India’s indignation over (un)diplomatic conventions
Forget WikiLeaks, according to India’s Foreign Minister the greatest threat to Indo-U.S. relations are the hands of airport security guards on New Delhi’s diplomatic elite.
On Dec 4, Indian Ambassador to the U.S. Meera Shankar was pulled from the interminable airport security queue at Jackson-Evers International Airport in Mississippi and subjected to a full body pat-down by security officials, despite reportedly stressing her diplomatic credentials.
India’s three biggest English newspapers gave the story front-page treatment on Friday, jostling for column inches alongside the continued investigations into a $39 billion telecoms scam and India’s crucial role in the ongoing climate change talks in Cancun.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s view, that the incident was “appropriate under the circumstances“, fuelled a sense of injustice in New Delhi.
“This is unacceptable to India and we are going to take it up with the U.S. government and I hope things will be resolved so that such unpleasant incidents do not recur,” S.M. Krishna, India’s Foreign Minister, was reported as saying in response.
Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao, presumingly taking a break from such pressing issues as thawing talks with nuclear-armed neighbour Pakistan and organising the upcoming visit of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, told reporters on Friday that India was awaiting a report from Washington before taking up the matter with American authorities.
But not everyone is caught up in the hyperbole.
“Just think there is too much fuss and fury wasted on this stuff. And anyway, why should a diplomat be above the normal rules?” prominent Indian broadcast journalist Barkha Dutt tweeted on Friday, as her channel, NDTV, screened U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s promise to respond to Krishna‚Äôs complaints prominently in its news bulletins.
And one mainstream media outlet appears to have seen this incident as little more than a cocktail of miscommunication and over-zealous security procedures — themselves attracting increased ire from ordinary Americans.
In an editorial titled ‚ÄėPat down, grow up‚Äô, the daily Indian Express newspaper, which placed the news story on page 3 of its Friday edition, asked ‚ÄúDoes a simple case of over-vigilant airport security warrant such emotion from India‚Äôs foreign minister?‚ÄĚ
‚ÄúThere are certain exemptions that the diplomatic corps enjoy, but if those conventions are occasionally bypassed, that‚Äôs not a grievous injury to India‚Äôs self-worth,‚ÄĚ the editorial concluded.
The perceived targeting of Indian VIPs, political or otherwise, by airport security officers seems to be the Ministry of External Affairs‚Äô b√™te noire.
Praful Patel, ironically the Indian Aviation Minister, was stopped and questioned by airport officials in Chicago in September, Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan was detained by Newark Airport officials in August of last year and former President A.P.J Abdul Kalam was forced to remove his shoes and submit to a full body check by Continental Airlines officials at Delhi Airport in July 2009.
All three incidents had the foreign office rolling out stinging criticism.
The furore created by India‚Äôs diplomatic elite and whipped up by the fiercely patriotic press is in marked contrast to the coyness out of New Delhi with regards to Beijing‚Äôs pressure for India to boycott Friday evening‚Äôs Nobel Prize ceremony in Oslo, in which jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo will – in absentia – win the global peace prize.
India has chosen to attend, but declined to use its decision to take a public stand for free speech or human rights.
VIP treatment for its diplomatic corps is obviously far more important.