Modi sets conditions, US swallows Meet on third attempt

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by Ray, Feb 12, 2014.

  1. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Apr 17, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Modi sets conditions, US swallows
    Meet on third attempt

    New Delhi, Feb. 11: The US made Narendra Modi wait for more than eight years. But in the end, it was the Gujarat chief minister who forced Washington to plead — not once, not twice, but thrice in the past three months before agreeing to terminate a diplomatic spat that began when the US denied Modi a visa in 2005.

    US ambassador to India Nancy Powell will meet Modi on Thursday in Gandhinagar, ending America’s boycott of the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate ahead of the Lok Sabha elections where he is widely viewed as a front-runner.

    But it is the US embassy here that was eventually made to sweat for the meeting by Modi after a series of tense attempts at ice-breaking that failed, Indian and American officials aware of the details of the outreach have confirmed to The Telegraph.

    Modi eventually agreed only to a meet strictly on his terms, the officials said. The location had to be Gandhinagar; the choice of subjects had to be in tune with his national role; and the US had to discomfit his rivals, the Congress-led central government, by obtaining its approval for the meeting even though Modi and Powell could have circumvented the foreign ministry nod.

    The US, left alone in its boycott of Modi for the 2002 Gujarat riots after the European Union and Britain made up with him, accepted the conditions.

    “He got what he wanted, and he got it exactly the way he wanted,” an official said. “In the end, they (the US) were chasing him.”

    Modi first snubbed the US in November, when the American embassy requested a meeting between Powell and him in New Delhi on the margins of a series of rallies he was to hold in the last week of the month leading up to state elections in the capital.

    A meeting on the sidelines of a public event would have helped Washington limit the criticism of an about-turn on its human rights concerns that a full-fledged, one-on-one meet would trigger.

    It would also eliminate the need for Powell to seek prior approval from the external affairs ministry. The foreign office, under diplomatic protocol, only expects to be consulted for pre-scheduled, one-on-one meetings between foreign diplomats and constitutional office-holders in India. The foreign ministry, officials confirmed, was not told about the attempted November meet.

    But Modi refused to meet Powell on the sidelines of any public event in New Delhi, insisting that any meeting take place in his Gandhinagar office.

    The US embassy spokesperson hinted at the November attempt at brokering a truce, but did not comment on details.

    “This (the February 13 meeting) is a part of our concerted outreach to senior political and business leaders that began in November to highlight the India-US relationship,” the spokesperson told The Telegraph.

    The second snub came in December, when US Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo from Barack Obama’s Democratic Party wanted to meet Modi along with five Republican Congressmen. Republican Congressmen had earlier too met Modi, but the presence of a Democrat was meant to signal a thaw from Obama’s party.

    But Modi turned down a meet with the delegation, citing the arrest of diplomat Devyani Khobragade in New York on charges of visa fraud.

    The Gujarat government then told the US embassy that Powell would need the foreign ministry’s approval for a meeting with Modi. The US embassy wrote to the foreign ministry in January, officials said.

    Although Modi and the Congress leadership have traded vitriolic barbs in election campaigning, the government had no reason to block the meeting, and approved it on February 7, officials said.

    When foreign diplomats meet chief ministers, talks usually revolve around investment. But Modi and Powell will talk about India-US relations, in a willing recognition by Washington that he may be Prime Minister in a few months.

    Modi’s snubs appear rooted both in the US delay in breaking the ice with him, and in a specific spat in September 2013.

    The BJP had invited Powell to attend Modi’s rally in Delhi on September 29, but the US embassy indicated that Powell would not be able to attend the event.

    Washington had begun a thaw in ties with Modi that began on November 16, 2010, when then American consul-general in Mumbai Michael Owen met him in Gandhinagar.

    But in September, 2013, the US was still contemplating whether to formally signal an end to its boycott --- a message that would need a meeting between Modi and a senior representative of the Obama administration like the American ambassador to India.

    The European Union’s top envoy in India and the ambassadors of Italy, Germany, Greece and six other European nations had already met Modi earlier in the year. And in October, British high commissioner James Bevan travelled to Gandhinagar to meet Modi, the highest diplomatic contact between the UK and the chief minister since the riots.

    An angry BJP withdrew the September invitation, leaving US officials worried that they may have burnt under-construction bridges with Modi, who had earlier that month been declared the party’s prime ministerial candidate. This Thursday, the reconstruction will start.

    Modi sets conditions, US swallows


    This indicates how the whole issue panned out, notwithstanding all the hot air that was reverberating on the TV channels last night.
    VIP, Free Karma, iNDiAN.96 and 6 others like this.
  3. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Apr 17, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Hope US will apply uniform standards of human rights in dealing with Narendra Modi: Salman Khurshid

    Ahead of US envoy Nancy Powell's meeting with Narendra Modi, External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid today hoped America will apply with regard to the Gujarat Chief Minister the standards consistent with its policies in dealing with issues like human rights.

    Holding that the US was free to interact with Modi, Khurshid, however, said "there are lot of things that they will not and we should not put behind."

    Khurshid hoped Americans, Europeans and other countries will apply standards consistent with their policies in dealing with issues of human rights.

    He said that in the past, India was lectured by a number of countries on human rights and it would be interesting to "know what Powell tells Modi."

    "He is not the example that should be seen as an Indian.

    We are a country that believes in Gandhian way of life, compassion, service without recognition and none of these terms applies to Modi," he said.
    Meanwhile, External Affairs spokesman Syed Akbaruddin said it was normal for foreign embassies to make a request for facilitating meetings with "constitutionally-elected functionaries" of India.

    "The request was made quite sometime back and the MEA said they could proceed with the meeting with the constitutionally-elected functionary. It is a normal courtesy extended to all the heads of missions," he said.

    Asked how he saw the upcoming meeting, the spokesman said "we consider the meeting between the Ambassador of a country, which has friendly relations with India, and a constitutionally-elected functionary of a state," he said.

    Signalling an end to nine years of boycott of Modi in the aftermath of post-Godhra riots, Powell is meeting the Gujarat Chief Minister on Thursday in Gandhinagar.

    Khurshid said "as far as any other country treating him or for that matter any other political party dealing with him, everything has to be done on merit.

    "They (US) have to understand that they are dealing with particular set of circumstances, they are dealing with particular background with the person they are dealing with.

    But it's their decision. We did not persuade anyone not to give a visa and we are not going to say that you give a visa," the External Affairs Minister said.

    "There are lot of things that they will not and we should not put behind. The holocaust is not put behind and if holocaust is not put behind who are we to lecture them to say you put holocust behind?.

    "Similarly, if we find that there are certain things that still have to make accountable, then that's our decision as a country as people and they should not by any act of theirs or by any decisions of theirs undermine something which is our democratic entitlement. I am sure they would not want to undermine our democratic entitlement," Khurshid said.

    The External Affairs Minister also referred to conviction of Maya Kodnani, a former minister in Modi government, in a riot case.
    "Maya Kondani has been convicted for most horrendus slaughter that had taken place. She was a Minister in Modi's government. I only want to know if Modi or somebody in his government feels responsible for what Maya Kondani did," he said.

    Hope US will apply uniform standards of human rights in dealing with Narendra Modi: Salman Khurshid | Latest News & Updates at

    I am appalled at the way petty politicking in our country can be applied wherein we demean ourselves as a country and as Indians.

    First of all, it is not earthshaking that the US Ambassador is to meet Modi.

    Ambassadors meet Chief Ministers quite regularly and so why the hoop la over the US Ambassador meeting Modi.

    Last night the US analyst of US News on a TV channel when asked why the US treated Modi as an untouchable and now so keen to meet him, said quite candidly that it was done to further US national interest; in that the US had to show that US was not against Muslims because of the Islamic clamour after the Iraq War that it was not a War on Terror but a War on Islam. Hence, since this was a riot which affected the Muslim, this was a good way to show that the US was not targeting the Muslim.

    Even though some in the US had reservations on the War on Iraq, yet the Democrats never openly criticised Bush and the Republican Party. Here in India, we love to condemn each other in front of the world! And to imagine a Foreign Minister could be such a lowdown person, in charge of Foreign relations, wears it on his sleeve to condemn India and Indians.

    Khurshid is a Muslim and he has every reason to feel aggrieved by the events in Gujarat. That is understandable. However, being a Govt functionary and that too a Minister of the Nation, should not stoop so low as to put his religious anger above the Nation publicly and so officially!

    How is the Gujarat riot equal to that of the Holocaust? Only a person who is an illiterate village idiot would not know the facts. Khurshid is surely not an illiterate, or an idiot or even a village idiot or is he?

    What about the Sikh riots? Now, the Sikhs can feel that was also a Holocaust. In fact, Sikhs on the TV Debates, irrespective of political affiliations are very categorical about the carnage and how, unlike the Gujarat riots where leading luminaries involved in the riots, none of the 'stalwarts' in the Sikh riots have been arrested or jailed! I wonder if that slipped Khurshid mind.

    Likewise, why does Khurshid have selective amnesia? How can be forget the Muslims of the Muzzafarnagar carnage, where another fool Muslim leader had the audacity to dub the Muslim victims as beggars?

    No sir, India has a history of rioting.

    It is OUR problem. It is OUR shame. It is OUR business to right the wrong.

    It is NOT the business of anyone of us to publicly humiliate ourselves at the doormat for foreigners.

    Actually, they only laugh at us as the Biggest Fools on Earth and not feel that we have any reason to claim to be the Biggest Democracy of the World or whatever foolish tag we love to give ourselves.

    Khurshid is the Biggest FOOL of India and a total disgrace to Indian mankind.

    Modi will be judged by the Courts, even if those involved in the Sikh riots aren't, duly shielded by Khurshid and his cahoots!

    Yesterday, watching the TV, I squirmed to be an Indian!

    What a sad state we are in.
    VIP, Free Karma, iNDiAN.96 and 5 others like this.
  4. bose

    bose Senior Member Senior Member

    Apr 5, 2010
    Likes Received:
    Kolkata, India.
    Shame on Khurshid and Congress...
    chase and parijataka like this.
  5. Jagdish58

    Jagdish58 Regular Member

    Feb 5, 2014
    Likes Received:
    Yes Narendra modi should be punished by USA

    Because in 1968 Narendra modi was the one who motivated US troops in Vietnam in My Lai Massacre

    My Lai Massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    And Khurshid saab & Congress were asked by Modi to Massacre Sikh in 1984:thumb:

    Funny Wolfs have become justice:taunt1:
  6. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    May 6, 2013
    Likes Received:
    Strong words by the EAM. Is he representing the official GOI position.
  7. chase

    chase Tihar Jail Banned

    Aug 22, 2012
    Likes Received:
    salman khurshid is such a @@%#$#[email protected] !!

    this moron should think that such statements show india as a greatly divided nation and shows the people of india in bad light.
  8. dhananjay1

    dhananjay1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Mar 10, 2013
    Likes Received:
    Indian commies who still live in 1950s and consider US as the commie version of devil were happy and approved of US when it didn't give Modi visa to visit US. Now they can safely go back to bashing US. :rofl:
  9. pkroyal

    pkroyal Regular Member

    Aug 5, 2013
    Likes Received:
    Realpolitik is about enlightened self interest
    Any thing wrong with that- NO
    Problem arises when a Nation cannot arrive at a distilled version of where its self interest lies.
    In any Govt, responses to events that have occurred can be" war gamed" and the best response as official version arrived at . No rocket science required.
    Things get out of hand when guys with "down's syndrome", imbeciles, morons , idiots & half wits take centre stage to prove a point but land up scoring self goals !! ( so much for Khurshid & co)

    Americans are smart, there Int agencies have informed them about the likely results of elections 2014.
    When at one extreme they could do business with a dictator like Musharraf or the Saud King, Modi is a much better prospect & democratically elected. Their posturing was for short term effect.

    Let the results of the elections come ,one never knows they may give him a doctorate for International peace & bend over backwards to accommodate him. India is also a very useful ally against growing Chinese hegemony in this region.
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2014
  10. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Sep 28, 2011
    Likes Received:
    North Carolina, USA
    I am trying to think of another example where US diplomats conferred with a politician in another country who did not hold a national office.

    I take this as just political posturing on Modi's part:


Share This Page