When I was growing up in India, I had heard much about an institution named New York Times (NYT) in United States from my relatives and father. In many of my sojourns to different public libraries across India, I had read NYT enthusiastically. After arriving in United States, one of my first actions was to create an account in their web site. I have enjoyed their reports and writings over the years. In my heart, I identify with many liberal causes. The paper did satisfy my liberal point of view most of the times. Sometimes I felt that NYT is too harsh on the religious conservatives of United but I decided to give them the benefit of doubt. The reason for this might have been that I never understood the importance of the causes of the religious conservatives. In brief, when you hail from a country where 300 million people live below the poverty line, passions over abortion and other stuff appear to be really superficial. However, this lack of balance sometimes used to disturb me.

Now the wheel has turned full circle. This happened with the visit of President Bush to India. I have listed down some of the articles published in NYT about the visit and the nuclear deal inked between the United States and India. I, as an Indian, overwhelmingly support the deal. I understand the importance of this deal for the future of India. The concept of energy security is very important for future growth of the Indian economy and the reduction in poverty. If you go through the listed articles and the editorials below, you will see a consistent trend of anti-India bias in NYT. In retrospect, NYT team comes off as pretentious pricks! Their position seems to be as long as Indians show the world their rope trick, Rajasthani folk songs, elephants, jungles, and pay the obligatory obeisance to the west, we will be treated as the exotic land that needs a pat on the back every now and then. But as soon as we start becoming really independent economically, start thinking, take lead in setting up policies, and innovating in the brave new world, we will be shown our real place and that place is beneath the feet of our masters. NYT pretends to be one of them as they seem to be carrying " the white man's burden" nowadays.

1. U.S. Gives India Applause, Pakistan a Pat on the Back
2. We Are (Aren't) Safer With India in the Nuclear Club
3. Dissenting on Atomic Deal
4. Muslim-Led Protesters Rage Against Bush on His India Visit
5. President Bush Goes to India
6. Bush Urges India to Split Civilian-Military Nuclear Plants
7. India, Oil and Nuclear Weapons

Nitin Pai who writes the wonderful blog "The Acorn" has written a great rejoinder to the last editorial titled "India, Oil and Nuclear Weapons". After reading that piece of trash (the editorial), I have realized the mental maturity of the idiots that comprise the editorial team of the NYT.

Unfortunately, because of some fallacious assumptions and pernicious arguments, the entire agreement is seen as a death blow to NPT by the experts here in the States. The deal has still not been finalized. Many US laws need to be changed for the agreement to eventually become a reality. The Bush administration will be facing a mountain when they have to convince the senate for modifying the laws. The non-proliferation "ayatollahs" are already baying for blood.

Generations of supposedly highly educated experts have based their entire careers in propagating the myth of the success of NPT to the world. They think that their entire life's work has been destroyed by the cheekiness of one country - India. India had the courage to call the bluff and show the world what NPT really is - a failed policy that not only did not succeed in preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons but was also destined to be doomed from the start. The basic premise of the NPT favoring the five nuclear weapon states is discriminatory. Something like this can never last forever. China, Iran, and North Korea have done everything to undermine the agreement in the last 20 years and yet the prophets of doom single out an open, responsible, and a democratic society for not only the failure of the agreement but also the apparent failure of their careers too.

¶ 9:23 PM