US embassy cable - 05DHAKA1450

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 DHAKA 001450 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FOR I/FW, B/G, IIP/G/NEA-SA, B/VOA/N (BANGLA SERVICE) STATE 
FOR SA/PAB, SA/PPD (LSCENSNY, SSTRYKER), SA/RA, INR/R/MR, 
AND PASS TO USAID FOR ANE/ASIA/SA/B (WJOHNSON) 
 
CINCPAC FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR, J51 (MAJ TURNER), J45 
(MAJ NICHOLLS) 
 
USARPAC FOR APOP-IM (MAJ HEDRICK) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KMDR, OIIP, OPRC, KPAO, PREL, ETRD, PTER, ASEC, BG, OCII 
SUBJECT: Media Reaction: Dr. Rice's reported comments on 
Bangladesh; Dhaka 
 
 
Summary: English language daily "New Age" op-ed says that it 
is quite clear that there was no specific mention of any 
Indo-US joint initiatives with regard to Bangladesh. 
Bangladeshi political affiliation is so blinding that one 
does not even hesitate to condemn the entire nation and rip 
asunder the country_fs image if it is convenient to a 
partisan political agenda. 
------------------------------------------ 
Dr. Rice's reported comments on Bangladesh 
------------------------------------------ 
"Motivated Journalism Troubling Bangladesh " 
Independent English language daily "New Age" op-ed 
(03/29/05) says: 
Be it politics or the press, political affiliation is so 
blinding that one does not even hesitate to condemn the 
entire nation and rip asunder the country_fs image alongside 
that of the government if that is convenient for partisan 
political agenda. 
An example of such journalistic bigotry has been the recent 
coverage given by a section of our press to the comment on 
Bangladesh made by the US Secretary of State Dr. Condoleezza 
Rice during her visit to India on 16 March.  I browsed the 
official websites of the US State Department, the US embassy 
in New Delhi as well as the relevant Indian and Bangladeshi 
press sites and found some interesting twists to the whole 
episode. For example, Bangladesh was mentioned not even once 
in the US State Department transcript on the joint press 
conference in New Delhi (16 March) attended by Indian 
Minister for External Affairs Natwar Singh and US Secretary 
of State Dr. Rice. The same was true in case of the 
statements issued by the US embassy in New Delhi. But 
surprisingly, the Indo-Asian News Service (IANS) circulated 
a news on 16 March quoting an unnamed senior US embassy 
official as saying that the US had suggested that the _etwo 
countries work together in Bangladesh_f in view of the 
_egeneral deterioration of security_f in Bangladesh. _eThe 
official was referring to the spiraling violence and the 
growing assertiveness by fundamentalist groups in that 
country_f, so said the IANS dispatch. Judging from the 
anonymous nature of the source, it is most likely that the 
Indian news agency had merely cooked up the story to satisfy 
certain hostile quarters that find it advantageous to 
stigmatize the Bangladeshi nation as well as its 
democratically elected government. 
It is quite clear from the foregoing that there was no 
mention of any Indo-US joint initiative on Bangladesh. But 
on the basis of the above transcript, the first line of our 
BDNEWS story published by the leading national dailies was 
_eUS Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said, 
Bangladesh is becoming _equite troubling_f and there is more 
that the USA and India could do_f. What a distorted 
presentation of facts! A section of the Indian and Western 
press may be justified in forever seeking holes in the 
social and political fabric of Bangladesh, but it is beyond 
comprehension why our very own press should go out of the 
way to put slur on the Bangladeshi nation. 
 
The latest twist in this whole string of anti-Bangladesh 
propaganda centering on Dr. Rice_fs visit to India was the 
UNB (United News of Bangladesh - a private wire service) 
story published in the national dailies on 22 March. The 
story says: _eThere has been no development of specific 
initiatives on US-Indo cooperation on issues pertaining to 
Bangladesh, a spokesperson for the US embassy told UNB, 
responding to a query about what US Secretary of State 
Condoleezza Rice had stated in India about the US-India 
initiatives to deal with the security situation in 
Bangladesh_f. If the story had ended there as an admission 
of earlier reporting errors, that would have earned kudos 
from the adherents of ethical journalism. But the story 
continues with another round of vitriolic utterances on the 
state of affairs in Bangladesh: _eThe US mission in Dhaka, 
along with counterparts of other donor organizations, are 
concerned by the deterioration of governance in Bangladesh - 
especially by political violence and the law and order 
situation. The spokesperson said, _eThreats to, and attacks 
upon the press, the political opposition, cultural 
institutions, and minority communities are all causes for 
concern." This is what we call motivated, partisan and 
unpatriotic journalism. 
Chammas