Syed Ali Geelani, a pro-Pakistan APHC leader, said that 40 Muslims were

denied permission to travel to Saudi Arabia for Haj. Also, it was reported that Vajpayee's

lead adviser on foreign policy Brajesh Mishra arrived in Islamabad ahead of him, which

raised hopes for the peace. According to Reuters Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha told a

business forum that Pakistan was a vital link between India and Gulf and Central Asian

regions. Reuters reported that Vajpayee said in an interview ahead of Pakistan visit that

Kashmir could be solved if Pakistan changed its policy that the region belongs to it

because of its Muslim majority. Yashwant Sinha said the SAARC Summit will be

successful. The paper reported that Vajpayee was coming to Islamabad after nearly a

149

quarter century since his first visit in 1978 as Foreign Minister of Prime Minister Morarji

Desai.

January 4

The coverage was moderate as the paper carried six stories.


Sr

No


1 Karachi Report Pakistan, India

urged to respect

rights

MS P SP

2 Islamabad APP Saarc moot to be

historic: Shashank

OS P SP

3 Islamabad Report Summit opens

today on optimistic

note

MS N SP

4 Islamabad Report Sinha sees winds of

change in region:

Islamabad making

history

OS P P

5 Islamabad Reuter/AFP/APP Vajpayee willing to

hold talks with

Musharraf: Indian

PM arrives in

Islamabad

OS P P

6 Islamabad APP Warm welcome

accorded

MS P P

A civil society group, Pakistan-India People's Forum for Peace and Democracy

(PIPFPD), met in Karachi and urged both countries to respect the basic rights. APP

reported that Foreign Secretary (FS) Shashank told media that the SAARC Summit will

be historic. The paper also noted that the summit opens on January 4. Yashwant Sinha

said at the SAARC journalist summit organized by SAFMA that important decisions

were made at the Council of Ministers meeting. Vajpayee told PTV in an interview that

Musharraf was someone he could talk but needed time for agreement on Kashmir. APP

reported Vajpayee was given warm welcome on arrival to attend the summit. He was the

150

second Indian leader to land at Islamabad International Airport after late Prime Minister

Rajiv Gandhi visited in 1988.

January 5

Five stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Report Vajpayee seeks

mutual trust

MS P P

2 Srinagar AFP Kashmiris pledge to

work for peace

MS P P

3 Islamabad Report Jamali, Vajpayee hold

one-on-one meeting:

Talks with Musharraf

today

OS P EP

4 Islamabad Report High hopes mark start

of summit

MS P EP

5 Islamabad Report President pleads for

end to rifts: Reception

for Saarc leaders

MS P EP

The paper reported that the SAARC Summit had started. Vajpayee was applauded when

he gave his speech. "We must make the bold transition from mistrust to trust, from

discord to concord, and from tension to peace," he said. AFP reported that both hardline

and moderate separatists in Kashmir vowed to work for peace. The paper also reported

that Prime Minister Zafarullah Jamali met counterpart Vajpayee and discussed the vital

issues. An important meeting was scheduled between Musharraf and Vajpayee.

Separately, it was reported that SAARC had rekindled hopes for the regional peace.

President Musharraf speaking at a reception for the SAARC leaders highlighted need for

peace through the resolution of the political disputes.

January 6

The coverage went dramatically up due to the meetings of Vajpayee with the Pakistan

leaders.

151


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Report Musharraf, Vajpayee

hold historic meeting

MS P EP

2 Islamabad Report Secretary level

discussion soon

AS P EP

3 Islamabad APP 'New answers' being

sought, says Vajpayee

OS P P

4 Islamabad APP Joint efforts sought to

resolve issues

OS P P

5 Muzaffarabad Report MJC doubts Saarc

summit's success

OS C N

6 Chakothi Report Kashmiris hope for

durable truce

MS P P

7 Islamabad Report It might be real this

time

MS P P

8 New Delhi APP Indian press

commends peace

moves

MS P P

9 Islamabad Report Fahim welcomes

peace efforts

OS P SP

10 Srinagar APP APHC calls for

Saarc's role in peace

process

OS C SN

The lead of the day was a meeting between Musharraf and Vajpayee. In their 65-minute

meeting, they discussed all important issues and also agreed to launch the composite

dialogue.157 APP reported that Vajpayee said the dialogue will continue to find a solution

for the problems. Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali urged for collective efforts

to confront the problems faced by South Asia. Chairman of the Muttahida Jihad Council

and Hizbul Mujahideen commander Syed Salahuddin said he doubted the outcome of

SAARC to establish durable peace. It was also reported that hopes were high among the

people living along the LoC in Azad Kashmir that the gathering of leaders will create

peace.

The paper also carried an analysis that it was time for making advances towards the real

peace between Pakistan and India. APP gave an overview of the Indian press which was

157 “Musharraf, Vajpayee hold historic meeting,” Dawn, January 6, 2004.

152

positive about the peace moves. Leader of PPP and chairman Alliance for the Restoration

of Democracy (ARD) Amin Fahim welcomed the efforts initiated by Pakistan and India.

APP in its report said that APHC leader Syed Ali Gilani urged the SAARC leaders to

persuade India to initiate a serious, sincere and meaningful dialogue on Kashmir.

January 7

There were 10 relevant stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Report Dialogue to start next

month

OS P EP

2 Islamabad Report It's a leap forward,

says president

OS P P

3 Islamabad Report Early contacts to focus

on trade

AS P P

4 Islamabad Report Economic and

political issues

interlinked: PM

OS N SP

5 Islamabad APP Pakistan, India Joint

Statement

OS P P

6 Islamabad Report Kashmiri leaders

express concern:

Pakistan-India peace

move

MS C SN

7 Islamabad Report Vajpayee to be gifted

sherwanis

AS P P

8 Sialkot Report Talks vital for

Kashmir solution:

congressmen

OS N SP

9 New Delhi Report Kashmiri leaders to

wait for their turn in

talks

OS N SP

10 New Delhi APP Vajpayee returns MS N SP

In a major development the two sides issued the joint statement of Musharraf-Vajpayee

meeting in which they agreed to start peace talks from the next month.158 Officials told

Dawn that talks will also focus on trade with other problems. PM Jamali was quoted as

158 “Dialogue to start next month,” Dawn, January 7, 2004.

153

saying that the economic and political issues were mutually linked and SAARC had taken

initiatives for better ties among the members. The paper also published the full text of

joint statement. Leaders from Kashmir welcomed the start of the dialogue. Pakistan gifted

four sherwanis to Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee by designer Amir Adnan who also

made sherwanis for Musharraf. Three US Congressmen welcomed the talks of Musharraf

and Jamali with Vajpayee during SAARC, while pro-freedom Kashmiri leaders said they

will wait for their inclusion in the talks. APP reported that Vajpayee had returned after

the summit.

April 15

The coverage period for the mid-term review of the dialogue is from April 15-19, 2005.

Dawn’s coverage continued in this period, which carried four stories on this day.

Table 3.89: Dawn Coverage on April 15

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Agencies Islamabad abetting

terrorism: Delhi

OS C N

2 Lahore Reporter India frees 24

Pakistani prisoners

MS P P

3 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi India hints at troop

reduction in Valley

MS P P

4 Rawalpindi Reuters Musharraf optimistic

about visit outcome

OS P P

The paper reported Defence Minister Parnab Mukherjee as saying that Pakistan was

encouraging religious terrorism in Kashmir. His cabinet colleague Foreign Minister

Natwar Singh said it was not possible to give any timeframe for the resolution of

disputes. There was a report that India released 24 Pakistani prisoners and Pakistan

announced to set free 564 Indian prisoners. In a major development ahead of visit of

Musharraf, India hinted to reduce troops in Kashmir. “If the level of violence comes

down, and if the infiltration remains low… then the level of Indian forces can come

down,” India’s National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan said.159 Musharraf said in an

159 “India hints at troops’ reduction in Valley,” Dawn, April 15, 2005.

154

interview with Reuters that he hoped for the resolution of Kashmir issue and that the

peace process was irreversible.

April 16

Only three stories were published in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Washington Anwar Iqbal Bush urges India to

‘encourage’

Musharraf

MS N SP

2 Islamabad Reporter Pakistan-India

summit today

MS P P

3 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Singh call for joint

anti-terror strategy

OS N SP

Dawn reported from Washington that President George Bush met Indian Foreign

Minister Natwar Singh and told media that he had asked the Indian diplomat to be

appreciative of Musharraf’s efforts against al-Qaeda. An important story was about the

landing of Musharraf in India, where he was scheduled to meet Prime Minister

Manmohan Singh. Natwar Singh was set to meet Musharraf before his meeting with the

Indian premier. Jawed Naqvi reported that Manmohan Singh said that there was need of a

joint anti-terror strategy with Pakistan to fight militancy.

April 17

The coverage of relations with India went up to eight stories as Musharraf had arrived in

India for talks on the sidelines of the SAARC conference.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Unknown Optimistic mood

prevails in New Delhi

MS P P

2 New Delhi Habib Khan

Ghori

‘Musharraf in Delhi

with open mind’

OS P P

155

3 New Delhi AFP ‘We need to seize this

opportunity’

OS P P

4 Srinagar AFP ‘Mujahideen ready

for talks with India’

OS P P

5 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Resolve Kashmir

issue for peace, says

Musharraf

OS C SN

6 Muzaffarabad Reporter Many AJK citizens

still in Indian jails

MS C SN

7 Ajmer AFP Musharraf prays for

peace, visits to Ajmer

shrine

MS P P

8 Islamabad APP APHC leaders arrive

in Delhi

OS C SN

The paper reported from Indian capital that optimism was in the air as Musharraf arrived

for a three-day visit to attend the SAARC Summit and hold talks with the Indian leaders.

Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmad said Musharraf had gone to India with an

open mind to hold dialogue. AFP reported that Musharraf said soon after reaching in

Delhi that he was hopeful to resolve all issues through talks. He also said it was time to

create peace. AFP also reported that Hizbul Mujahideen said it was ready for talks with

India and its chief Syed Salahuddin in an interview with the Zee News said the dialogue

“should be serious and sincere and involve no political maneuvering.” Separately,

Musharraf said he had brought a message of peace and solidarity but also cautioned that

Kashmir could not be brushed under the carpet. The paper also reported that a number of

people from Azad Kashmir were in the Indian jails. AFP reported that Musharraf visited

shrine of a Sufi saint in Ajmer and prayed for peace. APP reported that a delegation of

APHC had arrived in New Delhi to meet Musharraf.

April 18

Another eight stories appeared in the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi AFP Musharraf, joins MS N P

156

Singh, Sonia at Delhi

stadium

2 New Delhi Unknown Majority of Kashmiris

want independence:

poll

MS C SN

3 New Delhi Unknown Islamabad, Delhi

sideline Iran pipeline

issue in talks

OS N SP

4 New Delhi Reuters Accord to revive

business council

OS P P

5 Ahmedabad AFP Over 150 fishermen

released

OS P P

6 New Delhi AFP India offers new talks

on Baglihar

OS P P

7 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi India to consider

Valley troops cut:

Musharraf satisfied

with talks

AS P P

8 Lahore Reporter Justice basic

condition: Tarar:

Friendship with India

OS P P

AFP reported that Musharraf joined Manmohan Singh and Congress leader Sonia Gandhi

in a bullet-proof glass enclosure to catch the opening overs of the last one-day match

between Pakistan and India at Ferozeshah Kotla ground. The paper said that according to

the poll conducted by Synovate India, a market research agency, majority 53.9 per cent of

the respondents in Kashmir areas of Srinagar and Rajouri chose for independence when

asked in the survey to choose between staying with India or going to Pakistan or

becoming an independent country. Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran told a news

conference that the Iran gas pipeline issue was discussed by the two sides. Reuters

reported that the two countries had “positive and businesslike” talks, agreeing to boost

trade and transport links to bolster the peace process.

Shyam Saran said the two sides had agreed to revive a joint business council to boost

economic links. AFP reported that India released 156 Pakistan fishermen jailed in

Gujarat. AFP also reported that India said it was open to a new round of talks to resolve

the differences with Pakistan over the construction of a hydroelectric dam in Kashmir.

Separately, India promised to consider the troops reduction in Kashmir to improve ties

157

with Pakistan. The paper quoted official sources that Musharraf and Manmohan met for

20 minutes with delegations and then went into a one-to-one session that lasted more than

two hours, thereby delaying a lunch that President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam was to host for

Musharraf. Pakistan ex-President Rafiq Tarar welcomed the Pakistan-India friendship

and called for basing it on principles of justice and fairness.

April 19

The coverage period ended with seven stories as Musharraf completed his visit.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Agencies Tensions can erupt

again: president

OS C N

2 New Delhi Agencies Singh says Baglihar

design can be changed

OS P P

3 New Delhi Habib Khan

Ghori

Visit ‘beyond

expectations’:

Musharraf

OS P P

4 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Peace process

‘irreversible’:

Pakistan, India to

work for Kashmir

issue settlement: joint

statement

OS P EP

5 United

Nations

Unknown Annan hails statement OS

P P

6 Faisalabad APP Sikhs visit birthplaces MS P SP

7 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Advani sees progress

in peace process

OS P P

President Musharraf asked India’s senior editors to press New Delhi to work for a

genuine resolution of the Kashmir dispute. “If you brush issues under the carpet it doesn’t

work,” Musharraf said at a breakfast interaction with the Indian Editors’ Guild. Prime

Minister Manmohan Singh assured a group of visiting Pakistani editors that the design of

the controversial Baglihar hydroelectric project could be changed. “Nothing will be done

which violates the Indus Water Basin Treaty in letter and spirit,” he said. Musharraf

declared that his visit was ‘very successful’. Talking to Pakistani journalists who

158

accompanied him, he said that in his meetings with the Indian leaders, all issues between

the two countries, including Kashmir, Baglihar dam, bus service and trade and commerce

were discussed in the spirit of sincerity and flexibility.160

A joint statement read out by Manmohan Singh with Pervez Musharraf said it was their

considered assessment that the peace process had become irreversible. They agreed to re-

establish the Khokhrapar-Munnabao and to re-open the consulates in Mumbai and

Karachi. Separately, the paper reported that the UN Secretary-General welcomed the

joint declaration that “the dialogue had become ‘irreversible’”. APP reported that a group

of 40 Sikhs from India visited Faisalabad to refresh memories of their pre-partition

homes and localities in Lyallpur. In another story, the paper reported that opposition

leader LK Advani expressed satisfaction over the talks.

July 9

The coverage period for the final review of the composite dialogue is from July 9-13.

Dawn’s coverage continues and the paper carried only two stories on July 9.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Report ANP leaders leave for

India tomorrow

OS N SP

2 Islamabad Agencies Five die in Kashmir

shrine attack

MS C N

The paper reported that a six-member team of the Awami National Party (ANP) led by its

President Asfandyar Wali Khan will visit India. It also carried a new item that five people

were killed in Occupied Kashmir in an attack by militants.

July 10

Like the previous day, only two stories were published.

160 “Visit ‘beyond expectations’: Musharraf,” Dawn, April 19, 2005.

159


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Report FO says no

information about

Indian plan for troops

in Afghanistan

OS C SN

2 Bhubaneshwar Report Long-range Indian

missile hits snag

AS C SN

Foreign office spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said that Pakistan has no information about a

reported proposal for deployment of Indian troops in Afghanistan under the coalition

command. AFP reported that India test-fired its longest-range nuclear-capable ballistic

missile Agni- III for the first time which failed to hit its target.

July 11

Only one story was published on the day of attack on the Mumbai trains.

Table 3.96: Dawn Coverage on July11

Sr

No


1 New Delhi AFP India shrugs off

missile failure

OS N SN

AFP report said that Indian Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee shrugged off the

unsuccessful maiden missile test by saying that the problem faced by Agni was not

unusual and there is nothing to worry about it.

July 12

Four stories were carried by the paper one day after the trains’ bombing.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Report Terror bombs cause

mayhem on

Mumbai’s lifeline

MS C EN

160

2 Washington Reuters Kasuri says blasts

show need for talks

OS C N

3 New Delhi Jawed

Naqvi

Singh vows to defeat

forces of terrorism

OS C N

4 Islamabad AP A despicable act:

president and PM

OS P SP

The paper reported that bombs ripped through seven packed commuter trains and stations

during the rush hour in Mumbai, killing at least 163 passengers and injuring about 600.

Reuters reported that the terrorist attack in Mumbai shows Pakistan and India should

address their outstanding issues. Jawed Naqvi reported Manmohan Singh condemned the

attack, saying his government had been sworn in to “defeat forces of terrorism”. AP

reported that President Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz condemned

bombings on the commuter trains as a “despicable act of terrorism.”

July 13

It was next day to the bombing and number of stories related to India increased to six.


Sr

No


1 Karachi Report Terrorism in Mumbai

condemned

MS P SP

2 Islamabad Report Mumbai blasts

condemned

OS P SP

3 Mumbai Reuters Muslims give blood

for Hindu victims

MS P P

4 Washington Anwar Iqbal ‘Pakistan ready for

bilateral N-freeze’

OS C N

5 Islamabad Report Kasuri did not link

blasts to Kashmir

dispute: FO

OS C SN

6 Mumbai AP India sees Lashkar

behind blasts

OS C EN

The paper reported that Pakistan Peace Coalition (PPC) condemned the series of bomb

blasts in Mumbai. Reuters reported that Indian Muslims gave blood to their Hindu

neighbours wounded in the Mumbai train bombings, in a rare show of harmony between

the two communities. Dawn correspondent in Washington wrote that Foreign Minister

161

Khurshid Kasuri told a select gathering at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,

that if India agrees to reduce its nuclear stockpiles, Pakistan will follow. FO said that

Kasuri in remarks on the Mumbai bomb blasts did not link them with the Kashmir issue.

AP reported India said that Mumbai attack was carried out by the LeT.161

3.7.2- The Nation

The Nation as second newspaper covers the launch of composite dialogue period from 3

to 7 January 2004.

January 3

The paper carried six stories about the ties with India.

Table 3.99: The Nation Coverage on January 3

Sr

No


1 Rawalpindi Raja Assad

Hameed

Vajpayee due today

amid tight security

MS P P

2 Islamabad Absar Alam Mishar-diplomacy

and diplomats

MS N SP

3 Islamabad Dilshad

Azeem

JUI-F contacts India

HC to fete Vajpayee

AS P SP

4 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Kashmir parties not

asked to close offices

in capital

MS N SN

5 Islamabad Afzal Bajwa Summit to be a

success: Sinha

OS P P

6 Rawalpindi NNI Vajpayee will have to

meet Musharraf, says

Sheikh Rashid

OS C SN

The paper published a key story on the front page that Prime Minister Vajpayee was due

to arrive in Pakistan to attend the SAARC Summit. Absar Alam delved into the

diplomacy of Birjesh Mishra who was Vajpayee’s point man and met with the “people”

in Rawalpindi as sign of developments in the ties. Dilsahd Azeem wrote that JUI-F had

approached the Indian High Commission to arrange a reception for the Indian Prime

161 “India sees Lashkar behind blasts,” Dawn, July 13, 2006.

162

Minister. Two interesting stories were published on the back page. The paper reported

that Kashmiri parties were not asked to close offices in Islamabad and Yashwant Sinha

said that the SAARC Summit will be a success. NNI reported that Information Minister

Sheikh Rashid said Vajpayee will have to meet Musharraf otherwise the entire summit

will be a failure.

January 4

Another six stories were published on the day.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Shaiq

Hussain

SAARC summit open

today

MS P P

2 Islamabad Agencies Vajpayee ready for

Kashmir talks with

Musharraf

OS P P

3 Rawalpindi Absar Alam The ego has landed MS C SN

4 Islamabad Dilshad

Azeem

JUI awaits Indian HC

response to fete

Vajpayee

AS N SN

5 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

FMs discuss

Vajpayee’s meetings

with Pak leaders

AS N SP

6 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Vajpayee comes with

‘Black Cats’

AS C SN

The lead was about the SAARC Summit being held in Islamabad. The second lead was

about Vajpayee who had landed a day before in Pakistan. He was quoted as saying that

India was ready to discuss Kashmir. Absar Alam reported that the Indian leader after

wasting five years since 1999 had finally come to Pakistan. There was a report that JUI-F

was still waiting for a response from the Indian officials about its invitation to hold a

reception for Vajpayee. Separately, the foreign ministers of Pakistan and India discussed

meetings of Vajpayee with Pakistan leaders. Also, the paper published an interesting

report that Indian PM brought his limousine and 25 commandoes known as ‘Black Cats’.

163

January 5

The coverage increased to eight stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Absar Alam Musharraf-Vajpayee

meeting today

OS P EP

2 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Retreat at PM House

today

MS P SP

3 Islamabad Shaiq

Hussain

SAARC leaders focus

on terror, poverty

MS P P

4 Islamabad Javed Rana No new inclusion in

SAARC: FO

OS N SN

5 Rawalpindi Abrar Saeed Pak-India CBMs be

started from Kashmir

MS C SN

6 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Pak opposition

leaders meet

Vajpayee

MS P P

7 Islamabad APP Rashid hopeful of

Pak-India talks

OS P SP

8 Lahore PPI Samjhota Express

resumes today

OS P P

Absar Alam reported about the upcoming meeting between Vajpayee and Musharraf. The

paper reported about a retreat for the leaders of SAARC at the PM House, while the

leaders during the summit discussed how to combat terrorism and poverty. Javed Rana

reported that Sinha and Kasuri had discussed the agenda for the meeting of leaders as

Pakistan rejected the idea of inclusion of any new country into the SAARC.

The paper on the back page carried some major stories. It reported that leaders from the

two sides of Kashmir demanded that the CBMs should start from Kashmir and the

massacre of the people of Kashmir should be stopped. Pakistan opposition leaders from

Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy met Vajpayee while Information Minister

Sheikh Rashid said that the composite dialogue between the two countries will start soon.

There was another important story that the Samjhota express train started between the

two countries. Earlier, the road and air links were restored.

164

January 6

As Vajpayee settled in Islamabad and held preliminary talks, the coverage increased.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Javed Rana Musharraf, Vajpayee

for more CBMs

OS P EP

2 Islamabad APP Talks should

continue: Vajpayee

OS P P

3 Islamabad Shaiq

Hussain

Pakistan, India urged

to resolve bilateral

issues

MS N P

4 Islamabad Absar Alam What are new

question?

MS C SN

5 Lahore APP Saarc terror talks

target Kashmiris, says

Qazi

OS C N

6 Islamabad APP Sheikh Rashid says

joint declaration soon

OS P P

7 Islamabad Staff

Reporter

Indo-Pak leaders

meeting a good omen:

Fahim

OS P P

8 New Delhi AFP Pakistani baby gets

gift of vision

OS N P

9 Muzaffarabad Roshan

Mughal

Kashmiris protest

self-determination

right denial

MS C N

10 Islamabad APP Gujral greets

Vajpayee, Musharraf

for a new start

OS P P

11 Islamabad Arif &

Lamia Zia

Pak-India peace

process overshadow

summit

MS N SP

The headline on front page was about the meeting between Musharraf and Vajpayee.

They agreed on more CBMs.162 Leader from the SAARC nations asked the two countries

to resolve their differences, while Vajpayee said that more talks were needed. Absar

Alam criticised Vajpayee for saying that there were new questions in ties which needed

162 Javed Rana, “Musharraf, Vajpayee for more CBMs,” The Nation, January 6, 2004.

165

answers. Jamaat-i-Islami chief Qazi Hussain Ahmad criticised the SAARC anti-terror

talks which he said aimed at Kashmir. Sheikh Rashid said soon a joint declaration will be

issued. Opposition leader Amin Fahim welcomed the meeting of leaders of Pakistan and

India.

AFP reported a rarely good story that a 15-month Pakistani boy got vision due to the

transplant of vital parts from a deceased Indian woman. Separately, the Kashmiris

protested for denial of the right of self-determination. Former Indian premier I.K. Gujral

welcomed the meeting of Pak-India leaders. The paper also reported that Pak-India peace

parleys overshadowed the summit.

January 7

The last day of coverage saw seven stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Staff Report Talks from February OS P EP

2 Islamabad Javed Rana India, Pakistan to fight

terrorism together

OS P P

3 Islamabad Absar Alam From Lahore to

Islamabad

MS P P

4 Islamabad Dilshad

Azeem

MMA terms joint

statement

disappointing

OS C N

5 Islamabad Staff Repot Vajpayee, 2 others

leaders leave for home

MS N SP

6 Islamabad Staff Report Shujaat, Saifullah hail

talk resumption

OS P P

7 Islamabad Afzal Bajwa India still averse to

gas pipeline via

Pakistan

AS C SN

There was the news on the front page as lead that Pakistan and India agreed to launch

peace process. Musharraf termed it as epoch making.163 The two sides were happy at the

progress and India hinted to fight terrorism together with Pakistan. “There is certainly

163 “Talks from February,” The Nation, January 7, 2004.

166

likelihood to fight terrorism together,” said national security advisor Brajesh Mishra.164

Absar Alam wrote about the journey from Lahore to Islamabad, saying that India will sell

it at the election campaign. Opposition MMA rejected the joint statement while the

SAARC leaders started leaving. Local politicians Shujaat Hussain and Salim Saifullah

welcomed the start of talks. Afzal Bajwa quoted sources that India was not ready for gas

pipeline passing through Pakistan due to the security reasons.

3.7.3- The Frontier Post

The paper covers the mid-term review as the second newspaper. The coverage period is

from April 15 to 19, 2005.

April 15

The paper had only two stories.

Table 3.104: The Frontier Post Coverage on April 15

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Online India urges Pakistan

not to impose deadline

over Kashmir impasse

OS N SP

2 Islamabad FP Report Musharraf to watch

cricket with

Manmohan, Vajpayee

MS P P

Foreign minister Natwar Singh urged Pakistan that it should not insist on a timeframe to

solve a complex issue like Kashmir. The paper reported that Musharraf will watch a

cricket match with Indian leaders during his visit starting on April 16.

April 16

Only one story was published on the day. Foreign Office spokesman said that Musharraf

during his visit to India will focus on all important issues of concern.

164 Javed Rana, “India, Pakistan to fight terrorism together,” The Nation, February 7, 2004.

167


Sr

No


1 Islamabad FP Report Musharraf visit to

focus on vital issues:

FO

OS C SN

April 17

Musharraf had arrived in India and also met Manmohan but the coverage was still mute.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi APP Musharraf, Singh vow

to move on peace path

OS P P

2 Washington INP US impressed with

peace moves: Rice

OS N P

3 Chennai Inp India test-fire

Brahmos for tenth

time

OS C SN

The paper reported that Musharraf and Manmohan Singh vowed to bring peace as they

met at a banquet. Musharraf also called for resolution of the Kashmir issue.165 Foreign

Secretary Condoleezza Rice said US appreciates what Pakistan and India achieved

through their peace efforts. It was also reported that India had tested Brahmos missile for

the tenth time.

April 18

The paper increased the number of stories to seven as there were major developments.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi APP Pak-India warm to

new land links

OS P P

2 New Delhi Online Manmohan ruled out

redrawing of Indian

OS C SN

165 “Musharraf, Singh vow to move on peace path,” The Frontier Post, April 17, 2005.

168

map

3 New Delhi Online Musharraf, Kalam

discuss peace process

MS P P

4 New Delhi Online Musharraf to meet

Vajpayee

MS N SP

5 New Delhi Online ‘Pakistan not leave

Kashmiris in

isolation’

OS C SN

6 New Delhi Inp Sonia accepts

invitation to visit

Pakistan

OS P P

7 Islamabad Saqlain

Mehdi

Pak-India friendship

responding to positive

signals

MS P P

The paper reported that Musharraf was satisfied with his talks with the Indian leaders

where he discussed all issues including Kashmir and a proposal to open up new links like

the Monabao-Khokrpar rail. Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran giving details of the meeting

quoted Manmohan Singh that Kashmir was an issue and India was ready to talks on it but

there will not be any redrawing of the boundaries.166 Musharraf also met President Abdul

Kalam and discussed the peace process. It was reported that Musharraf was also planning

to meet Vajpayee. He met with APHC and said that Pakistan will not leave the people of

Kashmir. There was a story that Sonia Gandhi met Musharraf and accepted an invitation

to visit Pakistan. The paper also carried an analytical story that the relations between

Pakistan and India were improving.

April 19

Five stories were published on the last day of the coverage period.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi APP Pakistan, India say

peace irreversible OS

OS P EP

2 New Delhi Online Kashmir cannot be

resolved in one say,

says Manmohan

OS N SN

166 “Manmohan rules out redrawing of Indian map,” The Frontier Post, April 18, 2005.

169

3 Karachi APP 156 fishermen arrive

today

MS P P

4 New Delhi APP President: Time for

Kashmir resolution

OS P SP

5 Lahore APP Govt committed to

fruitful talks with

India: Khusro

OS P SP

There was front page lead based on a joint press conference by Musharraf and

Manmohan. They expressed satisfaction at the peace process and termed it irreversible.167

Manmohan told a group of Indian editors at his residence that a step-by-step approach

will help move forward on Kashmir. APP reported that 156 fishermen were released by

India as a goodwill gesture. APP in another report said that Musharraf told the journalists

and writers in New Delhi that it was time to address Kashmir. Minister of State for

Foreign Affairs Khusro Bakhtiar said Pakistan was committed for the resolution of all

outstanding issues with India through the talks.

3.7.4- Daily Times

The final review has been studied through the Daily Times. The period of coverage is

from July 9 to 13, 2006.

July 9

There was just one story about India in the paper.

Table 3.109: Daily Times Coverage on July 9

Sr

No



Gilani

US-India nuclear deal:

IAEA hopes for early

safeguards pact with

India

OS N SN

Iftikhar Gilani reported that the head of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

delegation visiting Delhi and said agreement with India on the safeguards for the civil

nuclear facilities would be concluded soon.

167 “Pakistan, India say peace irreversible,” The Frontier Post, April 19, 2005.

170

July 10

The paper published only one story about India.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Staff Report ANP delegation

leaves for India

MS P SP

The paper reported that a delegation of six members of Awami National Party headed by

Asfandyar Wali left for India on the invitation of the Indian government.

July 11

There was a story about the IPI price issue.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Fida Hussain 'IPI gas pricing issue

to be resolved in July'

OS N SP

Fida Hussain reported that Iran told Pakistan and India that it was ready for resolving the

price of Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline.

July 12

Two stories were published one day after the attack.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Staff Report Pakistan condemns

blasts, attacks

OS P P

2 Srinagar AFP 7 tourists killed in

held Kashmir

OS C N

171

Indian financial hub Mumbai was rocked by bombings and Pakistan Foreign Office in a

statement condemned the act of terrorism.168 AFP reported that seven tourists were killed

in the held Kashmir.

July 13

The paper did not publish any story about India.

3.8- Electronic Media and Composite Dialogue

The composite dialogue was an exception in the conflict-ridden history of Pakistan and

India, as the two sides had agreed for a broad approach to explore the possibility of

peace. (As mentioned above, this section is based on the interviews with three Pakistani

journalists).

M. Ziauddin highlighted an important aspect of the process. He said the composite

dialogue was success for Pakistan Foreign Office because India did not want to have a

dialogue solely focused on Kashmir. Pakistan gave the formula of a composite dialogue

which was accepted by India. Since it came from the “top”, the media was ecstatic about

it and fully supported it. He said that media took a favorable view of the meetings and

interactions and supported it. The media also tried to sell it as an initiative based on

Pakistan’s view of Kashmir.169

Rahimullah Yusufzai said that composite dialogue was an important stage in the history

of Pak-India relations as it created a lot of goodwill which was also reflected in the

media. “That (launch of composite dialogue) was good news as far as Pakistan was

concerned.”170 He said Pakistan was seeking dialogue but the Indians were not

forthcoming because of the Kargil War. The Indian position was strengthened after

Kargil incident as Pakistan was “branded” as an aggressor. Under such circumstances, it

was an achievement that the dialogue was agreed and started, he said. The media was

very positive about it. “It was very positive and since we do not have many positives in

168 “Pakistan condemns blasts, attack,” Daily Times, July 12, 2006. 169 Ziauddin, interview. 170 Yusufzai, interview.

172

relations between India and Pakistan, so even a small movement is celebrated. There was

a sigh of relief that they (Pakistan-India) have started composite dialogue,” he said. There

were articles about positive impact of peace. “Pakistan media portrayed it as an

achievement. They were talking about the benefit of peace with India,” said Yusufzai.

Javed Siddiq like the other two experts appreciated the role of media at the launch of the

composite dialogue. He said that media in Pakistan, by and large, favoured the process of

the composite dialogue as it thought that the tension would come down and normalcy

return in relation. “Most of media was talking about the importance of stability in the

region so that there should be economic progress. It was the main angle taken by the

media in Pakistan,” he said.171 The coverage was positive as media was touched by the

bilateral desire for the peace but things changed after Mumbai attacks, he concluded.

3.9- Print Media and Mumbai Attack

The Mumbai terror attack was a watershed in the history of Pakistan and India. Dawn and

The News have been used to see the coverage of the incident in the Pakistani media.

3.9.1- Dawn

First, the coverage by Dawn is presented and the coverage period is from Nov 19 to Dec

3, 2008.

Nov 19

There were two relevant stories in the paper.

Table 3.113: Dawn Coverage on November 19

Sr

No


1 Srinagar Report Four militants killed AS C N

2 Srinagar Reuters ‘Good election turnout

does not undermine

Kashmiri movement’

MS N SP

171 Siddiq, interview.

173

The paper reported from Srinagar that the Indian troops killed four suspected militants.

Reuters said that the good turnout in the first phase of election in Kashmir may not

undermine the freedom movement in Kashmir.

November 20

Only two relevant stories appeared in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Dadu Report Indian writers urge

soft visa policy

OS P SP

2 New Delhi PTI Terror probe may

harm talks with

Pakistan: BJP

OS C SN

The paper reported from Dadu district of Sindh that the visiting Indian intellectuals urged

liberal visa policies. There was a PTI report that BJP criticised the ruling Congress and

also said that Pakistan’s links with terror will harm the peace process.

November 21

There was not a single relevant story in the paper.

November 22

The paper carried three stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi India assails FO’s

Kashmir comments

OS C N

2 New Delhi Agencies 47,000 died in

Kashmir, says Delhi

OS C EN

3 New Delhi Report Pakistan ready for

nuclear no first use

offer: Zardari

OS P EP

174

Jawed Naqvi reported that India reacted angrily to the comments by FO that elections in

the occupied Kashmir were not an authentic expression of the aspirations of the people.

The paper carried a report by various news agencies that according to the official Indian

data, over two-decade old conflict in Kashmir killed 47,000 people and injured over

20,000.172 President Asif Ali Zardari made a video link address to a conference in India

and said Pakistan was ready for no first use of nuclear weapons.173

November 23

There were just two news item and both were positive for Indo-Pak ties.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed

Naqvi

Zardari suggests

accord to avoid

nuclear conflict in S.

Asia

OS P P

2 Islamabad APP APHC hails Zardari’s

comments on Kashmir

OS P P

Jawed Naqvi reported that Zardari addressing a videoconference hosted by The

Hindustan Times suggested a mutual agreement with India to avoid use of nuclear

weapons. APP reported that APHC Chairman Umer Farooq welcomed the Kashmir-

specific comments of Zardari.

November 24

Four stories found way to the pages of the paper.


Sr

No


1 Multan APP Govt keen to improve

ties with India: FM

OS P P

2 Ganderbal Agencies No election, no MS C N

172 “47,000 died in Kashmir, says Delhi,” Dawn, November 22, 2008. 173 “Pakistan ready for nuclear no first use, Zardari,” Dawn, November 22, 2008.

175

(Occupied

Kashmir)

selection — we want

freedom, say

Kashmiris

3 Lahore Report Indian team due on

29th

OS N SP

4 Islamabad APP Pakistan to free 101

Indian prisoners

MS P P

APP reported that FM Shah Mehmood Qureshi said Pakistan wanted to improve ties with

India. There was a report based on dispatches by the agencies that riots broke in the

occupied Kashmir as police tried to control the protestors demanding freedom. The paper

also reported that an Indian team of water experts was to visit Pakistan on November 29.

APP reported that Pakistan decided to free 101 Indian prisoners including 99 fishermen.

November 25

No story related to India was published.

November 26

On the day of deadly attack in Mumbai, there were just two stories about India.


Sr

No


1 Karachi Report KARACHI: 99 Indian

fishermen released

OS P P

2 Islamabad Syed Irfan

Raza

Accord with India to

fight terror together

OS P SP

The paper said that Pakistan has released 99 Indian fishermen as a goodwill gesture. Syed

Irfan Raza reported that Pakistan and India discussed the cooperation to control cross-

border terrorism, illegal immigration and to liberalise the visa system under a joint anti-

terrorism mechanism.

November 27

A day after the attack, the coverage was still low to just three stories.

176


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Agencies Mayhem in Mumbai:

Terrorist attacks

claim at least 80 lives;

hundreds taken

hostage

MS C EN

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Peace linked to

Kashmir, says France:

Qureshi, Mukherjee

meet

OS C N


Raza

Indian request to

release Sarabjeet

turned down

AS C N

The paper reported the mayhem in Mumbai which killed dozens of people. Pakistan was

not blamed on the first day but the incident dealt a blow to the peace process. Jawed

Naqvi reported that the foreign ministers of India and Pakistan held wide-ranging talks,

amidst international hopes that the resolution of Kashmir will have good impact on the

situation in Afghanistan. Syed Irfan Raza reported that Pakistan rejected a request for the

release of the alleged Indian spy and death row prisoner Sarabjeet Singh, convicted for

blasts in Lahore in 1990.

November 28

Again three stories were published.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Terror attacks test

peace agenda

MS N SN


Raza

Zardari calls it a

detestable act

OS N SP

3 Mumbai Agencies

India facing threat of

home-grown

militancy?

MS C N

177

Jawed Naqvi reported that Manmohan Singh issued a veiled threat that if Pakistan-based

groups were involved in the attack, then the relations will be back to square one.

President Zardari termed the attack as detestable while PM Gilani condemned it.

Separately, the attacks were claimed by a previously unknown group the ‘Deccan

Mujahideen’ in an email to the news organisations.

November 29

The coverage was stuck at three stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Reuters What after Mumbai

mayhem

MS C N

2 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi Clues nudge India to

look beyond Pakistan

MS N SP


Raza

Govt accepts India’s

plea for ISI help in

Mumbai probe

AS P P

Reuters wrote a detailed story about the aftermath of the Mumbai incident and said the

trust between the two countries will suffer. Jawed Naqvi reported that there were clues

that the attack had links to India’s Middle East policy, as a Brooklyn rabbi and his wife

were among the dead. He also mentioned the news conference by Shah Mahmood

Qureshi that there was no terror training camp in Pakistan. The paper also reported that

Pakistan will send the chief of ISI agency to help in the probe of the attacks.174

November 30

There were two stories about the Mumbai attack.


Sr

No


1 Muzaffarabad Reuters UJC terms Mumbai

slaughter

OS N SP

174 Syed Irfan Raza, “Govt accepts India’s plea for ISI help in Mumbai probe,” Dawn, November 29, 2008.

178

reprehensible

2 Islamabad Report Mumbai fallout tests

govt-military ties

MS N SN

Syed Salahuddin of United Jihad Council called the slaughter of civilians in Mumbai

‘reprehensible’ and denied that any member of his alliance was involved. The paper also

reported that Mumbai attack will be a test case of relations between army and civilian

government in Pakistan, as the government wanted to send the ISI chief to India which

will be opposed by the powerful military.

December 1

The coverage remained low to five stories.


Sr

No


1 New York Masood

Haider

Can US stop an Indian

attack on Pakistan?

MS C N

2 New Delhi APP Pakistan should not be

linked to bloodbath,

says Abdullah

MS P P

3 Lahore Report Bullying by India

undiplomatic: Fazl

OS C N

4 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi India sending top

official to US: Home

minister quits over

carnage

OS C N

5 Mumbai AP Gunmen spoke Hindi

with strong Punjabi,

north-Indian accent

AS C N

Masood Haider reported from the US that New York Times reported that unlike in 2002,

US may not prevail upon India from a military response against Pakistan. APP reported

that Indian leader Farooq Abdullah asked his government to stop blaming Pakistan for

the Mumbai attacks. Chief of Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam Fazlur Rehman told reporters in

Lahore that the Indian attitude was un-diplomatic as it had no right to summon any

official of Pakistan. He was referring to reports that Pakistan was sending the ISI chief to

India. Jawed Naqvi reported that Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil resigned for the

179

failure to stop the attacks in Mumbai, while India was sending Foreign Secretary

Shivshankar Menon to US for putting pressure on Pakistan. AP reported that gunmen

who attacked Mumbai spoke Hindi with Punjabi accent.

December 2

Five stories were carried by the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Jawed Naqvi India toughens stand,

calls for strong action

MS C EN

2 Mumbai Agencies Attackers trained in

Pakistan, alleges India

AS C EN

3 Islamabad Report Pakistan, India asked

to desist from blame

game

OS N SP


Raza

Zardari offers India

unconditional help

OS N SP

Jawed Naqvi reported that Pakistan High Commissioner Shahid Malik was called to the

Indian foreign ministry and told that the Mumbai attack was carried out by the elements

from Pakistan. India was also demanding extradition of men like Masood Azhar and

Dawood Ibrahim. Agencies reported that India concluded that the militants involved in

the Mumbai attack had received training in Pakistan.175 A Pakistani minister, Raza

Rabbani, urged India not to let the militants derail the peace efforts. According to a report

by Syed Irfan Raza, President Zardari said he will provide unconditional cooperation in

probing the Mumbai carnage, as New Delhi blamed Pakistan-based elements for the

mayhem.

December 3

Six stories were carried on the day, which was the last day for the coverage of the

Mumbai attacks.

175 “Attackers trained in Pakistan, alleges India,” Dawn, December 2, 2008.

180


Sr

No



Raza

Nothing new in

India’s list of wanted

persons: Pakistan

seeks credible

evidence

AS C N

2 Washington Anwar Iqbal US urges Pakistan to

cooperate with India

OS N SP

3 Islamabad Baqir Sajjad

Syed

Pakistan proposes

joint probe

OS C N

4 New Delhi Reuters Military action not

being considered,

says Mukherjee

MS P EP

5 Washington AFP No military moves on

border: US

AS N P

6 Hong Kong AFP Gilani seeks Mumbai

evidence

OS C N

The paper had a report by Irfan Raza that an official of the Interior Ministry rejected a list

of wanted men by India as it carried the same names which India had given several years

earlier. Anwar Iqbal reported from Washington that US asked Pakistan to cooperate with

India as Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon arrived there to seek support. Baqir Sajjad

Syed reported that Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi briefed the foreign

diplomats a day before US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice began her visit to the

region and proposed a joint probe to investigate the attacks. Separately, India, Foreign

Minister told NDTV that they were not considering any military action against Pakistan.

AFP reported a US official saying that both India and Pakistan had not made any overt

military move. In a report from Hong Kong, AFP reported that Prime Minister Gilani said

in an interview with the CNN that India should provide evidence about the involvement

of Pakistan in the attack.

3.9.2- The News

The News has been used as second newspaper and its 15-day coverage from Nov 26- Dec

3 in 2008 is given below.

181

November 19

Only one story was published by The News.

Table 3.126: The News Coverage on November 19

Sr

No


1 Islamabad Report Indo-Pak secretaries

to meet on 25th

AS P P

The paper reported that a meeting of the interior secretaries of Pakistan and India will be

held on November 25 in Islamabad.

November 20

The paper published three stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad APP India taking keen

interest in Benazir

Income Support

Programme: Tarzana

Raja

AS N SP

2 Islamabad Mariana

Baabar

Will India share

information on

Samjhota train blast

now?

AS C N

3 New Delhi Report India must prosecute

cops for torturing

Muslims: HRW

OS N SN

Mariana Baabar reported that Pakistan was planning to raise the issue of Lieutenant

Colonel Prasad Prohit with visiting Indian Home Secretary. Prohit was reportedly

involved in the attack at the Samjhota train. Chairperson of Benazir Income Support

Programme (BISP) Farzana Raja was reported saying that India had taken keen interest in

the programme. Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a statement that India must punish

the officials involved in torturing the Muslims.

182

November 21

There was no story about India in the paper.

November 22

The coverage was limited to three stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Qudssia

Akhlaque

Crucial Pak-India

talks on 26th in New

Delhi

AS P P

2 Srinagar Report India puts Kashmir

toll at 47,000

OS C SN

3 Islamabad Qudssia

Akhlaque

Zardari may still write

to Manmohan on

Chenab water

AS C SN

Qudssia Akhlaque reported that Shah Mahmood Qureshi will travel to India and hold a

crucial meeting with Parnab Mukherjee on March 26. The paper reported that Kashmir

Chief Secretary S S Kapur said in a statement that more than 47,000 people died and over

20,000 injured in nearly two decades of the insurgency in Kashmir. There was a report

that Zardari delayed a decision to write to Manmohan Singh about the promise which the

Indian leader made in a meeting with Zardari to settle the Chenab water dispute.

November 23

Two stories were published in the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Report Pakistan ready for no

first use of nukes:

Zardari

OS P EP

2 Islamabad Muhammad

Saleh Zaafir

It is surrender

without battle!

MS C N

183

The paper reported about an address of Zardari through a video link to a conference that

Pakistan was willing to commit no first use of the nuclear weapons.176 Saleh Zaafir

reported what Zardari said on the key issues with India was like a surrender without fight.

November 24

Two news stories were carried by the paper.


Sr

No


1 Lahore Correspondent ‘India to make

Pakistan barren by

2014’

OS C EN

2 New Delhi Report US to support Indo-

Pak talks to resolve

Kashmir issue:

Obama aide

OS N SP

The paper reported Indus Water Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah saying that India was

blocking water to Pakistan which would turn it into a barren land by 2014. Karl

Inderfurth, aide to president-elect Barack Obama, told Karan Thapar of CNN-IBN that

the US will support Pak-India talks to resolve Kashmir.

November 25

The paper did not publish any story about India-Pakistan ties.

November 26

On the day of attack, there were just three relevant stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Mobarik

Virk

Pakistan asks India to

stop blame game

AS C N

2 New Delhi Report Qureshi meets Indian OS P P

176 “Pakistan ready for no first use of nukes: Zardari,” The News, November 23, 2008.

184

counterpart today

3 Islamabad Abrar

Mustafa

Pak group hacks

Indian sites

MS C SN

Mubarik Virk reported that Pakistan had asked India to avid blaming it before proper

investigation. The home secretaries of the two countries met in Islamabad as part of the

composite dialogue. FM Qureshi was in India and the paper said he was meeting

counterpart Parnab Mukherjee. Abrar Mustafa reported that a Pakistani group hacked five

Indian websites.

November 27

The paper published three relevant stories a day after the Mumbai attack.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Reports/

Agencies

80 dead in Mumbai’s

night of terror

MS C EN

2 New Delhi Report Islamabad wants

meaningful talks on

Kashmir

OS C N

3 Rawalpindi Report Indian home secretary

meets Rehman Malik

OS N SP

The main story was about the Mumbai terror attack which killed at least 80 people. Shah

Mahmood Qureshi reportedly said at a news conference after the talks with Mukherjee

that Pakistan looked for a meaningful dialogue to solve Kashmir. Indian Home Secretary

Mukhukar Gupta met Adviser on Interior Rehman Malik and discussed about the 5th

round of secretary-level talks under the Composite Dialogue.

November 28

Six stories were published, showing Pakistan media interest in the Mumbai attack.


Sr

No


185

1 Mumbai Reports/

Agencies

Mumbai death toll

rises to 125 ; India

blames neighbours

MS C EN

2 Islamabad Farrukh

Saleem

Who’s behind

Mumbai attacks?

MS C N

3 Mumbai PTI Indian security forces

arrest ‘Pakistani

militant’ in Mumbai:

report

AS C EN

4 Islamabad Reuters Lashkar-i-Taiba

denies role

OS N SN

5 Chandigarh Report Pakistan ready to

cooperate with India

at all levels: FM

OS N SP

6 Islamabad Report Qureshi meets

Manmohan today

OS N SP

The death toll in the Mumbai attacks had gone up to 125 and Manmohan Singh blamed

Pakistan without naming it.177 Farrukh Saleem tried to prove that India failed to stop

militancy and it may be home-grown elements who wreaked the havoc in Mumbai. The

paper carried a PTI report that India arrested three militants including a Pakistani

involved in the attack. He was identified as Ajmal Kasab, resident of Faridkot. It was also

reported that the attackers were part of LeT. Reuters reported that LeT had denied reports

about its involvement. Qureshi who was in India on a four-day visit condemned the

attack and offered cooperation. There was a report from Pakistan that Qureshi will meet

Manmohan.

November 29

The coverage increased to nine stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Rauf Klasra ISI to aid Mumbai

probe

OS P P

2 Islamabad Report ISI nominee to

represent DG

OS P SP

177 “Mumbai death toll rises to 125; India blames neighbours,” The News, November 28, 2008.

186

3 Islamabad Saleh Zaafir RAW chief visited

Pakistan last year

AS P SP

4 Islamabad Report Pakistan urged to

dismantle ‘terror

infrastructure’

OS C EN

5 Islamabad Qudsia

Akhlaque

Pak-India talks on Sir

Creek postponed

again

AS C N

6 Islamabad Report Pakistan calls for

avoiding blame game

OS C N

7 Mirpur Report Collective Indo-Pak

strategy must to

combat terrorism:

AJK PM

OS N SP

8 Washington Report Pakistan, India need

to work together

against terrorism:

Haqqani

OS P SP

9 Peshawar Report Mumbai mayhem not

to derail Indo-Pak

peace process: Bilour

OS N SP

Rauf Klasra reported that Manmohan Singh has asked Pakistan to send the ISI chief to

help in the Mumbai terror probe, as elements in Pakistan were involved in it. Separately,

the paper said that a representative of the ISI chief will go to India to help in the probe.

Saleh Zaafir reported that head of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) agency,

Ashok Chatuarvedi, visited Pakistan last year and held discussion with officials. He also

wrote that the ISI chief cannot go to India as he was busy with the war on terror.

Separately, it was reported that India had blamed a Pakistani militants group for the

attacks. “Preliminary evidence, prima facie evidence, indicates elements with links to

Pakistan are involved,” Mukherjee told a news conference.

Qudsia Akhlaque reported that an important next week meeting on Sir Creek was

postponed. In another report, it was said that Pakistan was ready to help India but it was

not happy with the knee-jerk reaction and blame by India. Prime Minister of Azad

Jammu and Kashmir, Sardar Atiq Ahmad Khan, told media that Pakistan and India

should have a joint strategy to combat terrorism. Pakistan’s ambassador to the United

States Husain Haqqani in an interview with the CNN urged both Pakistan and India to

187

cooperate to eliminate terrorism. Minister for Railways Ghulam Ahmad Bilour said in

Peshawar that the peace process will not be harmed by the Mumbai carnage.

November 30

On the last day of the month, the paper published seven stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Reports Pak troops to move

to Indian border if

tensions escalate

AS C EN

2 Islamabad Qudsia

Akhlaque

Rice call prompted

hasty decision to

send DG ISI

AS N SN

3 Islamabad Reports Pakistan asks India to

act sensibly

OS C N

4 Washington Reports US fears Pakistani

role in India attacks

AS C N

5 Islamabad Mumtaz

Alvi

Politicians assure

support to PM

AS C SN

6 Muzaffarabad Report Kashmiri leader

slams Mumbai

carnage

OS P P

7 Lahore Report Elahi criticises India

for blame game

OS C SN

The paper quoted officials saying that troops will be moved from Afghan to Indian border

if the escalation continued after Mumbai attacks.178 Qudsia Akhlaque reported that US

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made telephone call to President Asif Ali Zardari

and asked him to send the ISI chief to New Delhi to help in the probe. Shah Mahmood

Qureshi was reported as saying that border situation was serious and India should try to

reduce the tension.

The paper reported with Washington dateline that a US official said that the attack at

Mumbai was the handiwork of LeT. Mumtaz Alvi reported that PM Gilani talked to

various political leaders about the situation after the Mumbai attack and they offered to

178 “Pak troops to move to Indian border if tensions escalate,” The News, November 30, 2008.

188

support the government. As the situation was tense, Syed Salahuddin of United Jihad

Council, an umbrella organisations banding together around a dozen ethnic Kashmiri

militant groups, condemned the Mumbai attack, calling it “reprehensible”. Pakistan

Muslim League-Quaid-e-Azam (PML-Q) leader Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi said India

should not level charges against Pakistan.

December 1

Another seven stories were carried by the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi/

Rawalpindi

Reports/

Agencies

Pakistan, India deny

troops build-up

OS P SP

2 Islamabad Our

Corresp.

Zardari talks to world

leaders

OS N SP

3 Washington Report US to back India’s

hunt for terrorists:

Bush

OS N SN

4 Washington Report Haqqani seeks Indo-

Pak efforts against

terrorism

OS P SP

5 Islamabad Farrukh

Saleem

India afraid to admit

failure

MS C N

6 Islamabad Report India should not use

Mumbai attacks for

electioneering: PML-

N

OS C SN

7 New Delhi Report Pakistan not involved

in attacks: Farooq

Abdullah

OS P SP

Pakistan and India officially denied any military build-up as the tension was still high

after the Mumbai attacks. Pakistan army spokesman Maj-Gen Athar Abbas said they had

not found any unusual military movement by India. The Indian External Affairs Ministry

said India was considering suspending the ceasefire agreement with Pakistan, but there

was no directive for the movement of the army. Zardari talked to French President

Nicolas Sarkozy and Afghan President Hamid Karzai as part of effort to take the world

189

into confidence over the tension. US president George Bush said that his country would

help India track down the elements involved in the attack. Pakistan envoy to US Husain

Haqqani said in an interview with the ABC channel that militants involved in the attack

in India were not linked to Pakistan government and he urged India for the collective

effort against terrorism. Farrukh Saleem said India had failed to protect its citizens as it

failed at political and intelligence level to thwart the attack. Pakistan Muslim League-

Nawaz (PML-N) Information Secretary Ahsan Iqbal said India should not use attacks for

the elections and focus on the militants working on its soil. In a major development, pro-

Congress, National Conference chief Farooq Abdullah said that Pakistan was not

involved in the Mumbai attacks.

December 2

There were six stories in the newspaper on this day.


Sr

No


1 Washington/

London

Reports No evidence of Pak

involvement: White

House

OS N SP

2 New Delhi Report India demands strong,

swift action

OS C EN

3 Lahore Amir Mir India may target

Muridke to avenge

attacks

AS C EN

4 Islamabad Reuters Post-Mumbai attacks

scenario

AS C N

5 Islamabad Report ‘Pakistan willing to

cooperate with India to

probe Mumbai attacks’

OS N SP

6 Lahore Our

Corresp.

Pakistan, India should

overcome

misunderstandings:

Aitzaz

OS N SP

The United States said that Pakistan was not involved in the Mumbai attacks according to

available evidence and there was no reason to doubt the pledges by Islamabad to help

India in the investigation. Foreign Secretary Rice urged Pakistan to cooperate in the

190

probe. India’s foreign ministry summoned Pakistan’s High Commissioner and lodged an

official protest over the Mumbai attack. Amir Mir reported that India may attack Muridke

headquarters of the Jamaat-ul-Dawah (JuD), headed by chief of Lashkar-e-Taiba Hafiz

Mohammad Saeed, to avenge the Mumbai attacks.

Pakistan called a special meeting of the parliament to discuss post-Mumbai attack

situation and its impact on the security situation. Foreign Minister Qureshi told a private

TV channel that Pakistan was willing to help India in the probe. Respected lawyer and

politician Aitzaz Ahsan said it was time for India and Pakistan to overcome their

misunderstandings instead of going to war.

December 3

The last day was the highest in term of coverage as 13 stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Asim Yasim Nation unites to

defend sovereignty

OS N N

2 New Delhi Report No military action

against Pakistan:

Mukherjee

OS P P

3 Islamabad Qudsia

Akhlaque

Pakistan proposes

commission to assist

in probe

OS P SP

4 Washington Reports Pakistan, India

nuclear posture

unchanged: US

military

AS N SP

5 Brussels Report US official links

Pakistan-based group

to Mumbai attacks

AS C EN

6 Islamabad Mazhar

Tufail

Pakistan not to hand

over any terror

suspect to India

AS C N

7 Washington Report No evidence linking

Pakistan to Mumbai

attacks yet: US

OS N SP

8 Lahore Report Scholars urge India to

avoid endangering

MS P SP

191

regional peace

9 Islamabad Tariq Butt No tough message

sent to Pakistan after

Mumbai attacks

AS N SN

10 Islamabad Asim Yasin Sherry asks Pak-India

media to cool down

tempers

OS

P SP

11 Washington Report Islamabad will smash

any group linked to

Mumbai attacks:

Haqqani

MS P SP

12 Islamabad Mumtaz

Alvi

Former Army chief

rules out Pak-India

war

OS N SP

13 Peshawar Report NWFP minister terms

Mumbai terror attack

inhuman act

OS N SP

Pakistan Prime Minister chaired a meeting to discuss the post-Mumbai situation, which

condemned the attack and offered help to India.179 Pranab Mukherjee said India was not

contemplating military action against Pakistan. Qudsia Akhlaque reported that Pakistan

proposed India to set up a join probe commission. The paper quoted a US military official

saying that India and Pakistan were not changing the nuclear posture after the Mumbai

attack. Another US official said that a group based in Pakistan carried out the attack.

Mazhar Tufail reported that Pakistan will not handover any terror-suspect to India. US

State Department said it was too early to say wherefrom the Mumbai attackers came.

The paper reported from Lahore that a group of scholars at a conference urged Pakistan

and India to resolve difference through talks. Tariq Butt reported that Pakistan had not

received any tough message from any country after the Mumbai attack during the

telephonic talks of Gilani and Zardari with world leaders. Asim Yasin reported that

Information Minister Sherry Rehman said Pakistan would not allow the terrorists to use

its soil. Pakistan ambassador to US Husain Haqqani said his country will smash any

militant group found guilty of the Mumbai attack. Mumtaz Alvi reported that former

Army Chief Aslam Beg said there was no chance of war between Pakistan and India.

179 Asim Yasin, “Nation united to defend sovereignty,” The News, December 3, 2008.

192

NWFP Minister for Information Mian Iftikhar Hussain said the Mumbai attack was

inhuman.

3.10- Electronic Media and Mumbai Attack

Pakistan media took a lot of interest in the attack, according to the selected three experts

interviewed for the research.

M. Ziauddin said that by the time the Mumbai attack happened, Pakistan media had

matured a bit. The media was now discussing issues in a way which were not in

conformity with the “official certified truth”. He said there was a difference in the

coverage of Pakistan media and stories other than based on official truth were also being

broadcast. He called it as an important moment in Pakistan where media, which

traditionally followed the officials, was breaking away from its path. Conversely, the

Indian media which in the past had a more liberal view of Pakistan was towing the

official position of Indian establishment towards Pakistan.180

Rahimullah Yusufzai termed the Mumbai attack as a turning point in the history of

relations with India. It was for the first time that Pakistani media mostly gave the factual

coverage to the incident and did not try to simply highlight the official point of view. He

said the Mumbai attack was important from coverage angle because “it was the Pakistani

media which actually broke this news that Ajmal Kasab was a Pakistani and his village

and family were traced.”181 He said that during the 72 hours of attack, there was first

confusion in the Pakistani media as how to respond, as India was already accusing

Pakistan. In normal times, the media would have rejected Indian allegations as

propaganda but it followed restraint. Yusufzai also said that, unfortunately in some

sections, there was satisfaction over the attack at the Indian financial hub. He also said

that media was caught unaware and it had no clue that the attack would have

repercussions and the composite dialogue would be suspended.

He said that another aspect which media failed to understand was that Pakistan would get

a very bad image in the world. “I think the coverage was straight forward, reporting only

180 Ziauddin, interview. 181 Yusufzai, interview.

193

what happened and not doing many analyses at that time,” he said.182 According to

Yusufzai, the media in Pakistan was not careful about the official view point, as local TV

channels raced to trace down the village and identity of Ajmal Kasab, which was

unthinkable a few years ago.

Javed Siddiq highlighted the new role of Pakistani electronic media in the wake of

Mumbai attack. He said a Pakistani TV channel was the first to trace the whereabouts of

militant Ajmal Kasab who was arrested alive during the attacks. “When the news of the

attack came, one of the electronic media, Geo group, came out with the story that Ajmal

Kasab belonged to Pakistan (which changed the coverage pattern)”, because the initial

Pakistani line was that those involved in the attack were not Pakistanis. It was generally

believed that the attackers were from some other country or may be from India. He said

that the media coverage of Mumbai changed the entire atmosphere and Pakistan came

under a lot of pressure after that.183

He also said that the Mumbai attack created a “new dynamic” in the Pakistani media

regarding coverage of relations with India, as it ignored the official line and tried to give

the factual coverage to the attacks. It had implications as India used the issue of Kasab to

convince the international community that Pakistani military establishment was involved

in the attack. India became so bold that it demanded Pakistan to send the chief of ISI spy

agency to India for the discussion over the issue of attack, he said. It created a lot of

resentment in Pakistan as public generally was against sending the head of the premier

agency to India. Siddiq said that at another level the local media was also trying to cool

down the situation so that the escalation should be avoided.

182 Yusufzai, interview. 183 Siddiq, interview.

194

Chapter 4

Indian Media: An Assessment

India is big country with hundreds of newspapers and TV channels. Their circulation and

viewership runs into hundreds and thousands of people. It was a huge challenge to select

a sample of the media outlets for the research, as mentioned in the introduction. Finally,

The Hindu has been used as the major paper for the coverage of five selected incidents

from 2000 to 2010. The second papers have been changed in order to get wider picture of

the coverage. The coverage plan for the Indian newspapers is given below:

Table 4.1: Coverage in Indian Newspapers

Sr

No.

Events First

Newspaper

Second

Newspaper

Coverage (15

days)

1 Agra Summit: 2001 The Hindu Hindustan

Times

July 8-22

2 Parliament Attack: 2001 The Hindu The Times of

India

Dec 6-20

3 Military

Standoff:

2002

Escalation The Hindu The Tribune Jan 1-5

Escalation

on Peak

The Hindu The Tribune June 1-5

De-

escalation

The Hindu The Tribune Oct 1-5

4 Composite

Dialogue:

2004-8

Launch of

Dialogue

The Hindu The Indian

Express

Jan 3-7

Mid-term

Review

The Hindu The Telegraph April 15-19

Final

Review

The Hindu Deccan Herald July 9-13

5 Mumbai Attack: 2008 The Hindu The Times of

India

Nov 19- Dec

3

Indian electronic media is big and diverse. For the sake of this study, the overall pattern

of the coverage has been analysed. The coverage of five key events already identified has

been used to map the impact of the electronic media on the Pak-India relations. The

technique is based on the interviews of key journalists, who were active during the period

of the study and had covered some of the events. On the basis of the criteria already

discussed in the methodology, the researcher used the techniques like emails and face-to-

195

face interviews. During a conference in Islamabad towards the end of September 2013,

two prominent journalists - Suhasini Haidar and Syed Shujaat Bukhari - agreed to record

interviews. Another Indian journalist - Karan Thapar – gave written interview through

emails. These interviews are structured around the already mentioned five events.

First, the coverage of Indian print media is presented, followed by the electronic media

coverage.

4.1- Print Media and Agra Summit

The Hindu has been used as main newspaper and the Hindustan Times as the second

paper to study the coverage of the Agra Summit.

4.1.1- The Hindu

Its coverage of the summit from July 8-22, 2001 is presented below:

July 8


Table 4.2: The Hindu Coverage on July 8

Sr

No


1 Islamabad Muralidhar

Reddy

Focus will be on Kashmir

during summit, says Pak.

OS C N


Reddy

`Not officially told of

CBMs'

OS P SP

3 New

Delhi

C. Raja

Mohan

Indo-Pak. talks: an air of

pessimism

MS C EN

4 Mumbai Special

Corresp.

Tushar Gandhi writes to

Musharraf

OS C N

5 New

Delhi

Staff

Report

India, Pak. must give up

confrontation: Advani

OS C N

6 New

Delhi

Atul

Aneja

Siachen issue may be

linked to forces reduction

AS C N

Muralidhar Reddy reported from Islamabad that Pakistan was focused on Kashmir and

will use the summit for seeking its quick solution. Separately, he reported that Pakistan

has said to give due consideration to any Confidence Building Measures (CBMs)

196

proposal by India. Raja Mohan in an article said that pessimism was creeping up in India

ahead of the summit due to Pakistan’s harsh statements over Kashmir.184 The paper also

published a story based on a letter written by Tushar Gandhi, a great-grandson of

Mahatma Gandhi, to Musharraf, asking him to stop giving protection to Dawood Ibrahim,

Tiger Memon and others allegedly involved in the Mumbai blasts of 1993. Advani asked

Pakistan to give up confrontation. Atul Aneja reported that the security establishment is

considering the idea of linking the pullout of troops from the Siachen Glacier to the

overall reduction of forces along the LoC.

July 9

The paper published 14 stories related to Pakistan and India. It showed that media was

taking keen interest in the upcoming summit.


Sr

No


1 New

Delhi

C. Raja

Mohan

More unilateral Indian

gestures on the way

AS P SP


Reddy

Pak. Commerce Minister

may be left out

AS C SN

3 New

Delhi

Atul Aneja DGMO for Pak. 'early

next week'

AS P SP

4 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

Clarify stance on summit,

Govt. told

OS C SN


Reddy

Pak. harps on 'centrality

of Kashmir'

MS C N

6 New

Delhi

Harish

Khare

No visa for Altaf Hussain AS C SN

7

Islamabad Muralidhar

Reddy

Musharraf convenes NSC

meeting

MS N SP

8 Islamabad UNI Pak. unaware of DGMO

visit?

OS C N

9 Islamabad VoA

Interview

Onus of summit success

on both of us: Musharraf

MS N SP

10 New

Delhi

PTI Fernandes against

removing troops from

Kargil

OS C EN

11 New K.K. Change in stance due to MS C N

184 C. Raja Mohan, “Indo-Pak. Talk: an air of pessimism,” The Hindu, July 8, 2001.

197

Delhi Katyal pressure

12 Uri in

Kashmir

Shujaat

Bukhari

On the 'road' to peace MS P SP

13 Chennai Staff

Reporter

Indo-Pak. summit will

bring two nations

together'

OS P EP

14 Shimla Staff

Reporter

Talks not under pressure:

BJP chief

OS C N

Raja Mohan wrote in a front page story that India will be positive in talks with Pakistan

and may take steps like easing travel restrictions to improve the atmosphere. Muralidhar

Reddy filed from Islamabad that Musharraf will visit India but Commerce Minister

Razzak Dawood will not accompany him, which is an indication that Pakistan will only

focus on Kashmir. Atul Aneja reported quoting military sources that the Indian Director

General Military Operations (DGMO), Lt. General G.S. Sihota, will travel to Pakistan to

discuss the security issues. The paper had a report by the special correspondent that

opposition parties asked Vajpayee to clear its position on the summit with Pakistan.

Reddy in another report said Pakistan was just harping on the “centrality of Kashmir”. A

minor story about India saying that it will not grant vsia to Muttahida Qaumi Movement

(MQM) leader was also in the paper. Reddy also reported that Musharraf decided to

convene a meeting of the National Security Council (NSC) to consult the senior officials

for talks. UNI reported that FO said Pakistan was not aware of any plan of visit by the

Indian DGMO. The paper also reported about Musharraf’s interview with the VoA that it

was common responsibility to make the summit successful.

Defence Minister George Fernandes opposed any plan to withdraw the troops from

Kargil or Siachen. K.K. Katyal criticised Pakistani government’s insistence on the

negative rhetoric ahead of the talks.185 Shujaat Bukhari wrote from Kashmir that

possibility of re-opening of a crucial road across the LoC after the summit was hailed by

the Kashmiris. There was a pro-peace story based on a statement by activist Nirmala

Deshpande, who said that the summit will help the two nations come together. BJP

185 K.K. Katyal, “Change in stance due to pressure,” The Hindu, July 9, 2001.

198

President Jana Krishnamurthi said talks with Pakistan were not being held under any

pressure.

July 10

The paper published 12 stories about Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 New

Delhi

Neena Vyas Kashmir not the only

subject: Opposition,

Govt. agree

OS C SN

2 New

Delhi

Atul Aneja India to lift barriers on

LoC for family

reunions

OS P P

3 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

Hurriyat leaders

invited for tea party

OS C N


Reddy

No sign of Pak.

granting MFN status

OS C N


Reddy

No problem about

DGMO visit:

Musharraf

OS P SP


Reddy

Small delegation

coming with

Musharraf

OS C SN

7

New

Delhi

Sushma

Ramachandran

Prospects bleak for

economic issues at

summit

MS C N

8 New

Delhi

PTI Sangh Parivar hardens

stand

OS C N

9 New

Delhi

Neena Vyas Tea party: 'It is for

parties to decide'

MS C N

10 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

PM begins discussions

with party leaders

OS N SP

11 New

Delhi

K.K. Katyal National consensus

dictates India, Pak.

position

MS C SP

12 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

Indo-Pak. social

scientists' meet begins

OS P SP

Neena Vyas reported that Vajpayee called an all party conference and got support for the

meeting with Musharraf. Atul Aneja reported that Vajpayee announced to open the

199

designated points along the LoC for family reunions of the divided Kashmiris. The paper

also said the APHC was invited for a meeting over tea with Musharraf, which angered the

Indians. From Pakistan, The Hindu correspondent reported that Pakistan was not ready to

grant the Most-Favoured Nation (MFN) status to India. In another report from Pakistan,

the correspondent said Musharraf welcomed the Indian decision to send DGMO to

Pakistan. The reporter also filed a separate story that Musharraf will take a smaller

delegation to India.

Sushma Ramachandran reported that though the major political issues will be discussed

but there is no chance of any talks on the economic matters. PTI reported that Sangh

Parivar had hardened stand on the summit. Neena Vyas reported that the Indian political

leaders may stay away from the tea party hosted by Pakistan High Commission due to the

invitation to the APHC leaders. There was a report by the special correspondent that

Indian premier started discussion with the party leaders to get support for the summit.

K.K. Katyal wrote that both Vajpayee and Musharraf had national consensus on their

back but the problem is that India wants to talk about the entirety of relationship but

Pakistan is insisting on the centrality of Kashmir. There was also a story about the

meeting between the social scientists of two countries who urged for peace.

July 11

Another big day of stories about Pakistan as 14 stories were published.


Sr

No


1 New

Delhi

C. Raja

Mohan

India ready for a long

haul

AS P P

2 Islamabad Special

Corresp.

Musharraf for joint press

meet

OS C SN

3 New

Delhi

PTI PM meeting on

Musharraf visit

OS N SP

4 Islamabad PTI Narrow escape for

Musharraf

OS N SP


Reddy

Pak. unimpressed with

'unilateral peace

offensive'

OS C N

200

6 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

DGMO to visit Pak. after

summit

OS C N

7

Lucknow Special

Corresp.

Summit in itself

significant: Fernandes

OS P SP

8 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

Congress may not

boycott tea party

MS C N

9 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

JD(S) hails summit OS C SN

10 New

Delhi

K. K.

Katyal

Lahore exercise still

relevant

MS N

SP

11 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

Will summit cool down

the 'hot' Siachen

MS C N

12 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

JKNF extends 'full'

support to summit

OS P SP

13 Mumbai Reporter M.F. Hussain's painting

for Musharraf

OS P P

14 New

Delhi

Special

Corresp.

Call for peace talks

beyond the summit

OS P P

Raja Mohan reported that India was ready for long-term engagement with Pakistan

irrespective of the outcome of the summit. The paper published a report from Islamabad

that Pakistan proposed a joint press conference by Musharraf and Vajpayee but India had

not responded to it. PTI reported that Musharraf had a narrow escape when a private car

crashed into his convoy injuring one of his bodyguards and the driver of an escort

vehicle. Muralidhar Reddy reported that Pakistan was not impressed with the unilateral

CBMs by India, which seemed an effort to put pressure on Musharraf. The paper had an

interesting report about a telephonic talk between Indian DGMO Lt. Gen. G.S. Sihota and

his counterpart Maj. Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani who asked the Indian counterpart to

visit Pakistan after the summit. George Fernandes reportedly said in Lucknow that

Vajpayee-Musharraf summit would be significant even if they failed to make any

headway.

Congress leadership decided to boycott the tea party hosted by Pakistan High

Commission while Janta Dal, a secular party, welcomed the summit but suggested the

talks be held on the basis of the Shimla and Lahore accords. Katyal wrote that the Lahore

Declaration was still relevant. Shujaat Bukhari wrote from Srinagar that it was not clear

whether the meeting could pave way for the resolution of the Siachen issue. Separately,

201

he filed that independent-minded Jammu and Kashmir National Front (JKNF) extended

full support to the summit. On a positive note, the paper said that Vajpayee would present

a painting by renowned F.M. Hussain to Musharraf. In another positive news, participants

in a contest for peace agenda for the summit opposed terrorism.

July 12

Eleven news stories were published.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

NDA to keep off tea

party

OS C N

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

BJP not invited, Cong.

rethink

MS C SN

3 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

JKLF strikes a

different note

OS C N

4 Washington Sridhar

Krishnaswami

Indo-Pak. issues

important for U.S.'

OS N SP


Reddy

Nawab wants

Musharraf to plead

Junagadh's case

OS C SN

6 Islamabad Special

Corresp.

No POWs in Pak.

jails'

OS C N

7 New Delhi C. Raja

Mohan

Talks to focus on

framework

MS C N

8 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Officials tight-lipped

on security

arrangements

AS C SN

9 Banreogal Special

Corresp.

India should not be

fussy about Pak.-

Hurriyat meet'

OS C N

10 New Delhi K. K. Katyal

Does Musharraf have

a fallback option?

MS C N

11 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Limited live TV

coverage for

Musharraf visit

AS

C SN

The major story of the day was a decision by the BJP led ruling National Democratic

Alliance (NDA) to stay away from the controversial tea party at Pakistan High

Commission. In another related story, the paper said that BJP boycotted the tea party

202

though it was not even invited as yet. Bukhari reported from Srinagar that JKLF decided

to stay away from the tea party, a setback to the APHC. Sridhar Krishnaswami filed from

Washington that the Agra Summit was important for the United States. Muralidhar

Reddy reported that as if the Kashmir dispute was not enough, the `Nawab of Junagadh'

claimed that accession of Junagadh (now part of Rajasthan) to India was disputed and

that Pakistan should not ignore the sentiments of the `subjects of Junagadh' as and when

it took up issues with India. Reddy also reported that chief spokesman of the military

government, Maj. Gen. Rashid Qureshi, told a news conference that there was not any

Indian POW in Pakistan.

Raja Mohan reported that the two leaders at summit will try to create mechanisms for the

resolution of issues. “If General Musharraf is prepared to move towards a normal

relationship with India that is free from violence, it is strongly held here, New Delhi may

be more than willing to address Islamabad's concerns on Kashmir.”186 The paper also

reported that the Indian police was not giving any details about the security arrangements

ahead of the visit by Musharraf. Opposition Leader in the Rajya Sabha, Manmohan

Singh, said that India should not waste time about the tea party issue. Katyal reported that

Musharraf cannot afford the summit to fail due to the possible backlash at home. There

was also a story that only limited live coverage will be provided to Musharraf.

July 13

The paper carried 11 stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi C. Raja

Mohan

We will be positive at

Agra: Jaswant

OS P P


Reddy

'Kashmir, main cause

of tension'

OS C N

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

It will be token Cong.

presence at tea party

MS P SP

4 Islamabad Special

Corresp.

Hurriyat leaders to

meet Musharraf at

MS C N

186 C. Raja Mohan, “Talks to focus on framework,” The Hindu, July 11, 2001.

203

reception


Reddy

Let us move forward:

Vajpayee

OS P EP


Reddy

CBMs won't move

ahead alone: Pak.

OS C N

7 Islamabad Special

Corresp.

Lashkar against visa

posts along LoC

OS C N

8 New Delhi Atul Aneja An agenda for peace

likely

MS P SP

9 New Delhi Kalpana

Sharma

For Kashmiris, peace is

a question of survival'

OS P SP

10 Chennai Reporter

An online school for

Indian, Pak. youths

OS P P

11 Jaipur Special

Corresp.

Entertainment for Pak.

team in Agra

MS P P

Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh said his country will show positive approach

towards Musharraf despite the displeasure over his meeting with the Kashmir leaders.

Reddy reported that Pakistan spokesman Rashid Qureshi said the basic objective at the

Agra Summit would be the resolution of Kashmir.187 Congress decided to make token

presence at the tea party. Pakistan sources said that APHC leaders will meet Musharraf

on July 14. Muralidhar reported that Vajpayee in an interview to the Associated Press of

Pakistan said the time had come for two the countries to shed “narrow and cliché-ridden''

approaches and take their relationship forward by addressing the core concerns. The

Hindu correspondent in Pakistan reported that Musharraf said without solving Kashmir,

the CBMs will not help. On a different note, the paper quoted chief of the Lashkar-e-

Taiba, Hafiz Saeed, that his organisation would not allow India to establish visa posts on

the LoC.

Atul Aneja wrote that after early posturing, the two sides were settling for a workable

formula for the talks. As the two sides were busy talking terms of peace, private peace

activists gathered in Delhi and asked the leaders to solve the problems and bring peace,

reported Kalpana Sharma. In another private initiative, the paper reported that the South

Asian Community Center for Education, Research and Action Trust, based in Chennai,

set up an “India-Pakistan Reconciliation School'' on the eve of Musharraf's visit. Also, it

187 Muralidhar Reddy, “‘Kashmir, main cause of tension,’” The Hindu, July 12, 2001.

204

was reported that noted musician and Grammy Award winner Pundit Vishwa Mohan

Bhatt will perform live in Agra during the summit to entertain the Pakistan delegation.

July 14

The paper published 15 stories, which were a mix of pro-peace and pro-conflict pieces.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi C. Raja

Mohan

A 'new opportunity' for

India, Pak.

AS P P

2 New Delhi PTI Let's bury the past:

Vajpayee

OS P EP


Reddy

We are for building

trust: PM

OS P P

4 Manama

(Bahrain)

Kesava

Menon

Musharraf against

permanence to LoC

OS C N

5 New Delhi PTI Indians barred at

Hurriyat, Pak. scribes

meet

OS C N

6 New Delhi Gargi Parsai

Will Tulbul navigation

project be taken up at

Agra?

MS C N

7 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

PM briefs President on

summit

OS N SP

8 New Delhi Neena Vyas Change in BJP stand? MS P SP

9 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Cancel summit, says

VHP

OS C N

10 New Delhi UNI A good beginning:

RSS

OS P P


Corresp.

Cong. disapproves of

Musharraf remarks

OS C N

12 New Delhi Nirnimesh

Kumar

PIL on Musharraf visit

dismissed

OS P SP

13 Mumbai Arunkumar

Bhatt

Thackeray questions

concessions to Pak.

OS C N

14 New Delhi K. K. Katyal

Overcoming hiccups,

over to Agra now

MS N SP


Corresp.

Rabbani plea to

Vajpayee

OS C N

205

Raja Mohan reported that despite escalation in Kashmir, India decided to stay calm and

positive ahead of the summit. PTI quoted Vajpayee saying that no one can forget

Pakistan’s aggression in Kargil but it was time to move forward. Reddy reported an

interview of Vajpayee with Dawn newspaper in which he said that India would like to

build peace and trust by placing a stable structure of cooperative ties with Pakistan.

Musharraf in an interview with the Gulf News said that he was against making the LoC a

permanent border. PTI reported that Indian media was barred from attending a meeting of

APHC with Pakistani media. There were also speculative stories like one by Gargi Parsai

whether Tulbul navigation project will be part of the talks.

Indian Prime Minister briefed President K.R. Narayanan about the summit. He also met

several other leaders as part of the pre-summit consultations. Neena Vyas reported that

BJP accepted that Kashmir was an issue with Pakistan. The offshoots of the extremist

Sangh Parivar were divided over the summit: Vishwa Hindu Parishad asked government

to cancel the meeting and the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) termed the summit

as a good beginning. Congress criticised Musharraf’s remarks related to rejection of

Shimla and Lahore agreements and terming APHC as sole representatives of Kashmir.

The Delhi High Court threw out the Public Interest Litigations challenging Musharraf

visit. The Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray criticised Vajpayee for showering concessions

to Pakistan before the summit. Katyal said the time of the summit had finally come and

all irritants of the past week were overcome. Separately, Afghanistan leader Burhanuddin

Rabbani asked Vajpayee to raise the issue of Pakistan’s role in spreading regional

instability through Taliban.

July 15

It was the first day of the summit level talks and the paper published 22 stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi C. Raja

Mohan

Hopes rise for a

productive summit

MS P P

2 New Delhi Shujaat

Bukhari

We are satisfied:

Hurriyat leaders

OS C N

206

3 New Delhi C. Raja

Mohan

We need to show

boldness: Musharraf

OS P SP

4 New Delhi Staff

Reporter

Ceremonial welcome at

Rashtrapati Bhavan

OS N SP

5 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

President calls for

'structured dialogue'

OS P P

6 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Advani raises cross-

border terrorism

OS C N

7 New Delhi Gaurav

Vivek

Bhatnagar

The General keeps his

date with haveli

MS P P

8 New Delhi Atul Aneja India, Pak. Naval

hotline?

MS P SP

9 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

'Undaa Hai', exclaims

Musharraf

MS P SP


Corresp.

Let's agree on adequate

nuclear safeguards:

Sonia

OS P P

11 New Delhi PTI Tipnis handshake MS C N

12 New Delhi Shujaat

Bukhari

Chaos, confusion at

party

OS C N


Corresp.

Gandhiji's ideals

required now for

bringing peace, says

Musharraf

MS P P


Corresp.

No place for Musharraf

plant?

MS C N

15 New Delhi Staff

Reporter

Hope, disappointment,

then business as usual

MS C SN

16 Agra PTI The Taj can be seen

from every room

MS P SP


Corresp.

I will convey your

views to my husband:

Sehba Musharraf

OS P SP

18 New Delhi Javed Ansari The General won

some, lost some

MS P P

19 Hyderabad Special

Corresp.

Church council hails

Vajpayee initiative

OS N SN

20 New Delhi Staff Report She came, she saw, she

left captivated

MS P SP

21 Agra PTI Agra administration

shells out Rs. 1.5 cr.

AS C SN


Corresp.

Military solution to

Kashmir ruled out

OS P SP

207

Raja Mohan reported that there was a chance of fresh start in ties as Musharraf arrived to

hold talks. APHC leaders were satisfied after their meeting with Musharraf, reported

Shujaat Bukhari. Musharraf in his first interaction with a group of intellectuals said he

was hopeful of a breakthrough. Musharraf was given the ceremonial welcome as he

visited the presidential palace to meet President K.R. Narayanan. It was also reported that

Home Minister L.K. Advani conveyed concerns over terrorism to Musharraf in his brief

meeting. Musharraf’s visit to his ancestral haveli in New Delhi was also reported as an

“emotional homecoming”. Atul Aneja reported that defence ministry proposed a hotline

between the two navies. The paper also had a story about the food served to the Pakistani

leader who termed it as “undaa hai” (excellent).

Sonia Gandhi also met Musharraf with a three-member delegation. PTI reported that

Marshal A.Y. Tipnis, Chief of Air Staff, did not salute Musharraf at the ceremonial

reception at the Rashtrapati Bhavan and only shook hands, a reminder of 1999 when

Musharraf as army chief refused to come to the border to greet Vajpayee. Shujaat

Bukhari reported that the tea party was marred by chaos and confusion. Musharraf’s visit

to Samadhi of Gandhi at Raj Ghat was also reported as he became the first Pakistani

leader to pay the homage. “Never has the requirement of his ideals been more severely

felt than today, especially in the context of Pakistan- India relations. May his soul rest in

eternal peace,'' Musharraf wrote in the visitors' book. Another story was about

cancellation of Musharraf’s visit to the dargah of Hazrat Nizamddin Auliya.

A story from Agra captured the details of the suite of Amar Vilas where Musharraf was

supposed to stay. He could see the Taj from the room. An address by Sehba Musharraf to

a group of women was also part of the day’s coverage. The details of high-profile

luncheon to Musharraf were also published. The National Council of Churches in India

(NCCI) described Kashmir as an “integral part of India''. There was also a report about

Sehba Musharraf being appreciated by the media. The paper reported that the Agra

administration spent Rs 1.5 crore on the security arrangement. Musharraf said that there

was no military solution to Kashmir.

208

July 16

The day was full of interesting stories as it was the first day of the summit.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi C. Raja

Mohan

'Cordial, constructive'

talks on day one at

Agra

MS P P


Reddy

Sushma remarks cause

a flutter

OS C EN

3 Agra UNI Casuals all the way MS P SP


Reddy

Pakistanis euphoric,

militants to wait and

watch

MS C SN

5 Agra Neena Vyas Will the Big Two seize

the moment?

MS P P

6 Agra Neena Vyas Media kept out of

'action'

MS C N

7 Agra Anita Joshua Agra back in Centre

stage

MS N SP

8 New Delhi Gaurav

Vivek

Bhatnagar

One more Indo-Pak

summit: this one is

different

OS P SP

9 New Delhi UNI 'We are not sheltering

Dawood'

AS C N

10 Agra Anita Joshua 'Lucky to have visited

the Taj'

OS P P

11 Agra PTI Wish I stayed here

longer: Musharraf

OS P P

12 New Delhi Reporter A pilgrimage for Sehba MS P P

13 Indore PTI 'Musharraf should have

avoided meeting

Hurriyat exclusively'

OS C N

14 Guwahati Special

Corresp.

Will ISI support to

ULFA stop?

AS C N

15 Aligarh PTI Situation will worsen if

the summit fails'

OS C SN

16 Agra UNI Third party

intervention'

AS P SP

As the historic talks started at Agra, the media went ecstatic with the hope of a

breakthrough. In the front page lead, The Hindu reported that the two countries were

209

hopeful to bury the bitter past for a promising future. The big story of the day was about

the controversial remarks by Information and Broadcasting Minister Sushma Swaraj who

after the first day of the summit gave the impression that issues other than Kashmir

figured prominently in the dialogue. The casual attire of the two leaders was also

prominently reported, as Musharraf wore an open-neck cream colour shirt and black

trousers, while Vajpayee was clad in a dhoti, kurta and sleeveless jacket. Reddy reported

Pakistan was positive about the prospects of the talks but Kashmiri militants did not share

the optimism. Neena Vyas reported from Agra that it appeared the two leaders were

willing to write a new chapter in the history of relations. Vyas also reported media was

kept on a tight leash during the first day of the summit.

Anita Joshua wrote Agra, the capital of Mughal Empire till 17th century, was back on

stage due to the summit. Gaurav Vivek Bhatnagar filed a story about a poetry recitation

show joined by the writers from Pakistan and India who sang for peace. A Pakistan

official was quoted as saying that underworld don Dawood Ibrahim was not staying in

Pakistan. Joshua reported about Musharraf trip to Taj Mahal with his wife. PTI reported

that Pakistani leader said he should have stayed longer at Agra. Sehba Musharraf visited

shrine of Hazrat Sheikh Salim Chishti.

The deputy leader of Congress parliamentary party in the Lok Sabha, Madhavrao Scindia,

said Pakistani President should have avoided the exclusive meeting with the APHC

leaders. In another story, the paper said that it was time to see if ISI would stop support to

the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) rebels in Assam. Former Prime Minister

Chandra Shekhar said that the situation will worsen if the summit failed. The paper had

also an interesting story that when Vajpayee and Musharraf were chatting during the

lunch at Taj Palace Hotel, Indian Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah walked

towards them to join them in their talks. “Gen. Saheb, this is third party intervention

taking place,'' Mr. Vajpayee, known for his felicity with words, said, official sources told

UNI. In response, the Pakistani leader just smiled.

July 17

The talks had failed and the paper published 17 stories.

210


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Raja Mohan Agra talks fail MS C EN

2 Agra Malini

Parthasarathy

We cannot brush

Kashmir under the

carpet: Musharraf

OS C EN

3 New Delhi Neena Vyas We will counter

terrorism: PM

MS C N

4 Agra UNI CCS holds informal

meeting

MS C N

5 Agra Neena Vyas When propaganda

played spoilsport

MS C N

6 Agra Special

Corresp.

MEA spokesperson

manhandled

MS C N

7 Lucknow Special

Corresp.

'An attempt to gain

cheap popularity'

OS C N

8 Agra Special

Corresp.

Media kept on

tenterhooks

MS C SN

9 Agra Special

Corresp.

Attracting attention -

the Sena way

MS C N

10 Agra Atul Aneja Stuck for the right

language

AS C N

11 Ajmer Mohammed

Iqbal

Musharraf fails to keep

date at Ajmer dargah

AS C SN

12 Agra Special

Corresp.

Sehba Musharraf takes

in Agra Fort

MS P SP

13 Agra Shujaat

Bukhari

Pak. media persons

optimistic

MS P SP

14 Agra PTI Never forget view of

Taj: Musharraf

MS P SP

As the two day-summit failed, The Hindu reported, “Fundamental differences over

Kashmir and cross-border terrorism turned out to be too strong to let both the countries

reach a broad accommodation of each other's core political concerns.”188 Musharraf’s

breakfast meeting with Indian journalists was given extensive coverage and his insistence

to keep Kashmir at center of talks invited backlash. It was said that the frank talk by

Musharraf contributed to the failure of talks. Vajpayee chaired a crucial meeting of the

Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) and it was later reported that he was asked to be

188 C. Raja Mohan, “Agra talks fail,” The Hindu, July 17, 2001.

211

tough with Musharraf. Neena Vyas said both countries continued to unleash

disinformation to their advantage during the summit. They were trying to address the

home audience without realising that it will hurt the goodwill and atmosphere. It was also

reported by Indian media that spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs, Nirupma

Rao, was “virtually manhandled” by the members of the Pakistani media.

As the summit failed, criticism started pouring in. Former Prime Minister Chandra

Shekhar said Vajpayee knew that Pakistan will not budge on Kashmir and still he went

ahead to invite Musharraf. Media also faced problems as the flow of information was

blocked. Shiv Sena burnt Pakistan flag in front of Mughal Sheraton hotel to protest the

talks. The paper also carried a report by Atul Aneja that the two countries tried to agree

on the joint statement but they could not. In other twist of the day, Musharraf failed to

pay visit to Ajmer as he dashed home after the failure but Sehba made a tour to the Agra

Fort. Shujaat Bukhari reported after interviewing Pakistan journalists and academicians

that they were hopeful about the direction set by the summit. PTI reported Musharraf

saying that he will never forget the view of historic Taj Mahal from Kohinoor

presidential suite of Amar Vilas Hotel.

July 18



Sr

No


1 New Delhi C. Raja

Mohan

Ready to pick up the

thread, says Jaswant

Singh

OS P P


Reddy

Summit inconclusive,

not a failure: Sattar

OS P P

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Cong., BJP blame Pak.

for failure

OS C N

4 Islamabad Special

Corresp.

POWs: Musharraf

orders probe

OS P P

5 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Dialogue must

continue, say Left

parties

OS P P

6 Agra Neena Vyas Killing with kindness, OS C N

212

Jaswant style

7 Agra Special

Corresp.

Pak. diplomacy one

factor for failure'

OS C EN

8 New Delhi PTI Gujral blames Pak.

leadership

OS C EN

9 Agra Neena Vyas Sushma, Jaswant and

the media

MS C N

10 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

Kashmiris keep hope

alive

MS P SP

11 New Delhi Staff Report Musharraf was tense at

Raj Ghat'

MS C N


Corresp.

Industry to send team

to Pakistan

OS P SP

The post-summit official reaction from India was positive and Foreign Minister Jaswant

Singh said they were ready to continue to seek reconciliation. Also, positive messages

were issued from Pakistan and Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar said that the summit was

inconclusive and not a failure. Congress and BJP blamed Pakistan for the failure.

Pakistan showed further commitment to the spirit of the summit when Musharraf ordered

administrative action to locate if any Indian POW was in jails, which was raised during

the summit. The Indian parties of the left expressed disappointment at the failure and

asked that the dialogue should continue. Jaswant Singh told media that Musharraf was

never stopped from visiting the shrine of Sufi saint in Ajmer. He also said Pakistan’s

reluctance to sit for the preparatory talks and doing diplomacy through media was cause

of failure. Former Prime Minister I.K. Gujral also blamed Pakistan for failure.

Jaswant Singh also said that Information Minister Sushma Swaraj had full backing of the

party when she spoke with media. Bukhari wrote that Kashmiri people were positive

about the ties between Pakistan and India despite failure. An interesting story was based

on the handwriting of Musharraf in the visitor’s book at the Raj Ghat. A specialist of

writing said that he was nervous. The paper reported that Associated Chambers of

Commerce and Industry of India decided to send a trade delegation to Pakistan.

July 19

After end of the summit, the coverage went down.

213


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Atul Aneja 'We must start from

Shimla, Lahore'

OS C N


Reddy

Pak. dumb-struck AS C EN

3 New Delhi PTI Pak. apologises for

heckling of official

AS C N


Reddy

India goes ahead with

CBMs

MS P SP

5 New Delhi Neena Vyas India against holding

ties hostage to

Kashmir question

MS C N

6 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

India to brief U.S.

official on summit

AS C N

7 New Delhi K.K. Katyal Peace lost a chance in

Agra

MS P EP

8 Mumbai Mahesh

Vijapurkar

Vajpayee should not

go to Pak.'

OS C N

9 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Panun Kashmir wants

PM to come clean on

summit

OS C N

India said the future engagements should be based on the Simla and Lahore agreements.

Reddy reported from Pakistan that the military establishment was ‘dumb-struck’ at the U-

turn by India over the Agra Summit and considered it as setback for the reconciliation. It

was also reported that Pakistan spokesman apologised to the External Affairs Ministry

spokesperson Nirupma Rao who was heckled by the Pakistani journalists. Reddy also

reported that India was going ahead with the CBMs and secretary of the Indian Council

of Social Sciences Research (ICSSR), Bhaskar Chatterjee, was in Pakistan with 27

fellowships to senior researchers.

Neena Vyas reported that India was against holding the ties hostage to Kashmir. It was

also reported that India will brief the visiting Chief of the US Army, General Henry

Shelton, about ties with Pakistan. Katyal made an analysis of who gained and who lost at

Agra, and came out that it was the peace which suffered. Shiv Sena said Vajpayee should

not go to Pakistan. Kashmir Pundits demanded the government to explain why APHC

was allowed to meet Musharraf.

214

July 20

The coverage further nosedived after failure of the summit.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Summit 'not

unsuccessful': PM

OS C SN


Reddy

The Agra journey must

continue, says Pak.

OS C SN

3 New Delhi Neena Vyas BJP executive to

analyse Agra summit

AS C N

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Be better prepared next

time, says V.P. Singh

OS C N

5 New Delhi UNI Militancy may

escalate: Gujral

OS C N

The paper reported Vajpayee said that the summit was not unsuccessful and efforts would

be made for more talks. Reddy reported that Pakistan showed disappointment over the

Indian decision to reject the understanding reached at Agra. Pakistan contested Indian

view that since the formal joint statement was not issued, hence they were not bound by

it. Neena Vyas reported that ruling BJP will meet soon to extract the political mileage out

of the summit, which many thought was a bad show on its part. Former Prime Minister

V.P. Singh told the government to be better prepared in the next interaction with

Pakistan. Another ex-premier I.K. Gujral said that militancy will increase due to the

summit failure.

July 21

There were just three stories and all were negative.


Sr

No



Reddy

Resolution of Kashmir

only way to amity:

Musharraf

OS C EN

2 Islamabad PTI Musharraf derailed OS C EN

215

summit: Sushma

3 New Delhi Neena Vyas BJP blames it on

Jaswant Singh

AS C N

Musharraf gave his first press conference since the summit and said it was a failure as

they could not agree on the centrality of Kashmir. PTI reported Sushma Swaraj said that

Musharraf derailed the summit. She told a Pakistani daily that it was not she but

Musharraf who must be blamed for the failure. As the two countries blamed each other,

BJP accused Jaswant Singh for the failure.

July 22

The coverage of the day was limited to mutual bickering over apportioning the blame for

the failure.


Sr

No



Reddy

Pak. accuses India of

firing on LoC

OS C EN


Reddy

'Cross-border terrorism

was linked to Kashmir'

OS C EN

3 Srinagar Pak. firing in Kargil

continues

AS C N

4 New Delhi PTI Sonia convenes

Opposition leaders'

meet

MS C N

5 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

BJP hits out at

Musharraf

OS C N

6 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Centre must snap out

of diplomatic stupor:

Cong.

OS C N

7 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Seize the opportunity,

CPI(M) tells Govt.

OS P SP

8 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Govt. accused of

'diplomatic paralysis'

OS C SN

216

The failure of the Agra Summit was visible on the LoC as Pakistan accused India for

firing.189 Reddy reported Musharraf saying that the issue of cross border terrorism was

due to Kashmir. PTI reported from Srinagar that the Pakistani firing was continuing in

Kargil. Sonia called a meeting of the opposition parties to discuss the bungling of BJP at

the summit. BJP on its part hit back at Musharraf’s press conference and called him the

biggest hawk. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) called on the government to

continue the talks. Former Foreign Minister Natwar Singh said that Musharraf’s

obsession with Kashmir prevented the settlement.

4.1.2- Hindustan Times

The Hindustan Times is considered as an important newspaper in India. Its coverage

period of the Agra Summit is from July 8 to 22, 2001.

July 8


Table 4.17: Hindustan Times Coverage on July 8

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Manoj Joshi No quick fix on

Kashmir possible

MS C SN

2 New Delhi PTI Altaf Hussain to visit

India soon

AS C N

3 New Delhi Pramit Pal

Chaudhuri

Pak vitriol seen as

panic over India

CBMs

AS C N

Manoj Joshi reported that both countries would try to tackle the issue of Kashmir at the

summit but no quick solution was visible.190 The paper reported that leaders of Muttahida

Qaumi Movement Altaf Hussain will visit India to highlight the plight of his people. It

also reported that India was not happy with the negative response from Islamabad over a

series of CBMs, as Indian officials suspected that Pakistan wanted to keep the focus on

Kashmir and believed that the concession by India would deflect the attention.

189 Muralidhar Reddy, “Pak. Accuses India of shelling on LoC,” The Hindu, July 22, 2001. 190 Manoj Joshi, “No quick fix on Kashmir possible,” Hindustan Times, July 8, 2001.

217

July 9

There wasn’t any relevant story on July 9.

July 10

There were six stories but five of them were negative for Pak-India ties.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Tribune

News Service

Qazi invites Hurriyat

leader

OS C N

2 New Delhi Shakti

Sharma

Pervez’s host-to-be

was police’s guest

MS N SN

3 New Delhi HTC No concession on

Kashmir, says

Vajpayee

OS C N

4 New Delhi HT Corresp. ‘Govt in a bind over

Qazi’s high tea’

MS N SN

5 New Delhi HT Corresp. More border gates to

open for Pakistanis

AS P P

6 New Delhi Vinod

Sharma &

Udayan

Namboodiri

Musharraf mood

mirrors popular

mindset

MS C N

The paper reported that High Commissioner Ashraf Jehangir Qazi had invited APHC

leaders for the high tea and meeting with Musharraf, disregarding the Indian reservations.

There was an interesting story by Shakti Sharma who traced the criminal record of the

man, now living in the Neharwali Haveli where Musharraf was born. Rakesh Gola, part-

owner of the property, was arrested for stealing Rs 5 million. The paper also reported that

Vajpayee told a meeting of 37 political leaders that there will be no compromise on

Kashmir.

The issue of high tea was also getting blown out as the Indian government was in

dilemma to attend the party or skip it. The paper also reported that India was announcing

more CBMs to facilitate visitors from Pakistan, which included issuing visas at the border

and opening new entry points at the border and the LoC. Vinod Sharma & Udayan

218

Namboodiri reported that Pakistan was not responding to the unilateral CBMs, fearing

that India was trying to sideline Kashmir.

July 11

The paper published four stories related to Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Chandan

Nandy

Slew of CBMs

compound security

worries

MS C N

2 New Delhi Poonam

Goel

A gift from Husain to

Musharraf via

Vajpayee

OS N SP

3 Srinagar Rashid

Ahmad

Hurriyat divided over

invitation to Qazi’s tea

MS C SN

4 New Delhi Vivek

Shukla

High Commissioner’s

house hold special

memories

AS N SP

The paper reported that the Indian security establishment was disturbed due to the CBMs

like relaxation of visas for Pakistanis and opening up new entry points, as it may

compromise the security. Poonam Goel reported that master painter F.M. Husain created

a special painting of horses on the request of Vajpayee for Musharraf. Rashid Ahmad

reported from Srinagar that APHC was divided over the invitation to the tea party and

JKLF announced to boycott it. An interesting story was about the High Commissioner’s

house, as the paper reported that Musharraf’s visit to the building for the tea party will be

like a pilgrimage as his family once took refuge in it after the partition riots in 1947.191

July 12

There were four stories about Pakistan.


Sr Dateline Byline Headline Source Slant Impact

191 Vivek Shukla, “High Commissioner’s house holds special memories,” Hindustan Times, July 11, 2001.

219

No

1 New Delhi Report Pak President actually

holding pistol to our

head, say Gujral

OS C N

2 New Delhi Shekhar Iyer ‘We’ll boycott Qazi

tea’: NDA

OS C N

3 New Delhi Rajnish

Sharma &

Sutirtho

Patranobis

Pakistan media

person are here for

serious business

MS N SP

4 New Delhi Saurabh

Shukla

Kandahar highjack

victims wait for

Musharraf to deliver

justice

MS C N

Ex-premier I.K. Gujral said that Pakistan was dictating terms on Kashmir, reducing hopes

for a breakthrough during the summit. The NDA decided to stay away from the tea party

due to the invitation extended to APHC while other leaders from Kashmir were ignored.

The paper also had a report about the 78-memebr strong media team flown from Pakistan

to India for the coverage of the Agra Summit. Saurabh Shukla reported that the victims of

the Indian plane high-jacked by Pakistani militants wanted justice from Musharraf.

July 13

The paper carried five stories a day before Musharraf was arriving in India.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi HT Corresp. Pak for Mandela’s

meditation

AS C N

2 London Vijay Dutt Bhutto, Hussain

welcome summit

OS P SP

3 New Delhi Udayan

Namboodiri

President to put

democracy on the

menu at banquet

AS N SN

4 New Delhi Saurabh

Shukla

Pak team lands India

in seating soup

AS N SN

5 New Delhi Sutirtho

Patranobis

Pak VIP at Rajghat

after 21 years

MS N SP

220

The paper reported that Pakistan wanted to haul in Nelson Mandela to mediate on

Kashmir.192 Vijay Dutt reported from London that former premier Benazir Bhutto and

leader of Muttahida Qaumi Movement Altaf Hussain, both living in self-imposed exile,

welcomed the summit. Indian President who was hosting a banquet planned to deliver a

speech extolling the virtues of democracy which may appear too hot for a general, who

seized power through a coup. But to Musharraf’s relief, K.R. Narayanan was not going to

touch cross-border terrorism or Kargil.

There was an interesting story about seating protocol at the summit, termed as “protocol

nightmare”. The paper said that Musharraf was accompanied by just one minister,

Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar and rest of 19-memebr team comprised bureaucrats. Three

each of whom were secretary and additional secretary level officers. India had three

ministers and was in quandary who will be seated in front of whom. Musharraf was

visiting Rajghat which was the first visit by any Pakistan VIP since Foreign Minister

Agha Shahi paid a visit on July 16, 1980.

July 14

The coverage peaked on the day of Musharraf’s arrival and the paper published 11

stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi HT Corresp. Two summits, two

ethos

MS N SN

2 Srinagar Rashid

Ahmad

‘Jaswant’s statement

on Kashmir

discouraging’, says

Lone

OS C N

3 New Delhi Sudhi Ranjan

Sen

“Advani to take up

issue of Pakistan

giving shelter to

criminals”

AS C N

4 New Delhi HT Corrsep. Digvijay Singh to be

Pak president’s

MS N SP

192 “Pak for Mandela’s meditation,” Hindustan Times, July 13, 2001.

221

minister-in-waiting

5 New Delhi HT Corresp. Talks will be

meaningless

OS C N

6 Dubai PTI “LoC as permanent

border not

acceptable”

MS C N

7 New Delhi Vinod

Sharma

Dhindsa seek meet

with Musharraf on

upkeep of Sikh

shrines in Pak

MS C N

8 Agra Sourish

Bhattacharya

Menu laces with

Ayurvedic elixirs to

set the right mood

MS N SP

9 New Delhi Jay Raina Pervez will have some

food for thought

MS N P

10 New Delhi HT Corresp. Anti-Pervez PIL cost

litigant Rs 50,000

OS N SP

11 New Delhi HT Corresp. Kashmir cloud over

summit

MS C N

The paper compared the Lahore and Agra Summits, focusing how Lahore trip was

historic but Musharraf sabotaged it by launching the Kargil War. Rashid Ahmad reported

from Srinagar that senior Hurriyat leader Abdul Ghani Lone said the statement of

Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh that Kashmir was non-negotiable was unfortunate.

Advani was planning to raise the issue of at least 50 hardcore criminals wanted in India

and allegedly hiding in Pakistan. Railway Minister Digvijay Singh was designated as

minister-in-waiting for Musharraf to accompany him during the three-day trip. VHP

lashed at Musharraf and said he was not serious in the talks. Its leader Acharya

Dharmnedra also announced two-day protest fast against the summit. PTI reported that

Musharraf in an interview to the Gulf News said Pakistan will not accept the LoC as

border.

Vinod Sharma reported that Akali leader and union minister S.S. Dhindsa wanted to meet

Musharraf for involving Sikh leaders from India in the maintenance of their holy places

in Pakistan. An interesting report said that Vajpayee and Musharraf will be served a food

laced with Ayurvedic substances and the philosophy was that this kind of food keeps

222

people at peace with themselves and with others.193 Jay Raina reported that Vajpayee

would serve the best lunch to Musharraf during the summit break where a galaxy of

Bollywood stars will be invited. A litigant has field petition against visit of Musharraf but

it was dismissed and a fine of Rs 50,000 was imposed on him. The paper also reported

that due to the hard line taken by Pakistan on Kashmir, the entire Agra Summit may end

in failure.

July 15

The coverage for the first day of the summit was limited to four stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Udayan

Namboodiri

Narayanan focuses on

social issues,

development

OS P P

2 New Delhi Vinod

Sharma

No military solution

of Kashmir:

Musharraf

OS P SP

3 New Delhi Vinod

Sharma &

Udayan

Namboodiri

Soft notes after shrill

rhetoric

MS P SP

4 New Delhi HT Corresp. Musharraf to ask

Vajpayee to visit

Pakistan

OS P P

Indian President K.R. Narayanan reportedly gave a new meaning to the unfinished

agenda of partition when he urged Pak-India cooperation for the development of the sub-

continent. Musharraf made a conciliatory speech at the banquet saying that Kashmir

cannot be solved through military means. The paper reported that Musharraf arrived on

July 14 and looked grim but by the evening he had changed and looked more relaxed.

Foreign Secretary Inamul Haq told media that Pakistan would invite Vajpayee for a

return visit to have back-to-back summits.

193 Sourish Bhattacharya, “Menu laced with Ayurvedic elixirs to set the right mood,” Hindustan Times, July

14, 2001.

223

July 16

There were five stories on the second day of summit.


Sr

No


1 Fatehpur

Sikri

Soni

Sangwan

Peace in city of clove OS P P

2 Agra Vinod

Sharma &

Udayan

Namboodiri

The “joint” statement

was a sign of

changing times, ties

MS N SP

3 Agra Pramit Pal

Chaudhuri

Kashmir discussions

may be bumped up to

political level

AS P P

4 Agra Vinod

Sharma &

Udayan

Namboodiri

So far, so good MS P P

5 Agra Vir Sanghvi In search of the half-

way house

MS N SN

The main story in the paper was that the first day of talks was good, as the two leaders

met one-on-one and delegation levels. They also agreed to carry on the meetings for the

next day. Vajpayee also accepted an invitation to visit Pakistan. In his analysis of the first

day, Vir Sanghvi reported that the basic differences over Kashmir and cross-border

terrorism were still there and it will be expecting too much if someone felt that a major

breakthrough would come.

The paper reported about the visit of Sehba Musharraf to the shrine of saint Salim in

Fatehpur Sikri. Later, she told media that she prayed for peace. Vinod Sharma & Udayan

Namboodiri reported that the mid-summit press statement was approved by both sides.

There was a report that the two sides were considering scaling up discussion on Kashmir

by setting up a ministerial level group from the existing bureaucratic level parleys.194

194 Pramit Chaudhuri, “Kashmir discussion may be bumped up to political level,” Hindustan Times, July

15, 2001.

224

July 17

The two-day summit failed and the paper published nine stories about it.


Sr

No


1 Agra Vinod

Sharma &

Udayan

Namboodiri

Summit comes to

dead end

OS C EN

2 Agra Vir Sanghvi The Pervez Musharraf

breakfast show

OS C N

3 Agra Pramit Pal

Chaudhuri

Where do India, Pak

go from here?

MS N SP

4 Agra Soni

Sangwan

“Indian warmth

welcome surprise”

MS P SP

5 Agra Vinay Menon Who is real villain of

peace

MS C SN

6 Agra Report PM for broad based

approach

OS N SN

7 Agra PTI & AFP Here is how

Musharraf wants the

Kashmir tangle

resolved

MS C SN

8 Agra Pramit Pal

Chaudhuri

Hopes a t dawn gave

way to gloom at dusk

AS C N

9 Agra HT Corresp. Negotiators from hell AS C N

The paper in the front page reported that the summit had failed and the two sides could

not agree on a joint statement. “I am disappointed to inform all of you that although the

commencement of a process and beginning of journey has been made, the destination of

an agreed joint statement has not been reached,” Indian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman

said.195 Vir Sanghvi wrote about the breakfast meeting with Musharraf, saying he

dragged Kashmir in everything, and perhaps spoiling the entire show. Pramit Chaudhuri

reported that it was not known where the two sides were going after failure of the

summit. The uncertainty was due to lack of any announcement about the future of talks.

195 Vinod Sharma and Udayab Namboodiri, “Summit comes to dead end,” Hindustan Times, July 17, 2001.

225

Soni Sangwan wrote about Pakistan media team, drawing parallel between the old

generation and the new that people born around partition were more stubborn in ties with

India while the younger people were more accommodative. The paper reported that

Sushma Swaraj was blamed for allegedly wrecking the summit, though it was none of her

faults. The paper also carried the initial remarks of Vajpayee at the summit who talked

about making the ties broad-based. PTI and AFP reported about Musharraf’s three-step

policy to resolve the Kashmir dispute. Pramit Chaudhuri traced how the mood and tone

of the summit changed from the morning to evening when it was declared as a failure.

The paper said that Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar played key role in the failure as he was

a hardcore diplomat and refused to give concessions on the joint statement.

July 18

The coverage went down on the day and there were just three stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi HT Corresp. Tough-talking

General surprises

PM’s team

AS C N

2 Washington S.

Rajagopalan

It will be long,

difficult process: US

OS N SN

3 New Delhi HT Corresp. Media was the third

party at the summit,

says J N Dixit

OS C SN

The paper quoted an official saying that Musharraf’s tough talk on Kashmir with editors

at the breakfast meeting was a shocker for the Indians. They came to know about it when

TV channels all over India were beaming his hard hitting conversation and Musharraf

was having one-on-one meeting with Vajpayee. At this time a piece of paper was passed

on to Vajpayee to formulate his position. For the Indians, it was end of the summit. The

United States had welcomed the peace talks but said it will be a long and difficult

process. Former Foreign Secretary J.N. Dixit in a panel discussion said that media was

the third party and played a role in the failure of the summit.

226

July 19

There was further dip in the coverage.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Surabh

Shukla

CBMs hit reality

hurdle: Forces object

to opening visa posts

AS C N

2 New Delhi HT Corresp. No draft, just

disagreement: India

OS C N

The paper reported that a slew of CBMs announced by Vajpayee government had hit

snags as the security forces objected to the opening of posts in Kashmir. Indian

spokeswoman Nirupma Rao said no agreement was reached at Agra, so Simla and Lahore

documents were still the basis of talks with Pakistan.

July 20

The coverage improved in terms of numbers and the paper published four stories.

Table 4.28: The Hindustan Times Coverage on July 20

Sr

No


1 Washington S.

Ragagopalan

‘No US agenda for

Indo-Pak talks’

OS N SN

2 New Delhi Udayan

Namboodiri

Pakistan dumps visa

rules for Musharraf’s

press conference

AS P SP

3 New Delhi HT Corresp. Agra ‘draft’ is

Pakistan ace

OS C N

4 New Delhi Saroj Nagi No structured

Agenda, no Pak visit:

Vajpayee

OS C N

The United States in reaction to Pak-India talks said that it will not set the agenda or play

a role of a mediator but will only encourage sustained dialogue. The paper reported that

20 India journalists were given visas in record time and some of the confirmed

227

passengers were offloaded to let them fly to Islamabad for a press conference by Pervez

Musharraf.196 Pakistan High Commissioner Ashraf Jehangir Qazi said in a media

interview that a draft was almost ready with nine areas including Kashmir identified for

the talks. Vajpayee already under criticism for showing softness said ahead of a crucial

parliament session that there was no change in Kashmir policy and he will not visit

Pakistan without a structured agenda for the talks.

July 21

Two stories were published, each one from New Delhi and Islamabad.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi HT Corresp. India rejects core

status for Kashmir

OS C N

2 Islamabad Vinod

Sharma

Pervez plays both

statesman and hawk

OS C N

Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh rejected that Kashmir was the core issue and said that it

was actually the core of Indian nationalism. Vinod Sharma reported after flying to

Islamabad to attend the press conference by Musharraf that he refused to accept that the

cross border terrorism was an issue and insisted that Kashmir was the main issue.

July 22

The last day of coverage in the stipulated period was limited to just three stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Vinod

Sharma

For Musharraf,

dialogue is one way

traffic

MS C N

2 New Delhi Anju Sharma Cong to go for the OS C N

196 Udayan Namboodiri, “Pakistan dumps visa rules for Musharraf’s press conference,” Hindustan Times,

July 20, 2001.

228

jugular over Agra

summit failure

3 Islamabad Mubashir

Zaidi

A matter of honour MS N SP

Vinod Sharma in his analysis wrote that Musharraf seems to be in “tearing hurry” and for

him dialogue meant just one thing: discussion on Kashmir. “The message emanating

from his post-Agra press conference last night here is that there can be peace between

India and Pakistan if Vajpayee accepts his diktat and signs on the dotted lines.”197

Opposition Congress party was set to embarrass the government in the parliament for

what it alleged as shoddy performance at Agra. Mubashir Zaidi reported from Islamabad

that people in Pakistan were upset at the failure of the summit.

4.2- Electronic Media and Agra Summit

The Agra Summit was a high-profile activity as Musharraf, considered as the architect of

the Kargil War, was invited by Prime Minister Vajpayee for talks. The visit created

ripples in the electronic media. Though, the practice of live coverage was not common at

that time but Musharraf’s almost every gesture was captured on camera and shown to the

Indian audience. (As already mentioned, three Indian journalists were interviewed for this

part.)

Suhasini Haidar took a critical view of both the timing of the visit and attitude of the

media. She said that the ruling BJP government had invited Musharraf as the Indian

Prime Minister had faith in the peace process, but there were a lot of misgivings and

many people questioned whether it was right time to invite him, barley a year and half

after the Kargil War. She said there were also questions over Musharraf’s authority to

deliver, as he was from the military and not a popular elected leader. “I still remember a

conversation within the ministry of external affairs at the highest level just a week before

the invitation went out, where they said there was no question of talks with Pakistan right

now. So it (Summit) was a shock to the system, to begin with,” she said.198

197 Vinod Sharma, “For Musharraf dialogue is one-way traffic,” Hindustan Times, July 22, 2001. 198 Suhasini Haidar, Interview by Researcher, Islamabad, September 25, 2013.

229

She also said that once the decision was taken for the meeting and it was made clear that

the substantive discussions will be held at the retreat of Agra, the event became the focus

of all. But the process began to unravel soon. The moment Musharraf landed in Delhi,

there was a reception for a lot of people including the Hurriyat leaders that caused its own

problems for the Indian establishment. “It was not the most auspicious of the start for

talks in India. He also came across, at times, like a brusque man.” Haidar said it was quite

odd how he was going to talk with the Indian leader after his role in the Kargil War. She

said he “looked out of place”, which was also reflected in the media at different levels.

She said one of the key events during Musharraf’s visit was the breakfast meeting with

Indian media. It is believed that it might have contributed to the failure of the peace talks

as Musharraf was blunt to portray Kashmir as the central issue of conflict. Haidar said

that the breakfast meeting played role in creating hurdles for peace but already the talks

had run into difficulties.

She said that by the time the breakfast meeting happened, there were talks within the

government about differences between Vajpayee and his Home Minister Advani on how

to go forward. The wording of proposed joint statement also caused a lot of problems.

She said that in such circumstances, the meeting with media only exasperated the tension.

Musharraf’s decision to hold the breakfast meeting was unprecedented. “You do not hold

the kind of briefing he held...You do not hold the kind of briefing, the kind of mammoth

nature before the media before any agreement has been actually forged,” she said.199

Haidar said it was not live briefing as only Pakistan official media was allowed to record

it. But Indian NDTV took the tapes from Pakistan government officials and played them

shortly after the meeting which gave the impression that it was live. The showing of the

meeting by various TV channels came as a shock for the Indian officials. She said people

saw Musharraf delving deep into the kind of agreement he wanted to make with India,

which changed everything. She said that he also talked about Kashmir as being the main

point. “There was no going back after that since it was on television and all over the

199 Haidar, interview.

230

place. Then what followed was just an effort to control the damage, as it was clear, that

the talks will not succeed.”

Haidar holds Musharraf responsible for trying to bend the electronic media in his favour.

She talked about her travel to Pakistan to cover a press conference which Musharraf held

after his return, where the general “went for about three hours” answering the same

questions again which he already addressed in the breakfast meeting. She said the Indian

side concluded that it was already too much. “With the harsh glare of the media “it

became an overdose”, as it was 2001 when live press conferences were rare. “I definitely

think that the breakfast meeting was one big reason for the failure. I don’t think it was the

only one, but it was very large one,” she said.200

She was asked, did Indian electronic media contribute, in some way, to the failure of the

summit. She said: “Absolutely, but once those tapes were out, I cannot think of any TV

channel that would not have run the interview.” She said that Musharraf was not really

doing interviews on that visit and to have the detail of the breakfast meeting was a

“scoop”. When asked “do you thing the way the summit was covered contributed to the

failure”, she said, “Absolutely. The Indo-Pakistan talks even at the best of time are such a

slippery slope. It is so hard to make any gains. The moment it starts, media get into it.”

She was also present in Agra to cover the event and recalled that the places where

Musharraf and Vajpayee were staying were just a strip apart and there were TV camera

everywhere. Hence, everything and every movement were discussed. “It was saturation

coverage at its extreme” and in that kind of glare to run India-Pakistan relations was still

difficult to manage. “It was extremely hard to get something positive when everything

was done before the media,” she said.

Karan Thapar said that the popular Indian view is that the Agra Summit failed because of

Musharraf's breakfast meeting with the Indian media which he said was, “whether

intentionally or accidentally, broadcast live”. (Earlier, Haidar had said that it was

recorded and not live.) He said Musharraf seemed to be both tough and

unaccommodating on the critical issue of Kashmir but also somewhat belligerent in tone


231

and manner. “It seemed as if at times he was scoring points. The response and attitude of

some members of the Indian media only seemed to add to the off-putting nature of this

breakfast meeting,” he said.201

He was not categorical to blame Indian electronic media for the failure of the summit.

Though, the coverage of the meeting was considered as a contributory factor to the

failure of the talks. “I am not sure the Indian media contributed to the failure of the

Summit but certainly it underlined and emphasized the hardliner attitude of Gen.

Musharraf as well as his tough answers at the breakfast meeting,” he said.

Thapar reminded that the Indian media is always skeptical of Pakistan and in 2001 of

Musharraf in particular because he was not only the architect of Kargil but was viewed as

the man who had attempted to sabotage the Lahore Accord by his less-than-respectful

attitude towards Prime Minister Vajpayee who was invited by Nawaz Sharif.

Shujaat Bukhari said the Indian media coverage contributed to the failure of the summit

but it was not solely responsible for the fiasco. “There were many other factors which

were responsible for failure at Agra. May be it (media) was a small factor,” he said.202 He

held Musharraf’s breakfast meeting as one of the main reasons for the failure of the

summit. “In a way I would say yes (the breakfast meeting was one of the main reason for

failure) in the sense that whatever was talked about in Agra Summit…it was cited as one

of the reasons for that.” He said it was intriguing why Musharraf in the breakfast meeting

tried to preempt the decisions or the consensus the two sides were trying to achieve.

Bukhari said Musharraf visit to India was destined to create media hype, as he was the

man who had launched Kargil. “It (media) is a two way thing: it has its own positive

effects and it has its own negative impact”. The failure of the Agra Summit was

something which should not be entirely blamed on media. He also said that Musharraf

tried to clarify a number of things in the meeting with media, but it (media) portrayed

everything in a negative way. The breakfast meeting should have contributed to clarify

things but it worked the other way. Bukhari defended media and said it cannot be blamed

201 Karan Thapar, e-mail to author, May 31, 2013. 202 Shujaat Bukhari, Interview by Researcher, Islamabad, September 27, 2013.

232

as it was a decision of Musharraf to hold the meeting and whatever he said was told live.

“There was no paraphrasing. So media should not be blamed for it,” he said.

4.3- Print Media and Parliament Attack

The Hindu and The Times of India have been used for the coverage. First, the coverage in

The Hindu is presented.

4.3.1- The Hindu

The coverage period is from December 6-20, 2001.

December 6 -7

It was noted that on the first two days of coverage (December 6-7), not a single relevant

story was published in The Hindu.

December 8

There were just two stories

Table 4.31: The Hindu Coverage on December 8

Sr

No


1 Jammu PTI Exchange of fire along

border

AS C N

2 Washington AFP 39 terrorist group put on

visa back list

OS C SN

PTI reported about the exchange of fire on the LoC but no loss of life or property

occurred. AFP reported from Washington that US placed 39 alleged terrorists groups on

visa black list, including those linked with Jaish-e-Mohammad and the Lashkar-e-Taiba

outfits.

December 9

There was just one story related to Pakistan on the main pages. UNI reported that India

and Pakistan armies traded fire on the LoC.

233


Sr

No


1 Jammu UNI India, Pak. exchange fire AS C N

December10

The pattern of stories was same as there was just one story and that from Kashmir about

the violence.


Sr

No


1 Jammu Luv Puri Shelling along LoC AS C N

December 11

No relevant story was published.

December 12

It was a day before the parliament attack and there were only two stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Now, 'Kargil coffin'

haunts Govt.

OS C SN

2 New Delhi Raja Mohan Pak. allows over flights

of Indian mission to

Kabul

MS P P

There was an interesting story about the alleged fraud in the purchase of coffins for the

soldiers killed in the Kargil War. In another story, Raja Mohan reported that Pakistan

allowed second Indian relief mission to Afghanistan to overfly its territory, which was

termed as an important political gesture.

234

December 13

Two stories were carried by the paper on the day of the parliament attack.


Sr

No



Reddy

Al-Qaeda slipped into

Pakistan?

OS C SN

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

“Probe Pak. scientist

issue”

MS C N

Muralidhar Reddy reported from Pakistan that US-led western coalition claimed that

members of al-Qaeda crossed to Pakistan from Tora Bora. The paper had a story about

the Indians getting nervous over reports in the western media that Pakistan sent two of its

nuclear scientists, wanted by the US for questioning for alleged proliferation, to

Myanmar.

December 14

The Hindu published four stories about the parliament attack.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Harish

Kharee

Suicide squad storms

Parliament; 5 militants

killed; Army deployed,

MS C N

2 New Delhi Harish

Kharee

A decisive battle has to

take place: PM

MS C EN


Reddy

I am shocked:

Musharraf

OS N SP


Reddy

Engineered:

Salahuddin

OS C EN

The paper in the main story reported that Pakistan was not directly blamed for the attack

but the language used had wide implications: “The terrorists brought their decade-old

235

battle against the nation right to the heart of official India.”203 The Indian government

went ballistic over the attack. Vajpayee announced that time had come for a final war

against terrorism. “We will liquidate the terrorists and their sponsors wherever they are,

whosoever they are,'' he said. Advani was more pointed when he said that government

was considering “surgical strikes” across the LoC to target militants. Muralidhar reported

that Musharraf in his first reaction and message to Vajpayee said that he was shocked.

December 15

The tone of media changed with that of the government and stories demanding tough

action against Pakistan got prominent place.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Atul Aneja Lashkar responsible

for attack, says

Jaswant

OS C N


Reddy

Attack could have

been stage-managed:

Pak.

OS C EN

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Police claim `clinching

evidence'

MS C N

4 New Delhi Harish Khare Govt. under pressure

to àct'

AS C N

5 Mumbai Special

Corresp.

Destroy terrorist

camps in Pak: VHP

OS C N

6 Mumbai Mahesh

Vijapurkar

Thackeray wants

revenge

OS C N

Indian named Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) for the attack. “In a demarche

delivered by the Foreign Secretary Chokila Iyer to the Pakistani High Commissioner

Ashraf Jehangir Qazi, India said that it had enough technical evidence to hold the LeT

responsible.”204 The Pakistani media in response towed the official line that the attack

203 Harish Khare, “Suicide squad storms Parliament; 5 militants killed; Army deployed,” The Hindu,

December 14, 2001. 204 Atul Aneja, “Lashkar responsible for attack, says Jaswant,” The Hindu, December 15, 2001.

236

was “stage-managed” by India to discredit the freedom struggle in Kashmir. Another

story based on the police claims reported that evidence was found regarding the

involvement of LeT. Harish Khare reported that government was under pressure to act in

retaliation of the attack. The extremist VHP urged the government to take the fight across

the border like Israel did. Hardliner Bal Thackeray asked for revenge.

December 16

The day saw six stories which negatively impacted the relations.


Sr

No


1 Shantiniketan

(West

Bengal)

Malabika

Bhattacharya

We'll respond to

terrorism on many

fronts: PM

OS C EN

2 Ahmedabad Manas

Dasgupta

It is for Pak. to act:

Advani

OS C EN

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

India dismisses Pak.

charges

AS C N


Reddy

Ready to act if Delhi

gives proof:

Musharraf

OS C N

5 Kolkata Special

Corresp.

We have found out

who are behind it:

PM

OS C N

6 Patna Staff

Corresp.

ISI behind attack:

Fernandes

OS C EN

Vajpayee in his veiled threat to Pakistan said India will respond to terrorism on many

fronts. Advani said India will watch for a few days for Pakistan to act against the militant

organisations like the LeT and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) before taking the next step. The

paper also had a story in which India dismissed Pakistani charges that the terrorist attack

was stage managed. From Pakistan Muralidhar Reddy reported that Musharraf said

Pakistan was ready to act against militants if India provided evidence. Vajpayee said they

found that Pakistan was behind the attack and it will portray Pakistan as a breeding

237

ground for militancy. Defence Minister George Fernandes said that ISI was behind the

attacks. It was the first time that India named the premier Pakistan intelligence agency for

the attack.

December 17

The paper carried seven stories as war mania was rising in India.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Prashant

Pandey

Jaish, Lashkar carried

out attack with ISI

guidance: police

OS C EN

2 New Delhi Vinay

Kumar

We have strong proof:

Advani

OS C N

3 Washington PTI India must exercise

restraint: Powell

OS C SN

4 New Delhi UNI Stop aiding terrorism,

U.K. tells Pak.

OS C N

5 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Decision at right time:

Fernandes

OS C N

6 New Delhi PTI Malik cautions against

attacks

OS P P

7 Chennai Special

Corresp.

The onus is on Pak.,

says BJP chief

OS C N

The main news was based on a press conference by police that the attack was a joint

operation by the LeT and JeM. Police had already arrested some suspects. Advani told

The Hindu that they had strong evidence about the involvement of both the LeT and JeM.

PTI reported from Washington that the US was getting involved and Secretary of State

Colin Powell urged India to follow restraint. British High Commissioner to India Sir

Robert Young was quoted as saying to Pakistan to stop aiding terrorism. Defence

Minister Fernandes was quoted saying that any decision to respond to the attacks will be

taken at the suitable time. In the frenzy of war hysteria, a saner voice came from the

Indian military when former army chief General V.P. Malik told government that instead

of just blaming Pakistan, it should take into account the consequences of war. BJP

238

President Jana Krishnamurthy said it was for Pakistan to prove that it was serious to

tackle terrorism.

December 18

There were seven relevant stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Harish

Khare

Advani to spell out

Govt. stand in

Parliament today

AS C N

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Cong. backs Govt.:

CPI(M) sounds a note

of caution

OS C SN

3 New Delhi Atul Aneja Army heightens

vigilance

AS C N

4 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

Pak. troop build-up

causes concern

AS C N

5 Hyderabad Special

Corresp.

`Crossing LoC an

option'

OS C N

6 New Delhi PTI Advani counsels

patience

OS C N

7 New Delhi PTI Omar rejects Pak. offer OS C N

Harish Khare reported that Home Minister Advani was expected to spell out the official

response to the attack. He was also supposed to send a tough message to the attackers.

The paper also reported that Congress threw unconditional support behind the

government to deal with the attack but CPI (M) opposed military action as it would flare

up into a full scale war. Atul Aneja reported that army had increased it vigil after the

reported mobilization by Pakistan. Shujaat Bukhari reported from Srinagar that Pakistan

increased its movement on the LoC. Union Minister for Rural Development Venkaiah

Naidu was reported as saying that India may cross the LoC. Advani said that appropriate

action will be taken. Another minister Omer Abdullah rejected Pakistan’s peace offer.

239

December 19

There were nine relevant stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Attack aimed at wiping

out top leadership:

Advani

OS C EN

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

PM rejects call for

joint probe

OS C EN

3 New Delhi Pranab Dhal

Samanta

Pak. markings on

weapons

AS C N


Reddy

Advani's statement is

inflammatory:

Islamabad

OS C N

5 Washington PTI U.S. asks Pak. to

control terrorist

activities

OS C SN

6 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

War should be the last

option: Opposition

OS C N

7 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Pak. designs will be

foiled: Omar

OS C N

8 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Armed forces for

weighing all

possibilities

AS C N

9 Lucknow Special

Corresp.

Mayawati for

consensus on strikes

across LoC

OS C N

Advani’s statement that the attack aimed at killing the top leadership of India was the

main news of the day. He also blamed ISI for sponsoring the attack. In another story,

Vajpayee rejected joint probe offered by Pakistan. It was also reported that the weapons

used had markings of Pakistan Wah Nobel group of companies on the detonators.

Muralidhar Reddy reported that Pakistan said India was trying to implicate it in the

attacks.

PTI reported from Washington that US asked Pakistan to control militants and that India

had right to defend itself. The Indian opposition parties supported government for any

240

suitable action. Omer Abdullah said India was firm against terrorism and will foil designs

of Pakistan. There was a story that army was weighing all options to deal with the

situation. Bahaman Samar Party leader Mayawati asked government to create consensus

before attacking the terrorist camps.

December 20

The number of stories had increased but the tone was same: anti-peace and pro-war.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

All options are open:

PM

OS C N

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Sonia pledges full

support

OS C N


Krishnaswami

Pak. has obligation to

check terrorism: U.S.

OS C N

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

We're watching Pak.

build-up: Army Chief

OS C N


Reddy

Pak. denies build-up

OS C N


Reddy

Pakistan insists on a

joint probe

OS C N

7 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

A struggle between

democracy and

terrorism, says

Advani

MS C N

8 New Delhi K.K. Katyal

PM-Musharraf talks

unlikely during

SAARC summit

MS C N

9 New Delhi Atul Aneja India ready for

combat if need be

AS C N


Corresp.

`Human bomb called

Karachi twice'

AS C N

Vajpayee was reported as saying that all options to deal with the attack on parliament

were open. Opposition leader Sonia Gandhi said her party will give full support to the

government on the issue of terrorism. There was a report from Washington that Pakistan

had obligation to deal with terrorism. Similarly, a routine report about army which said it

241

was watching Pakistani moves on the border and LoC was also carried by the paper.

Muralidhar Reddy sent two reports from Islamabad that Pakistan denied the military

build-up and that it insisted on a joint probe. Home Minister Advani said in the

parliament that the attack was “audacious and unprecedented” and it shows the struggle

between democracy and terrorism. K.K. Katyal said any meeting between Musharraf and

Vajpayee was not possible at the SAARC Summit in Nepal. Atul Aneja reported India

was trying to get the international support to put pressure on Pakistan for an action

against groups like the LeT and JeM. It was reported that one of the attackers made two

calls to Karachi.

4.3.2- The Times of India

The Times of India is a leading newspaper and having the largest circulation in India. It

has been selected as the second paper to see the coverage of the parliament attack in the

Indian media. The time period of the coverage is: December 6-20, 2001.

December 6

There was only one story and it was about a book on the founder of Pakistan.

Table 4.43: The Times of India Coverage on December 6

Sr

No


1 Mumbai PTI New book on Jinnah

irks Pakistanis

OS C SN

The paper carried a PTI story about Rafique Zakria’s book on Jinnah which was criticised

by Pakistanis including the High Commissioner in India for not being impartial.

December 7

Again, there was just one Pakistan related story.

242


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Manoj Joshi Pak help to nab

Osama sought

AS C SN

Manoj Joshi reported that Pakistan hid the presence of Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora till

the allied forces were tipped-off about him by the northern alliance and an attack was

launched.

December 8

The paper published two anti-Pakistan stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi TNN Pak govt proposes, ISI

disposes?

MS C EN

2 New Delhi TNN Qanooni blasts Pak

for its role in

terrorism

OS C N

The paper through its Times News Network (TNN) said Pakistan troubles were far from

over after Taliban lost Kandahar as ISI support for the militants was putting Pakistan in

an “embarrassing position”. Afghan Interior Minister Younus Qanooni during a visit to

India lashed Pakistan for allegedly supporting militancy.

December 9

There were six stories and all were in the category of negative.


Sr

No


243

1 New York PTI US had warned Pak to

bridle ISI in 1992:

Report

MS C N

2 New Delhi TNN Pak nuclear experts

may have al-Qaeda

links

MS C N

3 Jammu PTI Indian, Pak troops

exchange fire along

LoC

AS C EN

4 Islamabad PTI Pak's plans to sell

submarines suffers

setback

MS C SN

5 Islamabad PTI Pak denies setting

border inside Afghan

territory

AS C SN

6 New York PTI Pak banks in US

banned from cash

dealings

AS C SN

PTI from New York reported that US had warned Pakistan about the alleged activities of

ISI in Kashmir and Afghanistan.205 The paper also had another report by the New York

Times that US was seeking to interrogate two Pakistan’s nuclear scientists who were

hiding in Myanmar for their alleged links with al-Qaeda. PTI reported exchange of fire

between troops in Kashmir. It also reported from Islamabad that Pakistan’s plans to sell

Agosta 90-B submarines got a jolt when the only buyer Malaysia decided not to buy

them. Another PTI report from Islamabad said that Pakistan denied setting up posts inside

Afghanistan territory. Also, there was a story from New York that US stopped Pakistani

banks to deal in cash.

December 10

There was just one story as PTI reported from US that Washington Post criticised

Pakistan for expelling its correspondent of Indian origin, Rajiv Chandrasekaran.


Sr

No


205 “US had warned Pa to bridle ISI in 1992: Report,” The Times of India, December 9, 2001.

244

1 Washington PTI Pak ill-treating

scribes of Indian

descent: Post

MS C SN

December 11

The number of published stories went up to six.


Sr

No


1 Tokyo PTI PM warns Pak

against interfering in

J&K polls

OS C SN

2 Islamabad PTI Pak arrests 20 Laden

associates at Afghan

border

MS C N

3 Washington Chidanand

Rajghatta

Indo-Pak sideshow in

Afghanistan worries

US

MS N SP

4 New Delhi PTI Differences crop up

between Hurriyat,

Pak

MS C SN

5 Dubai PTI Reform Pak

madrassas, says

Imran Khan

OS N SP

6 Islamabad PTI Vajpayee’s remarks

unfortunate: Pak

OS C N

Prime Minister Vajpayee warned Pakistan in Tokyo over creating hurdle in the Kashmir

elections. PTI reported that Pakistan arrested at least 20 al-Qaeda operatives who were

trying to sneak into Pakistan from Afghanistan. Chidanand Rajghatta in his analysis said

that the rivalry between Pakistan and India was worrying the US. PTI reported about the

differences between APHC and Pakistan over efforts of Islamabad to create a parallel

body. Imran Khan was reported as saying that the religious seminaries should be

reformed. Pakistan said that Vajpayee’s remarks that the atmosphere for talks was not

conducive were “unfortunate”.

245

December 12

There were three reports a day before the parliament attack.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI Pak wants world to

persuade India for

talks

OS P SP

2 Jammu PTI Villager killed, three

injured in Pak firing

AS C N

3 New Delhi PTI India wants probe into

Pak's links with

Taliban

OS C SN

Pakistan urged the international community to ask India to start the peace talks. PTI

reported that firing by Pakistan killed one villager in Kashmir while three were injured.

PTI also reported that India sought proper investigation of reports about the links

between Pakistan and Taliban.

December 13

Six stories were published on the day of the parliament attack.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Reporter Osama has fled to

Pakistan: Report

MS C SN

2 Islamabad Reporter Pak scientists briefed

Osama on nuke

AS C N

3 New Delhi TNN &

agencies

US, Pak condemn

attack

MS N SP

4 New Delhi PTI Abdullah dismisses

Pak's worries

OS C SN

5 Rajkot TNN Rajkotians see Pak

hand in attack

MS C N

6 New Delhi PTI Pakistan Zindabad,

said one militant

AS C EN

246

There was a story that Osama had fled to Pakistan through the porous border. The paper

also reported that a Pakistani nuclear scientist had met Osama bin Laden to discuss about

the nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.206 According to another report, the US and

Pakistan condemned the parliament attack. Musharraf said he was shocked and sent a

message to Vajpayee. PTI reported that Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah

rejected Pakistan’s concerns about his visit to India. The paper had news from Rajkot

based on vox pox that people said Pakistan was involved in the attack. In another

Pakistan specific news item, the paper said that one of the militants said Pakistan

Zindabad (long live Pakistan) before being killed by the security forces.

December 14

There were four stories connected with Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Siddharth

Srivastava

Govt names Lashkar,

tells Pak to act

OS C EN

2 Islamabad PTI 'Pak will study

evidence against

Lashkar, Jaish'

OS C N

3 Islamabad PTI Pak troops on high

alert along LoC:

Report

MS C EN

4 Panaji TNN &

Agencies

Declare Pak a

terrorist state,

demands VHP

OS C EN

Siddharth Srivastava reported that Indian government asked Pakistan to take measures

against the LeT and JeM. It was first official indictment of Pakistan-based organisations

for allegedly carrying out the attack. PTI reported that Pakistan in response to the

allegations said it will examine the evidence against the two entities. PTI also quoted

media reports that Pakistan put troops on high alert after the attack. The paper also

reported that extremist VHP had asked India to declare Pakistan as a terrorist state.

206 “Pakistani scientist briefed Osama on nuke,” The Times of India, December 13, 2001.

247

December 15

There were five stories, which were all negative for Pak-India relations.


Sr

No


1 Panaji TNN Take tough stand

with Pakistan: VHP

OS C EN

2 New Delhi PTI All five terrorists

were Pakistanis

AS C EN

3 Ahmadabad Agencies Pakistan asks for

proof, India gives it

time

OS C N

4 Islamabad Agencies Pak troops on alert in

Indian border

OS C EN

5 Jammu PTI Pak shelling along

Line of Control

AS C EN

The paper ran news of VHP on the second consecutive day, calling government to take

tough stand against Pakistan. PTI reported that all five terrorists were Pakistanis. The

news was based on “highly placed sources”. The paper also said the Indian government

will wait a few days to see the measures taken by Pakistan against the LeT and JeM. A

story based on the reports of agencies said that Pakistan military leader issued a general

alert to the forces on the border after India blamed organisations based in Pakistan for the

attack. PTI reported from Jammu that Pakistan troops had resorted to shelling in different

areas of the LoC which was responded by India.

December 16

The paper published seven stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI Pak wants to join

probe into Parliament

attack

OS C SN

2 New York PTI US to increase AS C N

248

pressure on Pak to

curb JeM, LeT

3 New Delhi TNN &

agencies

Jaish carried out

attack with ISI help

OS C EN

4 New Delhi PTI Jaish wants to avert

punitive action

AS C N

5 Lahore Rashme

Sehgal

Musharraf is Enemy

No 1: Jehadis

MS C N

6 Beijing PTI China likely to urge

Musharraf to rein in

J&K militants

AS C N

7 New Delhi PTI We have proof against

Lashkar: George

OS C EN

PTI reported that Pakistan's defence spokesman, Major General Rashid Qureshi, told

BBC that his country wanted to join the Indian probe into the parliament attack. PTI in its

dispatch from New York said quoting officials that US was upping pressure on Pakistan

to take action against the LeT and JeM. Delhi Police Commissioner Ajai Raj Sharma told

media that the parliament attack was a joint effort by LeT and JeM and “by default

Pakistan's ruling military regime must also have been aware of the plot to attack

parliament”.207

Separately, the paper quoted official sources that JeM was denying involvement in the

attack to avoid punitive actions. Rashme Sehgal reported from Lahore that Musharraf

was enemy of the jihadi organizations in Pakistan and they wanted to remove him from

the scene. The report also said that militants wanted to provoke a war between Pakistan

and India. PTI reported from Beijing that during his visit to China, Musharraf will be

asked by his hosts to control militancy in Kashmir. Indian Defence Minister George

Fernandes said they had enough evidence to link LeT with the attack. He also said that

the group cannot launch the attack without support of its patrons in ISI.

December 17

The coverage had increased but the quality and tone was similar to the previous days.

207 “Jaish carried out attack with ISI help,” The Times of India, December 16, 2001.

249


Sr

No


1 New Delhi PTI India debunks

Pakistan's offer of

joint probe

OS C SN

2 Islamabad TNN Pakistanis in India

helping militants

AS C N

3 Varanasi TNN People want action

against Pak terrorists:

Thakre

OS C N

4 Washington PTI Osama, Omar escape

to Pak: Reports

OS C SN

5 New Delhi PTI CCS discusses Pak

troop movement

along LoC

OS C N

6 Jammu PTI 'Pak troops resorting

to hit-and-run

guerrilla tactics'

AS C EN

7 New York PTI 'Pak scientists

suspected of Osama

links freed'

MS C SN

8 Washington PTI Taliban power base

remains intact: Pak

MS C SN

9 Islamabad PTI Jaish denies hand in

attack on Parliament

OS C SN

10 New Delhi TNN Points man of Jaish

leader arrested

MS C N

Indian Deputy Foreign Minister Omar Abdullah rejected Pakistan’s offer for a joint probe

by saying that Pakistan was not serious. "Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) was quick enough to

own the responsibility for the October 1 attack on Jammu and Kashmir state assembly

which was later withdrawn following pressures from ISI," Abdullah said208 The paper

also reported that some Pakistan nationals entered India on short visits to help the

militants. Former BJP President Kushabhau Thakre said people of India wanted

retaliatory action against Pakistan-based terrorists. PTI reported from Washington that

media reports said Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar escaped to Pakistan.

208 “India debunks Pakistan’s offer for joint probe,” The Times of India, December 16, 2001.

250

As the situation remained tense, Indian Cabinet Committee on Security discussed reports

that Pakistan troops were making movements along the LoC. PTI reported from Jammu

that Pakistan soldiers were being sent to the LoC to carry out hit and run attacks. PTI

reported from New York that two Pakistani nuclear scientists arrested for links with bin

Laden were released. PTI also reported from US that Washington Post reported Taliban

were defeated but their power base was intact in Pakistan. The wire reported from

Pakistan that JeM denied its role in the attack. Separately, the paper reported that a

certain Tariq was arrested who was a point man of JeM and a link between the

organisation and its Indian supporters.

December 18

The paper carried five reports.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi PTI

'Pakistanis prefer

Benazir or Sharif to

Musharraf'

MS N SP

2 Beijing PTI Pakistan a victim of

terrorism: Musharraf

OS C N


exchange fire along

LoC

AS C EN

4 Pathankot TNN Man in Gurdaspur

caught spying for Pak

OS C N

5 Srinagar PTI Cool down, Yasin

Malik urges India, Pak

OS P P

PTI reported that the results of the local government elections in Pakistan showed that

people were likely to elect Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif as new prime minister instead

of incumbent President Pervez Musharraf. PTI also reported from Beijing that Musharraf,

who was visiting China, said Pakistan was a victim of terrorism and will fight it in all its

manifestations. The same newswire filed from Jammu that troops of Pakistan and India

traded fire on the disputed border line. It also reported that an Indian man spying for

251

Pakistan was caught from Gurdaspur in Punjab. A voice of reason came from Srinagar

where JKLF leader Yasin Malik asked both India and Pakistan to cool down.

December 19

The coverage peaked on the day as there were ominous 13 stories.


Sr

No


1 New York PTI Al-Qaeda fighters slip

into Pakistan: Report

AS C SN

2 New Delhi TNN India dismisses Pak

demand for proof

OS C N

3 Ferozepur Yudhvir

Rana and

Dinesh K

Sharma

Army movement

along Pak border

MS C EN


exchange fire, three

injured

AS C EN

5 New Delhi TNN New leads strengthen

Pak connection

AS C EN

6 Washington PTI Fight terrorism

together, US tells

India, Pak

OS N SP

7 Beijing PTI 'Pak welcomes

international

mediation on

Kashmir'

OS C SN

8 New Delhi TNN Hand over Azhar and

Dawood: Advani to

Pak

OS C N

9 Kabul PTI 'Pak still has designs

on Afghanistan'

OS C SN

10 New Delhi PTI Markings of Pak

company found on

grenades

AS C N

11 Islamabad PTI Franks discusses

Indo-Pak tension with

Musharraf

MS C SN

12 Beijing PTI China not to support

Musharraf's Kashmir

agenda

OS C SN

252

13 Islamabad PTI Benazir asks

Musharraf to defuse

tensions with India

OS P SP

PTI filed from New York that US officials said several al-Qaeda fighters slipped into

Pakistan after attack on Afghanistan. The paper also reported that the Indian foreign

ministry rejected a suggestion by Pakistan to place any evidence regarding the parliament

attack against Pakistan before the UN. There was a report based on the visit of journalists

to border villages that Indian troops were taking positions in bunkers. In the rising

tension, PTI reported from Jammu that the troops exchanged fire. The paper had its

exclusive report based on the police sources that the terrorists involved in the parliament

attack remained in touch with their handlers in Karachi. PTI had a pro-peace report from

Washington that US asked both India and Pakistan to join hands in the fight against

terrorism.

Musharraf said in Beijing that Pakistan will welcome international efforts to settle the

Kashmir issue. Home Minister Advani asked Pakistan to hand over Masood Azhar and

Dawood Ibrahim. On a different note, the paper had a PTI report from Kabul quoting an

Afghan official that Pakistan wanted to control its war-torn neighbour. There was a PTI

report based on Delhi police sources that marking of a Pakistani company, Wah Noble

Industries, was found on the grenades used in the attack on the parliament. PTI reported

from Islamabad that CENTCOM chief General Tommy Franks telephoned Musharraf and

discussed the tension with India. From Beijing PTI reported that China may not support

Pakistan’s agenda on Kashmir as it asked Musharraf to solve the issue through the

peaceful means. The same newswire reported from Pakistan that former Prime Minister

Benazir Bhutto asked Musharraf to defuse the tension.

December 20

The paper published nine stories as the coverage of the incident concluded.


Sr

No


253


Rajghatta

US hot pursuit inside

Pakistan under secret

deal

AS C SN

2 New Delhi TNN Army ready to meet

Pak threat:

Padmanabhan

OS C N


Rajghatta,

TNN

World media blames

Pak for terrorism

MS C N

4 Jammu PTI India, Pak exchange

fire in Naushera

AS C EN

5 Beijing PTI China concerned over

India-Pak tension

OS C N

6 United

Nations

PTI Annan urges India,

Pak to cool down

OS N SP

7 Islamabad PTI Chances of PM-

Musharraf meet get

more bleak

OS C N

8 New Delhi TNN India shows the world

proof against LeT,

Jaish

OS C N

9 Srinagar PTI Jaish threatens

'shocking attacks'

across India

MS C N

Chidanand Rajghatta reported from Washington that US Special Forces started operating

inside Pakistan under a secret deal to hunt down the militants. Indian army chief General

Sunderajan Padmanabhan said at the sidelines of a seminar that army was ready for any

threat from Pakistan. Chidanand Rajghatta reported from Washington that the world

media was blaming Pakistan for supporting terrorism.209 PTI said the troops of Pakistan

and India had traded fire in Kashmir. PTI also filed from Beijing that China was

concerned at the escalation of tension. From the UN headquarters, PTI said that the world

body was concerned at the tension.

From Islamabad, PTI had a report, based on the statement of Foreign Minister Abdul

Sattar that his country was ready to engage with India. The TNN reported that Indian

spokesperson Nirupma Rao had said that they had evidence that LeT and JeM were

209 Chidanand Rajghatta, “World media blames Pak for terrorism,” The Times of India, December 20, 2001.

254

involved in the attack. PTI reported from Srinagar that JeM denied involvement in the

attack but threatened to carry out shocking attacks in some major cities of India.

4.4- Electronic Media and Parliament Attack

The parliament attack was the first major test of ties during a crisis situation after the

goodwill created by the Agra talks. The experts differ on the role of media in blowing out

the attacks to the extent that outbreak of a nuclear war looked imminent.

Suhasini Haidar said she got into the parliament building for regular coverage about 20

minutes before the attack. When it started, the crew of about 20 TV channels was

positioned to cover it live, which made a huge impact. However, she maintained that

despite being live, the coverage was not “as warlike as after the Mumbai attacks” of

2008. She said the actual media war started when India decided to mobilize the troops

and TV channels flared it up. Media had no major role in the mobilization, as it was a

decision by the government. “It was definitely the government which first pointed finger

at Pakistan. I remember PM advisor giving off-cam briefing. It was clear that government

had decided to take it up a notch,” said she.210

She noted that after the parliament attack, there were a lot of electronic media coverage

due to a series of linked events like the mobilization, the Parakarm and the Kathmandu

SAARC Summit. The summit came into focus due to the media interest about whether

Vajpayee and Musharraf will meet on the sidelines. She said the coverage had increased

but media was not driving the events. “It was genuinely driven by the government which

wanted to show that it means business.”

When she was asked about any link between the coverage of the parliament attack and

the Indian government decision to mobilize army, Haidar said it was government which

took the decision as the attack was a huge issue and the reaction of public as well as

government was genuine. To another question, whether media was on the side of peace or

war or neutral, she said that “media in India was definitely for a very very strong reaction

to the attack.”


255

She also noted some previous incidents and said the government was already on the back

foot due to events like plane hijacking incident which led to the release of Masood Azhar

when Indian Defence Minister took him to Kandahar. It was still fresh in the minds of the

people when Indian government in a short span of time determined that JeM outfit of

Azhar was involved in the parliament attack. It increased the pressure on media but the

government was leading the whole show and not the media. At the same time, the Indian

government was also afraid of the media backlash, and when the incident of a meeting of

Pak-India foreign ministers in Kathmandu was reported, the Indian government

vehemently denied it, as it did not want to give the impression of its minister’s meeting

with the Pakistani counterpart. “It all shows that the government was controlling the

events after the parliament attack,” concluded Haidar.

Karan Thapar was less categorical about the quality of media coverage and apportioning

the blame after the parliament attack, and said he was not sure who first blamed Pakistan

or Pakistan-based groups for the attack on the parliament. He said it did not really matter

as public at large was convinced about the “perpetrators”. He also expressed inability to

determine if the media coverage of the parliament attack influenced the Indian

government's decision to mobilize the army but said “certainly it would have put pressure

on the government to take a tough action”. He also said the government, anyway, was

inclined towards a strong reaction to the attack.

Shujaat Bukhari said media had no mechanism to investigate the cases like parliament

attack immediately and it depended on the official sources. He said Pakistan was first

blamed on the evening of the attack and the information came from the government.

“Anything which comes to the media essentially comes through the government sources.

In an attack like the one on parliament, the first reaction about the involvement of

Pakistan was not from media,” he said.211

He also said that the important question was that media should have filtered the

information provided by the government. If media blindly used the information in the

way the government wanted, then “media was not (behaving in a) responsible (way)”, he

211 Bukhari, interview.

256

said. Bukhari criticised the media coverage and said media hype was not always good for

the peace between Pakistan and India.

Bukhari did absolve the media of provoking the tension between the two countries after

the attack but also said that media should use the information provided by the authorities

with sagacity. He said there were always vested interests in the government which

wanted to plant the information. He gave an example and said that after the parliament

attack, media played role in implicating a university lecturer Abdul Rehman Gilani, who

was later released by the court. He also criticised the conviction of another accused Afzal

Guru and said there were flaws in the trial. He said that in the case of Gilani, media

played a responsible role which was missing in the case of Guru.

4.5- Print Media and Military Standoff

The two papers selected for the coverage of the military standoff are The Hindu and The

Tribune. The coverage has been dispersed over ten month period to get a better view of

the standoff which continued for about a year. First five days of each January, June and

October have been used for coverage.

4- Escalation: Jan 1-5

5- Escalation on Peak: June 1-5

6- De-escalation: Oct 1-5

First, the coverage in The Hindu is presented below.

4.5.1- The Hindu

The coverage period for escalation is January 1-5, 2002.

January 1

There were nine stories in the paper, linked with Pak-India tension.

Table 4.58: The Hindu Coverage on January 1

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Atul Aneja Pak. arrests a step OS P SP

257

forward: Jaswant


Reddy

A positive signal:

Islamabad

OS P SP


Reddy

Former Lashkar chief

arrested

OS C N

4 New Delhi Harish Khare PM extends a `hand of

alliance' to Pak.

OS P SP


Reddy

Musharraf to avoid

Indian airspace

OS C N

6 Attari Sarabjit

Pandher

They leave for Pak.

with misty eyes and

memories

MS N SP

7 Somewhere

in the

western

border

PTI `Tough measures if

diplomacy fails'

OS C N

8 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

BJP backs PM's

decision not to meet

Musharraf

MS C N

9 Jammu Special

Corresp.

Four Pak. soldiers

killed in firing

AS C EN

Atul Aneja reported that India welcomed the arrest of Hafiz Saeed, chief of LeT and

Masood Azhar, head of JeM, along with 50 of their supporters. In a related development,

Pakistan welcomed the possibility of meeting between the foreign ministers of the two

countries on the sideline of the SAARC conference in Kathmandu. Separately, it was

reported that Pakistan arrested Hafiz Saeed under the intense international pressure.

Vajpayee extended hand of alliance towards Pakistan if it was ready to join global efforts

against terrorism. Muralidhar Reddy reported that Musharraf will attend the SAARC

Summit in Nepal but will avoid Indian airspace.

Sarabjit Pandher reported from Attari railway station that the last passengers had boarded

the Samjhota Express which was being discontinued from January 1 due to the rising

tension. He tried to present the human element of the tragedy as common people were

suffering due to the tension. George Fernandes warned Pakistan of tough measures if

diplomacy failed, according to PTI. Vajpayee got support from BJP on not meeting

Musharraf during the SAARC Summit. As the tension increased, firing started on the

LoC and the paper reported that a Pakistani soldier was killed.

258

January 2

The paper published five stories on the day.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Jaswant non-

committal on meeting

Sattar

OS C N


Krishnaswami

Give Musharraf a

chance, says Bush

OS P SP

3 Chennai Special

Corresp.

Let us start a dialogue:

Sattar

MS P SP

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

'No further troop

mobilisation'

AS C N

5 Jammu Special

Corresp.

11 Pakistan soldiers

killed

AS C EN

In the main story the paper reported that Jaswant Singh was not committed to meet his

Pakistani counterpart in Nepal. Sridhar Krishnaswami reported from Washington that

President George Bush asked India to give a chance to Musharraf to work for peace. The

paper also carried parts of an interview of Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar with A.G.

Noorani who asked India to start a dialogue with Pakistan. Quoting official sources the

paper reported that there was no more mobilization of troops on the border with Pakistan

but the situation was still tense. There was another story through anonymous sources that

11 Pakistan soldiers were killed by India.

January 3

The paper carried five stories and the pattern was similar to the previous day.


Sr

No


1 Kathmandu C. Raja

Mohan

India yet to decide on

bilateral meeting with

Pak.

MS C SN

259


Reddy

ISI 'ordered' to keep

off jihadi outfits in

J&K

MS C SN


Reddy

Justify extradition

request: Pak.

OS C N

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Cong. dissatisfied with

Pak. action

OS C N

5 Jammu PTI 18 Pak. bunkers

destroyed

AS C EN

Raja Mohan reported Jaswant Singh had close encounters with Abdul Sattar at

Kathmandu but no proper talks were held. Muralidhar Reddy reported that western

diplomats said that there was a big shift in Pakistan’s policy towards militancy and

Musharraf asked ISI to keep the Islamic fighters off Kashmir by ending support to them.

He also reported that Pakistan was ready to extradite about 20 fugitives who had

allegedly taken shelter in Pakistan after committing crimes in India, provided Delhi gave

substantial evidence of their crime. The paper reported on its national page that

opposition Congress party was not happy with the steps taken by Pakistan to control

militancy after the parliament attack. PTI reported from Jammu that the Indian forces

destroyed at least 18 bunkers of Pakistan troops on the LoC.

January 4

Another five stories were published in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Kathmandu C. Raja

Mohan

India hints at giving

more time to Pakistan

MS P SP

2 New York PTI `Military option if

diplomacy fails'

OS C N

3 Lucknow J.P. Shukla No proposal to meet

Musharraf, says

Vajpayee

OS C N

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

`Pak. has no intention

of stopping proxy war'

OS C EN

5 Jammu PTI Army, BSF troops lay

mines along LoC

AS C N

260

Raja Mohan reported that India was ready to give some space to Pakistan to take action

against the militants before taking any decision on tough action.212 The paper also quoted

Defence Minister George Fernandes saying that India will wait for the diplomatic efforts

to force Pakistan to take action against the militants but its military option was on the

table if such efforts failed. J.P. Shukla reported that Vajpayee said in Lucknow before

going to Nepal that there was no proposal to meet Musharraf. BJP was reported as saying

that Pakistan was not ready to stop its proxy war against India. PTI reported that the

Indian forces had laid mines along the LoC to stop infiltrations by the Pakistani militants.

January 5

The paper carried eight stories, a mix of positive and negative ones.


Sr

No


1 Kathmandu Raja Mohan SAARC summit

delayed by a day

OS C N

2 Islamabad AFP Pak. relaxes ban on

TV channels

OS P SP

3 Beijing PTI `Pak. curbing

terrorism'

OS N SP

4 Islamabad B.

Muralidhar

Reddy

Crackdown in Punjab

province

MS N SP

5 New Delhi Vinay Kumar Hijackers figure in list

sent to Pak.

AS C SN

6 Kathmandu C. Raja

Mohan

`Just a list, no

evidence'

OS C N

7 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

V.P. Singh supports

Centre's measures

against Pak.

OS C N

8 Kolkata PTI ISI spy ring busted,

Pak. agent nabbed

OS C N

212 C. Raja Mohan, “India hints at giving more time to Pakistan,” The Hindu, January 4, 2002.

261

Raja Mohan reported from Nepal that the SAARC summit was delayed by one day due to

the late arrival of Musharraf. AFP reported from Islamabad that Pakistan relaxed ban on

the Indian channels which was put in place due to the recent tension. PTI reported from

Beijing that Musharraf said his country was curbing terrorism. Muralidhar Reddy filed

from Islamabad that the crackdown on militancy started in Punjab. Vinay Kumar reported

that the list of 20 wanted men sent to Pakistan consisted of hijackers, terrorists, criminals

and smugglers. Raja Mohan filed that Pakistan termed the list of wanted men as just a list

having not evidence. Former premier V.P. Singh said he will support diplomatic and

military actions against Pakistan to stop terrorism in India. The paper had a PTI report

that Home Secretary A.K. Deb said a spying ring of ISI was busted in West Bengal.

June 1

The period of coverage deals with the “escalation on peak” phase. Total eight stories

were published on the first day of this five-day period.

Table 4.63: The Hindu Coverage on June 1

Sr

No



Krishnaswami

Infiltration still on:

Powell

OS C N

2 Jammu PTI Shelling continues AS C EN

3 Singapore Amit Baruah Fernandes downplays

threat of war

OS P SP

4 New Delhi Atul Aneja

Gujral suggests PM,

Musharraf meet in

Almaty

OS P SP

5 New Delhi PTI Meeting ruled out OS C N

6 Leh PTI India will be victor:

Advani

OS C N

7 Shimla Kanwar

Yogendra

Sonia concerned over

tension on border

OS P SP

8 New Delhi Reporter Time has come for

decisive action: BJP

OS C N

Sridhar Krishnaswami reported from Washington that Bush administration criticised

Pakistan for still continuing support for the cross-border militancy. A PTI report said that

262

an Indian soldier was killed in firing by Pakistani forces in Kashmir. George Fernandes

who was more hawkish six months ago had mellowed down and said there was no danger

of war. Former premier I.K. Gujral gave a proposal of meeting between Musharraf and

Vajpayee who were supposed to be together in Almaty to attend a regional conference.

PTI reported that the Indian government has ruled out the meeting. Advani said in Leh

that in case of war with Pakistan, India will come out as victorious. Kanwar Yogendra

reported from Simla that Congress President Sonia Gandhi expressed concern over the

situation on the border. Bhartiya Janata Party President Jana Krishnamurthi said the time

had come for a decisive action against Pakistan.

June 2

There were only four stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI Musharraf rules out

possibility of nuclear

war

OS C N

2 Leh PTI 'Our action will depend

on Pak. conduct'

OS C N

3 New Delhi K.K. Katyal Infiltration not a myth MS C N

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

`War has never solved

any issue'

MS P SP

PTI filed from Pakistan that Musharraf said there was no possibility of a nuclear war with

India. He also termed the reports of moving nuclear missiles closer to the border as

baseless. Advani was reported as saying from Leh that Indian actions in future will

depend on Pakistan’s measures against terrorism. K.K. Katyal in his analysis said

infiltration by the Pakistan-based militants was a fact and not a myth. Members of civil

society who met under the banner of South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR) said peace

can be achieved by cooperation and not by wars.

263

June 3

There were eight stories and most of them were positive, a rarity during tension.


Sr

No


1 Almaty Atul Aneja We will respond if

Pak. shows results on

ground: PM

OS P SP

2 Almaty Special

Corresp.

Putin, Zemin to help

defuse tension

MS N SP

3 Singapore Amit

Baruah

Ìndia determined but

not impulsive'

OS C SN

4 Dushanbe AFP Musharraf appeals to

Vajpayee for peace

talks

MS P SP

5 Almaty Atul Aneja No Indo-Pak. meet in

Almaty

OS C N

6 Jammu Reporter Camps for border

migrants overflowing

OS C N

7 Sriganganagar

(Rajasthan)

PTI Rise in number of

'lunatics' in border

areas

MS C SN

8 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Plea to avert Indo-

Pak. military conflict

MS P P

Atul Aneja reported from Almaty that India relented by saying that it was ready to

respond positively if Pakistan showed readiness to tackle terrorism. The paper also

reported that Vajpayee met Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Chinese President

Jiang Zemin. They discussed the current tension with Pakistan and both leaders offered

help to reduce it. Fernandes told international community in Singapore that India will not

attack Pakistan. AFP reported that Musharraf assured his country will not start war. Atul

Aneja said from Almaty that Vajpayee ruled out any talks with Musharraf. There was a

report from Jammu that camps set up for the people displaced from the border region due

to tension were overflowing with the refugees. There was an interesting PTI report from

Rajasthan that number of lunatics had increased in the border areas where authorities

264

suspected that Pakistan was sending its spies in their garbs. In a rare peace plea, over 50

eminent persons from India and Pakistan made an appeal for peace.

June 4

Just three stories about Pakistan could find place on the pages of the newspaper.


Sr

No


1 Almaty Atul Aneja Appropriate steps if

Pak. keeps its word:

Brajesh

MS P SP

2 New Delhi Sandeep

Dikshit

India's parameters for

de-escalation

AS C N

3 Jammu Agencies Six Pak. soldiers

killed

MS C EN

Atul Aneja reported from Almaty that India and Pakistan were giving positive signals

after months of tension. Indian National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra said they will

take steps to reduce tension if promises by Pakistan to target militants were

implemented.213 Sandeep Dikshit reported India linked its de-escalation with Pakistan

taking concrete steps to address the cross-border militancy. There was a report based on

agencies’ dispatches that six Pakistan soldiers were killed in Kashmir due to the firing by

Indian troops.

June 5

The paper published six stories on the day.


Sr

No


1 Almaty Atul Aneja Cross-border terrorism

has to end for talks:

PM

OS C N

2 Almaty Agencies Serious and positive MS N SP

213 Atul Aneja, “Appropriate steps if Pak. keeps its words: Mishra,” The Hindu, June 4, 2002.

265

signals from

Musharraf: Putin

3 Almaty AP and AFP N-arms possession

implies usage:

Musharraf

OS C SN

4 Almaty AP No handshake, eye

contact

MS C SN

5 Almaty Atul Aneja Putin has invited us:

Musharraf

OS P SP

6 New Delhi Neena Vyas Rumsfeld coming on

June 9

AS N P

The main story showed that India was still adamant with its basic demand that Pakistan

should take concrete action against cross-border militancy before any decision to start

talks. Separately, Russian President Putin told Vajpayee that Musharraf was serious and

positive to end the tension. AP and AFP reported Musharraf saying that possession of

nukes implies that they can be used as well under the critical conditions. AP reported

Vajpayee and Musharraf had eye contact but there was no handshake. Atul Aneja

reported Musharraf saying that Putin had invited him to Moscow with a promise to also

invite Vajpayee for possible talks to end the tension. Neena Vyas reported that US

Secretary Defence Ronald Rumsfeld will arrive in India on June 9 to launch a diplomatic

offensive to avert the war. Meanwhile, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who

was in Pakistan, was supposed to visit India ahead of Rumsfeld.

October 1

The de-escalation started in the second half of 2002 and was almost complete by October.

As the tension came down due to the de-escalation, the coverage decreased.

Table 4.68: The Hindu Coverage on October 1

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Vinay

Kumar

Pakistan must be held

accountable: PM

OS C N

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

'Musharraf statements

on Akshardham

unacceptable'

OS C N

266

Vinay Kumar reported Vajpayee saying that Pakistan must be held accountable for acts

of terror in India. India rejected a statement by Musharraf in which he equated attack in

Akshardham in Gujarat with the killing of Muslims.

October 2

There was only one story. Sridhar Krishnaswami reported that United States Commission

on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) asked Secretary of State to designate India

and Pakistan as “Countries of particular concern'' under the International Religious

Freedom Act of 1998.


Sr

No



Krishnaswami

U.S. panel for

naming India, Pak.

as 'countries of

concern'

OS C N

October 3

No story was published on the day about Pak-India ties.

October 4

The number was same as previous day: one story but with the negative tone.


Sr

No


1 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

Infiltration continues:

J&K DGP

OS C N

Shujaat Bukhari reported that Director-General of the Jammu and Kashmir police Ashok

Suri said the infiltration from Pakistan side of Kashmir was going on.

267

October 5

There were four stories and all were negative. The tension had gone but its bitterness

lingered on.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Amit Baruah

'Pak. failed all tests to

end cross-border

terrorism'

OS C N

2 Balasore PTI Akash test-fired AS C N

3 Karachi Muralidhar

Reddy

Pak. tests Hatf-IV

missile

OS C N

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

'Pak. missile test a

provocation'

OS C N

Amit Baruah quoted Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal that Islamabad had failed “all tests"

to end cross-border terrorism. PTI reported that India test-fired surface to air Akash

missile. Muralidhar Reddy reported that Pakistan also fired medium range surface to

surface Hatf-V. India responded by saying that the latest missile test conducted by

Pakistan was "clearly targeted" at the coming general elections in that country.214

4.5.2- The Tribune

The Tribune is an important newspaper published from Chandigarh in Punjab. It gave

extensive coverage to military standoff and has been used as the second paper for this

section. The coverage for escalation period (January 1-5, 2002) is given below:

January 1

There were 11 stories on the first day of the year.

Table 4.72: The Tribune Coverage on January 1

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Rajeev India gives list of 20 AS C N

214 “Pak. missile test provocation,” The Hindu, October 5, 2002.

268

Sharma terrorists

2 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

Step forward by Pak:

Jaswant

OS N SP

3 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

PM ready to discuss

any issue

OS P P

4 Kathmandu PTI, UNI SAARC backs India

on terrorism

OS N SN

5 London AFP UK urges Pak, India

to show restraint

OS P SP

6 Jammu UNI Four Pak soldiers

killed

AS C EN

7 Amritsar Our Corresp. 22 families from

Khalra shift to Patti

OS C N

8 Attari

(Amritsar)

Ashok Sethi

and Pawan

Kumar

Sun sets on

Samjhauta Express

MS N P

9 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

IAF fully prepared:

Air Chief

OS C N

10 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

BJP against hot

pursuit

OS P SP

Rajeev Sharma reported that India asked Pakistan that arrests of LeT chief Hafiz Saeed

and JeM chief Masood Azhar were just not enough. Arun Kumar Singh, Joint Secretary

(IPA) in the Ministry of External Affairs, summoned Deputy High Commissioner Jalil

Abbas Jilani and gave a list of 20 wanted terrorists and criminals allegedly based in

Pakistan. The paper in another story reported that Jaswant Singh welcomed the arrest of

JeM and LeT leaders. Vajpayee in his new year musings said if Islamabad shed its “anti-

India mentality” and took “effective steps to stop cross-border terrorism,” then “you will

find India willing to walk more than half of the distance to work closely” for resolving

any issue through dialogue.215

The paper also reported that India won the backing of SAARC to its proposal for strong

regional efforts to combat terrorism. AFP reported from London that UK asked both

Pakistan and India to show restraint. UNI reported from Jammu that four Pakistan

215 “PM ready to discuss any issue,” The Tribune, January 1, 2002.

269

soldiers were killed in “Indian retaliatory fire”. Due to panic caused by movement of

forces, families from border areas had started shifting.

Ashok Sethi and Pawan Kumar wrote about the last journey on the train service between

the two countries which faced closure due to the tension. Separately, the paper reported

that Chief of Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal S. Krishnaswamy, said that IAF was fully

prepared for strikes against the terrorist camps in “Pakistan-occupied Kashmir”. The

paper also reported that BJP said it was not in favour of the hot pursuit or war against

Pakistan. It also welcomed Vajpayee’s decision not to meet Musharraf on the sidelines of

the SAARC Summit in Kathmandu.

January 2

It was day of maximum news item carried by the paper during this coverage slot.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

10 Pak soldiers killed

in Poonch

AS C EN

2 New Delhi Girja

Shankar

Kaura

Limited strikes not

ruled out

AS C EN

3 Kathmandu PTI, UNI India refuses talks

with Pak

OS C N

4 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

Jaswant awaits

confirmation

OS N SN

5 Kathmandu UNI Pervez feels pinch of

airspace ban

AS C N

6 Mumbai UNI Last PIA flight leaves

for Karachi

MS C N

7 Kathmandu UNI Terrorism on top of

SAARC agenda

MS C N

8 United

Nations

PTI Talk peace at

SAARC, Annan tells

India, Pakistan

OS N SP

9 London AFP Britain wants talks

between India, Pak

OS N SP

10 Islamabad PTI Pak police breaks up MS P SP

270

peace rally at Wagah


News

Service

Snapping of air link to

cost Rs 50 crore

OS N SP


News

Service

Offensive on Pak to

be BJP poll plank

AS C N


News

Service

India, Pak exchange

nuke lists

OS N SP

The paper reported quoting sources of defence ministry that 10 Pakistan soldiers were

killed in Kashmir. Girja Shankar Kaura reported quoting sources that the option of

limited strikes against the militants were still on the table, though officially government

had ruled out war. There was news that no meeting was planned between Vajpayee and

Musharraf on the sidelines of SAARC. Jaswant Singh said he was waiting for the

confirmation of his meeting from counterpart Abdul Sattar. UNI reported Pakistan

officials saying that India banned Pakistan flights using its airspace from January 1

despite knowing that Musharraf would have used it to go to Nepal. In a related story UNI

reported from Mumbai that the last PIA flight took off for Karachi.

The paper also reported that India succeeded to push terrorism on the top of agenda in the

SAARC Summit. PTI reported from the United Nations that Secretary-General Kofi

Annan “strongly” urged Vajpayee and Musharraf to “seize the opportunity” provided by

the SAARC Summit to reduce tensions. AFP said Britain wanted talks to end the tension.

PTI reported from Islamabad that an anti-war rally held near Wagah border was forcibly

dispersed by the paramilitary Rangers.

There was an interesting story highlighting the cost of tension, as the paper reported that

Indian aviation officials asked the finance ministry to give them Rs 50 crore which was

the loss it suffered due to snapping of air ties with Pakistan. The paper also said though

the BJP toned down anti-Pakistan rhetoric but it was keen on making all-out efforts to

cash in on the anti-Pakistan mood during assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab,

Uttaranchal and Manipur. A regular type news item was about the ritual of exchange of

list of nukes between Pakistan and India at the start 2002.

271

January 3

There were eight stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Rajeev Sharma How Osama was

smuggled into

Pakistan

AS C N

2 Islamabad PTI Pak hands over 85

Al-Qaida men to

USA

MS N SN

3 Kathmandu PTI, UNI US bid to arrange

PM-Pervez meeting

fails

AS C SN

4 Kathmandu T.R.

Ramachandran

Indo-Pak talks in

Nepal ruled out,

Jaswant steers clear

of Sattar

MS C EN

5 Kathmandu T.R.

Ramachandran

Pak plays game of

one-upmanship

MS C N

6 London PTI Blair to visit India,

Pak on peace

mission

OS N SP

7 Jammu Tribune News

Service

10 Pak soldiers

killed,

Enemy bunkers

smashed

AS C EN

8 Ferozepore Varinder

Walia

Villagers ready to

play soldier

MS C N

Rajeev Sharma reported how Osama bin Laden was smuggled into Pakistan by Sufi

Mohammed, who had gone into Afghanistan with militants to fight. PTI reported quoting

local newspapers that Pakistan handed over 85 al-Qaeda militants to the US. UNI and

PTI reported from Kathmandu that the US efforts to organise a meeting between

Musharraf and Vajpayee failed. T. R. Ramachandran reported that there was no

indication of meeting between officials and leaders of Pakistan and India during the

SAARC Summit. He in a different report said Pakistani officials were busy using media

to tell the world that they wanted talks with India. PTI reported from London that Tony

272

Blair will visit Pakistan and India on a peace mission. The paper reported that 10 Pakistan

soldiers were killed in Kashmir. Varinder Walia reported from the border areas of

Ferozepore that villagers wanted arms to fight Pakistan in case of war.

January 4

The high coverage continued with seven stories.


Sr

No


1 Kathmandu T. R.

Ramachandran

Jaswant Singh calls

Pakistan’s bluff

OS C N

2 Kathmandu T. R.

Ramachandran

Indo-Pak tension

looms over SAARC

MS C N

3 Kathmandu T. R.

Ramachandran

Gayoom buffer

between Vajpayee,

Pervez

MS C SN

4 Kathmandu Tribune News

Service

Will there be thaw

in Indo-Pak ties?

MS C N

5 Jammu UNI Pak may deploy

‘strike corps’ on

LoC

AS C EN

6 Lucknow Kanchan

Vasdev

India for all possible

steps to avoid war:

PM

OS P P

7 New Delhi Tribune News

Service

Pak’s stance a sham:

BJP

OS C N

T.R. Ramachandran reported from Kathmandu that Jaswant Singh rejected Pakistani

claim that India had not provided enough evidence against militants.216 In another story

Ramachndran said Maldives President Mamoon Abdul Gayoom will be the buffer

between Vajpayee and Musharraf at the 11th SAARC Summit. The paper also carried an

analytical story about the possible thaw in the Indo-Pak ties but tried to conclude that

Islamabad was trying in vain to resurrect the ties. UNI reported from Jammu that

Pakistan was planning to deploy troops from its 11 and 12 strike corps, stationed in the

216 T.R. Ramachandran, “Indo-Pak tension looms over SAARC,” The Tribune, January 4, 2002.

273

north-western border with Afghanistan. Vajpayee said in Lucknow while on the way to

Kathmandu that India would take all possible steps to avoid war but he refused to have

any bilateral dialogue until Pakistan stopped “cross-border terrorism”. As the Prime

Minister talked of peace, his BJP said Pakistan’s asking ISI to stop backing extremists

was a sham.

January 5

The coverage went further up with 11 stories.


Sr

No


1 Kathmandu T. R.

Ramachandran

Musharraf gets late

coming via China,

SAARC summit

deferred till today

MS C N

2 New Delhi Tribune News

Service

Summit put off at

India’s behest: Pak

OS C N

3 Kathmandu T. R.

Ramachandran

Pak scribes blame

India for delay

MS C N

4 Kathmandu UNI Vajpayee, Pervez

come face to face

AS N SP

5 Kathmandu UNI, AFP Pak official held

with fake notes,

released

MS C SN

6 New Delhi UNI IA to fly back Indian

staff from Pak today

AS C N

7 Kathmandu Tribune News

Service

No proof given,

counters Pak

OS C N

8 Jammu Tribune News

Service, UNI

11 Pak soldiers

killed

AS C EN

274

9 New Delhi PTI Dismantle terrorist

networks in Pak:

Fernandes

OS C N

10 Ranchi UNI India ready for any

exigency: Sinha

OS C N

11 Hyderabad PTI VHP for stern action

against Pak

OS C N

T.R. Ramachandran reported that inauguration of the SAARC meeting was delayed for a

day as Musharraf arrived late. Pakistan spokesman Ashfaq Ahmed Gondal said the delay

in the summit was not due to Musharraf’s arrival. Ramachandran said the Pakistan media

held India responsible for the “hiccups connected with the inauguration of the 11th

SAARC Summit”. UNI reported Vajpayee and Musharraf came face-to-face at a dinner

for the SAARC leaders but only exchanged pleasantries. This was the first time they

came face to face since the failed Agra Summit. UNI and AFP reported a Pakistani

embassy official was caught with the counterfeit US and Indian currencies but released

on the intervention by the Nepali officials. As the tension was peaking, India decided to

send an Indian Airlines Airbus 300 to Pakistan to bring back 55 officials of High

Commission from Islamabad.

The paper using tough anti-Pakistan words said that it continued to harp on the lack of

proof in bringing to book those involved in terror in India. Musharraf’s spokesperson

Rashid Qureshi insisted that India had not provided a “shred of evidence to Pakistan”.

There was a report from Jammu that at least 11 Pakistani soldiers were killed in the

clashes. Defence Minister George Fernandes in an interview to the Far Eastern Economic

Review said Pakistan should destroy terrorism network. Finance Minister Yashwant

Sinha said India was prepared for a “decisive war” with Pakistan if the situation so

warranted. VHP International Working President Ashok Singhal called upon the BJP-led

NDA government for stern action against Pakistan for abetting terrorism.

275

June 1

The escalation peaked in June. The coverage on the first day was limited to three stories.

Table 4.77: The Tribune Coverage on June 1

Sr

No


1 London UNI 61 pc of Kashmiris

want to remain with

India

MS C N

2 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

N-threat will not deter

Army

AS C N

3 Pune Agencies Pak missile show

‘Diwali’

OS C N

The paper carried a report based on an opinion poll that said about 61 per cent of

Kashmiris want to remain Indian while only 6 per cent want to be Pakistani citizens. It

also reported through sources that the Indian army would not be deterred by the Pakistani

threat to use the nuclear weapons. Air Chief Marshal S. Krishnaswamy said India was

fully prepared to counter any threat from Pakistan.

June 2

The pattern was same as previous day as only three stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Jammu Tribune

News

Service

13 Pak troops killed,

bid to blow up

Srinagar-Leh highway

OS C EN

276

2 Jammu M. L. Kak Kashmiris want peace

via war

MS C N

3 New Delhi Rajeev

Sharma

Pay for flood data,

India tells Pakistan

AS C SN

The paper reported that the Indian troops in a retaliatory fire killed 13 enemy soldiers in

Kashmir. M.L. Kak reported from Jammu that majority of Kashmiris were for “peace via

war” in case Islamabad refuses to stop aiding terrorism. Rajeev Sharma reported that for

the first time since 1947, India demanded money from Pakistan for releasing flood data

of the Indus river system, “thus sending a chilling diplomatic message to the Musharraf

regime”.

June 3

There was slight upward surge and six stories were carried.


Sr

No


1 Almaty PTI, UNI PM to talk with Putin

and Zemin, but not

Musharraf

OS C N

2 Dushanbe AP Musharraf for one-to-

one talks

OS P SP

3 Jammu Tribune

News

Service

Pak shelling

continues, woman

killed

AS C EN

4 Ferozepore Kulwinder

Sandhu

Army to mine more

border areas

OS C EN

5 Allahabad PTI Stop war mongering,

VP tells Centre

OS P P

277

6 Jodhpur PTI Pak army explodes

smoke bombs

OS C N

PTI and UNI reported that Indian PM Vajpayee will meet Russian President Vladimir

Putin and Chinese President Jiang Zemin during the four-day visit to Almaty where he

had gone to attend the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in

Asia (CICA), also being attended by Musharraf. He told media in New Delhi that there

was no plan to meet the Pakistani leader. AP reported that Musharraf told reporters in the

Tajik capital Dushanbe, during a stopover on his way to Almaty, that he was ready to

meet Vajpayee anywhere and at any level for talks.

There was no let-up in the tension and the paper reported that a woman was killed when

Pakistani troops resorted to heavy mortar shelling in Kashmir. Kulwinder Sandhu quoted

D.K. Tiwari, Deputy Commissioner Ferozepore, that army had already acquired 27,127

hectares (105 square miles), including 350 villages, along the 210 km long international

border in the district to lay mines or construct fortifications. PTI reported that ex-PM

V.P. Singh told the government to stop “war-mongering” and use all diplomatic channels

to counter the Pak-sponsored terrorism. PTI also filed from Jodhpur that Pakistan army

exploded 43 smoke bombs inside its territory along the international border near Barmer

in Rajasthan.

June 4

Only three stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Jammu Tribune

News

Service

Six Pak soldiers

killed, guns continue

to roar along border

AS C EN

2 Srinagar UNI Jaish commander OS C N

278

killed, houses burnt in

valley

3 Jammu UNI War sirens installed in

Jammu, Pak constructs

spring top bunkers

along LoC

AS C N

The paper said artillery and mortar guns continued to roar on the LoC. Sources said six

Pakistani soldiers were killed in the Indian retaliatory fire and several army camps

damaged. UNI said a Pakistan-based commander of the banned JeM was among four

persons killed in Kashmir. Separately, UNI reported that 15 war sirens were installed in

Jammu, while Pakistan army set up nearly 200 “spring top bunkers” across the LoC so

that whenever a mortar shell hit them, the same would ricochet and fall elsewhere to

explode.

June 5

There were seven relevant stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Almaty PTI, AP India rejects third-

party mediation

OS C SN

2 Islamabad UNI Jehadis to announce

ceasefire

MS C SN

3 Washington PTI Apply Bush doctrine

to Pak: Mansingh

MS C N

4 Santa Clara

(California)

AP US Indians following

stand-off

MS N SP

5 Jammu Tribune 12 Pak soldiers killed AS C EN

279

News

Service

6 Wagah Varinder

Walia and

Pawan

Kumar

Indian staffer still in

Pak

AS C N

7 Islamabad PTI India protests over

staffer

AS C N

According to the paper, India denied Musharraf’s claim that Vajpayee had been invited

by Russian leader Vladimir Putin to Moscow to defuse the standoff with Pakistan. UNI

reported an interview of Kashmir leader Syed Salahuddin, founder of the Hizbul

Mujahedeen, that they will announce temporary ceasefire.217 PTI reported from

Washington that Indian ambassador Lalit Mansingh asked the US to “apply the Bush

Doctrine on terrorism to Pakistan”. AP reported from Santa Clara (California) that the

American-Indians were keenly following the standoff with Pakistan. In its routine story,

the paper carried a report from Jammu that 12 Pakistan soldiers were killed in Kashmir.

The paper also said that an Indian High Commission staffer at Islamabad, Kulwant Singh,

was not allowed to return to India for the treatment of his injuries sustained during the

alleged torture by ISI. PTI said India lodged a strong protest with Pakistan for preventing

Kulwant Singh return to India.

October 1

The de-escalation had already started and by October it was known that the war was

averted. The Tribune carried only two stories on the first day of this phase.

Table 4.82: The Tribune Coverage on October 1

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Tribune

News

Hold Pak accountable:

PM

OS C N

217 “Jehadis to announce ceasefire,” The Tribune, June 5, 2002.

280

Service

2 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

Pervez ‘interfering’ in

Indian affairs

OS C N

The Tribune quoted Prime Minister Vajpayee that Pakistan must be held accountable for

continuing to sponsor terrorism in India. Separately, India asked Pakistan to set its own

house in order instead of interfering in the affairs of New Delhi.

October 2

There was only one story in the paper, which showed that the tension had come down.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

Terrorism’s epicentre

now in Pak: Advani

OS C N

Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani said the world community should realise that the

epicentre of international terrorism had shifted from Afghanistan to Pakistan.

October 3

No Pakistan related story appeared on the day.

October 4

Like the previous day, there was no story about Pakistan.

October 5

Only four stories were carried by the paper.


Sr

No


281

1 Islamabad PTI Pak test-fires Shaheen OS C N

2 Balasore PTI India test-fires Akash OS C N

3 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

Test provocative, says

India

OS C N

4 New Delhi Tribune

News

Service

Musharraf poor

hurdler: Sibal

OS C N

PTI reported from Islamabad that Pakistan test-fired a medium range surface-to-surface

ballistic missile Hatf-IV, which can carry nuclear warheads and hit targets within the

range of 750 km, covering several parts of India. The newswire also reported that India

test-fired its “most sophisticated” medium range surface-to-air missile Akash. Foreign

Secretary Kanwal Sibal said Pakistan’s test-firing of Hatf-IV missile was “a provocation

to the international community and a further act of irresponsible behaviour.”

4.6- Electronic Media and Military Standoff

The military standoff of 2002 was triggered by the attack on the Indian parliament,

allegedly by militants groups based in Pakistan. The incident pitched the two nuclear-

armed nations against each other.

Talking about the standoff, Suhasini Haidar defended the hyper media: “Media was given

the understanding that there would be a war.”218 She said it was not just a question of

sending troops to the border or the LoC but the soldiers were given orders to dig trenches,

mine the area and the people were being evacuated. “The truth was that the media was

given the idea that the attack was imminent. Clearly, the media was extremely jingoistic

…We are looking at a situation when media thought war will come very soon,” said she.

The government in India also had public support mobilized. It was eventful time as it was

just two years after Kargil and one year after Kandahar hijack when the militants linked

with JeM were released. According to India JeM attacked the parliament. She also said

the media lost touch with the horrors of war and became a part of the national campaign


282

to get support for the government decision for war. “The media was extremely poised for

war. It had turned extremely nationalistic,” she said.

Haidar was shocked at the kind of coverage by the Indian electronic media. She said that

at one point during the standoff, media went ahead of the government when there was

attack at an army camp in Kashmir in May, 2002 and 19 people were killed. She said it

was the time when media was convinced that the war was just around the corner. “I was

actually shocked at the kind of coverage I saw,” she observed.

She also said that none of Indian channels were trying to show the dark side of the war

when the warring parties were armed with the nuclear weapons. She said that it was the

CNN which did a series of stories about the consequences of a nuclear war between

Pakistan and India. She could not recall any talk-show or TV program highlighting the

importance of peace and horrors of war, as the two sides stood in eyeball-to-eyeball

position. She said the CNN story created interest and America doubled efforts for ending

th tension.

Karan Thapar response to the question of media coverage of 2002 military confrontation

was that he was not sure about it as he could not recall the coverage of that time.

Shujaat Bukhari agreed with Haidar that media was following the government in creating

a jingoistic atmosphere. He also expressed doubts about the official strategy regarding

operation Parakram as the build-up was code-named. He said that there were many

loopholes and flaws as shown by many reports after the operation. The reports concluded

that Parakram was a failure, according to Bukhari.

He also said that perhaps government was not going for a war but creating pressure so

that Pakistan should control militancy. He also said that the media was not responsible

for the standoff as it was the government’s decision. “I do not think the media was

pushing India to war in operation Parakram. There was media hype but I think that the

government wanted it. The government itself was building it,” he said.219


283

He, however, criticised media for not showing the negative fallout of a war with Pakistan.

He failed to recall major pro-peace stories and comments in the TV talk-shows. When

asked about any stories highlighting the dangers of war or nuclear fallout, he said, “I

think very less in India.”220

4.7- Print Media and Composite Dialogue

The composite dialogue was launched in 2004 and went on for about five years. Its

coverage has been divided into three phases:

4- Launch of Dialogue: January 3-7, 2004

5- Mid-term Review (Around Musharraf visit to India): April 15-19, 2005

6- Final Review (Around Mumbai Train attack): July 9-13, 2006

First, coverage in The Hindu is presented.

4.7.1- The Hindu

The coverage by The Hindu is given below:

January 3

The paper published just three stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Amit Baruah

&

Muralidhar

Reddy

Ready for dialogue,

ball in India's court:

Pakistan

OS P P

2 New Delhi PTI Interview Cancelled OS C SN

3 Islamabad Islamabad

Bureau

My last attempt at

peace, says Vajpayee

OS C N

A joint by-line by Amit Baruah and Muralidhar Reddy quoted FM Yashwant Sinha that

regional draft agreements on trade and terrorism among the South Asian Association for


284

Regional Cooperation (SAARC) nations would have a positive impact on the ties. PTI

reported that Vajpayee cancelled interviews with Pakistan Television and Doordarshan

due to “sore throat''. He was advised rest ahead of the visit to Pakistan. In his interview

with Dawn, Vajpayee said it was his last attempt to make peace with Pakistan.

January 4

The coverage was restricted to just one story. Amit Baruah and Muralidhar Reddy

reported that Vajpayee said he would hold talks with Pakistani leaders during the

SAARC Summit.


Sr

No



&

Muralidhar

Reddy

India and Pakistan

must keep talking:

Vajpayee

OS P P

January 5

The coverage was low and the paper carried just two stories.


Sr

No



&

Muralidhar

Reddy

Vajpayee meets

Jamali as ties are put

on track

OS P P

2 New Delhi Neena Vyas BJP plans to sell

peace with Pakistan

in poll campaign

OS C SN

Vajpayee started the tour of Pakistan by having a meeting with Prime Minister Zafarullah

Khan Jamali. The Hindu termed it as the end of nearly “three-year of drought” in the

bilateral ties. Neena Vyas said BJP was planning to sell the idea of peace with Pakistan in

the forthcoming elections.

285

January 6

Despite meeting between Vajpayee and Musharraf, the coverage was limited.


Sr

No



&

Muralidhar

Reddy

Vajpayee, Musharraf

hope peace process

will continue

OS P EP

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Peace is essential for

prosperity: Kalam

OS P SP

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

A step in the right

direction, says

Venkaiah Naidu

OS P SP

Amit Baruah and Muralidhar Reddy reported that Vajpayee met Musharraf in an ice-

breaking meeting. President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam and Home Minister L.K. Advani

expressed hope that meeting with Musharraf will bring peace. Bharatiya Janata Party

President Venkaiah Naidu also termed the meeting as a "positive step in the right

direction."

January 7

The paper published three stories as the two countries agreed to launch the composite

dialogue to smooth the ties.


Sr

No



&

Muralidhar

Reddy

India, Pakistan to

start dialogue in

February

OS P EP

2 Islamabad PTI and UNI `Ready to come

tomorrow'

OS P EP

3 Islamabad Islamabad

Bureau

`Vajpayee asked me

to take care'

OS P P

286

The meeting and backdoor interactions proved fruitful and both sides agreed to launch

the peace dialogue in February. The paper termed it as “a giant step forward”. The level

of the dialogue was not decided but it was clear that the two sides had agreed to embark

on a new phase of their ties. Agencies reported that Musharraf told reporters that he was

ready to visit India. In another report the paper said Musharraf disclosed that Vajpayee

asked him to take care from the terrorists.

April 15

On the first day of this period, the paper published seven stories.

Table 4.90: The Hindu Coverage on April 15

Sr

No


1 New Delhi Amit Baruah Kashmir-related

CBMs in the offing

AS P P

2 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

Meeting with

Musharraf first:

Hurriyat faction

OS C SN

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Improved ties have

not reduced militant

activity, says Pranab

OS C N

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

"Pakistan did not live

up to the vision of

Jinnah"

OS C N

5 New Delhi PTI Not prudent to set

timeframe, says

Natwar

OS C N

Amit Baruah reported that after the launch of Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service,

Pakistan and India will discuss more CBMs during Musharraf’s visit. Shujaat Bukhari

reported that an APHC group led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq will meet Musharraf. Defence

Minister Parnab Mukherjee said the infiltration was still going on in Kashmir. There was

a story about the launch of Asiananda's book "Jinnah- A Corrective Reading of Indian

History''. External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh said it was not possible to give any

timeframe for the resolution of Kashmir. He also said Pakistan will not be allowed to get

off the hook on the issue of terrorism.

287

April 16

There were two stories and both were anti-peace.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Vinay

Kumar

No political

compromise with

terror: Manmohan

OS C N

2 New Delhi Diplomatic

Corresp.

Peace process will not

come to a wall:

Brajesh

OS C SN

Manmohan Singh was quoted as saying that efforts to derail the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad

bus service will be foiled and there will no compromise with terrorists. The former

National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra said in BBC's Hardtack India programme that

the trade ties between Pakistan and India will open up new avenues.

April 17

The coverage picked up as Musharraf reached India.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Harish Khare `Ì have come with a

message of peace''

OS P P

2 Ajmer Mohammed

Iqbal

Musharraf prays for

peace at Ajmer

dargah

MS N SP

3 Jaipur Sunny

Sebastian

The Khwaja has

finally called Gen.

Musharraf

MS P SP

4 New Delhi Staff

Reporter

Gursharan praise for

Musharraf's mother

OS P SP

5 New Delhi Amit Baruah Musharraf is free to

meet Hurriyat leaders:

Saran

OS P P

288

Musharraf was in India to attend the SAARC Summit and responding to Manmohan

Singh's call for the enduring solution to all problems, he told a gathering at the Ashoka

Hotel: "It needs two hands to clap. They say it takes two to tango, we may be too old to

tango, but my hand is extended to clap."221 Musharraf also paid a visit to the shrine of

13th century saint Moinuddin Chishti before starting the official business. He had missed

the opportunity in 2001 due to the failure of the Agra Summit. Indian Prime Minister's

wife Gursharan Kaur lavished praise on mother of Musharraf whom she met. Foreign

Secretary Shyam Saran said that Musharraf was free to meet APHC, which was contrary

to the stance taken by the Indian government in 2001.

April 18

Total 11 stories were published on the day as Musharraf got busy in meetings.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Amit Baruah Positive, forward-

looking talks:

Manmohan

MS P EP

2 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Involve Kashmiris in

peace process:

Hurriyat

OS C SN

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

India, Pakistan to set

up Joint Business

Council

OS P P

4 New Delhi PTI Musharraf gets his

birth certificate

OS P SP

5 New Delhi Mandira

Nayar

The Begum goes

sightseeing

MS N SP

6 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Two Presidents have a

cozy chat

MS P SP

7 Jammu PTI Pandits' plea to

Musharraf

OS P SP

8 New Delhi PTI A pleasant surprise for

Advani

OS P SP

9 New Delhi PTI Javed Mir not allowed

to meet Musharraf

MS P SP

221 Harish Khare, “I have come with a message of peace”, The Hindu, July 17, 2005.

289

According to the headline of the paper, Manmohan Singh and Pervez Musharraf agreed

to increase the frequency of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service and operationalize the

Munabao-Khokhrapar rail link by the end of December. Their talks were held after the

two leaders saw a cricket match between their teams at Ferozshah Kotla ground which

was won by Pakistan. The APHC leaders met Musharraf for nearly three-and-a-half hours

at the Pakistan House and asked that people of Kashmir should be involved in the peace

process. On the national page, the main report was that both countries had decided to set

up a Joint Business Council (JBC) of their apex industry associations to promote trade

and address issues like the MFN and non-tariff barriers.

Musharraf was also given the birth certificate and paining of the house where he was

born and spend his childhood. Mandira Nayar reported that Sehba Musharraf visited the

historical places and went for shopping. Musharraf also met Indian President A.P.J.

Abdul Kalam for 50-minutes and discussed various issues, including music. The paper

also reported that displaced Kashmiri Pandits urged Musharraf to renovate the Sharda

Peeth shrine in Pakistan Kashmir for the pilgrimage.

Musharraf had surprise for Advani when he presented him an album containing

photographs from Advani's school days till his last visit to Pakistan. Advani, who had

studied in the same school as the Pakistan President, said they had a hearty discussion for

“quite some time'' on their alma mater. Officials of Pakistan High Commission turned

down the militant-turned-separatist leader Javed Ahmed Mir's request to meet Musharraf.

April 19

The section of coverage closed with eight stories which showed that the media coverage

of Pakistan was linked to high-profile visits and tragic incidents.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Amit Baruah India-Pakistan peace

process ìrreversible'

MS P EP

2 New Delhi Diplomatic

Corresp.

`Ì came with a new

heart''

OS P N

290

3 New Delhi UNI Historic opportunity,

substantive talks

OS N SP

4 New Delhi Amit Baruah A first in trade ties

with Pakistan

MS P SP

5 New Delhi Delhi Bureau Paradigm shift in

India-Pakistan ties,

says Congress

OS P SP

6 Srinagar Shujaat

Bukhari

Sell-out by

Musharraf"

MS C N

The meetings of Musharraf had gone well and both sides termed the peace process as

irreversible.222 There was a report quoting Musharraf that he came with a new heart. On

the national page, the paper carried the joint statement by the two sides. Amit Baruah

reported it will be the first time in the history of independent India and Pakistan that trade

will take place through the LoC. Separately, he also had a story about Musharraf who

said that while no rigid time-frame could be set for resolving the Kashmir issue,

indefinite discussions on the question were not feasible. Indian political parties

appreciated the joint statement as it pushed through the CBMs and started a shift in the

nature of relations. Shujaat Bukhari reported from Kashmir that while others were

praising Pakistan and India for showing flexibility, the separatist leaders were furious and

accused Musharraf of "selling out" Kashmir.

July 9

No relevant story was published by the paper.

July 10

None of Pakistan related story was published on the day.

July 11

The paper did not carry any story about Pakistan.

July 12

After days of silence the paper carried eight stories.

222 Amit Baruah, “India-Pakistan peace process ‘irreversible’,” The Hindu, April 19, 2005.

291


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Main

Bureau

Report

Terror strikes

Mumbai, over 147

killed

MS C EN

2 Washington PTI Kasuri, Rice discuss

India-Pakistan

dialogue

OS C SN

3 New Delhi Amit Baruah Pakistan flexible on

Foreign Minister-

level talks

OS P SP

4 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

No brakes on peace

process: Centre

OS C N

5 Srinagar UNI Lashkar-e-Taiba

denies hand

OS P SP

6 New Delhi Staff Report Lashkar conduit

arrested, RDX seized

OS C N

The main story was about the terror attacks in Mumbai which had killed at least 147

people. PTI reported that Pakistan Foreign Minister was in the US and met Condoleezza

Rice. Amit Baruah reported that Pakistan was flexible about who would represent India

in talks in absence of a full-fledged Foreign Minister. It showed that the dialogue process

was intact despite the attacks. In another report, the paper said that Union Home

Secretary Vinod Kumar Duggal made it clear that the peace process would neither be

slowed no halted due to the attacks. In another report, Lashkar-e-Taiba condemned the

attacks and also denied its involvement. Separately, Delhi Joint Commissioner of Police

Karnal Singh said the Special Cell arrested a man allegedly working as the conduit for

the LeT.

July 13

The coverage period ended with just one story by the paper.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Amit

Baruah

Pakistan must act

against terror groups'

MS C EN

292

India asked Pakistan to take strict action against the militants and dismantle their network

in the country. The paper reported that a day after the Mumbai blasts, an External Affairs

Ministry spokesman described as "appalling" the remarks by Foreign Minister Khurshid

Kasuri that drew a link between the Mumbai attacks and non-resolution of disputes

between India and Pakistan.223

4.7.2- The Indian Express

The Indian Express is relatively smaller newspaper in circulation but is respected in the

Indian policy-making circles. Its coverage for the selected period of January 3-7, 2004 is

given.

January 3

The paper carried four stories at the start of the coverage of this slot.

Table 4.97: The Indian Express Coverage on January 3

Sr

No


1 Jammu Express

News

Service

Operation Derail

Saarc: terror on

Jammu tracks

OS C N

2 Karachi Reuters

(Mike

Collett-

White)

Foreigners see

backlash at Pak

madrasas

MS N SN

3 New Delhi Dawn (M.

Ziauddin)

Peace common desire

in India, says

Vajpayee

MS P P

The paper reported that the militants attacked Jammu Railway Station and killed four

people as Prime Minister Vajpayee was preparing for Pakistan’s visit to attend the

SAARC Summit. Mike Collett-White reported from Karachi that foreign students

studying in Pakistani madrasahs were feeling insecure after the recent arrests by Pakistan.

223 Amit Baruah, “Pakistan must act against terror groups,” The Hindu, July 13, 2006.

293

The newspaper reported an interview of Vajpayee to Ziauddin of Dawn newspaper, who

said all mainstream parties wanted peace with Pakistan.

January 4

It was an important day as Prime Minister Vajpayee arrived in Pakistan for the SAARC

Summit.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Jyoti

Malhotra

Landing in Pak, PM

sheds baggage of

past, has one thing to

declare: hope

OS N SP

Joyti Malhotra reported from Islamabad that Prime Minister Vajpayee arrived in Pakistan

and told media that he wanted to meet the leaders of Pakistan and talk about all issues

including Kashmir.

January 5

Three stories appeared in the paper on the day.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Jyoti

Malhotra

Musharraf skips K-

course at banquet, but

serves bilateral talk

dish

OS P P

2 Islamabad Express

News

Service

They all agree: no

room for terror, need

to unite

MS P P

3 Srinagar Mir Ehsan Summit echoes in J-

K: Change is not far

away

OS P P

294

Malhotra who had apparently flown from New Delhi to cover the trip of the prime

minister in her dispatch said that Musharraf did not directly mentioned Kashmir at a

banquet for the SAARC leaders but said that ‘‘there can be no development in the

absence of peace and no peace until political disputes continue to fester.”224 The paper

also said that the SAARC leaders called for action against terrorism and increasing

efforts for regional cooperation. Mir Ehsan reported from Srinagar that the Kashmiri

leaders were hoping that the SAARC Summit will be a major step towards peace.

January 6

The coverage went up considerably as Pak-India leaders were having meetings in

Islamabad.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Jyoti

Malhotra

Mistrust brushed

under huge, red carpet

MS P EP

2 Islamabad PTI Rashid can’t forget

the K-word

OS C SN

3 New Delhi Express

News service

Movement towards

peace: Parties hoping

for results

OS P P

4 Srinagar Agencies Back home: Valley

pins hope on Summit

MS P SP

5 Moscow Dadan

Upadhyay

Russia welcomes

Pak.-India leaders

meeting

OS N SP

6 Islamabad Jyoti

Malhotra

Silence, men at work

on peace track

OS P P

Tracing the welcome given to Vajpayee in Pakistan, Malhotra wrote “If ever Prime

Minister A B Vajpayee wanted to contest elections from Islamabad rather than his

beloved Lucknow,…winning wouldn’t be difficult.” The paper also had a PTI story

which said that Pakistan Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmad kept harping on

224 Jyoti Malhotra, “Musharraf skips K-course at banquet, but serves bilateral talk dish,” The Indian

Express, January 5, 2004.

295

Kashmir as top leadership was silent about it. Separately, the paper said that BJP had

described the meeting between Prime Minister Vajpayee and Musharraf as a step in the

right direction.

There was a detailed report based on the input by the newswires that Vajpayee’s visit had

raised hopes in Kashmir for peace. Dadan Upadhyay reported from Moscow that Russia

welcomed the meeting of Vajpayee and Musharraf. In a major story Malhotra reported

that there was a possibility of breakthrough as officials were working out the contours of

a peace process that “would give centrality to the twin issues of Kashmir and

terrorism”.225

January 7

The coverage period ended with five stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI Saarc says no to terror OS P P

2 Tripoli Patrick Tyler

& David

Sanger

Pak gave nuke tech to

Libya: US

MS C SN

3 Suigam

(Gujarat)

Janyala

Sreenivas

Gujarat village wants

a road, too, to

Pakistan

MS P P

4 Islamabad Jyoti

Malhotra

Their January Spring MS P EP

5 Islamabad Jyoti

Malhotra

Brajesh, Aziz did

spadework to bury

past

AS P P

A PTI report by V.S. Chandrasekar & V. Mohan Narayan stated that leaders of the seven

SAARC nations pledged to eliminate terrorism in all its forms. The Islamabad

Declaration, adopted at the end of the three-day summit, was hailed as a ‘‘historic and

landmark’’. The paper also had a story of New York Times’ correspondent Patrick Tyler

and David Sanger that Pakistan provided centrifuge design technology to Libya. There

225 Jyoti Malhotra, “Silence, men at work on peace track,” The Indian Express, January 6, 2004.

296

was an interesting story from Janyala Sreenivas from a village Suigam in Gujarat, which

was hardly 50 kilometers away from border in Sindh province in Pakistan. The villagers

told the correspondent that they cannot afford air or train travels and will happy to walk

or use carts to go to meet their relatives in Pakistan if the broken road was repaired.

Malhotra said in a news item from Islamabad that Pakistan and India had agreed to

launch the ‘composite dialogue’ in February. In another peace, she said that secret

diplomacy between Brajesh Mishra principal secretary to Vajpayee and Tariq Aziz,

secretary of National Security Council, which started in May 2003 helped the two sides

to agree on the launch of the peace process.226

4.7.3- The Telegraph

The coverage period for this slot is: April 15-19, 2005. Kolkata-based The Telegraph has

been used for this period.

April 15

The coverage was quite slim as there was only one story.

Table 4.102: The Telegraph Coverage on April 15

Sr

No


1 Islamabad Imtiaz Gul 24 F-16s flash on

Pakistan first list

AS C SN

Imtiaz Gul reported from Pakistan that the country was planning to buy 24 new F-16s of

upgraded (Block 52) C and D version in the first phase as Defence Secretary Donald

Rumsfeld concluded his visit to Islamabad with a commitment to further broaden the

strategic partnership.

April 16

The paper published three stories on the day.

226 Jyoti Mahotra, “Brajesh, Aziz did spadework to bury past,” The Indian Express, January 7, 2004.

297


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Bus onus on Pak too:

Singh

OS N SN

2 Ajmer Sujan Dutta Tanks on peace path-

Memories of war

await Musharraf

MS C SN

3 Kathmandu Bharat

Bhushan

Nepal walks in

Pakistan's steps

MS N SN

The paper reported Prime Minister Manmohan Singh saying that it was the joint

responsibility of India and Pakistan to provide security to the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus.

It also reported that Musharraf was arriving in Delhi via Ajmer for a three-day trip. There

was an interesting story about troubled history of the two countries as two tanks flank the

route Musharraf was take to the dargah to seek the blessings of Khwaja Moinuddin

Chishti. The tanks were once owned by Pakistan but destroyed and put on display by the

Indian army after a war. There was story linked to Pakistan as the paper reported that in

order to understand Nepal, India should first understand Pakistan as the two countries

were building their nationhood on a similar pattern in opposition to India.

April 17

The coverage was down and there was only one story.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Pranay

Sharma

Peace prayer on all

lips

MS P EP

The paper reported that there were prayers for peace on lips of everyone as leaders of

India and Pakistan met in New Delhi.227

227 Pranay Sharma, “Peace prayers on al lips,” The Telegraph, April 17, 2005.

298

April 18

The paper carried three stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Pranay

Sharma

Play over, result

withheld

MS N N

2 New Delhi S.P.S. Pannu Finally, neighbours

mean business

OS P P

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

2005: A heart

transplant

OS P EP

Pranay Sharma reported that Musharraf and Singh watched a cricket match between their

teams and met for a long meeting. Later, Musharraf also called on Indian President Abdul

Kalam who hosted lunch for him. The paper said that the two countries decided to start

the railway service between Khokrapar in Rajasthan and Munabao in Sind. “All other

proposals, especially those on Kashmir put on the table by India for greater people-to-

people contact and turning the Line of Control into a soft border, were greeted by the

Pakistan side with an assurance of favourable consideration,” reported the paper.228

Pannu reported that the two countries had agreed to set up a joint business council to

promote bilateral trade. In a detailed story about Musharraf, the paper captured his media

interaction like the one in 2001 during the Agra Summit, but the general said that he had

come with new heart. “I beg to differ. Phir wohi dil nahi laya hoon (I have not come with

the same heart). I would like to say main naya dil laya hoon (I have come with a new

heart).”The reference was to a television news channel's headline, 'Phir wohi dil laya

hoon', a take-off on the title of a hit Hindi movie of the sixties.

April 19

The coverage period ended with just two stories.

228 Pranay Sharma, “Play over, result withheld,” The Telegraph, April 18, 2005.

299


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Pranay

Sharma

People dot line of

peace

OS N SP

2 New Delhi Pranay

Sharma

Behind soft wall, hard

nuts to crack

MS N SN

The paper reported that Musharraf and Singh agreed that the LoC should be softer to let

the people travel. But Pakistan President said this would only be a temporary measure

and the LoC could not be converted into a permanent border. India insisted that

boundaries could not be redrawn. A joint statement contained several steps that will

enhance contacts between divided Kashmiri families and promote trade and cultural

exchange. They (Singh and Musharraf) determined that the “peace process was now

irreversible.”229 In another story Pranay Sharma said India and Pakistan agreed to work

towards a “soft border” in Kashmir but doubts remained on how long it could endure as a

viable option to settle the main dispute.

4.7.4- Deccan Herald

Deccan Herald is published by The Printers (Mysore) Private Limited set up by K N

Guruswamy in 1948. The group also publishes Prajavani, Sudha and Mayura from it forte

Karnataka. It caters to sizeable audience in the state and helps to understand the level of

interest in Pakistan-India conflict from that region. Its coverage deals with the period of

July 9-13, 2006.

July 9

There was no Pakistan related story.

July 10


229 Pranay Sharma, “People dot line of peace,” The Telegraph, April 19, 2005.

300

Table 4.107: Deccan Herald Coverage on July 10

Sr

No


1 Islamabad UNI 45 die in PIA plane

crash

OS N SN

2 New Delhi PTI India, Pak, Iran to

discuss pricing of

pipeline gas in Aug

AS P SP

The main Pakistan related story was about PIA Fokker crash in Multan which killed 45

people. Another story was by PTI that officials of India, Pakistan and Iran will meet to

resolve the issue of natural gas price that Tehran wants to sell to the South Asian

countries.

July 11

The pattern of coverage was same as the previous day, as just two stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai PTI

138 dead, 257 injured

in Mumbai serial

blasts

MS C EN

2 Srinagar IANS Five killed as serial

blasts rock Srinagar

MS C EN

The main story was about Mumbai train serial blasts that killed more than 100 people.

Though, Pakistan was not mentioned in the news but terrorism in India was sure to drag

in Pakistan. Another bombing story was by IANS news agency which said that five

people were killed and 26 injured in four blasts in Srinagar.

July 12

It was next day to the Mumbai train attack and there should have been more stories but

the paper restricted its coverage to three stories.

301


Sr

No


1 New Delgi K

Subrahmanya

Rattled UPA govt

suspects LeT link

AS C EN

2 New Delhi PTI India will win war

against terror: PM

OS C N

3 New Delhi PTI Govt claims some

"leads" on serial

blasts

OS C N

The blast in Srinagar and Mumbai rattled the Congress government which immediately

held an important meeting. “We have reasons to believe that some Kashmir terrorist

group, possibly Lashkar-e-Taiba may have had a hand in the Mumbai blasts,” an official

source told the newspaper.230 PTI reported Manmohan Singh as saying that India will win

the war against terrorism. Separately, PTI said that government had claimed it had some

information about the people behind the Mumbai train terror.

July 13

The coverage peaked on the last day of coverage period with five stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi PTI

Public transport

system a weak spot,

Dar told his LeT

bosses

AS C N

2 Islamabad PTI Pak planned Kargil

even before

Vajpayee's visit:

Musharraf

MS C N

3 New Delhi DHNS India may review

CBMs with Pak

OS C N

4 New Delhi DHNS Pakistan would realise

this. No one can make

India kneel: PM

OS C N

5 Mumbai PTI Extradite Dawood:

Advani

OS C N

230 K Subrahmanya, “Rattled UPA govt suspects LeT link,” Deccan Herald, July 12, 2006.

302

The paper had a report by PTI that the Mumbai train blasts seems to be part of a plan by

militant outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba to target public transport system during the peak hours to

cause maximum casualty. There was a PTI story from Islamabad that President

Musharraf said in a TV interview that Kargil operation was planned long before the then

Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee was preparing his Lahore visit in February

1999.

The paper also reported that Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran told a news channel that

India could be compelled to review some of the CBMs with Pakistan in the aftermath of

the terrorist strikes. Separately, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was quoted as saying

that India will win the war against terror and “no one can make India kneel”. Opposition

leader and senior BJP leader L.K. Advani said that the underworld don Dawood Ibrahim

should be brought to India for trial.

4.8- Electronic Media and Composite Dialogue

The launch of composite dialogue peace process in 2004 was a unique moment in the

conflict-ridden history of Pakistan and India.

Suhasini Haidar said that the start of the bilateral dialogue was received well in the Indian

press but media was more cautious than optimistic because in 2001, it went out of way to

create the hype for talks and when they failed, eventually media was blamed for it. “By

2004 there was a realisation that media should have its own editorial calls…The fact was

that media continued to show the positive side of the engagements…Media in general

was positive,” she said about the coverage after the start of peace process.231 Haidar also

accused governments of India and Pakistan for using media for their vested interests. She

said Pakistan government selectively leaked stories about the peace process while Indian

government withheld information about it. They selectively engaged the media to build a

narrative for peace through the media. “My opinion is that governments play the media

what they are.”

She said the composite dialogue got good coverage till Mumbai attack happened and

everything changed. She recalled that hours before Mumbai, Foreign Minister Shah


303

Mahmood Qureshi and his counterpart Parnab Mukherjee held a press conference in

Delhi and talked about the possibility of Indian cricket team touring Pakistan.

Commenting on the Indian media coverage of various official interactions and talks under

the composite dialogue process from 2004 to 2008, she said the coverage in India “was

extremely positive but all changed after the Mumbai attack.”

Karan Thapar as usual was very cautious in responding to the question about media

reaction to the launch of peace process but said that it was welcomed in India. “From

what I can recall - and my memory is both faint and could be wrong - the media

welcomed the launch of the composite dialogue in 2004 because it viewed the January

2004 statement as a small but significant step forward as well as a 'victory' for India,” he

said.232

Shujaat Bukhari said that the composite dialogue was welcomed as it provided a chance

for peace. The process was mainly a success because of support by the people. He said

people on both sides stood with the peace process between India and Pakistan and

essentially people of Kashmir had a lot of hope from it. He also said that media was

positive about the start of talks. “I think media played a very positive role in pushing

forward that process,” he said.

Bukhari mentioned that the dialogue was derailed due to the Mumbai attack in 2008. The

incident of Mumbai provided an opportunity to the media to play against the peace

process. He said it was unfortunate as Mumbai was a very bad attack and nobody

approved of it, not even the people of Kashmir as it killed the innocent people. He urged

that media should come out of the Mumbai incident. “But at the same time to continue to

crack the whip around that particular incident and not to contribute to a process which

would again bring Pakistan and India on a table, I do not think that is responsible media,”

he said.

He also said that the Mumbai incident is actually brought into focus at every occasion for

peace and smaller incidents on the LoC are blown out of proportion. “If you look at the

news rooms of certain TV channels in India, it seems like India and Pakistan are at war. I

232 Thapar, e-mail.

304

think in that sense media is actually playing a very bad role,” he said. He also appreciated

media for giving positive coverage to the bilateral talks during the composite dialogue.

He said that some anti-peace elements were present and will always remain active but

they should be ignored.

4.9- Print Media and Mumbai Attack

The two papers used for the coverage of Mumbai attack are The Hindu and the Times of

India. First coverage by The Hindu is presented.

4.9.1- The Hindu

The coverage period is from Nov 19 to Dec 3, 2008.

November 19

Just one story was published. Nirupama Subramanian reported that cross LoC trade was

in trouble due to lack of facilities on the border. The trade had started on October 21.

Table 4.111: The Hindu Coverage on November 19

Sr

No


1 Islamabad Nirupama

Subramanian

Cross-LoC trade runs

into problems

MS C N

November 20

The paper did not publish any relevant story.

November 21

Nirupama Subramanian reported that Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani said he would

talk to Manmohan Singh to ensure that Indian cricket team would visit Pakistan in 2009.


Sr

No



Subramanian

Gilani to speak to

Manmohan

MS C SN

305

November 22

The paper did not publish any story about Pakistan.

November 23

There were two stories in the paper related to Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Sandeep

Dikshit

I am for no-first use

of nuclear weapons:

Zardari

MS P EP

2 Islamabad Corresp. Al-Qaeda leader

killed in Pakistan

AS C SN

Sandeep Dikshit reported Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari said that Pakistan would

work on to follow a no-first-use policy on the nuclear weapons. “We will most certainly

not use it first,” Zardari said.233 It was the first time that any Pakistani leader had given

assurance about not resorting to nuclear attack in case of war with India. There was a

report from Islamabad that al-Qaeda linked Rashid Rauf, who was said to be behind the

2006 trans-Atlantic plane bombing plot, was among the five al-Qaeda militants killed in a

US drone strike in Pakistan.

November 24

The coverage was limited to just two pieces.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Sandeep

Dikshit

Musharraf on visit to

the U.K.

OS N SP


Subramanian

“Take up prisoners’

issue with Delhi”

MS C SN

233 Sandeep Dikshit, “I am for no-first use of nuclear weapons: Zardari,” The Hindu, November 23, 2008.

306

There was a report that former President Musharraf left for a week-long trip to Britain,

his first visit abroad since he resigned in August. FM Shah Mehmood Qureshi was going

to India and Human Rights Commission of Pakistan asked him to take the issue of

prisoners with India.

November 25

It was the day before the Mumbai attack and there was just one story.


Sr

No



Subramanian

India may share

Samjhauta probe

details with Pakistan

AS C SP

Nirupama Subramanian reported that Indian Home Secretary Madhukar Gupta arrived in

Pakistan for talks under the composite dialogue process.

November 26

The day of the attack saw just one story. PTI reported that Pakistan released 101 Indian

prisoners as goodwill gesture on the eve of talks between the interior secretaries.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI Pakistan releases 101

Indian prisoners

OS P SP

November 27

It was the day when full coverage of November 26 started. There were several terror-

linked stories but Pakistan did not surface in most of them.


Sr

No


307

1 Mumbai Meena Menon

& Rahi

Gaikwad

Rash of terror attacks

in Mumbai

MS C EN


Subramanian

India, Pakistan seek

to ease visa regime

MS P SP

3 New Delhi Sandeep

Dikshit

“No third-party

mediation”

OS C SN

The main story of the day was about terror attack in Mumbai which killed and injured

scores of people. Though Pakistan did not figure in the first day but the scale of terror

was alarming and could harm the ties. As India was reeling under the attacks, Nirupama

Subramanian filed from Islamabad that India and Pakistan interior secretaries decided in

their two-day talks to ease the visa regime. But the positive spirit of the meeting

evaporated in the smoke and fire of Mumbai as the future interactions were cancelled.

There was a story by Sandeep Dikshit about the meeting between Parnab Mukherjee and

Shah Mahmood Qureshi in New Delhi. They discussed various issues and Pakistan urged

India to let its cricket team tour Pakistan. The paper also reported that India said there

was no room for third party mediation in the Indo-Pak relations.

November 28

The number of relevant stories increased after India started blaming Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Meena

Menon

Fierce fighting rages

in Mumbai

MS C EN

2 New Delhi Praveen

Swami

Lashkar was planning

fidayeen attacks in

Mumbai

MS C N

3 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

“Full-scale war, let’s

stay united”

OS C SN

4 Mumbai Praveen

Swami

Three Lashkar

fidayeen captured

AS C EN

5 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

Manmohan talks

tough, warns

neighbours

OS C N

6 Mumbai Praveen

Swami

Lashkar tested sea

route to Mumbai in

AS C N

308

2007 dry run


Subramanian

Militants want to

destabilise peace:

Pakistan

MS C N

Meena Menon reported that fierce fighting was still going on in Mumbai as death toll had

risen to 125. Praveen Swami reported from Delhi that LeT was involved in Mumbai

attack. It was first indirect indictment of Pakistan. Advani termed the attack as a full-

scale war and urged unity to face the challenge. Swami in another story reported police

sources saying that Pakistan-based LeT was involved in the attack. “Police sources said

an injured terrorist captured during the fighting at the Taj Mahal hotel was tentatively

identified as Ajmal Amir Kamal, a resident of Faridkot in Pakistan’s Punjab province.”234

For the first time officially Manmohan Singh said that the group involved in the attack

was based outside India. Parveen Swami reported that LeT men had tested the sea route

in 2007 when they sent eight suicide bombers from Karachi to Mumbai on a commercial

fishing boat. Nirupama reported from Pakistan that the statement by Manmohan that the

attackers came from a neighbouring country spread gloom in Pakistan where people were

worried about the future of peace dialogue.

November 29

The coverage was lower than the previous day but it was still good in terms of numbers.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Bureau

Report

Endgame in Mumbai,

death toll could be

200

MS C EN


Subramanian

Decision to send ISI

chief to India draws

flak

MS C N


Subramanian

ISI chief coming to

India at the earliest

OS P SP

4 Mumbai Praveen

Swami

Terrorists used

hijacked vessel

AS C N

234 Praveen Swami, “Three Lashkar fidayeen captured,” The Hindu, November 28, 2008.

309


Subramanian

We will comment

after formal order:

Army

OS C N

6 New Delhi Gargi Parsai Qureshi: no training

camps in Pakistan

OS C N

In the main story the paper reported that the fighting ended with the forces killing the

attackers. The death toll was reported as closer to 200. Nirupma reported that Pakistan’s

decision to send ISI chief to India had drawn flak from the opposition. Later the decision

was reversed. The Hindu’s Islamabad correspondent reported that the ISI chief was going

to India to exchange information about the attacks. Parveen Swami said the terrorist used

hijacked vessels to travel to India, according to the information gleaned from arrested

militant Ajmal Kasab. The controversy about whether ISI chief will go to India was

deepening as Pakistan army was not happy with the decision. Nirupama reported that

military spokesman refused to share his thoughts on the issue. Gargi Parsai reported that

Pakistan Foreign Minister Qureshi, who was visiting India, said there was no terrorist

training camp in Pakistan.

November 30

Five stories were published on the day.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Praveen

Swami

Pointed intelligence

warnings preceded

attacks

AS C N

2 Islamabad Report Zardari: if evidence

points to any group in

my country, I shall

take the strictest

action

MS P SP


Subramanian

Our hands are clean:

Pakistan

OS C N

4 Chennai Special

Corresp.

Too early for

Directors General to

meet: Zardari

OS C N

5 New Delhi Neena Vyas Pakistan’s flip-flop

no surprise, says BJP

OS C N

310

Praveen Swami reported quoting sources that intelligence services delivered at least three

precise warnings that a major terrorist attack on Mumbai was imminent. The agencies

had also warned that LeT will carry out the attack. The paper also published complete

interview of President Zardari with Karan Thapar. The Pakistani leader promised action

if evidence provided about the involvement of any militant group. Niruapma

Subramanian reported that Shah Mahmood Qureshi said Pakistan had nothing to hide on

the issue of terrorism as “our hands are clean”.

Separately, the paper quoted Zardari that the confusion over whether the Director-

General Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was going to India is the result of a

“miscommunication” during a telephonic talk he had with Manmohan Singh. Neena Vyas

said BJP hit at Pakistan’s flip-flop over sending the ISI chief to India.

December 1

The high coverage returned and seven stories were carried by the paper.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai Praveen

Swami

Terror mail analysis

supports claim of

Lashkar authorship

AS C EN

2 Mumbai Praveen

Swami

Lashkar honed

fidayeen skills in

Srinagar attacks

AS C N

3 Mumbai Praveen

Swami

No evidence so far of

local involvement

AS C N

4 Chennai T.

Ramakrishnan

“South Asia must be

united against terror”

OS N SP

5 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

CPI(M): take up with

UNSC evidence of

links in Pakistan

OS C N

6 New Delhi Gargi Parsai OS C N


Subramanian

MS C N

Parveen Swami in his lead said that analysis of an email showed that it was written by

LeT which was hiding its identity by posing as Mujahideen Hyderabad Deccan. The

311

Indian sleuths had clear indications that some foreign group was trying to hide under a

fake façade. In another report, the same reporter said that the suicide attackers had honed

their killing skills in Kashmir where they carried out several suicidal attacks. Swami filed

another front page story that so far police had not found any clue about any involvement

of the locals in the attack. There was a story that Sri Lankan Health Minister Nimal

Siripala de Silva said in Chennai that South Asia should be united against terrorism. The

Communist Party of India (Marxist) said India should take up with the UN Security

Council the evidence about links in Pakistan of the persons who committed the Mumbai

outrage.

December 2

Pakistan-related stories were finding more space.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Special

Corresp.

India serves

demarche on Pakistan

OS C EN

2 Mumbai Parveen

Swami

A journey into the

Lashkar

AS C EN

3 Mumbai Parveen

Swami

Mumbai massacre

story unfolds in

terrorist’s

interrogation

AS C EN


Subramanian

Composite dialogue:

India presses the

pause button

OS C N

5 New Delhi Sandeep

Dikshit

Rice: Pakistan’s

cooperation crucial

OS C SN

6 New Delhi Sandeep

Dikshit

Rice compliments

India, Pakistan

OS N SP


Subramanian

MS C N

India summoned High Commissioner Shahid Malik and served a demarche that

Islamabad should take “strong action” against those responsible for the Mumbai

312

strikes.235 Swami wrote a detailed profile of Ajmal Kasab, showing that he was a

Pakistani recruited by LeT. In another story, Swami gave details about how Kasab came

to Mumbai from Karachi. Nirupama reported that the immediate fallout of the Mumbai

attack was that India suspended the five years old composite dialogue.236 In the same

story the paper patched a PTI dispatch that Pakistan rejected the charges.

Sandeep Dikshit reported that US President George Bush asked Secretary of State

Condoleezza Rice to travel to India. The visit took place against the backdrop of Rice

asking Pakistan to follow the evidence from the terror strike “wherever it leads” and to do

that in the most “committed and firmest possible way.” In another story Dikshit said Rice

complimented India and Pakistan for keeping the line of communication open despite the

tension.

December 3



Sr

No


1 Mumbai Rahi

Gaikwad

Terrorists came from

Pakistan: Mumbai

police chief

OS C EN


Subramanian

Pakistan offers “joint

investigating

mechanism”

OS C SN


Subramanian

Defend Pakistan’s

honour: all-party

meet

OS C N

Rahi Gaikwad in the front page report said Mumbai Police Commissioner Hasan Gafoor

confirmed that the 10 terrorists involved in the attack came from Karachi.237 Nirupama

filed from Islamabad that Pakistan offered joint investigations. In another report

Nirupama said Pakistan held all-party conference to deal with the post-Mumbai situation.

235 “India serves demarche on Pakistan,” The Hindu, December 2, 2008. 236 Nirupama Subramanian, “Composite dialogue: India presses the pause button,” The Hindu, December

2, 2008. 237 Rahi Gaikwad, “Terrorist came from Pakistan, Mumbai police chief,” The Hindu, December 3, 2003.

313

4.9.2- The Times of India

The Times of India has been selected as the second newspaper for the coverage of the

Mumbai attack. The paper was also used as the second paper for the coverage of

parliament attack of 2001. The coverage period is from Nov 19 to Dec 3 in 2008.

November 19

There was just one story on the first day of coverage. PTI reported that a suspected US

missile hit a village in Bannu district and killed six people.

Table 4.124: The Times of India Coverage on November 19

Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI

Suspected US missile

strike kills six in

Pakistan

MS N SN

November 20

The coverage was better in numbers as four Pakistan related stories were published.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi TNN

With Sonia help, Pak

boy gets new liver

MS P EP

2 New Delhi TNN HC stays deportation

of 67 Pakistanis

OS C SN

3 Islamabad PTI US missile attacks in

Pakistan 'intolerable':

Gilani

OS N SP

4 Ahmedabad PTI 'Ahmedabad blasts

carried out on the

direction of Pak's

Amir Raza Khan'

AS C N

The paper had a detailed report about a 15-year old Pakistan boy Mubeen Ahmed, who

underwent a liver transplant in India with the financial support of Congress top leader

Sonia Gandhi. It was a rare good story to highlight the positive side of relations. In

314

another story, Delhi High Court stayed the decision to deport 67 jailed Pakistanis. PTI

reported that Prime Minister Gilani condemned the US missile attack, which had killed

six people a day before. PTI reported that police claimed that a militants Amir Raza

Khan was based in Pakistan and had directed some militants in India to carry out bomb

blasts of July 26 in Ahmedabad.

November 21



Sr

No


1 Moga PTI

Pak teen with

Bollywood dreams

freed

OS P P

2 Washington PTI China-Pak N-

cooperation needs

NSG approval: US

OS C SN

PTI reported that a Pakistan teenager, Nasir Sultan, who crossed the international border

to enter the Bollywood, was released from the Juvenile Home at Faridkot for his return.

In its dispatch from Washington, PTI said US asked China to halt its plan to construct

two more nuclear reactors in Pakistan as it would require "consensus" approval from the

NSG.

November 22

There were three stories in the paper.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI

Pak woos ‘friends’ to

stop US strikes

AS N SP

2 New Delhi TNN India hopes for replies

on Kabul blast…

AS C N

3 New Delhi PTI Pak will not use N-

weapons first: Zardari

OS P EP

315

PTI reported from Pakistan that it had launched an "aggressive diplomatic initiative"

aimed at taking into confidence "all friendly countries" to counter a series of US missile

strikes on its territory. The paper also had a report that Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood

Qureshi will be in Delhi on November 26 for talks with counterpart Pranab Mukherjee.

Informed sources told the paper that India would seek information from Pakistan about

bombing of its Kabul embassy. It reported that President Zardari said in a video

conference that Pakistan will not use nuclear weapons first against India. It was important

as Pakistani does not follow ‘no-first-use’ policy.

November 23

Four Pak- India relation related stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Karachi PTI

250 pilgrims from

Pakistan visiting

temples in India

MS P P

2 Islamabad PTI Pakistan: ISI's

political wing

disbanded

AS C N

3 Islamabad PTI Bomb targets NATO

convoy in Pakistan en

route to Afghanistan

MS N SN

4 New Delhi PTI Patil nails Bangladesh,

Pak on terror

OS C N

PTI reported from Karachi that over 250 Hindus from Pakistan's southern Sindh province

were going for a pilgrimage to temples and shrines in India. PTI reported an official

telling Dawn News TV that the political wing of Inter-Services Intelligence agency,

which allegedly used to spy on politicians and rig elections, had been disbanded. In

another story from Pakistan PTI said a NATO convoy going to Afghanistan was hit by a

roadside bomb in Khyber tribal region. Home Minister Shivraj Patil said in reference to

Pakistan and Bangladesh that terrorism can be controlled if some countries refused to

shelter and aid the terrorist outfits.

316

November 24

The coverage was low to two stories.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI

Pak to release 101

Indian prisoners

OS P P

2 Lahore PTI India would make Pak

barren by 2014, says

Pak official

OS C EN

PTI said from Islamabad that Pakistan will release 101 Indian prisoners, a majority of

them fishermen, as a goodwill gesture ahead of a meeting between the interior secretaries

of the two countries. The same newswire said Pakistan Indus Water Commissioner

Jamaat Ali Shah said that India would make Pakistan a barren land in the next six years

by blocking its water through construction of dams in violation of the Indus Water

Treaty.

November 25

There were only two relevant stories.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Vishwa

Mohan

India to press Pak for

deportation of blasts'

mastermind

AS C N

2 Islamabad PTI Pak frees 101 Indian

prisoners including 99

fishermen

OS P P

Vishwa Mohan said quoting sources that India will ask Pakistan to deport Karachi-based

gang lord Aamir Raza Khan identified by Gujarat police as mastermind of the Indian

Mujahideen (IM) outfit. PTI following the last day story reported that Pakistan released

101 Indian prisoners as a goodwill gesture.

317

November 26

Only one relevant news item appeared in the paper on the day of attack. PTI reported that

in tit-for-tat defacing of government-run websites of the two countries, Indian and

Pakistani hackers are targeting major organisations.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI

Indian, Pak hackers

deface govt websites

MS C SN

November 27

Six stories appeared a day after the attack.


Sr

No


1 Washington PTI

US, Pakistan

condemn Mumbai

attacks

OS N SP

2 Mumbai PTI Mumbai attackers

may be Pakistani

nationals

AS C EN

3 Attari Yudhvir

Rana

Pakistan releases 101

Indian prisoners

OS P P

4 Islamabad PTI Pak denies any role

in Mumbai terror

attacks

OS N SP


Rajghatta

Mumbai attack: Pak

role under scrutiny

MS C EN

6 Islamabad PTI Pak top judge in a

row over daughter's

'high marks'

MS N SP

PTI reported that President-elect Barack Obama supported India to "root out" terrorist

networks while President George Bush said US stood with India, as the international

community denounced terror strikes in Mumbai. Pakistan expressed shock over the

attacks and offered "complete cooperation". PTI quoted sources saying that investigations

318

pointed to the involvement of at least some Pakistanis in the attacks. Amidst gloom, there

was positive news by Yudhvir Rana that Pakistan had released 101 Indian prisoners, days

after India sent home the 14-year-old Pakistani boy who had crossed into India to fulfil

his dream of meeting Shah Rukh Khan. PTI reported that Pakistan Defence Minister

Ahmed Mukhtar said his country had no role in the terror attacks as suspicions were

growing about involvement of Pakistan-based terrorists.

Chidanand Rajghatta reported from Washington that role of Pakistan was under scanner

regarding Mumbai terror attacks. “Strategic gurus and security analysts in the US and

from across the world are examining Pakistan's role in terrorism following yet another

terror episode in India ending with fingers pointed at its widely-reviled neighbour.”238

PTI reported that Pakistan Supreme Court chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar was at the

centre of a controversy over the revision of the marks of his daughter in a high school

examination to enable her pursue a course in medicine.

November 28

Eight stories were published on the day.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi TNN

Pak may be pushing

hardened jihadis

MS C EN

2 Mumbai PTI Modi says Pak has

violated UN code

OS C N

3 Jodhpur PTI Initial information

suggests Pak hand in

Mumbai attack:

Pranab

OS C EN

4 Islamabad PTI Pak PM agrees to send

ISI chief to Delhi on

Manmohan Singh's

summons

OS P EP

5 Jammu PTI Pak troops violate

ceasefire again: Army

AS C EN

238 Chidanand Rajghatta, “Mumbai attack: Pak role under scrutiny,” The Times of India, November 27,

2008.

319

6 Islamabad PTI Mumbai attacks: Pak

media cautions against

blame game

MS N SP

7 Beijing PTI Mumbai attacks to

hurt Indo-Pak ties:

Pranab Mukherjee

OS C N

8 Islamabad PTI Pak opposition slams

govt's plan to send ISI

chief to India

MS C N

The paper in an analytical story titles as “Pak may be pushing hardened jihadis”, said that

the attacks carried out by the terrorists in Mumbai were clearly the handiwork of jihadis

from across the border. Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi held Pakistan responsible

for the attacks. External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters, "According to

preliminary information, some elements in Pakistan are responsible for Mumbai terror

attacks." It was for the first time that India directly accused Pakistan. In a major

development, Prime Minister Gilani accepted a request by Manmohan Singh to send the

Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief to India for sharing of information about the attack

in Mumbai, reported PTI.

As tension was going up, PTI reported from Jammu that Pakistan troops violated

ceasefire in Kashmir. The news agency reported from Islamabad that local media urged

India that Pakistan should not be held responsible for the attacks and the peace process

should continue. The paper reported that External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee told

his visiting Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi that he hoped Islamabad would

take "immediate action" with regard to the terrorist attacks. PTI reported that the

opposition parties in Pakistan slammed the PPP-led government for its decision to send

the ISI chief to India.

November 29

The coverage was higher and there were seven stories related to Pakistan.


Sr

No


1 Ahmedabad TNN Kuber was seized by AS N SN

320

Pakistan in 2004


Rajghatta

Glib Pakistan talks its

way out of trouble

MS C N

3 Mumbai TNN Pakistani attacker

arrested

MS C EN

4 Jammu PTI India, Pak should

fight terrorism

together: Farooq

OS P P

5 New Delhi TNN Crowds cheer

operations with anti-

Pak slogans

OS C N

6 Islamabad PTI Pak to send

representative instead

of ISI chief to India

OS C N

7 Islamabad Agencies Pak says not involved

in Mumbai attacks, to

help in probe

OS C N

The paper reported that the fishing trawler suspected to have been hijacked by the

terrorists in the Arabian Sea to reach Mumbai, was last spotted off Jakhau in Kutch. The

Times US correspondent, Chidanand Rajghatta, reported that Pakistan ambassador

Hussain Haqqani was making efforts to offset the impact of the “universal disgust and

opprobrium” for the attacks in Mumbai and their link to Islamabad. There was another

important story about arrest of Amir Ajmal Kasab, a Pakistani national, who was part of

the group that attacked Mumbai.

PTI reported from Jammu that at a time when there was mounting evidence that the

attack on Mumbai was launched from Pakistani soil, former J&K Chief Minister Farooq

Abdullah “sprang in defence of Pakistan, ruling out Islamabad's complicity” and instead

suggesting the two countries come together to fight terrorism. Pranab Mukherjee was

reported telling his counterpart Qureshi that Pakistan should take immediate steps with

regard to the attacks on Mumbai. PTI reported Pakistan decided to send a representative

of ISI to help India instead of its chief Lt. Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha. Foreign Minister

Qureshi who came from India said Pakistan will extend "full cooperation" to India

following the attack.

321

November 30

Five stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad Reporter

Empathy and fear of

fallout in Pakistan

MS N P

2 New Delhi TNN India has tell-tale

evidence of Pak

connection, say

agencies

AS C EN

3 New Delhi TNN CPM wants govt to

approach UN with

proof of Pak

involvement

OS C SN

4 Karachi PTI Pak may relocate

100,000 army men to

border

MS C N

5 New Delhi TNN Wary Pak army steps

up vigil

AS C N

The paper carried a feature by a Pakistani journalist- titled as “Empathy and fear of

fallout in Pakistan”, the writer said Pakistanis are traditionally phlegmatic when bombs

go off on Indian soil but it is different this time round. “There is grief, disgust and alarm

with the local TV channels providing updated, minute-by-minute detail of the Mumbai

mayhem and local newspapers offering extensive coverage of the events.”239

The paper said quoting sources that a satellite phone recovered from one of the rafts used

by militants “yielded tell-tale evidence of the direct involvement of the top hierarchy of

ISI-backed Lashkar-e-Taiba in the Mumbai mayhem.” The leftist CPM asked the Indian

government to move UN once the evidence of Pakistan’s involvement was complete. PTI

said Pakistan was planning to relocate around 100,000 military personnel from its restive

border area with Afghanistan in case of escalation with India. The paper also reported

that Pakistani forces stepped up operational readiness in the wake of the terrorist strike in

Mumbai.

239 “Empathy and fear for fallout in Pakistan,” The Times of India, November 30, 2008.

322

December 1

The paper published nine stories.


Sr

No


1 Mumbai PTI

Pakistan former

human rights minister

donates blood for

Mumbai attack

victims

MS P P

2 Islamabad PTI 10 killed in Pakistani

suicide attack

OS N SN

3 New Delhi Indrani

Bagchi

India in fix over how

to handle Pak

MS N SN


Rajghatta

US, India face Pak

blackmail on terror

MS C EN

5 New Delhi PTI India summons Pak

envoy, issues protest

note

OS C EN

6 Islamabad PTI Pak responds,

summons Indian high

commissioner

OS C EN

7 Islamabad PTI Tribal leaders vow to

support Pak govt

against India

MS C N


Rajghatta

Bush sends Condi

Rice to India to

manage response

towards Pak

OS N SP

9 Islamabad PTI Pak army to stop

operation against

local militants

MS C EN

PTI reported that Ansar Burney, a former Human Rights Minister of Pakistan, went India

to donate blood for the Mumbai attack victims. The new agency filed from Islamabad

that at least 10 people were killed and 38 injured when a suicide bomber rammed his

explosive-laden vehicle into a check post in the Swat region of Pakistan. Indrani Bagchi

wrote India was in deep dilemma how to handle Pakistan in the wake of the terrorist

attacks. Chidanand Rajghatta in his report from US said that like India, America was also

323

suffering Pakistan blackmail on terrorism. India summoned Pakistan High Commissioner

and given a demarche to take action against the terrorist responsible for attacks.240

Pakistan hit back by summoning Indian High Commissioner and rejected Indian protest

and demands.

PTI reported that Pakistan’s tribal elders pledged support for army in case of attack by

India. “The outlawed Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan too offered unconditional support to the

Pakistani government if hostilities broke out with India.” In another development US

President Bush sent his Foreign Secretary to India. Separately, PTI said Pakistan army

chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani told President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani, if

India escalated tensions, then Pakistan would have to move troops from the tribal areas.

December 2

There were six stories in the paper as the coverage period was winding down.


Sr

No


1 New Delhi Nandita

Sengupta

Pak TV channel says

26/11 hatched by

Hindu Zionists

MS C N

2 New Delhi TNN Terror mail routed

through Pakistan's

Lahore

AS C EN

3 Washington PTI Pakistan, an

international

migraine: Albright

OS C N

4 Beijing Saibal

Dasgupta

China quizzes

Pakistan over

Mumbai attack

AS C SN

5 Mumbai PTI Arrested terrorist

admits to be a

Pakistani: Mumbai

police

OS C EN

6 Islamabad PTI Musharraf blames

Pak govt. for tensions

in ties with India

OS N SP

240 “India summons Pak envoy, issues protest note,” The Times of India, December 1, 2008.

324

The paper reported that the Indian agencies tracing the source of the email sent by an

outfit calling itself Deccan Mujahedeen to a TV channel, claiming responsibility for

attacks, found that the text was routed through Lahore before travelling to different

locations through anonymous "remailer" service. Former US Secretary of State

Madeleine Albright said Pakistan was a source of global worry due to issues like

terrorism and nukes and she termed it as “international migraine”. Saibal Dasgupta

reported from Beijing that security agencies in China were seeking from Pakistan details

about the possible links between the attack in Mumbai and terrorist organisations based

in Pakistan.

Mumbai Police Commissioner Hasan Gafoor told media that the lone survivor attacker,

Ajmal Kasab, admitted that they were a group of 10 and travelled from Karachi for the

attack. Police also said that they were trained by “ex-army personnel”. Nandita Sengupta

reported Pakistan TV aired interview of Zahid Hamid that Mumbai attack was carried out

by the Hindu Zionists. PTI reported that ex-President Musharraf accused Pakistan's ruling

administration for the tensions with India in the wake of the Mumbai terror attacks.

December 3

The coverage peaked on the last day of selected coverage as 16 stories were published.


Sr

No


1 Islamabad PTI

Pakistan will not

hand over terror

suspects: Reports

MS C N

2 New Delhi PTI Pakistan must

cooperate with India:

Rice

OS N SN

3 Islamabad PTI Pakistan to acquire

100 air-to-surface

missiles from Brazil

MS C SN

4 Islamabad Agencies Pak says will reply to

India's 'hand over

fugitives' demand

OS C N

5 BHUJ/

MUMBAI

Anand

McNair &

Coast Guard detains

Pak fishing boat,

AS C N

325

Yogesh Naik seven held

6 Mumbai Bharati

Dubey

26/11 fallout: Pak TV

actors feel the heat

MS N SP

7 New Delhi TNN India briefs envoys of

select nations on

attack, says Pak

responsible

OS C N

8 New Delhi TNN McCain urges Pak to

act against terror

groups

OS N SN

9 New Delhi Himanshi

Dhawan

LeT adopted an

agenda for global

jihad: Pak diplomat

said in article

MS C N

10 Washington PTI Next terror attack on

US will originate in

Pak: Report

MS C EN

11 New Delhi Indrani

Bagchi &

Sachin

Parashar

India doesn't rule out

military option

against Pak

AS C EN

12 New Delhi TNN India not interested in

Pak offer of joint

probe

AS C N

13 Bangalore TNN Pak-trained ultras

forced to operate in

India

AS C N

14 Islamabad PTI Five killed in Pak

suicide bombing

OS N SN

15 New Delhi PTI Need for direct and

tough action from

Pak: US

OS C SN


Rajghatta

US sets stage for

strikes if Pak does not

act

MS C EN

PTI said Pakistan media reported that the government will not hand over 20 “terrorists”

wanted by India. Visiting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in India that Pakistan

must cooperate to tackle the issue of terrorism. PTI reported that Pakistan will buy 100

MAR-1 medium-range missiles manufactured by a Brazilian firm, Mectron. The paper

also had a story based on agencies input that Pakistan will frame its official response to

the Indian demand of handing over 20 militants hiding in the country. Anand McNair &

326

Yogesh Naik reported that Indian Coast Guard detained a Pakistani fishing vessel at Kori

Creek off the Gulf of Kutch and took into custody seven Pakistani nationals.

Bharati Dubey reported from Mumbai that the tension in the ties of two nations was

taking toll on Pakistani actors seeking work in the Bollywood. The paper also reported

that India briefed countries who lost citizens in the Mumbai attack that Pakistan was

responsible for the terror. US former presidential candidate Senator John McCain paid an

unscheduled visit to India to express "sorrow and solidarity". Himanshi Dhawan reported

that Pakistan envoy in US, Hussain Haqqani, said the real issue was Kashmir and

terrorism was just a symptom of this conflict. PTI reported that a high-powered bipartisan

US Congressional commission said that any next terror attack in the US will originate

from Pakistan. "If one has to map terrorism and weapons of mass destruction today, all

roads would intersect in Pakistan," the paper quoted the report "World at Risk".241

In another story, the paper reported that India said military option was available to deal

with the threat of terrorism from Pakistan. There was another report that India was not

interested in Pakistan’s offer of joint probe. The paper also reported that the Indian

youths trapped for militancy by Pakistan were disenchanted as they were forced to fight

in India instead of a front of their choice. PTI reported from Islamabad that five people

were killed in a suicide bombing. PTI also reported a news conference by Condoleezza

Rice who said Pakistan should take tough actions against militants. Chidanand Rajghatta

wrote from Washington that the US was preparing a stage for internationally-backed

strikes by India against terrorist camps in Pakistan.

4.10- Electronic Media and Mumbai Attacks

The Mumbai attack was shown live by the Indian TV channels. It is believed that by the

time the militants were killed and the situation brought under control, the coverage had

also killed the five-year old peace process.

Suhasini Haidar criticised round-the-clock coverage. “During the attack was saturation

coverage, 72 hours of not-stop coverage…In the first 72 hours, there was no

editorialization as it was about what was going on,” said Haidar, adding that the editorial

241 “Next terror attack on US will originate in Pakistan: Report,” The Times of India, December 3, 2008.

327

call was taken a few days later but by that time the damage had been done. She also said

that the Indian government in the beginning did not point a finger at anyone because it

was not a normal attack and nobody said straight away that Pakistan was responsible, but

the insinuations were there and questions were being asked that who was responsible for

the tragedy. She said that the officials took time to prepare their case.

“But I do remember that on December 5 there was an off-the-record briefing, I could

check but it was National Security Advisor who said that they have evidence that it was

ISI… After that briefing, everything changed,” said she.242

She admitted being conservative to defend media but also said that media always take a

lot of cues from the government, and after the Mumbai incident, it was the government

that called the shots. Haidar said that during the attack most of the coverage was about

the attack but obvious indications were made to refer towards Pakistan. “There was

obvious inference that the attack was carried out by Pakistan. But everybody was in

shock. I do not remember channels specifically saying this.”

She also referred to presence of Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi in India at the

time of the attack who in his best wisdom decided to hold a press conference which she

termed as a disaster. He faced an extremely hostile press. Presumably things have already

gone sour, she said. President Zardari got a hoax call and it was said that Parnab

Mukherjee made the call. Then Pakistan sent a plane to bring back Qureshi. She said that

“none of these events were driven by media” but people were discussing about them. The

idea was that if Pakistan had pulled out its foreign minister so quickly, it showed that

some kind of conflict was imminent. She said once India blamed Pakistan, “media

unleashed” itself.

Karan Thapar said the coverage of the Mumbai attack was the first time when the Indian

media faced such a challenge of coverage and there was a lot of criticism of its tone and

content, particularly the careless or thoughtless revealing of details that should have been

kept secret. There was also criticism of the anchors and their manner and style as well as


328

their lack of control of emotions. The newspapers were more measured than television,

he said.

He said that the media had been skeptical and distrusting of Pakistan since 2008 and

particularly after the David Headley revelations which seemed to the Indian eyes to

confirm some measure of Pakistani state complicity in 2008. “Within this there are

pockets of the media that have more understanding. By and large, however, the media is

and has been skeptical. That could be changing- but I emphasize the word could,” he

said.243

Thapar also said that media had no role in suspension of the composite dialogue. “The

media played no real role in the suspension of dialogue after Mumbai. But certainly the

overall pressure of public opinion, including the media, would have made the

continuation of dialogue impossible,” said he.

Shujaat Bukhari commenting on the electronic media coverage of the Mumbai attack said

that the role of media became target of the critique because of the way the live coverage

was done during the fighting between the militants and the security forces. The main

criticism was that live coverage was also giving directions to the militants on how to

fight. Bukhari termed the electronic media coverage as excessive and denounced it by

saying that “anything being done in excess certainly does not help.”244

He said that the Mumbai attack was a terrible incident but “media should have some sort

of restraint” while covering it. Bukhari complained that the element of restraint was

missing during its coverage and the media is still suffering from this as mere mention of

Mumbai suddenly creates hype for the journalists. He said that even after more than five

years, media is centring the whole debate of ties with Pakistan on the Mumbai issue. “It

shows the power of media which has a role and duty to engage people but it should be in

a positive direction,” he concluded.

243 Thapar, e-mail. 244 Bukhari, interview.

329

Chapter 5

Analysis and Findings

The analysis is divided into two parts: first, print media analysis and second, electronic

media analysis. The print portion is based on the content analysis of the newspapers of

the two countries, whereas the electronic media has been analysed through elite

interviews with professional media practitioners from Pakistan and India.

The technique used for newspapers is mostly quantitative while qualitative technique has

been used for the electronic media. The data has been presented through tables. Graphic

presentation has been used wherever it was necessary. The analysis is followed by the

findings of the study.

5.1- Analysis

The analysis of the media coverage of the Agra Summit, parliament attack, military

standoff, composite dialogue and Mumbai attack is presented below.

5.1.1- The Agra Summit

Dawn published 125 stories during the selected 15-day period of the Agra Summit, with

average 8 stories per day. The coverage peaked around the days of meetings between

Vajpayee and Musharraf. Majority of 53 stories were filed from cities other than

Islamabad and New Delhi, which shows that the paper was taking stories from different

locations. The byline was an issue as only 36 proper byliners were used as compared to

89 non-byliners. The paper properly sourced majority 73 stories, as compared to 14

anonymous items. The pro-conflict stories were 60 as compared to 36 pro-peace and 29

neutral stories. The impact part is almost even with 64 positive stories for Pak-India

relations and 61 negatives ones.

Table 5.1: Dawn Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit

Jul

y

Stori

es

Origin Byline Source Slant Impact

Is

b

Dl

h

Ot

h

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

OS M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

8 10 7 2 1 4 6 6 4 0 2 6 2 4 0 0 1 4 1

330

9 8 1 4 3 1 7 2 4 2 3 2 3 3 2 1 0 2 0

10 6 1 5 0 2 4 5 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 1 0 2 0

11 10 2 3 5 5 5 5 4 1 0 9 1 1 0 0 0 8 1

12 9 1 4 4 2 7 6 3 0 0 5 4 3 1 0 0 5 0

13 9 1 5 3 3 6 6 2 1 3 4 2 3 2 0 0 4 0

14 9 1 5 3 3 6 2 6 1 1 5 3 4 0 0 1 4 0

15 12 0 9 3 3 9 6 2 4 5 4 3 4 4 0 0 2 2

16 11 1 0 10 3 8 6 4 1 3 5 3 3 3 0 2 3 0

17 10 2 1 7 1 9 7 2 1 2 6 2 3 0 0 1 1 5

18 8 3 1 4 3 5 5 2 1 3 2 3 2 4 0 0 2 0

19 6 2 1 3 3 3 4 1 1 4 1 1 1 3 1 0 1 0

20 6 3 1 2 0 6 5 1 0 3 2 1 2 2 0 0 2 0

21 6 2 2 2 1 5 5 0 1 4 2 1 3 1 0 0 1 1

22 5 1 2 2 2 3 3 2 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 3 1

Tot

al

12 5 28 45 52 36 89 73 38 1

4

3

6

6

0

2

9

3

8

2

3

3 6 4

4

11

Isb: Islamabad

Dlh: New Delhi

Oth: Other cities

Known: Clear byline

Unknown: Staff report etc./agencies

OS: Open Official source

MS: Mix source

AS: Anonymous source

P: Pro-peace

C: Pro-conflict

N: Neutral

SP: Slightly positive (for Pak-India ties)

P: Positive


SN: Slightly Negative (for Pak-India ties)

N: Negative


331

The Nation published 144 stories during the selected period. It shows that the paper was

publishing about 10 stories per day, which was higher than Dawn’s eight stories per day.

Forty five stories originated from Islamabad, 38 from New Delhi and 61 from other cities

and locations of Pakistan and India. Forty-six stories had byliners whereas 98 were

without proper byliners. Seventy-three stories used official sources and 52 were based on

mixed sources whereas 19 used anonymous sources. Majority 88 stories were having a

conflict angle as compared to 38 with a peace angle. It was also found that 22 stories

were in the category of neutral reporting. Majority 94 stories had a negative impact as

compared to 50 with a positive impact on the relations.

Table 5.2: The Nation Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit

Jul

y

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

8 6 2 1 3 2 4 3 3 0 2 3 1 2 0 0 3 1 0

9 10 3 2 5 2 8 6 4 0 5 4 1 2 4 0 1 2 1

10 8 2 4 2 4 4 3 4 1 4 3 1 4 1 0 2 0 1

11 15 8 2 5 3 12 1

1

2 2 0 1

2

3 1 0 0 4 9 1

12 9 5 3 1 4 5 4 4 1 2 6 1 1 2 0 2 3 1

13 12 5 3 4 4 8 6 3 3 1 1

0

1 1 1 0 5 4 1

14 8 1 3 4 4 4 1 4 3 2 5 1 2 1 0 1 4 0

15 13 0 1

0

3 3 10 5 6 2 4 4 5 3 5 0 2 2 1

16 13 0 3 10 1 12 5 7 1 4 6 3 4 2 0 2 4 1

17 14 4 0 10 5 9 7 6 1 1 1

2

1 2 0 0 1 8 3

18 11 4 1 6 2 9 7 3 1 3 7 1 2 2 0 0 7 0

19 7 2 2 3 4 3 3 2 2 2 5 0 0 2 0 0 5 0

20 7 3 2 2 2 5 5 1 1 1 4 2 2 1 0 1 2 1

21 6 4 1 1 4 2 5 1 0 2 3 1 0 1 1 3 1 0

22 5 2 1 2 2 3 2 2 1 1 4 0 0 1 0 2 0 2

To

tal

144 4

5

3

8

61 46 98 7

3

5

2

1

9

3

4

8

8

2

2

2

6

2

3

1 2

9

5

2

1

3

The Hindu from India published 172 stories during the coverage period around the Agra

summit, with the average of over 11 stories in a day. Its 32 stories had Islamabad

dateline, 94 New Delhi and 46 from other places of the two countries. There was balance

332

in the byline category as 82 had exact bylines while 90 were identified as staff reports or

by agencies. It used 94 proper sources as compared to 57 multiple and just 21 anonymous

sources. Majority 101 stories had a conflict angle as compared to 59 falling in the peace

category. Twelve stories were designated as neutral. Majority 101 had negative impact on

ties while 71 had a positive impact.

Table 5.3: The Hindu Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit

Ju

ly

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

8 6 2 3 1 4 2 4 1 1 1 5 0 1 0 0 0 4 1

9 14 5 6 3 7 7 5 5 4 4 8 2 5 0 1 3 4 1

10 12 3 9 0 8 4 9 3 0 3 8 1 4 1 0 2 5 0

11 14 3 7 4 5 9 1

0

3 1 5 6 3 5 3 0 2 4 0

12 11 2 6 3 5 6 6 3 2 0 1

0

1 1 0 0 4 6 0

13 11 5 4 2 6 5 7 4 0 7 4 0 3 3 1 0 4 0

14 15 1 1

2

2 8 7 1

1

3 1 6 7 2 4 3 1 0 7 0

15 22 0 1

9

3 7 15 1

0

1

1

1 1

3

7 2 8 6 0 3 5 0

16 16 2 4 10 8 8 6 7 3 8 7 1 4 5 0 2 4 1

17 14 0 2 12 7 7 2 1

0

2 3 1

1

0 3 0 0 2 7 2

18 12 2 6 4 5 7 9 3 0 6 6 0 2 4 0 0 4 2

19 9 2 6 1 6 3 3 3 3 2 7 0 1 0 1 0 6 1

20 5 1 4 0 2 3 4 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 2 3 0

21 3 2 1 0 2 1 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 2

22 8 2 5 1 2 6 6 1 1 1 7 0 1 0 0 1 4 2

tot

al

172 3

2

9

4

46 82 90 9

4

5

7

2

1

5

9

1

0

1

1

2

4

2

2

5

4 2

1

6

8

1

2

The coverage by Hindustan Times was low as compared to other three papers. It

published just 63 stories, four per day. There were just two stories from Islamabad and 39

from New Delhi while 22 were from other locations. The good part was that 42 stories

were filed by its reporters with exact bylines as compared to just 21 without bylines.

Twenty-four stories had official sources as compared to 26 mix and 13 anonymous

sources. But the slant of the coverage was clearly anti-peace as its 33 stories used conflict

333

angle while just 11 were pro-peace. Another 19 were in the category of neutral. The

overall impact of the coverage was negative with 42 stories fuelling the conflict, as

compared to 21 seen as trying to calm things down.

Table 5.4: Hindustan Times Coverage (July 8-22, 2001) of Agra Summit

Jul

y

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

8 3 0 3 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 0

9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

10 6 0 6 0 2 4 2 3 1 1 3 2 0 1 0 2 3 0

11 4 0 3 1 4 0 1 2 1 0 2 2 2 0 0 1 1 0

12 4 0 4 0 4 0 2 2 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 2 1 0

13 5 0 4 1 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 0 0 2 1 0

14 11 0 7 4 5 6 3 7 1 0 6 5 3 1 0 1 6 0

15 4 0 4 0 3 1 3 1 0 4 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0

16 5 0 0 5 5 0 1 3 1 3 0 2 1 3 0 1 0 0

17 9 0 0 9 6 3 3 4 2 1 6 2 2 0 0 3 3 1

18 3 0 2 1 1 2 2 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 1 0

19 2 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

20 4 0 3 1 3 1 3 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 1 2 0

21 2 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

22 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

To

tal

63 2 3

9

22 42 21 2

4

2

6

1

3

1

1

3

3

1

9

1

4

7 0 1

4

2

7

1

The overall coverage of the Agra Summit gives interesting data. It received massive

coverage both in India and Pakistan. The selected four papers published 504 stories,

including 269 in Pakistan papers and 235 in Indian paper. The Hindu topped the list with

172 news items followed by The Nation with 144. All the papers used stories from

different locations. Indian papers had more byline stories (124 such news items), as

compared to Pakistan’s just 82. The paper had 264 stories coming from known official

sources as compared to 173 from mixed sources.

The number of anonymous stories was 67, including 33 from Pakistan and 34 from India.

It suggests that either the reporter did not try to go for exclusive stuff which is usually

based on anonymous sources or the government gave them so many stories through press

releases, handouts and pressers that they had not time to dig for the exclusive stuff. The

334

stories tilting towards conflict side of the relations were 282, which was far ahead of 140

peace-related and 82 neutral stories. Similarly, the number of overall stories showing the

negative side of ties was higher with 298 pieces, as compared to 206 positive news items.

The summary of coverage is given in the following table.

Table 5.5: Total Coverage of Agra Summit

Paper

s

St

or

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

Ot

h

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

OS M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

Dawn 12

5

28 45 52 36 89 73 38 1

4

3

6

6

0

2

9

3

8

2

3

3 6 4

4

11

The

Nation

14

4

45 38 61 46 98 73 52 1

9

3

4

8

8

2

2

2

6

2

3

1 2

9

5

2

13

Total 26

9

73 83 11

3

82 187 14

6

90 3

3

7

0

1

4

8

5

1

6

4

4

6

4 3

5

9

6

24

The

Hindu

17

2

32 94 46 82 90 94 57 2

1

5

9

1

0

1

1

2

4

2

2

5

4 2

1

6

8

12

HT 63 2 39 22 42 21 24 26 1

3

1

1

3

3

1

9

1

4

7 0 1

4

2

7

1

Total 23

5

34 13

3

68 124 111 11

8

83 3

4

7

0

1

3

4

3

1

5

6

3

2

4 3

5

9

5

13

Grand

Total

50

4

10

7

21

6

18

1

206 298 26

4

17

3

6

7

1

4

0

2

8

2

8

2

1

2

0

7

8

8 7

0

1

9

1

37

HT: The Hindustan Times

The Pakistan experts said that the media coverage of the Agra Summit in Pakistan was

influenced by the official version of the ties with India. Ziauddin held Musharraf

responsible for failure of the summit by saying that he refused to give assurance to India

about the cross border militancy in Kashmir. He also criticised Pakistan media for

keeping pressure on Musharraf to tow a traditional hard line on Kashmir.

Rahimullah Yusufzai said Musharraf’s media interaction and its coverage was totally

responsible for the Agra fiasco as he was by nature aggressive and lacked proper

diplomatic expressions. It could have led to hardening of Indian attitudes. But the real

cause of failure was the “high expectations” of the two sides from each other. India

335

thought it was an occasion to address cross border terrorism while Pakistan wanted to use

it for resolution of the Kashmir issue. According to Yusufzai, the summit failed as both

sides refused to accommodate each other’s expectations. Its failure was not due to media

which just showed what was happening.

Javed Siddiq differed with both Ziauddin and Yusufzai and said media coverage of

Musharraf’s breakfast meeting was decisive factor in failure as his emphasis on Kashmir

was interpreted by the Indian side as final line of argument by the collective military and

civilian leadership as Musharraf was both a civilian head of state and military chief.

The overall view of the experts was that media played a part in the failure as it was

reflecting the official version of the events.

The Indian experts who were interviewed for the research were unanimous that the Indian

media viewed Musharraf with a certain level of skepticism because he was considered as

man who had launched the Kargil War. Second, it also viewed Musharraf’s breakfast

meeting with the Indian media as one of the reasons for the failure of Agra summit. It

means that Indian media was having some kind of bias towards Musharraf which was

reflective of the Indian establishment attitude towards Pakistan and its leader. The same

was reflected in the coverage.

Suhasini Haidar also mentioned a high level interaction with Indian officials who were

against any invitation to the Pakistan leader. Karan Thapar talked about skepticism

towards Musharraf due to Kargil and his “less-than-respectful” attitude towards Vajpayee

when he visited Lahore in 1999. Thus media had pre-set structural constraints towards

peace talks with Pakistan. He said the Indian media had their dominant view that

Musharraf’s meeting with journalists was major setback for the summit. It was shown

live and had bad effect on the Indian audience. Thapar was less categorical to blame

media for failure but believed that media was negative and as usual not helping the cause

of peace.

Shujaat Bukhari was more direct to blame Indian media for the summit fiasco. He also

blamed the coverage of Musharraf’s breakfast meeting as major factor for failure of talks.

He also said that the hype created by media was unrealistic and had its fallout.

336

Thus, all experts agreed that media coverage was one of the major reasons for the failure

of the talks.

5.1.2- Parliament Attack

Dawn published 29 stories during the coverage period of 15 days. Six stories originated

from Islamabad, nine from New Delhi and 14 from other places in Pakistan and India.

Thirteen were bylined while 16 given credit-lines. Majority 15 came through official

sources, six through mix sources and eight through anonymous sources. Majority 19 had

conflict angle as compared to seven with peace angle and just three falling in the neutral

category. Majority 20 had negative impact on the ties of the two countries while nine had

positive influence. Another important thing was that eight stories had “extremely

negative” impact on ties but not a single story had “extremely positive” impact, according

to the pre-defined scale.

Table 5.6: Dawn Coverage (Dec 6-20, 2001) of Parliament Attack

De

c

200

1

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

6 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

7 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

8 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

9 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

10 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

12 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

13 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

14 4 1 1 2 2 3 0 1 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 2 1

15 4 1 1 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 3

16 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1

17 5 1 2 2 3 2 3 1 1 0 4 1 1 0 0 1 2 1

18 No P a P E R - E I d - - - - - - - -

19 No - - - - - - E I d - - - - - - - -

20 6 1 1 4 3 3 6 0 0 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 0

Tot

al

29 6 9 14 13 16 1

5

6 8 7 1

9

3 7 2 0 3 9 8

337

The News was used as the second newspaper from Pakistan to see the coverage of the

parliament attack and it published 46 stories in the allotted period: December 6-20, 2001.

Its 17 stories had Islamabad dateline, 13 New Delhi and 16 came from other places in the

two countries. The byline was an issue as only 10 stories had a byline as compared to 36

without it. On the sourcing side, the paper’s majority 36 stories had official sources as

compared to six each using mixed and anonymous sources. Majority 35 stories were pro-

conflict as compared to just five pro-peace. Similarly, majority 37 had negative impact on

ties while only nine had positive implications for relations.

Table 5.7: The News Coverage (Dec 6-20, 2001) of Parliament Attack

De

c

20

01

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7 2 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

8 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

9 3 1 1 1 0 3 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 0

10 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

11 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

12 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

13 3 0 2 1 0 3 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0

14 9 4 3 2 2 7 6 1 2 3 5 1 1 3 0 1 4 0

15 10 5 4 1 4 6 7 2 1 0 6 4 2 0 0 2 3 3

16 4 1 0 3 1 3 3 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 2

17 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1

18 No - P A P E r - E i d - - - - - - -

19 No - P A P E r - E i d - - - - - -

20 6 3 1 2 1 5 5 1 0 1 4 1 2 0 0 0 2 2

To

tal

46 1

7

13 16 10 36 3

4

6 4 5 3

5

6 5 4 0 4 2

5

8

The Hindu was the main paper from India for the parliament attack coverage. It published

57 stories - four stories per day during the 15-day coverage period. Majority of its 32

stories originated from New Delhi, eight from Islamabad and 17 from other cities of the

two countries. Twenty-six of its stories had by-lines while 31 were without it. Majority

38 stories came from official sources, while 10 were anonymous. Huge majority of 54

were in conflict category as compared to just two in the positive and one in the neutral

338

category. The coverage focused on the negative aspects and 54 stories were in the

category which had a negative impact on the relations with Pakistan, as compared to just

three stories trying to have a positive impact.

Table 5.8: The Hindu Coverage (Dec 6-20, 2001) of Parliament Attack

De

c

01

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8 2 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0

9 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

10 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

12 2 0 2 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

13 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0

14 4 2 2 0 4 0 2 2 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 2

15 6 1 3 2 4 2 4 1 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 5 0

16 6 1 1 4 3 3 5 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 3

17 7 0 5 2 2 5 7 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 0 1 4 1

18 7 0 5 2 3 4 4 0 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 6 0

19 9 1 6 2 2 7 7 2 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 1 6 2

20 10 2 7 1 5 5 6 2 2 0 1

0

0 0 0 0 0 1

0

0

To

tal

57 8 32 17 26 31 3

8

9 1

0

2 5

4

1 1 2 0 7 3

9

8

The Times of India has been used as second paper from India to measure the coverage of

parliament attack. The paper carried 79 stories about Pak-India ties at the average of over

five pieces per day. Majority 39 stories were from cities other than Islamabad and New

Delhi. Sixty-three stories were without bylines while only 16 were bylined. Thirty-seven

came from official sources while 22 had mixed sources while 20 came through

anonymous sources. Majority 70 had a conflict angle as compared to three as having a

peace angle. The number of stories with negative impact on the ties was 70, which was

far ahead of just nine with positive impact on the ties of the two nations. Out of 70 falling

in the negative category, 17 were extremely negative on the scale used for measuring the

impact.

339

Table 5.9: The Times of India Coverage (Dec 6-22, 2001) of Parliament Attack

De

c

20

01

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

6 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

7 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

8 2 0 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0

9 6 2 1 3 0 6 0 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 3 2 1

10 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

11 6 2 1 3 1 5 3 3 0 0 4 2 2 0 0 2 2 0

12 3 1 1 1 0 3 2 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 0

13 6 1 4 1 6 0 1 3 2 0 5 1 1 0 0 2 2 1

14 4 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 3

15 5 1 1 3 0 5 3 0 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 4

16 7 1 3 3 1 6 3 1 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 4 2

17 10 2 3 5 0 10 5 3 2 0 1

0

0 0 0 0 5 4 1

18 5 0 1 4 0 5 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 0 0 2 1

19 13 2 4 7 1 12 7 2 4 1 1

1

1 2 0 0 5 3 3

20 9 1 2 6 2 7 5 2 2 0 8 1 1 0 0 1 6 1

To

tal

79 1

5

25 39 16 63 3

7

2

2

2

0

3 7

0

6 8 1 0 2

4

2

9

1

7

The summary of the coverage shows that 211 stories were published by the four papers,

including 75 by Pakistan and 136 by Indian papers. Times of India led the coverage with

79 stories, followed by The Hindu with 57, The News with 46 and Dawn with 29. Total

46 stories originated from Islamabad, 79 from New Delhi and 86 from other cities. Sixty

five stories were bylined and 146 non-byliners. Their 124 stories came from known

sources like pressers, 43 from mixed and another 44 from anonymous sources. The

papers published 178 stories with conflict angle, as compared to just 17 with a peace

perspective.

The overall coverage was damaging for the relations as 181 stories highlighted the

negative aspects of the ties as compared to 30 stories showing the positive side of the

relations. The number of negative stories in the Indian papers was higher with 125, as

compared to 57 in the Pakistan papers. The number of positive stories in the Indian

papers was 12 while the same in the Pakistani papers was 18.

340

Table 5.10: Total Coverage of Parliament Attack

Paper

s

St

or

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

Ot

h

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

OS M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

Dawn 29 6 9 14 13 16 15 6 8 7 1

9

3 7 2 0 3 9 8

The

News

46 17 13 16 10 36 34 6 6 5 3

5

6 5 4 0 4 2

5

8

Total 75 23 22 30 23 52 49 12 1

4

1

2

5

4

9 1

2

6 0 7 3

4

16

The

Hindu

57 8 32 17 26 31 38 9 1

0

2 5

4

1 1 2 0 7 3

9

8

TOI 79 15 25 39 16 63 37 22 2

0

3 7

0

6 8 1 0 2

4

2

9

17

Total 13

6

23 57 56 42 94 75 31 3

0

5 1

2

4

7 9 3 0 3

1

6

8

25

Grand

Total

21

1

46 79 86 65 146 12

4

43 4

4

1

7

1

7

8

1

6

2

1

9 0 3

8

1

0

2

41

TOI: Times of India

According to experts, the coverage of the parliament attack in Pakistan was highly

opinionated in the favour of the official point of view that it was stage-managed by the

Indian intelligence agencies to trap Pakistan after 9/11 and build a case for attack on it.

Ziauddin said the official truth prevailed in media of Pakistan, which just blindly took the

bait offered by government. The place of difference was limited as it was the time of

Musharraf’s military rule and also such stories offered juicy anti-Indian stuff which local

media liked to play up.

Yusufzai almost echoed Ziauddin’s point of view. He said that the Pakistani media took

the official line that India “stage-managed” the attack to leverage the post 9/11 situation

in its favour. He said that only rare independent articles and news appeared in the media

about the involvement of Pakistani militants in the attack. The majority favoured the

official statements and press releases which blamed India.

Siddiq also accepted that media in Pakistan was following the official version of the

attack. He said that the Pakistan media was highly skeptical about India blaming Pakistan

341

for the attack. It was believed and portrayed that in a kneejerk reaction, India was trying

to put its failing at Pakistan’s door. It was part of India strategy to just drag Pakistan into

the attack to find an excuse to launch counter-attacks like that the United States did in

Afghanistan.

The Indian experts said that the Indian electronic media coverage was mostly factual in

the beginning but the tone of media changed after the Indian government blamed

Pakistan militants for the attack. The government was leading the onslaught on Pakistan

and media just followed. It shows that media failed to play its role of independent

watchdog and played in the hands of the officials.

Once Pakistan was blamed, the drumbeats started and there was no looking back. Karan

Thapar said media was with the public and believed that the attacks were a handiwork of

militants from Pakistan. For Thapar, it was not important who first blamed Pakistan, as

the backlash was already coming and the Indian decision to mobilize the army was part

of it.

Suhasini Haidar said that media did what everyone at that time wanted: to drum up frenzy

for a response to the attack. She had the firsthand experience of the attack as she was

inside the parliament building when militants tried to storm it. She said media showed

what happened at that time. It was factual but later on the government officials took over

as they started blaming Pakistan. Media was just giving what it was told. It had no role in

the decision of moving the army to the border as it was essentially a decision by the

government. But when the forces were marching in a battle array, the patriotism ran high

and media just showed it. So, it was doing what officials wanted at that time.

Shujaat Bukhari said that media had no independent means to get information as it came

from the official sources. But it failed to filter the information and just passed it on to the

people as it came out from the government. He thus accused media of failing to play the

role of a watchdog to give exact information to the people.

The experts from the two countries shared the view that media in both countries was

depending on the government for the information and in rush it failed to exercise control

and thus indirectly contributed to the tension between the two countries. It was also said

342

that the mobilization of armed forces was a decision by the governments but media didn’t

criticise it and also failed to highlight the horrors of a possible nuclear war.

5.1.3- Military Standoff

The analysis of coverage of the military standoff of 2002 in print and electronic media of

Pakistan and India is presented below.

Dawn published 106 stories during the coverage period which was spread over the

selected five days of three months in 2002. The average per day coverage was seven

stories. Majority 74 stories were from cities other than capitals of Pakistan and India.

Twenty-one stories were datelined Islamabad and 11 as New Delhi. Majority 99 stories

were without bylines as compared to seven byliners. Fifty-four stories used official

sources, while 36 had mixed sources and 16 came through the anonymous channels.

Sixty-four had conflict slant in the coverage while 19 had a positive slant. A good

number of 23 were neutral. The impact of majority 70 stories was negative on ties as

compared to 36 trying to have a positive impact.

Table 5.11: Dawn Coverage (Jan 1-5, June 1-5, Oct 1-5, 2002) of Military Standoff

Ja

n,

02

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

1 15 2 0 13 2 13 8 7 0 4 7 4 5 2 0 1 7 0

2 10 4 0 6 1 9 5 4 1 0 6 4 1 0 0 4 4 1

3 15 3 2 10 1 14 6 8 1 0 1

1

4 2 0 0 3 9 1

4 10 2 0 8 1 9 6 3 1 4 4 2 6 0 0 2 2 0

5 13 1 2 10 1 12 7 4 2 2 6 5 5 2 0 0 6 0

Jun

e, 1

4 1 1 2 0 4 3 1 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 2 0

2 7 1 0 6 0 7 4 3 0 3 4 0 2 0 1 2 1 1

3 5 0 1 4 0 5 4 0 1 1 4 0 1 0 0 1 2 1

4 4 1 1 2 0 4 1 1 2 1 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 2

5 6 1 0 5 0 6 1 4 1 0 4 2 2 0 0 0 2 2

Oct

,1

3 1 0 2 0 3 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 1

2 3 2 1 0 0 3 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0

3 4 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 2

4 3 0 0 3 0 3 1 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 2

343

5 4 1 2 1 0 4 3 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 1

To

tal

106 2

1

1

1

74 7 99 5

4

3

6

1

6

1

9

6

4

2

3

3

0

5 1 1

5

4

1

1

4

Two different papers were used to second the coverage from Pakistan during the military

tension of 2002. The Frontier Post was used for five days and Daily Times for 10 days.

They published 80 stories at the rate of over three stories in a day. Thirty stories

originated from Islamabad, 10 from New Delhi and 40 from other cities of the two

countries. Only 13 stories were bylined as compared to 67 without it. Forty-three came

from official, 22 from mixed sources and 15 from the anonymous channels. Majority 50

were pro-conflict, 10 pro-peace and 20 as neutral. The overall pattern of impact was not

different from other papers as 56 stories were negative for the ties and 24 had positive

angle for the relations of the two countries.

Table 5.12: FP (Jan 1-5, 2002) and DT (June 1-5 & Oct 1-5, 2002) on Military

Standoff

Jan,

02,

FP

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

1 7 4 1 2 1 6 3 3 1 5 1 0 1 0 2 4 0

2 9 4 1 4 2 7 6 2 1 1 4 4 3 1 0 1 3 1

3 11 5 1 5 1 10 4 5 2 2 7 2 3 1 0 0 5 2

4 8 3 0 5 0 8 6 1 1 3 4 1 4 0 0 0 1 3

5 9 4 1 4 1 8 5 2 2 1 5 3 4 0 0 0 4 1

DT:

Jun

1

9 0 3 6 0 9 4 2 3 0 8 1 0 0 0 2 5 2

2 4 2 0 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 2 1

3 4 0 0 4 0 4 2 1 1 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 2 1

4 5 1 1 3 1 4 2 1 2 0 3 2 1 1 0 0 2 1

5/6 5 3 0 2 1 4 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 0 0 1 2 0

Oct

1

1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

2 5 1 1 3 2 3 3 2 0 1 2 2 1 1 0 1 2 0

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0

Tot

al

80 3

0

1

0

40 13 67 4

3

2

2

1

5

1

0

5

0

2

0

1

9

5 0 8 3

6

1

2

FP: The Frontier Post, DT: Daily Times

344

The Hindu carried 69 stories during the allotted coverage period. Its 19 stories originated

from New Delhi, eight from Islamabad and 42 from cities. The paper gave bylines to 33

stories as compared to 36 without it. Majority 42 came from official sources as compared

to 18 from mixed and nine from anonymous sources. The number of pro-conflict stories

was 48 while that of pro-peace was 16 and neutral just five. The stories impacting

negatively on the relations of Pakistan and India were 47 while those positively

influencing the ties were 22.

Table 5.13: The Hindu Coverage (Jan 1-5, June 1-5, Oct 1-5, 2002) of Military

Standoff

Jan

, 01

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

1 9 3 3 3 6 3 6 2 1 3 5 1 4 0 0 0 4 1

2 5 0 2 3 1 4 2 1 2 2 3 0 2 2 0 0 2 1

3 5 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 2 2 1

4 5 0 1 4 2 3 3 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 0 0 3 1

5 8 2 2 4 4 4 6 1 1 1 5 3 3 0 0 1 4 0

Jun

e,1

8 0 1 7 4 4 7 0 1 3 5 0 3 0 0 0 4 1

2 4 1 2 1 1 3 2 2 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 3 0

3 8 0 1 7 3 5 4 4 0 3 4 1 3 1 0 2 2 0

4 3 0 1 2 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 1

5 6 0 1 5 2 4 3 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 0 2 1 0

Oct

, 1

2 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

5 4 0 2 2 2 2 3 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0

Tot

al

69 8 1

9

42 33 36 4

2

1

8

9 1

6

4

8

5 2

0

2 0 7 3

4

6

The Tribune is the second paper used for coverage of military standoff. It carried 78

stories during the allotted period at the rate of five stories in a day. Only 12 stories were

from Islamabad, 16 from New Delhi and 50 from other cities. Sixteen stories were

bylined while 62 were having credit-lines. The number of stories using official and open

sources was 38 while those coming from mixed sources were 19 and from anonymous

channels were 21. Fifty stories were pro-conflict, seven pro-peace and 21 neutral.

345

Majority 62 stories had negative impact on the ties as compared to just 16 having positive

impact.

Table 5.14: The Tribune Coverage (Jan 1-5, June 1-5, Oct 1-5, 2002) of Military

standoff

Ja

n,

01

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

1 10 0 5 5 2 8 7 1 2 3 4 3 3 2 0 1 3 1

2 13 6 1 6 1 12 6 3 4 1 7 5 5 0 0 1 5 2

3 8 1 1 6 4 4 1 4 3 0 6 2 1 0 0 3 3 1

4 7 0 1 6 4 3 3 3 1 1 6 0 0 1 0 1 4 1

5 11 0 3 8 2 9 5 3 3 0 1 1

0

1 0 0 1 8 1

Jun

e, 1

3 0 1 2 0 3 1 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0

2 3 0 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

3 6 0 0 6 1 5 5 0 1 2 4 0 1 1 0 0 2 2

4 3 0 0 3 0 3 1 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1

5 7 2 0 5 1 6 1 3 3 0 6 1 1 0 0 2 3 1

Oct

, 1

2 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5 4 1 2 1 0 4 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0

To

tal

78 1

2

16 50 16 62 3

8

1

9

2

1

7 5

0

2

1

1

2

4 0 1

0

4

1

1

1

The selected papers published 333 stories - 186 by the Pakistan papers and 147 in the

Indian papers - during the allotted days. Their 71 stories originated from Islamabad, 56

from New Delhi and 206 from other cities. The non-byliners were 264 as compared to

just 69 byliners. The stories coming from known channels were 177 while mixed sources

were used for 95 and anonymous sources for 61 news items.

The tone of coverage was pro-conflict as 212 stories had some kind of negative angle.

The pro-peace items were 52 while another 69 were treated as neutral. The coverage

showed the relations in negative light with overwhelming 235 stories. The number of

news showing the positive side of ties or promoting goodwill was 98. In terms of the

number of stories, the Pakistani media was ahead of the Indian side with the

346

corresponding ratio of negative and positive stories being 126 and 60 versus 109 and 28

respectively.

Table 5.15: Total Coverage of Military Standoff

Paper

s

St

or

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

Ot

h

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

OS M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

Dawn 10

6

21 11 74 7 99 54 36 1

6

1

9

6

4

2

3

3

0

5 1 1

5

4

1

14

FP

&DT

80 30 10 40 13 67 43 22 1

5

1

0

5

0

2

0

1

9

5 0 8 3

6

12

Total 18

6

51 21 11

4

20 166 97 58 3

1

2

9

1

1

4

4

3

4

9

1

0

1 2

3

7

7

26

The

Hindu

69 8 19 42 33 36 42 18 9 1

6

4

8

5 2

0

2 0 7 3

4

6

The

Tribu

ne

78 12 16 50 16 62 38 19 2

1

7 5

0

2

1

1

2

4 0 1

0

4

1

11

Total 14

7

20 35 92 49 98 80 37 3

0

2

3

9

8

2

6

3

2

6 0 1

7

7

5

17

Grand

Total

33

3

71 56 20

6

69 264 17

7

95 6

1

5

2

2

1

2

6

9

8

1

1

6

1 4

0

1

5

2

43

The experts said that the Pakistan media stood with the armed forces and supported the

mobilization of troops. The jingoistic flavor in coverage was evident. Pakistan blamed

India for the faceoff and media tried to present the country as victim. The media also

tried to show that India would eventually back off. The anti-war stories were just few and

the mainstream electronic media was busy in flashing the official truth that Pakistan was

a victim and sending troops to the border as a national duty to defend a possible external

aggression.

Ziauddin said media in Pakistan simply adopted the position of the government of the day

and joined the drumbeating in favour of the armed forces. Rahimullah Yusufzai said that

the decision to mobilize the forces was taken by Pakistan army and media had no role in

it. But later on, it joined the officials to justify it and whip up the popular sentiments in

the support of war. Javed Siddiq said media was responsible for creating war-hype in the

347

country. It portrayed that India was ready to strike Pakistan and it was duty to defend the

country.

The Pakistani experts agreed that local media was pro-war at the time and stood with the

government and army.

According to the Indian experts, the Indian government kept the initiative in its hands and

media played the role of a national monolith body which was exhorting the nation to

prepare for war. The saner voices were very few and anti-war stories almost nonexistent.

The talk-shows and top of the hour news were giving space to pro-war sentiments.

Suhasini Haidar said that media was given this understanding by the government that

there would be a war with Pakistan. It was in the presumptive frame of upcoming conflict

and was digging hard to side with the nation. In her opinion, the coverage was shockingly

anti-peace and war frenzy beamed out of television sets. Every small move was shown in

big way. In some cases Indian media was ahead of government to portray a war like

situation. Shujaat Bukhari seconded views of Haidar that media was highly negative

during the standoff and it sided with the government and followed the official

propaganda blindly. It also failed to serve the cause of peace and played role in increasing

the tension.

The experts from the two countries shared the views that coverage of the military

standoff was highly tilted along the nationalistic lines and anti-peace stories were

prominent.

5.1.4- Composite Dialogue

The composite dialogue was a rare period of positive coverage by the media of Pakistan

and India. The analysis of coverage is presented below.

Dawn published 87 stories during the 15-day coverage period spread over three different

years. The average was almost six stories per day. The majority of 36 stories originated

from Islamabad, 24 from New Delhi and 27 from other cities. The issue of byline was

still there, as 78 were without bylines and just nine used proper bylines. Fifty-one stories

came from the official sources, 24 from mixed ones and 12 from anonymous sources. The

348

number of pro-peace stories was 52 while 20 were pro-conflict and 15 neutral. The

number of stories seen as having positive impact on the relations was 66 as compared to

21 having negative influence.

Table 5.16: Dawn coverage (Jan, 2005; April, 2005; July 2006) of Composite

Dialogue

Ja

n

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

3 11 6 2 3 0 11 7 2 2 5 2 4 5 3 1 1 1 0

4 6 5 0 1 0 6 3 3 0 5 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 0

5 5 4 0 1 0 5 1 0 4 5 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0

6 10 6 1 3 0 10 5 4 1 8 2 0 1 5 2 1 1 0

7 10 7 2 1 0 10 6 2 2 5 1 4 4 4 1 1 0 0

Ap

r

15

4 0 2 2 0 4 2 2 0 3 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 0

16 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0

17 8 1 4 3 2 6 5 3 0 5 3 0 0 5 0 3 0 0

18 8 0 6 2 1 7 5 2 1 5 1 2 6 0 1 0 0

19 7 0 5 2 2 5 6 0 1 6 1 0 1 4 1 0 1 0

Jul

y9

2 2 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0

10 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0

11 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

12 4 1 1 2 1 3 3 1 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 2 1

13 6 2 0 4 1 5 4 2 0 3 3 0 2 1 0 1 1 1

To

tal

87 3

6

2

4

27 9 78 5

1

2

4

1

2

5

2

2

0

1

5

2

1

3

7

8 1

1

8 2

Three different papers were used to second the coverage as per research design. These

were The Nation, The Frontier Post and Daily Times having collectively published 61

stories during the selected time. The average was four stories in a day. Their 36 stories

originated from Islamabad, 12 from New Delhi and 13 from other cities. Twenty stories

had bylines. Thirty-four stories came from official sources while 22 from mixed and five

from anonymous channels. Majority 32 were pro-peace stories as compared to 14 pro-

conflict and five neutral. The papers gave positive coverage to the composite dialogue

with 42 positive stories while 19 stories were negative for relations.

349

Table 5.17: The Nation (Jan, 2004), FP (April, 2005), DT (July 2006): Composite

Dialogue

Ja

n

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

3 6 4 0 2 4 2 2 3 1 3 1 2 2 2 0 1 1 0

4 4 5 0 1 3 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 0 3 0 0

5 8 6 0 2 4 4 4 4 0 6 1 1 2 3 1 2 0 0

6 11 8 1 2 5 6 7 4 0 5 3 3 1 6 1 1 2 0

7 7 7 0 0 4 3 4 2 1 4 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 0

Ap

r

15

2 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

16 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

17 3 0 1 2 0 3 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0

18 7 1 6 0 1 6 4 3 0 4 2 1 1 4 0 2 0 0

19 5 0 3 2 0 5 4 1 0 4 0 1 2 1 1 1 0 0

Jul

y9

1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

10 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

11 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

12 2 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

To

tal

61 3

6

1

2

13 20 41 3

4

2

2

5 3

2

1

4

1

5

1

3

2

5

4 1

4

5 0

The Hindu used as main paper from India published 46 stories at the rate of over three in

a day. Its 30 stories originated from New Delhi, eight from Islamabad and eight from

other cities. Thirty-four stories used official sources, seven mixed sources and five came

from anonymous sources. Pro-peace stories were 27, which were more in number as

compared to 17 pro-conflict and two neutral pieces. The overall coverage was good for

the ties with 29 positive stories while 17 were negative for the ties.

Table 5.18: The Hindu Coverage (Jan, 2004; April, 2005; July 2006) of Composite

Dialogue

Ja

n

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

3 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 0

4 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

5 2 1 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

350

6 3 1 2 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0

7 3 3 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0

Ap

ril

15

5 0 4 1 2 3 4 0 1 1 4 0 0 1 0 1 3 0

16 2 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0

17 5 0 3 2 4 1 3 2 0 4 1 0 3 2 0 0 0 0

18 9 0 8 1 2 7 5 0 4 7 1 1 6 1 1 1 0 0

19 6 0 5 1 4 2 3 3 0 4 1 1 3 0 1 0 2 0

Jul

y9

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

12 6 0 3 3 1 5 5 1 0 2 4 0 2 0 0 1 2 1

13 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

To

tal

46 8 30 8 21 25 3

4

7 5 2

7

1

7

2 1

6

8 5 6 9 2

Three papers were used as the second source to see the coverage by Indian media around

the allotted period for the composite dialogue. The three papers published 39 stories, over

two stories per day. Twelve stories originated from Islamabad, 16 from New Delhi and

11 from other cities. These papers had 18 stories with byline and 21 without it. Eighteen

stories came from officials saying things on record, while 16 came from mixed sources

and five from anonymous channels. The pro-peace and pro-conflict categories had 15

stories each. The positive and negative impact stories were also almost equal with 19

falling in the group of positive impact pieces and 20 in the negative category.

Table 5.19: The Indian Express, The Telegraph and Deccan Herald on Composite

Dialogue

Ja

n

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

3 3 0 1 2 0 3 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0

4 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

5 2 2 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

6 6 3 1 2 3 3 4 2 0 4 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 0

7 5 3 0 2 4 1 1 3 1 4 1 0 0 3 1 1 0 0

Ap

15

1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

16 3 0 1 2 2 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 0 0

17 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

351

18 3 0 3 0 2 1 2 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0

19 2 0 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0

Jul

9

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

10 2 1 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0

11 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

12 3 0 3 0 1 2 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1

13 5 1 3 1 0 5 3 1 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0

To

tal

39 1

2

16 11 18 21 1

8

1

6

5 1

5

1

5

9 5 9 5 8 9 3

The papers of the two countries published 233 stories including 148 by Pakistan and 85

by the Indian newspapers. Their 92 stories originated from Islamabad, 82 from New

Delhi and 59 from other places in the two countries. The non-byliners once again

exceeded with 165 to 68 bylined stories. The dependence of known official sources was

heavy, as in previous cases, the papers used such sources for 137 stories as compared to

27 anonymous and 69 news with mixed sources. Surprisingly, the peace element was

dominant with 126 stories as compared to 66 conflict and 41 neutral news items. This

trend was also visible in the overall impact as the positive impact stories were 156 as

compared to 77 negative impact stories.

Table 5.20: Total Coverage of Composite Dialogue

Paper

s

St

or

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

Ot

h

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

OS M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

Dawn 87 36 24 27 9 78 51 24 1

2

5

2

2

0

1

5

2

1

3

7

8 1

1

8 2

TN,

FP &

DT

61 36 12 13 20 41 34 22 5 3

2

1

4

1

5

1

3

2

5

4 1

4

5 0

Total 14

8

72 36 40 29 119 85 46 1

7

8

4

3

4

3

0

3

4

6

2

1

2

2

5

1

3

2

The

Hindu

46 8 30 8 21 25 34 7 5 2

7

1

7

2 1

6

8 5 6 9 2

TIE,

TT &

DC

39 12 16 11 18 21 18 16 5 1

5

1

5

9 5 9 5 8 9 3

Total 85 20 46 19 39 46 52 23 1

0

4

2

3

2

1

1

2

1

1

7

1

0

1

4

1

8

5

Grand

Total

23

3

92 82 59 68 165 13

7

69 2

7

1

2

6

6

6

4

1

5

5

7

9

2

2

3

9

3

1

7

352

TN: The Nation

TIE: The Indian Express

TT: The Telegraph

DC: Deccan Herald

The Pakistani experts said that media in Pakistan was in favor of the composite dialogue

as it considered it a success of the foreign ministry to goad India into talks.

Ziauddin said Pakistan wanted Kashmir at the center of talks and India partially endorsed

it by accepting the dialogue. The experts agreed that media played a positive role in peace

process. But the bottom-line was that it was supportive of the peace move as Pakistan’s

military government wanted it to be supportive. India agreed to accept all issues of

concern in the dialogue and media was ecstatic about it as it was victory of the Pakistani

official policy. Rahimullah Yusufzai said that media was positive but it showed it as a

victory of Pakistan due to prospects of talks on Kashmir, which India previously did not

agree to. Javed Siddiq said that media favoured the dialogue and supported it with pro-

peace coverage. He said instead of conflict, the Pakistani media highlighted the

importance of the regional stability and economic cooperation.

Thus, Pakistani experts said that media was supportive of the composite dialogue.

The coverage of the composite dialogue shows that media in India was quite attentive to

the officials. The tone of coverage was positive right from the beginning as the Indian

government wanted to give a positive spin to the peace talks. The experts agree that

positive coverage of the composite dialogue was derailed by the Mumbai attack which is

still haunting the peace efforts between the two countries.

Karan Thapar recalled that the coverage was positive but the Indian media also tried to

show it as the Indian victory rather than an effort to find a durable solution to bring

peace. Suhasini Haidar said that media was positive about the launch of the peace process

but “so was the government of India.” The trajectory of media coverage was same as on

previous occasion and media reported what government of the day wanted it to report.

She said that the Indian government was using media for its vested interest. Shujaat

353

Bukhari said media was positive about launch of the composite dialogue. It welcomed the

initiative.

The dominant expert view was that the coverage of the composite dialogue was positive

as both governments supported it. The media of the countries lived with their respective

tradition of showing what the governments wanted.

5.1.5- Mumbai Attack

The analysis of the Mumbai Attack coverage in the selected media of Pakistan and India

is separately presented below.

Dawn published 41 stories in the 15-day period around the Mumbai attack. The coverage

was low as just over two stories a day were published. Eleven stories originated from

Islamabad, 13 from New Delhi and 17 from the other cities. It had 16 bylines as

compared to 25 stories without a byline. The paper carried 21 stories which came from

the official sources while it had 13 stories from the mixed sources and seven from the

anonymous channels. Eighteen stories were pro-conflict as compared to 12 pro-peace and

11 neutral. The impact was almost equally divided between negative (21) and positive

stories (20) stories.

Table 5.21: Dawn Coverage (Nov 19- Dec 3, 2008) of Mumbai Attack

No

v

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

19 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0

20 2 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

22 3 0 3 0 1 2 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

23 2 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

24 4 1 0 3 0 4 2 2 0 2 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 0

25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

26 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0

27 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1

28 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 0

29 3 1 2 0 2 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0

30 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0

De

c, 1

5 0 2 3 2 3 2 2 1 1 4 0 0 1 0 0 4 0

354

2 4 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 2

3 6 2 1 3 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 3 0

To

tal

41 1

1

1

3

17 16 25 2

1

1

3

7 1

2

1

8

1

1

1

0

8 2 3 1

4

4

The News published 65 stories, including 32 from Islamabad, eight from New Delhi and

25 from other cities of the two countries. Only 20 were properly bylined while 45 used

anonymous credit-lines. Thirty-eight stories were from official sources, seven from

mixed and 20 from anonymous sources. As many as twenty-seven stories had conflict

angle while 17 highlighted peace scenarios and 21 were in the category of neutral. There

were 33 stories in the group of negative impact while an almost equal number of 32

stories were branded as positive impact stories.

Table 5.22: The News Coverage (Nov19- Dec 3) of Mumbai Attack

No

v

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

19 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

20 3 2 1 0 1 2 1 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 1 0

21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

22 3 2 0 1 2 1 1 0 2 1 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 0

23 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0

24 2 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1

25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

26 3 2 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 0

27 3 0 1 2 0 3 2 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 1

28 6 3 0 3 1 5 3 1 2 0 3 3 2 0 0 1 1 2

29 9 6 0 3 4 5 7 0 2 4 3 2 5 1 0 0 2 1

30 7 4 0 3 2 5 3 0 4 1 5 1 0 1 0 3 2 1

De

c1

7 3 1 3 1 6 6 1 0 3 2 2 4 0 0 2 1 0

2 6 2 1 3 0 6 4 0 6 0 3 3 3 0 0 0 1 2

3 13 6 1 6 6 7 7 2 4 5 2 6 8 1 0 1 2 1

To

tal

65 3

2

8 25 20 45 3

8

7 2

0

1

7

2

7

2

1

2

5

6 1 1

1

1

3

9

The Hindu published 46 stories including 19 with Islamabad dateline, 12 New Delhi and

15 having datelines from other different cities of the two countries. Its 39 stories were

bylined as compared to nine non-byliners. Twenty-one stories came from known officials

355

while 12 were from mixed sources and 13 from anonymous people. Majority 37 were

pro-conflict stories while only five were pro-peace and four neutral. The impact was

heavily tilted towards the negative side with 37 stories as compared to nine positive

stories for the relations.

Table 5.23: The Hindu Coverage (Nov 19 to Dec 3) of Mumbai Attack

No

v

Stor

ies


Is

b

Dl

h

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

19 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

21 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

23 2 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

24 2 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0

25 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

26 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

27 3 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1

28 7 1 3 3 5 2 2 3 2 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 4 2

29 6 3 1 2 5 1 3 2 1 1 5 0 1 0 0 0 4 1

30 5 2 1 2 3 2 3 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 0 0 4 0

De

c, 1

7 1 2 4 6 1 3 1 3 0 6 1 1 0 0 0 5 1

2 7 2 3 2 6 1 4 1 2 0 6 1 1 0 0 1 2 3

3 3 2 0 1 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

To

tal

46 1

9

12 15 37 9 2

1

1

2

1

3

5 3

7

4 8 0 1 7 2

1

9

The Times of India published 76 stories - over five stories per day. The coverage was

higher than any other paper included in the research for the Mumbai attack. Twenty-five

stories originated from Islamabad, 22 from New Delhi and 29 from other cities. Sixty-

two stories were not given byline while 14 had proper bylines. Thirty-four stories were

from known sources, 26 from mixed sources and 16 from unknown sources. Majority 48

had conflict angle, 10 had positive spin while 18 were neutral. The net impact was

negative with 56 stories as compared to 20 stories with positive outlook on the ties of

Pakistan and India.

356

Table 5.24: The Times of India Coverage (Nov 19-Dec3) of Mumbai Attacks

De

c

Stor

ies


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kno

wn

Unkn

own

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

19 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

20 4 1 2 1 0 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 0

21 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

22 3 1 2 0 0 3 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0

23 4 2 1 1 0 4 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 0

24 2 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

25 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

26 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

27 6 2 0 4 2 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 3 1 0 0 0 2

28 8 3 1 4 0 8 4 3 1 1 6 1 1 0 1 1 4 1

29 7 2 1 4 1 6 4 2 1 1 5 1 0 1 0 1 4 1

30 5 1 3 1 0 5 1 2 2 0 4 1 1 0 0 1 2 1

De

c,1

9 4 2 3 3 6 4 5 0 1 5 3 1 1 0 2 1 4

2 6 1 2 3 2 4 3 1 2 0 5 1 1 0 0 1 2 2

3 16 4 7 5 5 11 6 6 4 0 1

2

4 1 0 0 5 7 3

Tot

al

76 2

5

2

2

29 14 62 3

4

2

6

1

6

1

0

4

8

1

8

1

0

7 3 1

5

2

4

1

7

The selected four papers of the two countries collectively published 228 stories, including

106 from Pakistan and 122 from India, of which 87 had Islamabad dateline, 55 used New

Delhi dateline and another 86 originated from other cities. The issue of byline was similar

to previous coverage as 87 items were bylined while 141 were not. The dependence on

the known official sources was also there as the paper used officials for 114 stories. Their

56 news used anonymous channels and another 58 mixed sources.

The pro-conflict stories were 130 while pro-peace were 44. The negative impact stories

were higher with 147 as compared to 81 positive influence news items. The Pakistan

media had 52 positive and 54 negative impact stories. The Indian media published 93

negative impact stories which were higher than its 29 positive impact stories.

Table 5.5: Total Coverage of Mumbai Attack

Paper

s

St

or


Is Dl Ot Kno Unkn OS M A P C N S P E S N E

357

ies b h h wn own S S P P N N

Dawn 41 11 13 17 16 25 21 13 7 1

2

1

8

1

1

1

0

8 2 3 1

4

4

The

News

65 32 8 25 20 45 38 7 2

0

1

7

2

7

2

1

2

5

6 1 1

1

1

3

9

Total 10

6

43 21 42 36 70 59 20 2

7

2

9

4

5

3

2

3

5

1

4

3 1

4

2

7

13

The

Hindu

46 19 12 15 37 9 21 12 1

3

5 3

7

4 8 0 1 7 2

1

9

TOI 76 25 22 29 14 62 34 26 1

6

1

0

4

8

1

8

1

0

7 3 1

5

2

4

17

Total 12

2

44 34 44 51 71 55 38 2

9

1

5

8

5

2

2

1

8

7 4 2

2

4

5

26

Grand

Total

22

8

87 55 86 87 141 11

4

58 5

6

4

4

1

3

0

5

4

5

3

2

1

7 3

6

7

2

39

The experts said that the Pakistan media performed better in terms of coverage of the

Mumbai attack.

Ziauddin said it was due to a sense of maturity in the electronic media. He said Pakistan

media after Mumbai started taking independent positions on the issues but the Indian

media regressed as it starting towing the official line. Ziauddin also suggested that media

took some steps before the Mumbai incident which had brought the two sides closer. He

mentioned the visits of media delegations from Indian and Pakistan to two parts of

Kashmir which was a big confidence-building measure. He also mentioned the role of

non-profit Safma media organisation which arranged several trips of journalists to both

counties and helped create goodwill in the media circles of the two nations.

Yusufzai also termed the attack as the turning point as far as its coverage was concerned

in Pakistan. He said it was Pakistani electronic media which traced the whereabouts of

Ajmal Kasab who was captured alive by Indian forces. Pakistan media was more

responsible and less susceptible to the official propaganda. Javed Siddiq also said that the

Pakistan electronic media showed maturity in covering the Mumbai attack. It was not

blindly following the official policy but digging up the stories and also giving airtime to

the Indian experts, which was not a common practice in Pakistan.

358

Thus, the experts agreed that the Pakistani electronic and print media played better role in

covering the Mumbai attack, which was a departure from its traditional role of just

showing what the officials wanted.

The Indian experts said that their media provided nonstop 72 hours coverage to the attack

and showed everything live. Suhasini Haidar said that there were insinuations that

Pakistan was involved but there was an element of restraint in the blame. But the

situation changed after December 5 when in an off-record media briefing, an Indian

official said Pakistan spy agency ISI was involved. After that media tore through

Pakistan. It is also believed that the Indian media became skeptical of Pakistan after the

Mumbai incident. The element of restraint was missing in coverage during the Mumbai

attack. Also, the Indian media is still centring the entire debate of relations with Pakistan

on the Mumbai attacks.

Karan Thapar said there was an element of carelessness in the Indian media coverage of

the attack as it showed everything. He also saw an element of Pakistan bashing in the

electronic media but the newspapers were more measured. He believed that media

indirectly played role in suspension of the peace process between the two countries

because after Mumbai, it put pressure on the government of the day. Shujaat Bukhari said

that the Mumbai attack coverage by electronic media was “excessive” and to some extent

uncontrolled. He blamed media for showing lack of restraint in the coverage.

The experts saw the Indian media coverage of the Mumbai in a negative light, and

possibly hurting the relations with Pakistan. The most obvious casualty was the five-year

old peace process which was suspended by India after heavy criticism by the media. The

experts also said that TV anchor-persons indulged in speculations and misdirected the

public.

They agreed that the overall coverage was negative. The Indian media was aggressive

and harmful for ties. The Pakistan media broke some new barriers like reporting about

the residence of Ajmal Kasab but it remained under the official influence and its coverage

was not free of biases.

359

5.1.6- Comparison of Pak-India Media

The Pakistani newspapers published 784 stories in the selected 75 days coverage period,

which shows that per day coverage was more than 10 news items. The majority of 269

stories were published during 15-day coverage of the Agra Summit. It was followed by

186 stories for military standoff, 148 for composite dialogue, 106 for Mumbai attack and

75 for parliament attack.

Chart 5.1: Pakistan Media Coverage of Five Events

The papers used Islamabad dateline for 262 stories while New Delhi for 183. Majority

339 stories originated from other cities in Pakistan or India. It shows that Pakistan

newspapers reflect the opinion from across the region. However, the Pakistani papers

failed to find adequate bylines as there were just 190 bylines as compared to 594 non-

bylines, showing lack of human resources and lack of emphasis on accuracy. The

sourcing was also not proper as the papers used official sources for 436 stories, mixed

sources for 226 and anonymous sources for 122 news items. The increasing reliance on

the official sources means that papers were increasingly following the agenda-reflecting

pattern and giving more coverage to the “official truth”.

There were total 352 positive and 432 negative stories in the Pakistani newspapers. Thus,

the overall impact of the coverage was negative on the peace process. Within the impact

269

75

186148

106

Agra Summit Parliament attack Military Standoff Composite Dialogue Mumbai Attack

Pakistan Media Coverage

360

category, majority 194 stories were slightly positive, 138 positive and just 20 as

extremely positive. Similarly, in the negative impact category, 104 were slightly

negative, 247 negative and 81 extremely negative. The negativity in the coverage was

more pervasive and intense.

Table 5.26: Coverage in Pakistan Newspapers

July Sto

ries


Is

b

D

l

h

O

th

Kn

ow

n

Unk

now

n

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

Agra

Sum

mit

269 7

3

8

3

1

1

3

82 187 1

4

6

9

0

3

3

7

0

1

4

8

5

1

6

4

4

6

4 3

5

9

6

2

4

Parli

amen

t

Attac

k

75 2

3

2

2

3

0

23 52 4

9

1

2

1

4

1

2

5

4

9 1

2

6 0 7 3

4

1

6

Stand

off

186 5

1

2

1

1

1

4

20 166 9

7

5

8

3

1

2

9

1

1

4

4

3

4

9

1

0

1 2

3

7

7

2

6

Com

posit

e

Dialo

gue

148 7

2

3

6

4

0

29 119 8

5

4

6

1

7

8

4

3

4

3

0

3

4

6

2

1

2

2

5

1

3

2

Mum

bai

attac

k

106 4

3

2

1

4

2

36 70 5

9

2

0

2

7

2

9

4

5

3

2

3

5

1

4

3 1

4

2

7

1

3

Total 784 2

6

2

1

8

3

3

3

9

190 594 4

3

6

2

2

6

1

2

2

2

2

4

3

9

5

1

6

5

1

9

4

1

3

8

2

0

1

0

4

2

4

7

8

1

Compared with Pakistan’s more than 10 stories a day, the Indian newspapers published

725 stories in the 75-days, at the rate of over nine stories in a day.

361

Chart 5.2: Indian Media Coverage of Five Events

Of these 305 stories originated from New Delhi, 141 from Islamabad and 279 from other

locations in the two countries. The papers had 305 bylines and 420 non-bylines, which

was better than the Pakistani newspapers. The sourcing was an issue as 380 stories came

from official sources, while 212 had mixed sources and 133 used anonymous sources.

There were as many as 219 positive and 506 negative stories in the Indian newspapers.

Within the positive category, there were 136 slightly positive, 65 positive and 18

extremely positive. In the negative group, there were 119 slightly negative, 301 negative

and 86 as extremely negative stories. Thus, the negative prevailed in the coverage of

relations.

Table 5.27: Coverage in Indian Newspapers

July Sto

ries


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kn

ow

n

Unk

now

n

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

Agra

Sum

mit

235 3

4

1

3

3

6

8

124 111 1

1

8

8

3

3

4

7

0

1

3

4

3

1

5

6

3

2

4 3

5

9

5

1

3

Parlia

ment

136 2

3

5

7

5

6

42 94 7

5

3

1

3

0

5 1

2

7 9 3 0 3

1

6

8

2

5

235

136 147

85122

Agra Summit Parliament Attack Military Standoff Composite Dialogue Mumbai Attack

Indian Media Coverage

362

Attac

k

4

Stand

off

147 2

0

3

5

9

2

49 98 8

0

3

7

3

0

2

3

9

8

2

6

3

2

6 0 1

7

7

5

1

7

Com

posite

Dialo

gue

85 2

0

4

6

1

9

39 46 5

2

2

3

1

0

4

2

3

2

1

1

2

1

1

7

1

0

1

4

1

8

5

Mum

bai

attack

122 4

4

3

4

4

4

51 71 5

5

3

8

2

9

1

5

8

5

2

2

1

8

7 4 2

2

4

5

2

6

Total 725 1

4

1

3

0

5

2

7

9

305 420 3

8

0

2

1

2

1

3

3

1

5

5

4

7

3

9

7

1

3

6

6

5

1

8

1

1

9

3

0

1

8

6

The experts were asked to compare the media of the two countries with regard to their

coverage of bilateral ties and impact on peace.

Ziauddin said the Pakistani media played more positive role in the relations of the two

countries than the Indian media, which after Mumbai had become even more narrow-

minded. Yusufzai said the Indian media followed the official line in terms of the foreign

policy and in relations with Pakistan. He said that the Pakistani media is more

independent. “We are livelier and more vibrant. I have no hesitation in saying that we are

sometimes irresponsible,” he said.

Javed Siddiq said the Indian media was more jingoistic during the parliament and

Mumbai attacks. Some media outlets were fomenting the conflict by urging the Indian

government to go for a punitive action. The Pakistani media was more cautious and

thought the situation could lead to a war like scenario which would not be good as

Pakistan army was already stretched and the war would create problems for the country.

Suhasini Haidar said the Pakistani media changed after 2008. Before 2008, it played

extremely active role in highlighting the official policy as it had easy access to the

officials and knew much before time about the events. She said that the Pakistan media

also often played a “mischievous role”, forcing the Indian government to react to what

media was saying. She also said the Indian media was traditionally more restrained but of

late it was the Pakistan media which was following a policy of “more restraint”.

363

Shujaat Bukhari said during the first five years under study, Pakistan media was really

good but in the last five years, it was more defensive. “But I would say that it was more

negative on the Indian side and especially among the TV channels,” he said and then

added that Pakistan has its own channels which “add fuel to the fire”. He also said that

Pakistan’s print media oscillate between positive and negative. It is difficult to judge it

sometimes but “I think Pakistani media is better.”

The general agreement among the experts is that the Pakistan media is better than the

Indian media and the same has been proved by the survey of newspapers.

5.2- Findings

The study shows that media coverage of Pak-India ties depends on the nature of political

relationship. It has been found that media was positive during moments of agreements

like when Musharraf paid a three-day visit to India in April 2005 to attend the SAARC

Summit and the peace process was termed as “irreversible”.245 However, the peace

process collapsed due to the Mumbai attacks in 2008, while media played its negative

part to sour the ties by publishing several pro-conflict stories.

The following findings show some clear trends about the role of media in relations

between Pakistan and India during the period under study (2000-2010).

5.2.1- Media as Stakeholder

The study shows that media of the two countries takes huge interest in their relations. The

overall coverage says that total 1509 stories were published in 75 days at the rate of 20

pieces a day.

Table 5.28: Total Coverage by Pak-India Newspapers

Pa

per

s

Sto

ries


Is

b

D

lh

O

th

Kn

ow

n

Unk

now

n

O

S

M

S

A

S

P C N S

P

P E

P

S

N

N E

N

Pak 784 2

6

1

8

3

3

190 594 4

3

2

2

1

2

2

2

3

9

1

6

1

9

1

3

2

0

1

0

2

4

8

1

245 “Pakistan, India say peace irreversible,” The Frontier Post, April 19, 2002.

364

2 3 9 6 6 2 4 5 5 4 8 4 7

Indi

a

725 1

4

1

3

0

5

2

7

9

305 420 3

8

0

2

1

2

1

3

3

1

5

5

4

7

3

9

7

1

3

6

6

5

1

8

1

1

9

3

0

1

8

6

Tot

al

150

9

4

0

3

4

8

8

6

1

8

495 1014 8

1

6

4

3

8

2

5

5

3

7

9

8

6

8

2

6

2

3

3

0

2

0

3

3

8

2

2

3

5

4

8

1

6

7

The Pakistan papers published 784 while the Indian papers 725 stories. Their share is

shown in the chart.

Chart 5.3: Coverage in Pak-Indian Media

The sheer amount of coverage proves that media is not just an independent watchdog but

also a stakeholder. The experts also accepted that media is a key player as every

movement in the peace process of the Pakistan and India is reported in details. It also

shows that most of the coverage is linked with the events. In normal days, the coverage

slips down as proved by low coverage in the days before the attack at the parliament in

2001 or the Mumbai attack of 2008. Also, the coverage becomes anti-peace during

conflict and pro-peace during peace talks as proved by coverage around the Agra Summit

or the launch of the composite dialogue.

Pakistan52%

India 48%

Pak-India Coverage Share

365

5.2.2- Horizontal Outreach

The coverage shows that the issue of Pak-India peace process is not limited to Islamabad

and New Delhi. It has been proved through the dateline of the stories, showing that 403

stories originated from Islamabad, 488 from New Delhi and 618 from other cities. In fact,

more stories came from other places of Pakistan and India than their capitals, as shown in

the chart below.

Chart 5.4: Origin of News Stories

The issue of dateline helps to understand that place of origin of stories. Stories coming

from different places on the same issue give more credible sample of opinions. It also

shows that the issue of Pak-India peace process has horizontal appeal. The dateline of the

coverage shows that people from almost all areas of Pakistan and India take interest in

the relations.

5.2.3- Media and Agenda

The important finding of who sets the agenda for media has been traced through the

bylines. The coverage shows that there were only 495 proper bylined stories as compared

to 1014 non-byliners. The following chart helps to understand.

Islamabad27%

New Delhi32%

Misc41%

Dateline Propotion

366

Chart 5.5: Percentage of Byline

The lack of bylined stories shows that media is willingly looking towards the government

for its contents. It also proves that either media is not free or not willing to publish stories

other than provided by the officials. It is symbol of agenda-reflecting media, which is less

reliable. It is common issue in the media of Pakistan and India but the Indians are better

as overall they have more bylines as compared to Pakistan.

5.2.4- Dependency Syndrome

The sources of the filed stories shows that 816 stories came from the official channels,

while 438 from mixed sources and another 255 were based on anonymous sources. Thus,

majority 54 per cent came from the official sources. See the chart below:

Byline 33%

Non-byline67%

Byline-Non-byline proportion

367

Chart 5.6: Sourcing of News Stories

Sourcing of news stories is important as it helps to understand the independence of

media. The greater dependence on the official sources shows that there is lesser freedom

of expression. Agenda reflecting media is totally dependent on officials and agenda

setting media is mostly dependent on private sources, while agenda-building media is

partially dependent on official sources for news.

Experts interviewed for the study said that the Pak-India media mostly relies on official

sources. Ziauddin said that official sources are more often used. The same was echoed by

Rahimullah Yusufzai who said official sources are most common both in print and

electronic. Javed Siddiq said official sources traditionally dominated. Suhasini Haidar

said the “sources are essentially officials” but sometimes other sources are used, while

Shujaat Bukhari said the “sources for journalists are always government based and

generally these sources are faceless.”

Thus, it has been concluded that both the electronic and print media of Pakistan and India

mostly depend on officials. It hinders freedom of reporting. Resultantly, media most of

the time reflect the official agenda.

Official Source54%

Mixed Source29%

Anonymous Source

17%

Sourcing

368

5.2.5- Highlighting Conflict

Another important finding is about the contents related to conflicts dominating the

coverage. The study showed that majority 868 stories highlighted conflicts between the

two countries, 379 focused on peace while 262 were neutral in stance. The following

chart highlights it further.

Chart 5.7: Ratio of Peace, Conflict and Neutral Stories

It helps to gauge the slant of the coverage which for the sake of the study was designed to

judge the stories before the impact was measured. Majority 58 per cent coverage

highlights the conflict between the two countries, as compared to 25 per cent showing the

positive aspect of the ties. It strengthens the hypothesis that media creates hurdles in the

ties between Pakistan and India rather than facilitating and promoting peace through its

coverage. The experts also supported this finding.

5.2.6- Impact on Peace Process

The study shows that there were 571 positive and 938 negative stories. The percentage of

positive stories is 37.83 while that of negative ones is 62.16 percent. The chart below also

shows the same in more graphic form:

Conflict58%

Peace25%

Neutral 17%

Slant in Stories

369

Chart 5.8: Negative-Positive Impact of Media on Relations

It shows that majority 62 per cent of the coverage was negative and had adverse impact

on the peace between the two countries. It confirms the fundamental argument that the

media plays a negative role in the relations of the two countries, thus supporting the

hypothesis.

The experts interviewed for the research also generally supported it. A specific question

was asked from them about the impact of media on the relations and peace efforts

between the two countries from 2000- 2010.

Ziauddin said the impact is negative while Siddiq said that media tries to give a realistic

picture of relations which are often tense. Hence, media highlight the tension. Yusufzai

said that media impact is often negative. He gave the example of Aman ki Asha initiative

by the Jang group and Times of India, which has not changed the editorial policy of the

two groups. He said they try to promote peace but their policy on nuclear issue, water

problem, Kashmir etc. remains the same. “It shows the media’s dilemma where they are

compelled to tow the official line even while trying to promote peace,” said Yusufzai.

Thapar said media often forces the government to take a tougher and harder stand. This

was most certainly apparent in January 2013 when Pakistan was accused of beheading an

Indian soldier and the Indian media went 'ballistic' ignoring that in the not so-distant past

Indian soldiers had done similar things. Haidar said in terms of impact, the government

Positve38%

Negative 62%

Impact

370

was a greater influencer than the media, which confirmed the agenda-reflecting mind-set.

Bukhari said the electronic media was more jingoistic and had more negative impact on

the peace process.

To further crystalize the response of the experts on the issue of media impact on ties, they

were asked three close-ending questions. All six experts agreed that the impact of media

on Pak-India peace process is generally negative during the period under study except

during the composite dialogue. They also said that media reinforced the existing biases

between Pakistan and India from 2000 to 2010. Lastly, they said that over all media

coverage was partially constructive and partially destructive for the relations during the

research period.

The responses match with the findings of the selected print media. Most of the time,

media is negative but there are moments when it becomes positive. It can be inferred that

it is highly dependent on the “official truth” and sways according to the policy shift of the

two governments.

5.2.7- Jingoistic Overtones

An important finding was about the impartiality of media in covering the ties of the two

countries. The experts were quite vocal about it. Ziauddin said jingoism is part of

Pakistan media. Though a segment of media was impartial but another part was biased

also. He said the Urdu media is more jingoistic and since electronic media is all in Urdu,

so jingoism is essential element of it. He also said media failed to play the role of an

independent watchdog and “most of the time it played in the hands of the state

authorities.”

Yusufzai commenting on the overall coverage said: “I don’t think it was very objective; it

was mostly partial and occasional impartial.” He also said that media was not

independent while covering ties of the two countries. “I don’t think we were very

independent media, or an independent watchdog. We can’t claim that.” Siddiq said media

coverage was mix of partiality and jingoism. Urdu media was more partial while English

media was more objective, he said.

371

Thapar said the Indian media coverage of Pakistan is often jingoistic and biased. He said

in both countries, there are “small pockets of objectivity and rationality.” Bukhari said

media is not an independent watchdog. “It was not playing in the hands of state

authorities but it was also not playing a positive role either,” he said.

Haidar said media coverage of relations of two countries is “negative” as Indian media is

not independent when it comes to the relations with Pakistan. “Media is driven by certain

bias, certain negative narrative which is fuelled from inside the government” she said,

adding that there were periods when media was positive “when government wants to

send out an unequivocal positive message.”

The experts generally agreed that media was jingoistic and plays a negative role but there

are moments when it becomes positive. The answer is in line with the survey of

newspapers which also shows that media was positive for events like the Agra Summit

and the Composite Dialogue but it was negative during military standoff and Mumbai

attacks.

5.2.8- Media of ‘Official Truth’

The study shows that Pak-India media reflects the official policy of successive

governments and behave as an “official mouthpiece” for the coverage. Whatever media

propagates is not always true or based on accepted canons of right and wrong. The

official statements, which media frequently uses are often a twisted form of national

interests. The running of official versions of events and policies, without exercising

editorial control, has been termed by the researcher as “media following the official

truth”.

The official truth is closer to propaganda but is subtler and more incisive. It offers a

grand narrative of national interests. Media is lured to present it as the only possible

solution to a given problem. In case of Pakistan and India, Kashmir offers a good

example. For the Pakistanis, Kashmir is a jugular vein of the country; for the Indians, it is

an integral part of the Indian Union. The media willingly buys the official truth and

splashes it across the country. The important part is that while presenting the official

truth, media seldom feels playing in the hands of the officials. It considers it a duty to

372

highlight the national interests, without feeling that official truth damages its impartiality

and neutrality.

The study shows that media of Pakistan and India more than often dances to the official

tunes. For example, it dug up the trivial details of the Musharraf’s visit to India for the

Agra Summit to make it interesting and justify the talks. In the same pattern, media is

positive at the launch of the composite dialogue and supports peace, but it takes lead to

sour the ties after the Mumbai attack. It was also jingoistic in the coverage of the military

standoff of 2002. The study shows that on all these occasion, there is a unique unity in

the official version of the events and editorial policy of media.

It leads the researcher to conclude that the Marc Genest concept of agenda-setting,

agenda-building and agenda-reflecting media is only partially applicable to the media of

Pakistan and India. Similarly, the ‘political contest model’ of Gadi Wolfsfeld has limited

application. Also, all other theoretical parameters only partially help to understand the

role of media in context of Pak-India ties. Hence, the model: ‘media of official truth’ has

been introduced.

The model allows deviations to the mainstream media while following the officials,

creating an aura of freedom of expression. It does not use intimidation like the close

societies but builds a narrative which media tends to follow. It inculcates a habit of subtle

self-censorship. The model also operates by building a system of patronization that

focuses on key media persons and media outlets, showcasing them as patriotic and

representatives of the free national media.

373

CONCLUSION

Pakistan-India ties have been critical throughout their history. A review of the relevant

literature shows that the relationship has not been properly analyzed through the

perspective of media. This study has investigated whether and how media factored in the

bilateral efforts to resolve issues and improve relations in the selected period of 2000-

2010. The main objective is to investigate whether the coverage in the mainstream media

has a positive or negative impact on the relations.

The researcher scanned the selected media in both countries through content analysis and

interviews to study the main premise that Pakistan-India media through partisan and

jingoistic coverage of relations create hurdles for peace between the two countries than

facilitating the peace process. Besides, the study has also addressed the following

questions:

1- What is the role of media in determining Pak-India relationship?

2- What is the source of news stories?

3- How the issue of dateline has been treated?

4- How the issue of byline has been treated?

The findings prove that media plays a role in Pakistan-India relations and the officials of

the two countries greatly rely on it to express opinions about each other. The sheer

magnitude of stories proves this point because the selected newspapers from both

countries published 1509 stories in the designated 75 days of coverage, at the average of

over 20 pieces a day.

The important conclusion is related to the impact of media on peace process. The

findings show that 938 stories in the mainstream media presented the negative side of the

relations as compared to relatively small number of 571 stories showing the positive side.

The percentage of negative stories is 62.16 per cent, while that of positive ones is 37.83

per cent. Within the positive category, there are 330 slightly positive, 203 positive and 38

extremely positive, while in the negative category, there are 223 slightly negative, 548

negative and 167 as extremely negative. It shows that the extremely positive stories (38)

374

are far less than extremely negative (167). Thus, highly negative contents dominate in the

media coverage.

The overall empirical data and evidence gleaned through the study prove that there is

widespread negativity in the media about the relations of the two countries, which hardly

helps the cause of peace. It confirms the basic arguments that the media creates hurdles

for peace than facilitating it.

The partisan approach of media has been proved by analyzing the sources of news

material. It has been concluded that media is mostly dependent on the official sources for

stories related to the bilateral ties, as a large number of 816 stories (54 per cent) came

from official sources, while 438 from mixed sources and only 255 came from anonymous

sources.

While showing media dependence on the government for contents, this trend also

confirms the theory of ‘official truth’ dominating the news contents. It means that media

follows the official agenda. The views of experts are also in conformity with this finding.

The consolidated result is that both the electronic and print media in Pakistan and India

mostly depend on the official sources. This trend not only interferes with freedom of

reporting but also imposes on media the official thinking about the nature of bilateral ties.

The twin results - first the reliance on the officials sources for contents and second media

highlighting the negative side of relations - confirm that media is partial and jingoistic. It

shows that the coverage of relations is biased, as it is based on the respective national

policies. The experts also agree that media is jingoistic and plays a negative role.

The research also shows that the reporting is diverse in terms of place of origin of news

stories which is also called as dateline. Total 403 stories originated from Islamabad, 488

from New Delhi and 618 from other cities of two countries. It proves that media gave

proper coverage to stories from different areas of the two countries. Hence, the horizontal

aspect of the coverage is satisfactory.

The study shows that media independence is minimized due to use of un-named writers

or non-bylines as 67 per cent stories were not adequately bylined. There are only 495

375

proper bylines as compared to 1014 inadequate by-liners, proving that media is not

circumspect to the authenticity of the writers and spends less on manpower to collect

news, and relies more on the news agencies or ambiguous channels for contents than

placing reporters in the field.

Another conclusion drawn is that Pakistan media is slightly better than the Indian media

in terms of pro-peace news contents. It has been proved through the survey of

newspapers and interviews of experts. First, Pakistan media published more stories (784)

than the Indian media (725) in the selected 75-day period. Second, there were total 352

positive and 432 negative stories in the Pakistani newspapers as compared to 219 positive

and 506 negative stories in the Indian newspapers. A comparison between the sub-

categories of positive and negative stories shows that Pakistan media is less negative than

Indian media. There were total 352 positive and 432 negative stories in the Pakistani

newspapers but there were total 219 positive and 506 negative stories in the Indian

newspapers.

Within the impact category, Pakistan media has majority 194 stories as slightly positive,

138 positive and 20 as extremely positive. In the negative impact category, its 104 stories

are slightly negative, 247 negative and 81 extremely negative. On the other hand, in the

Indian media, there are 136 slightly positive, 65 positive and 18 extremely positive,

whereas in the negative group, there are 119 slightly negative, 301 negative and 86 as

extremely negative stories. It shows Pakistan media having more positive stories than

negative ones about ties with India.

So, Pakistan fared better in terms of more positive and less negative stories about

bilateral ties than India. But on the other hand, overall media coverage in both countries

was more negative than positive for the ties and consequently, it had an adverse impact

on the relations.

In Pakistan, majority of 269 stories were published during coverage of the Agra Summit.

It was followed by 186 stories for military standoff, 148 for composite dialogue, 106 for

Mumbai attack and 75 for parliament attack. In India, maximum 235 were published

around the Agra Summit, followed by 147 for military standoff, 136 for parliament

376

attack, 122 for Mumbai attack and 85 for composite dialogue. It shows that Pakistan

media was more enthusiastic about peace efforts as evident by the coverage of the

composite dialogue when Pakistan media published 148 stories as compared to India’s

85.

The study also shows that there are moments when media becomes positive but it is

mostly linked to the events. For example, media was positive for events like the Agra

Summit and the Composite Dialogue but the same media was negative during the

military standoff and the Mumbai attack. It is in line with the main observation that

media depends on the government policies and when officials adopt a positive approach

towards each other, reporting in media also becomes positive. It strengthens the

conclusion that media changes its attitude according to the changes in the official policy

towards each other. It is also confirms the ‘official truth theory’ and thus an important

contribution to the body of knowledge about the bilateral relations between Pakistan and

India.

It also shows that bonhomie like the composite dialogue is susceptible to the dominant

narrative, which is often negative. The positive coverage through the years following the

start of the composite peace process completely vanished in the wake of the Mumbai

attack.

Another result of the research shows that media in Pakistan was slightly changing to

become more independent while covering India. Its positive coverage, though still weak,

provide a glimmer of hope. Its major example is maturity shown by Pakistan media after

the Mumbai attack when it deviated from the official version and dug up the location of

Ajmal Kasab in Pakistan. The experts interviewed for the research appreciated this new

role of Pakistani media.

There is also another trend showing that while Pakistan media is maturing, Indian media

is getting more aggressive towards Pakistan as proved by its coverage after the Mumbai

attack. One of the experts, Shujaat Bukhari, specially highlighted this point and

complained that the Indian media is a hurdle to normalize ties after Mumbai attack as it

377

goes on reminding the government about lack of progress about the slow trial of

“suspects” held in Pakistan.

The study also provides a theoretical basis to understand the role of media in the bilateral

peace process. This role has been summed up in the following five points:

1. Media in Pakistan and India is (relatively) free, diverse and vociferous.

2. It takes interest in the bilateral relations including peace moves, visits of

dignitaries, conflicts and other bilateral interactions.

3. Officials from both sides use media on issues of national interests.

4. Media in both countries mostly follow the official narrative of relations.

5. Media in both countries impact the foreign policy issues.

Like the empirical data, the theoretical findings also strengthen the “official truth theory”

that media in Pakistan and India mostly follows the respective official versions of

bilateral relations while reporting on peace processes of Pakistan and India. It is also

supported by the data showing reliance on the official sources for news contents.

One major limitation of the study was lack of access to content of electronic media. It

could not be addressed despite efforts. This is the area the next researchers interested to

study the role of media in relations of Pakistan and India should focus. In the absence of

proper archives, recording materials, hurdles in cross-border travels and lack of access to

media outlets, it is a daunting task but worth making an endeavor.

A major recommendation for the media practitioner is to look beyond the official version

of relations and avoid background interviews with un-named officials to write about the

matters of peace and conflict between Pakistan and India. There is a lot of scope for pro-

peace and neutral stories which reporters can attempt without antagonizing the “powerful

circles” within their countries and without hankering after the official version of

relations.

Another suggestion is related to the kinds of news articles. It has been seen that majority

of stories about the two countries are related to political, strategic and defence matters.

There are new areas of social security, human rights, food security, energy shortages,

378

environmental degradation, melting of glaciers, water issues, arms race, nuclear warfare

and economic issues which should be focus of working journalists interested in peace

between the two countries.

A slight paradigm shift in the editorial polices of the media houses and priorities of field

reporters can change the entire perspective of media coverage of relations and make a

positive impact on the peace process between Pakistan and India.

379

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abel, Elie. “Television in International Conflicts.” In The New Media in National and

International Conflict, edited by Andrew Arno and Wimal Dissanayake. Boulder;

Westview Press, 1984.

Ahmer, Moonis. The Arab-Israeli Peace Process: Lessons for India and Pakistan.

Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Akhtar, Hasan, and Jawed Naqvi. “Pakistan, India pledge to continue talks.” Dawn, July

18, 2001.

Alam, Absar. “Peace needs compromises, says Musharraf.” The Nation, July 21, 2001.

Allen, Tim, and Jean Seaton. The Media of Conflict. London: Zed Book, 1999.

Althiede, David L. "The Impact of Television News Formats on Social Policy." Journal

of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 1991, 3-21.

Amarnani, Kavita. “Beating the ban on Bollywood.” The Guardian, February 4, 2008.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2008/feb/04/beatingthebanonbollywood.

Amin, Shahid M. Pakistan Foreign Policy: An Appraisal. Karachi: Oxford University

Press, 2000.

Aneja, Atul. “Appropriate steps if Pak. keeps its words: Mishra.” The Hindu, June 4,

2002.

Aneja, Atul. “Lashkar responsible for attack, says Jaswant.” The Hindu, December 15,

2001.

“Attackers trained in Pakistan, alleges India.” Dawn, December 2, 2008.

Badhwar, Inderjit, and Tavleen Singh. "Sikh terrorists: The Pakistan hand." India Today,

May 15, 1986. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/pakistan-involvement-in-sikh-terrorism-

in-punjab-based-on-solid-evidence-india/1/348451.html.

Baruah, Amit. “India-Pakistan peace process ‘irreversible.’” The Hindu, April 19, 2005.

Baruah, Amit. “Pakistan must act against terror groups.” The Hindu, July 13, 2006.

Bhattacharya, Sourish. “Menu laced with Ayurvedic elixirs to set the right mood.”

Hindustan Times, July 14, 2001.

Bhutto, Benazir. “The Agra Summit.” The Nation, July 16, 2001.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2008/feb/04/beatingthebanonbollywood



380

Bozel III, L Brent. Weapons of Mass Distortion. New York: Three Rivers Press, 2005.

Bukhari, Shujaat. Editor Rising Kashmir newspaper, Interview by Researcher, Islamabad,

27 September 2013.

Chandran, D. Suba, and P. R. Chari. Armed conflicts in South Asia. London: Routledge,

2011.

Chari, P. R., Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema and Stephen P. Cohen. Perception, Politics and

Security in South Asia. London: Routledge, 2003.

Chari, P.R., Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema and Stephen P. Cohen. Four Crises and a Peace

Process: American Engagement in South Asia. Washington DC: The Brooking Institute,

2007.

Chaudhuri, Pramit. “Kashmir discussion may be bumped up to political level.” Hindustan

Times, July 15, 2001.

Cheema, Pervaiz Iqbal and Imtiaz H. Bukhari, ed. Conflict resolution and Regional

Cooperation in South Asia, Islamabad: Asia Printers, 2004.

Cheema, Pervaiz Iqbal, Rashid A Khan and Khalid Hussain ed. Pakistan-India Peace

process: The Way Forward, Islamabad: Asia Printer, 2010.

Cohen, B. C. The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,

1963.

Cole, Benjamin, ed. Conflict, Terrorism and the Media in Asia. London: Routledge,

2006.

“Dialogue to start next month.” Dawn, January 7, 2004.

Dikshit, Sandeep. “I am for no-first use of nuclear weapons: Zardari.” The Hindu,

November 23, 2008.

Dixit, J.N. India-Pakistan in War and Peace. London: Routledge, 2002.

Durrani, Mahmud Ali. India & Pakistan: The Cost of Conflict and Benefits of peace.

Karachi: OUP, 2001.

“Efforts on to defuse tension: Sattar.” Dawn, January 2, 2002.

“Empathy and fear for fallout in Pakistan.” The Times of India, November 30, 2008.

Entman, Robert M. "Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power." Journal of

Communication. 2007, 163-173.

381

Gaikwad, Rahi. “Terrorist came from Pakistan, Mumbai police chief.” The Hindu,

December 3, 2003.

Genest, Marc A. Negotiating in the Public Eye. Stanford: Stanford University Press,

1995.

Gergen, David R. “Diplomacy in a television age: The dangers of Teledemocracy”, in

The Media and foreign policy, ed. Simon Serfaty. London: MacMillan, 1990.

Geyelin, Phillip L. “The strategic defence initiative: The president’s Story.” In The Media

and Foreign policy, edited by Simon Serfaty. London: MacMillan, 1990.

Ghosh, Samarjit. “Mumbai Terror Attacks: An Analysis, Institute of Peace and Conflict

Studies.” http://www.ipcs.org/pdf_file/issue/SR66-Samarjit-Final.

Haidar, Suhasini. Foreign Affairs Editor CNN-IBN television, Interview by Researcher,

Islamabad, 25 September 2013.

Hallin, Daniel C. "The Media, the War in Vietnam, and Political Support: A Critique of

the Thesis of an Oppositional Media." The Journal of Politics, 1984, 2-24.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130432.

Haq, Ihtasham ul. “Summit to focus on Kashmir Dispute.” Dawn, July 11, 2001.

Hasan, Khalid. “End to infiltration no guarantee India won’t attack: CSIS.” Daily Times,

June 2, 2002.

Herman, Edward, and Noam Chomsky. Manufacturing Consent. New York: Pantheon,

1988.

Hess, Stephen, and Marvin Kalb, ed. The Media and War on Terrorism. Karachi: Oxford

University Press, 2004.

“History of Mass Media.” http://www.buzzle.com/articles/history-of-mass-media.html.

http://itv.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1:karan-

thapar&catid=1:about-us&Itemid=10.

“India debunks Pakistan’s offer for joint probe.” The Times of India, December 16, 2001.

“India faced an embarrassing defeat during Indo-Pak standoff 2000-2001: The Times of

India reveals.” Viewed at http;//www.induspress.com//p=786.

“India hints at troops’ reduction in Valley.” Dawn, April 15, 2005.

“India may cross LoC, says Vajpayee.” The News, December 16, 2001.

http://www.ipcs.org/pdf_file/issue/SR66-Samarjit-Final

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/history-of-mass-media.html



382

“India probe blames Pakistan for attack.” The News, December 17, 2001.

“India sees Lashkar behind blasts.” Dawn, July 13, 2006.

“India serves demarche on Pakistan.” The Hindu, December 2, 2008.

“India summons Pak envoy, issues protest note.” The Times of India, December 1, 2008.

“Indian official says attack plan ready: Defence ministry plays down report.” Dawn, June

4, 2002.

Iyengar, Shanto. "News Coverage of the Gulf Crisis and Public Opinion."

Communication Research. 1993, 365-383.

Jafferlot, Christophe, ed. A History of Pakistan and its Origins. trans. Gillian Beaumont,

London: Anthem press, 2008.

Jaish carried out attack with ISI help.” The Times of India, December 16, 2001.

Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, and Paul Waldman. The Press Effect. New York: OUP, 2003.

Jehadis to announce ceasefire.” The Tribune, June 5, 2002.

Joshi, Manoj. “No quick fix on Kashmir possible.” Hindustan Times, July 8, 2001.

Kalb, Marvin. “Forward.” In The Media and Foreign Policy, edited by Simon Serfaty.

London: MacMillan, 1990.

“Kashmir vote won’t pave way for talks: India.” Dawn, October 5, 2010.

Katyal. K. K. “Change in stance due to pressure.” The Hindu, July 9, 2001.

Khan, Zulfiqar. India-Pakistan Nuclear rivalry: Perceptions, Misperceptions and Mutual

Deterrence. Islamabad: IPRI, 2005

Khan, Zulfiqar. India-Pakistan Nuclear Rivalry: Perceptions, Misperceptions, and

Mutual Deterrence. Islamabad:Asia Printers, 2005.

Khare, Harish Khare. “I have come with a message of peace.” The Hindu, July 17, 2005.

Lang, K., and G. Lang. Politics and Television. Chicago: Quadrangle, 1969.

Louw, Eric. The Media & Political Process. 2nd Edition. London: Sage, 2010.

Malhotra, Jyoti. “Brajesh, Aziz did spadework to bury past.” The Indian Express, January

7, 2004.

383

Malhotra, Jyoti. “Musharraf skips K-course at banquet, but serves bilateral talk dish.” The

Indian Express, January 5, 2004.

Malhotra, Jyoti. “Silence, men at work on peace track.” The Indian Express, January 6,

2004.

Manmohan rules out redrawing of Indian map.” The Frontier Post, April 18, 2005.

McCombs, Maxwell E., and Donald L. Shaw. "The agenda-setting function of mass

media." Public opinion quarterly. 1972, 176-187.

Mehmud, Ershad. “Pak-India Peace Process: An Appraisal.” Policy Perspective.

Islamabad: Institute of Policy Studies, 2007.

Miller, Tobby. “US Journalism: Servant of the Nation, Scourge of the Truth.” In Conflict,

Terrorism and The Media in Asia, edited by Benjamin Cole. London: Routledge, 2006.

Miraj, Naveed. “Aggressor to regret: Musharraf.” The Frontier Post, January 3, 2002.

Mohan, C. Raja. “Agra talks fail.” The Hindu, July 17, 2001.

Mohan, C. Raja. “India hints at giving more time to Pakistan.” The Hindu, January 4,

2002.

Mohan, C. Raja. “Indo-Pak. Talk: an air of pessimism.” The Hindu, July 8, 2001.

Mohan, C. Raja. “Talks to focus on framework.” The Hindu, July 11, 2001.

Mowlana, Hamid. “The Media and Foreign Policy: A Framework of Analysis.” In News

Media and Foreign Relations: A Multifaceted Perspective, edited by A Malek. Norwood,

NJ: Ablex, 1998.

“Mumbai death toll rises to 125; India blames neighbours.” The News, November 28,

2008.

“Musharraf, Singh vow to move on peace path.” The Frontier Post, April 17, 2005.

“Musharraf, Vajpayee hold historic meeting.” Dawn, January 6, 2004

Namboodiri, Udayan. “Pakistan dumps visa rules for Musharraf’s press conference.”

Hindustan Times, July 20, 2001.

Naqvi, Jawed. “Musharraf meets APHC leaders, pledges support.” Dawn, July 15, 2001.

Naqvi, Jawed. “Vajpayee slams party hawks for war frenzy.” Dawn, December 20, 2001.

“New Delhi hopes to avert showdown.” The Frontier Post, January 3, 2002.

384

“Next terror attack on US will originate in Pakistan: Report,” The Times of India,

December 3, 2008.

Niazi, Zamir. The Press Under Siege. Karachi: Karachi Press Club, 1992.

Nokes, R. Gregory. “Libya: A government story.” In The Media and foreign policy,

edited by Simon Serfaty. London: Macmillan, 1990.

Noorani, A. G. “War Benefits Neither Side.” Frontline, January 05-18, 2002. Viewed at

http://www.flonnet.com/f11901/19010040.htm.

Paddar, Sajad. “The Composite Dialogue Process between India and Pakistan: Structure,

Process and Agency.” Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics,

Heidelberg University, Working Paper No 65, February 2012.

“Pak for Mandela’s meditation.” Hindustan Times, July 13, 2001.

“Pak troops to move to Indian border if tensions escalate.” The News, November 30,

2008.

“Pak. missile test provocation.” The Hindu, October 5, 2002.

“Pakistan condemns blasts, attack,” Daily Times, July 12, 2006.

“Pakistan ready for no first use of nukes: Zardari.” The New, November 23, 2008.

“Pakistan ready for nuclear no first use, Zardari.” Dawn, November 22, 2008

“Pakistan, India now closer to peace.” The Nation, July 13, 2001.

“Pakistan, India say peace irreversible.” The Frontier Post, April 19, 2005.

“Pakistan, India say peace irreversible.” The Frontier Post, April 19, 2002.

“Pakistani scientist briefed Osama on nuke.” The Times of India, December 13, 2001.

Paul, Thazha V. ed. The India-Pakistan Conflict: An Enduring Rivalry. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2005.

“PM ready to discuss any issue.” The Tribune, January 1, 2002.

Qaisar, Rana. “Islamabad declines pre-summit mily talks.” The Nation, July 10, 2001.

Qaisar, Rana. “Musharraf optimistic about talks’ continuity.” The Nation, July 19, 2001.

Rajain, Arpit. Nuclear Deterrence in South Asia: China, India and Pakistan. New Delhi:

SAGE Publication Ltd, 2005.

http://www.flonnet.com/f11901/19010040.htm

385

Rajghatta, Chidanand. “Mumbai attack: Pak role under scrutiny.” The Times of India,

November 27, 2008.

Rajghatta, Chidanand. “World media blames Pak for terrorism.” The Times of India,

December 20, 2001.

Raju, S., S. K. Jagadeswari and Wimal Dissanayake. "Treating the Indo-Pakistan

Conflict: The Role of Indian Newspapers and Magazines." In News Media in National

and International Conflict. London: Bowker 1984.

Ramachandran, T. R. “Indo-Pak tension looms over SAARC.” The Tribune, January 4,

2002.

Rana, Javed. “Musharraf, Vajpayee for more CBMs.” The Nation, January 6, 2004.

Ranney, Austin. Channels of Power: The Impact of Television in American Politics. New

York: Basic Books, 1983.

Ray, Keith. “Chinese Inventions.” Eye Magazine, Spring 2004. Viewed at

http://www.sacu.org/greatinventions.html.

Raza. Syed Irfan. “Govt accepts India’s plea for ISI help in Mumbai probe.” Dawn,

November 29, 2008.

Reddy, Muralidhar Reddy. “Pak. Accuses India of shelling on LoC.” The Hindu, July 22,

2001.

Reddy, Muralidhar. “‘Kashmir, main cause of tension.’” The Hindu, July 12, 2001.

Robinson, Piers. “The CNN Effect: Can the New Media Drive Foreign Policy?” Review

of International Studies. 1999, 301-309.

Rupesinghe, Kumar. Civil War, Civil Peace. London: Pluto Press, 1998.

Sareen, Sushant. The Jihad Factory: Pakistan’s Islamic Revolution in the Making. New

Delhi: Har-Anand Publications, 2005.

Sattar, Abdul. Pakistan’s Foreign Policy: 1947-2005. Karachi: OUP, 2007.

Schlesinger, Philip, Graham Murdock and Philip Elliot. Television ‘Terrorism. London:

Comedia, 1983.

Schofiled, Victoria. Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War. IB

Tauris, 2000.

Semour-Ure, Colin. The Press, Politics and the Public. London: Methuen, 1968.

http://www.sacu.org/greatinventions.html

386

Serfaty, Simon. “The Media and foreign policy.” In The Media and Foreign Policy,

edited by Simon Serfaty. London: Macmillan, 1990.

Seymour-Ure, Colin. The Political Impact of Mass Media. London: Constable & Co Ltd,

1974.

Shaikh, Shakil. “India to pay price for any misadventure.” The News, December 15,

2001.

Sharma, Pranay. “Peace prayers on al lips.” The Telegraph, April 17, 2005.

Sharma, Pranay. “Play over, result withheld.” The Telegraph, April 18, 2005.

Sharma, Vinod, and Udayab Namboodiri. “Summit comes to dead end.” Hindustan

Times, July 17, 2001.

Sharma, Vinod, and Zia Haq. “There is a bit of India in every Pakistan: Zardari.”

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Nwes-Feed/India/There-is-a-bit-of-India-in-every-

Pakistan-Zardari/Article 1-353488.aspx.

Sharma, Vinod. “For Musharraf dialogue is one-way traffic.” Hindustan Times, July 22,

2001.

Shukla, Vivek. “High Commissioner house hold special memories.” Hindustan Times,

July 11, 2001.

Siddiq, Javed. Resident Editor Nawa-i-Waqt. Interview by Researcher. Islamabad. 7

August 2014

Singh, Jaswant. Conflict and Diplomacy. New Delhi: Rupa & Co, 2008.

Singh, Jaswant. India and Pakistan. New Delhi: Lancers Publishing Pvt Ltd, 1990.

Soroka, Stuart N. "Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy." The International

Journal of Press/Politics. 2003, 27-48.

Stolar, Alex. “To the Brink: Indian Decision-Making and the 2001-2002 Standoff.”

http://www.stimson.org/spotlight/to-the-brink-indian-decision-making-and-the-2001-

2002-standoff/.

Stuart, Allan, and Barbie Zalizer, ed. Reporting War: Journalism in Wartime. Oxen, UK:

Routledge, 2004.

Subrahmanya, K. “Rattled UPA govt suspects LeT link.” Deccan Herald, July 12, 2006.



http://www.stimson.org/spotlight/to-the-brink-indian-decision-making-and-the-2001-2002-standoff/

http://www.stimson.org/spotlight/to-the-brink-indian-decision-making-and-the-2001-2002-standoff/

387

Subramanian, Nirupama. “Composite dialogue: India presses the pause button.” The

Hindu, December 2, 2008.

“Suicide attack on Indian parliament.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/13/newsid_3695000/3695057.s

tm.

“Summit breaks down.” The Nation, July 17, 2001.

Swami, Praveen. “Three Lashkar fidayeen captured.” The Hindu, November 28, 2008.

Symond, Peter. “Attack on Indian parliament heightens danger of Indo-Pakistan war.”

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2001/12/ind-d20.html.

“Talks from February.” The Nation, January 7, 2004.

Taylor, M. Philip. Global Communication, International Affairs and the Mass Media

since 1945. London: Routledge, 1997.

Taylor, Philip. War and the Media: Propaganda and Persuasion in the Gulf War.

Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992.

Thapar, Karan. Anchorman with CNN-IBN. Interview through email by Researcher. 31

May 2013.

Thapar, Karan. http://itv.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1:karan-

thapar&catid=1:about-us&Itemid=10.

“US had warned Pa to bridle ISI in 1992: Report.” The Times of India, December 9,

2001.

Walgrave, Stefaan, Stuart Soroka, and Michiel Nuytemans. "The Mass Media’s Political

Agenda-Setting Power: A Longitudinal Analysis of Media, Parliament, and Government

in Belgium (1993 to 2000)." Comparative Political Studies, 2007. 814-836

Watt, Nicholas. “Pakistan boasted of nuclear strike in India within eight seconds.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/15/pakistan-boasted-nuclear-sstrike-pakistan.

Weaver, David H. "Thoughts on Agenda Setting, Framing, and Priming," Journal of

Communication. 2007, 142–147.

Wolfsfeld, Gadi. Media and Political Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1997.

Yasin, Asim. “Nation united to defend sovereignty.” The News, December 3, 2008.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/13/newsid_3695000/3695057.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/13/newsid_3695000/3695057.stm

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2001/12/ind-d20.html



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/15/pakistan-boasted-nuclear-sstrike-pakistan

388

Yusufzai, Rahimullah. Resident Editor The News. Telephonic Interview by Researcher. 5

August 2014.

Zaller, John, The Nature of Mass Opinion, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Zehra, Nasim. “Role of Media in Conflict Resolution.” In Conflict Resolution and

Regional Cooperation in South Asia, edited by Cheema, Pervaiz Iqbal and Imtiaz H

Bokhari. Islamabad: Asia Printers, 2004.

Ziauddin, M. “Differences force third round.” Dawn, July 16, 2001.

Ziauddin, M. Group Editor The Express Tribune. Interview by Researcher. Islamabad, 24

July 2014.

Ziring, Lawrence. Pakistan: The Enigma of Political Development. Kent: Westview,

1980.

12 killed in attack on Indian parliament.” The News, December 14, 2001.

47,000 died in Kashmir, says Delhi.” Dawn, November 22, 2008.

Newspapers

Daily Times, June 1-5, 2002.

Daily Times, October 1-5, 2002.

Dawn, July 8-22, 2001.

Dawn, December 6-20, 2001.

Dawn, January 1-5, 2002.

Dawn, June 1-5, 2002.

Dawn (Islamabad) 1 Oct 2002- 5 Oct 2002.

Dawn, January 3-7, 2004.

Dawn, April 15-19, 2005.

Dawn, July 9-13, 2006.

Dawn, November 19-December 3, 2008.

Deccan Herald, July 9-13, 2006.

The Frontier Post, January 1-5, 2002.

389

The Frontier Post, April 15-19, 2005.

The Hindu, July 8-22, 2001.

The Hindu (New Delhi) 6 Dec 2001- 20 July 2001.

The Hindu, January 1-5, 2002.

The Hindu (New Delhi) 1 June 2002- 5 June 2002.

The Hindu, October 1-5, 2002.

The Hindu, January 3-7, 2004.

The Hindu, April 15-19, 2005.

The Hindu, July 9-13, 2006.

The Hindu, November 19-December 3, 2008.

Hindustan Times, July 8-22, 2001.

The Nation, July 8-22, 2001.

The Nation, January 3-7, 2004.

The News, December 6-20, 2001.

The News, November 19-December 3, 2008.

The Telegraph, April 15-19, 2005.

The Times of India, December 6-20, 2001.

The Times of India, November 19-December 3, 2008.

The Tribune, January 1-5 2002.

The Tribune, June 1-5 2002.

The Tribune, October 1-5, 2002.

The Indian Express, January 3-7, 2004.

390

APPENDICES

Appendix 1

Questionnaire for Pakistan Journalists

Specific Questions

1- What are your views on Musharraf's famous/infamous breakfast meeting with the

Indian media during the Agra Summit? Do you consider its coverage as a reason for th

failure of the Summit?

2- Did Pakistan media coverage contribute, in some way, to the failure of th Summit?

3- What are your views about coverage of Indian parliament attack in Pakistan media?

Do you think the coverage was fair? Did media played in the official hands to respond to

Indian allegations about involvement of Pakistn-based groups?

4- How do you comment on media coverage of 2002 military standoff? Whether media

was neutral or jingoistic and pro-conflict?

5- How was the launching of the composite dialogue in 2004 treated by Pakistan media?

6- How do you comment on Pakistan media coverage of various official interactions/talks

under composite dialogue process from 2004 to 2008? Did mainstream media support the

peace process?

7- How do you see the coverage of the Mumbai attacks in Pakistan media?

8- Did media play any role in the suspension of peace dialogue after the Mumbai

tragedy?

General Questions

1- Whether media coverage of above five incidents in Pakistan was mostly impartial or

biased and jingoistic?

2- Do you think media during these events played role of an independent watchdog, or it

played in the hand of state authorities?

3- How did media (through its stories) impact the relations and peace efforts between the

two countries from 2001- 2010?

Multiple-choice Questions

(Choose any one option. If you do not agree with given options, then please formulate

the response in your words.)

Q-1: How you would categorize role/impact of Pakistan media in/on relations of two

countries from 2001 to 2010.

391

1) Positive, 2) negative, 3) extremely positive, 4) extremely negative, 5) somewhat

positive, or 6) somewhat negative.

Q-2: Tick any one:

1) Media reinforced existing biases between Pakistan and India from 2001 to 2010.

2) Media broke barriers of differences and opened news avenues for ties from 2001

to 2010.

3) Media remained neutral and only gave factual coverage from 2001 to 2010.

Q-3: Tick any one:

1) Overall media coverage from 2001 to 200 was constructive for ties

2) Overall media coverage was destructive for relations

3) Partially constructive and partially destructive.

India media-related Question

1- How do you comment on coverage of the Indian media of the above five events

and its impact (whether positive or negative) on relations of the two countries?

392

Appendix 2

Questionnaire for Indian Journalists

Specific Questions

1- What are your views on Musharraf's famous/infamous breakfast meeting with Indian

media during the Agra Summit?

2- Did Indian media contribute, in some way, to the failure of summit?

3- Did Indian media or government first blam Pakistan or Pakistan-based groups for

parliament attack?

4- How did media coverage of parliament attack influence the Indian government

decision to mobilize army?

5- How do you comment on media coverage of 2002 standoff?

6- How was the launching of the composite dialogue in 2004 treated by the Indian

media?

7- How do you comment on the Indian media coverage of various official

interactions/talks under the composite dialogue process from 2004 to 2008? Did the

mainstream media support the peace process?

8- How do you see the coverage of Mumbai attacks by th Indian media?

9- How did media treat/mention/present Pakistan after during/following the attacks?

10- Did media play any role in suspension of peace dialogue after the Mumbai tragedy?

General Questions

1- What was the source of the most of news stories covered by media on/during/around

these events? (I am trying to see if officials were trying to feed media or journalists doing

independent work. So please if possible mention approximately if they were anonymous

sources, official sources, press release, press conference etc.).

2- Whether media coverage was mostly impartial or biased and jingoistic?

3- Do you think media during these events played role of an independent watchdog, or it

played in the hand of state authorities?

4- How did media (through its stories/editorials/analysis) impact the relations and peace

efforts between the two countries?

5- Briefly, how you would categorise role/impact of Indian media in/on relations of the

two countries from 2001 to 2010. (Choose any one option. If you do not agree with given

options, then please formulate the response in your words.)

A: 1) positive, 2) negative, 3) more positive, 4) more negative

393

B: 1) Media reinforced existing biases, or 2) Media broke barriers of differences and

opened news avenues for ties, or 3) Media remained neutral and only gave factual

coverage.

C: 1) Overall media coverage was constructive for ties, or 2) Overall media coverage was

destructive for relations, or 3) partially constructive and partially destructive.

Pakistan media related question

2- How do you comment on coverage of the Pakistani media of the above five events

and its impact - whether positive or negative - on relations of two countries?

Date post:	04-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

ROLE OF MEDIA IN PAKISTAN-INDIA PEACE PROCESS: 2000...

Documents