Pro-America India (and Anti-)

As President Bush departs for India today, he can expect a warmer reception than in most countries. Sixty-six percent of Indians polled by the newsweekly Outlook said that they regard Bush as a friend of India.

Bush benefits from generally pro-American feelings on the subcontinent. A 2005 poll done by the Pew Research Center found that 71 percent of Indians had a favorable image of the United States, the highest approval rating measured in any country, including Canada and Great Britain.

This popularity, however, does not necessarily translate into support for U.S. foreign policy. Three years ago, when the Bush administration asked India to supply troops for the invasion of Iraq, there was little popular support for the idea and the Indian government said no. Seventy-two percent of the Outlook poll respondents agreed with the proposition that America is "a bully."

What Indians find attractive in the United States is technology and job opportunities. Forty-six percent said they "loved" the United States, and the same percentage said they would like to settle in the United States.

Indians who don't like Bush are planning on making themselves heard. Novelist Arundhati Roy, writing in The Hindu, said she deplores Bush's scheduled visit to a memorial to Mahatma Gandhi, apostle of non-violence and founding father of modern India, in the Rajghat section of Dehli.

The American president is "by no means the only war criminal who has been invited by the Indian Government to lay flowers at Rajghat," Roy writes. "(Only recently we had the Burmese dictator General Than Shwe -- no shrinking violet himself.) But when George Bush places flowers on that famous slab of highly polished stone, millions of Indians will wince. It will be as though he has poured a pint of blood on the memory of Gandhi."

Roy predicts that the "the Government, the Police and the Corporate Press will do everything they can to minimise the extent of our outrage. Nothing the Happynews Papers say can change the fact that all over India from the biggest cities to the smallest villages, in public places and private homes -- George W. Bush, incumbent President of the United States of America, world nightmare incarnate, is just not welcome."

By Jefferson Morley |  February 28, 2006; 2:29 PM ET  | Category:  Asia
Previous: Iraq's Sectarian Violence: Made in America? | Next: India Divided on U.S. Nuke Deal


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Arundhati is being impractical and quite out of touch.

Rural india does not so much care. For them Bush, Clinton, Blair, Chirac and Putin are the same. I can understand that if it was Musharraf, some may have opinions.

The lower middle class is a small band. But they will be quite divided and tend to swing with the tide. Otherwise, the caste based voting and the successful practice of vote bank will not have survived.

The higher middle class is very upwardly mobile and competitive and hence will like Bush significantly. America is the symbol of opportunities and mobility.

The Upper class will like him anyways.

Posted by: G Puru | February 28, 2006 03:18 PM

How did an article about how India likes President Bush turn into an article about how India hates President Bush?

Oh right...the Washington Post.

Posted by: Irresponsible Speculator | February 28, 2006 03:27 PM

It's a balanced blog post. The first half centers on Bush's popularity in India, while the second half offers the contrarian viewpoint.

Posted by: Sydney, Australia | February 28, 2006 03:38 PM

Arundhati Roy is typical Indian Comminist against everything that's good for India, from economic decisions to foreign policy.

If India wants to sustain current GDP growth rate, eradicate poverty and be developed nation by 2020 its going to need immense contribution from USA in terms of strategic partnership, business and collaboration in various sectors.

Ms. Roy is grossly mistaken when she thinks that majority Indians are against Mr. Bush. Ms. Roy, it's time to be pragmatic and cut down on rhetoric.

Posted by: Amit Joshi | February 28, 2006 03:39 PM

Arund. Roy is a famous anti-Western leftist. It isn't news that she is going to say absurd things like that.

Why nearly half of this column was devoted to her pat nonsense is puzzling.

Posted by: rds | February 28, 2006 03:40 PM

Since Bush is much more popular in India (66%) than in the US (39%), it would be best for all of us if he stays there.

Posted by: fm | February 28, 2006 03:44 PM

Arundhati Roy - you could'nt have found a more opinionated left winger to express "outrage" at Bush's visit. Also, note that she has never been critical of communist/socialist dictators from Castro to authoritarian populists like Chavez - heck, you cant hear her complaining about the terror creating Maoists in neighboring Nepal.

When she can have a balanced view of the world, people will isten to her - and she is dead wrong about every one in India being against Bush - there is resentment over the Iraq war but there are no strong feelings of hate for Bush among the vast majority of Indians( on the contrary, it is more positive as the article points out)

Posted by: NS | February 28, 2006 03:53 PM


Oh that's right--once your popularity ratings get too low, you should be exiled. Makes perfect sense to me.

I bet you didn't say that when Clinton's numbers hit the toilet when he was doing some bloated intern in the Oval Office an lying under oath about it.

If you don't like Bush, try to convince a majority of people of that instead of spouting some silly nonsense you got from Then again, it's because of silly statements by people like you that independents don't vote for Democrats anyway.

Posted by: ILoveLiberals | February 28, 2006 03:56 PM

Looks like Bush is more popular in India and Roy is more popular in America.

I would like to see the article with more quotes from other writers who are not as angry as Roy.

Posted by: Rishi Naik | February 28, 2006 04:01 PM

Re: ILoveLiberals -

I stand corrected. Bush's approval rating in America is actually only 34%, and Cheney is at 18%, according the most recent major poll released today.

Posted by: fm | February 28, 2006 04:09 PM

Why shouldn't India love Bush? He has done nothing to stop them from taking American jobs.

Posted by: Dave Bob | February 28, 2006 04:16 PM

including Canada and the UK? why bring Canadians into it? we hate Bush more than any other country except perhaps Iraq. and India most assuredly doesn't need USA or any other country for its growth prospects.

Posted by: bpw | February 28, 2006 04:46 PM

Ms Roy is almost a unheard name to the Indian masses - this paper is adviced to better leave her alone. Atleast that will be incentive enough for her to consider writing her second book.
Bush going to Iraq is like Rajiv Gandhi taking on LTTE in Sri-lanka. Rajiv's popularity went down, but he was still loved after that. That explains why Indian's aren't too carried away by the Bush's Iraq misadventure.

Posted by: gemvini | February 28, 2006 04:46 PM

people like Arundhati roy and other leftists in India need just be ignored. they are just a crazy bunch of pinheads.

imagine these people are protesting in India in support of Iran's nuclear program (that India should vote in favour of Iran at IAEA), while they protested against Indian nuclear program in 1998.


Posted by: Chan | February 28, 2006 04:52 PM

The news media cannot seem to understand why the American people regard them with such low esteem. Could it come from unbalanced articles like this?

I could care less what Morley thinks of Bush but I am very interested in the beliefs and perceptions of 71% of Indians and how that translates into relations between India and the US. Unfortunately it seems Morley's personal motivation to slam Bush outweighs his job responsibility to accurately inform his readers.

Keep up the good work Morley.

Posted by: JS | February 28, 2006 04:54 PM

While Morley was attempting to show a variety of opinions in India, it is Roy's uninformed comments that do stand out.

Roy is a media darling of the West. While she was born into a privileged, wealthy family - she has not taken any steps to improve the economic conditions of poor Indians. Bush has certainly made mistakes, but he is spending more money on AIDS education than all previous administrations combined, he could have bashed Indian and American companies during his re-election, but chose not to, and understands that the badly broken system of nuclear technology controls needs to be fixed for the real world. India is more secure and growing faster as a result of greater interaction with the U.S., irrespective of who is in office in Washington or New Delhi.

Aside from her personal chauffer, how many jobs has Roy created in India? Limosine liberalism (cars and air-conditioning for me, but not for thee) may be bad enough in a developed Western nation like the U.S., but to practice it in a developing nation like India is truly abhorrent.

Posted by: KXB | February 28, 2006 05:04 PM

ILoveLiberals tells FM

"If you don't like Bush, try to convince a majority of people of that"

FM doesn't have to do anything. Bush has already done that all by himself, by convincing 66% of the people not to like him.

Posted by: NAC | February 28, 2006 05:10 PM

If India loves Bush, they have my permission to keep him. Please!

Posted by: | February 28, 2006 05:28 PM

"George W. Bush, incumbent President of the United States of America, world nightmare incarnate, is just not welcome."

Look out Eugene Robinson! Looks like she's out for your job!

Posted by: Capitalist Bob | February 28, 2006 05:29 PM

I'd like to know how much $$ this trip is costing America AND India. bush is taking 50 vehicles, 4 helicopters, 4 plane loads of CIA/Secret Service agents and who knows how much more. He is so hated he has to do all of this to stay safe. What's he going to do when he finally leaves office? Lock up the State of Texas to keep out the "bad guys"?

Posted by: Pat | February 28, 2006 05:33 PM

They are many in india who want unnecessary attention and she is one of them. Believe me in india many people adore US and also don't have any negative out look towards Mr.Bush. He will a nice welcome in India

Posted by: Raj | February 28, 2006 05:38 PM

"I'd like to know how much $$ this trip is costing America AND India. bush is taking 50 vehicles, 4 helicopters, 4 plane loads of CIA/Secret Service agents and who knows how much more."

When Clinton visited India in 2000, it cost over $40 million. I trust you were just as cost-conscious then?

Posted by: KXB | February 28, 2006 05:39 PM

Arundhati - the lunny leftist idiot. Just because someone conferred a worthless award, she's doesn't become the "heartbeat" of Indian masses. What a worthless trash this b*%#h.

Posted by: Puren | February 28, 2006 05:40 PM

Dave, its funny how people complain about indians taking american jobs, but no one complains when indians buy american stuff...or for that matter when any country buys american stuff!!

Posted by: Paul | February 28, 2006 05:42 PM

Historically, in India there are always peoples who supported the foreign power to rule over them. That genes are alive and well. The Moguls, British now the USA. Now we hate both moguls and british for colonizing us!! BUSH is new Badhusha or king of India. You hate or like him it is destiny.

Posted by: RAJA | February 28, 2006 05:47 PM

Hope you excuse my grammatical mistakes in the earlier message. My first language is Gujarati. I speak the language of business very well.

That's why I dilike people of Arundhati's, and her other communist supporter's, ilk. The do nothing, create nothing, and destroy everything brigade will bring down the country very soon. So for that reason, I advocate Gujarat to secede from the Republic of India on the ground of unfair taxation. Any takers of this idea from South India? You folks will be receiving the same brunt of leftist stupidity since Bengalis are ruling the roost.

Posted by: Puren | February 28, 2006 05:53 PM

I think indians (like RAJA) need to get over thier paranoia of being dominated by "foreign powers". The british and Moguls colonized a divided india. So my advice --- stick together and the world will treat us as a power to be befriended rather than colonized or dominated.

Posted by: Paul | February 28, 2006 05:55 PM

Clinton loved Indian food and ate like a pig when he went to India. Wonder how George's appetite is?

Posted by: Satya | February 28, 2006 06:09 PM

If anyone thinks bush will act like Clinton and eat the food he's offered, I have a port to sell to you. Are you kidding? He's too good to eat ordinary American food wherever he goes. He will bring his own cooks and his own ingredients. He won't touch anything in India. By the way, those of you who seem to think bush is a good thing: realize this - he thinks he's above Americans and you shouldn't think he has any good feelings toward you. The only thing you're good for is lower wages that puts money in his pockets. Please don't kid yourselves.

Posted by: Pat | February 28, 2006 06:17 PM

A.Roy would be a slave in the kitchens of the sultanates of "modern" india, or a namess servant -one of the oppressed masses of the hindu kingdoms where a woman needs to "know" her place, had it not been the liberation of women effected by evil British imperialists, and the ensuing world order sustained by the benevolence of the annoyingly-brash, loud-mouthed, good-intentioned American hegemony. The world will mourn America when its "gone". A.Roys of the world, whose "voice" is sustained by the very principles that America is defending, will disappear into the abyss of medieval societal "order". How wretched and ironic it is, for a hindu woman to be railing against America, when there is absolutely no pretext - historical grievance against America? Nixon sending the carrier in 71 is not a viable explanation for this vitriol.

She should be more concerned about what islam is doing to women and their minorities, in India and elsewhere, and what her "own" people, the hindus, are doing to each other in the name of caste, than to presume to be defending the rights of iranian mullahs to develop nukes and iraqi "freedom". Engaging in repetitive, stale diatraibes against the President of the United States? Presumptuous and embarrassing.

Perhaps she's angling to keep her profile high in the hopes of getting more book deals from the dreaded capitalists and imperialists (and more intercontinental jaunts, to spew more misguided taunts. hey that rhymed)

Posted by: Raj | February 28, 2006 07:26 PM

Throughout history the major power of that time has ruled. Here are a few examples, Great Britain ruled most of the world, the Ottoman Empire, Napolean, Gengis Khan (most of Asia), and Hitler tried to rule the world. The only "super-power" to never try to take over a country as part of itself is the US. Some may say that is what we are doing in Iraq. However, once the Iraqi gov't asks us to leave we will. They don't want us to go because they will have to deal with the insurgent terrorist who will try to take control of Iraq. So, what does the US do and why does India like the US. Well, we donate more money to charity as a gov't then all other nations combined, we donate more now to AIDS then ever before, we will defend any ally, we will overthrow a dictator, stop genicide, say exactly what we think, fight terrorist "head-on". We also assist foreign allies in, industrial growth, with environmental, financial, and humanitarian aid, and we will aid them if ever threatened by another nation or any threat. The countries that don't have a favorable opinion of the US is because they don't like that we have the power to affect ever nation on Earth and that scares them.

Posted by: Tony | February 28, 2006 07:38 PM

To comment on what Pat said, all Presidents have a motorcade that is basically a small army. That is to protect our leader and it doesn't matter if that person is a "Republican or Democrat" President, the fact is our President must be protected no matter the cost. And that protection cost just as much for Bush as it did for Clinton. So, give us a break.

Posted by: Tony | February 28, 2006 07:42 PM

Bush should learn from the biggest democracy in the world.It is the country where one is elected not "selected".Elections are held evey now and then an not always after 4 years.The leader of the party may not be the leader of the house.Hats off to US tax payers for blowing another 40 million !

Posted by: Top Gun | February 28, 2006 07:45 PM

So did anybody read the title of this article?????

World OPINION Roundup
It's a bunch of useless opinions that people have. And here you all are getting upset. Go outside, play with your kids/ the dog/ or a good friend. Read a book.

Sheesh Last time I ever read this. I'm going to go teach my son how to not be such a jerk.

Posted by: bmj | February 28, 2006 08:08 PM

Why is the Hooker with the Booker so important.

Posted by: Nilanjana Dasgupta | February 28, 2006 08:10 PM

One very good point someone made is that it is just the publicity stunt of Arundhati Roy. May be a acute case of attention seeking disorder. I believe since Indians are very moderate in their views they form opinion more objectively and welcomes Bush as a guest, don't like him when there is pressure on sovereign national policy. nothing much to read in opinion of single person, not 100 Indians bother what Arundhati says in the country of 1 billion people.

Posted by: | February 28, 2006 08:11 PM

Arundhati Roy can speak for herself. But Being an indian, I KNOW that people in india loves US and look up to it as a ROLE MODEL country.
Foreigners who have visited india can vouch for this, how many times locals asked them (in a good way) 'Are you from america?'.

People like Arundhati Roy's opinion just matters NOT. Infact I am preety sure that more people in india knows who BUSH is and not as much as who arundhati roy is.
By the way, in my humble openion, if it was only up to gandhi it would have taken india a few more years to get independance.

God Bless America and India.

Posted by: sid | February 28, 2006 08:12 PM

We the Undersigned, are appalled to learn that President George W. Bush will visit Mohandas ("Mahatma") Gandhi's memorial in the Rajghat section of New Delhi. President Bush's visit to this sacred memorial dedicated to the peace loving father of our motherland, and his intention of placing flowers on the beautiful slab of highly polished stone commemorating the life and work of Mr. Gandhi, is nothing short of an abomination to the virtues Mahatma Gandhi embodied, and connectedly, to the values, principles, and heritage of our great nation

We find Mr. Bush's visit to this sacrosanct political site in Rajghat celebrating the extraordinary accomplishments of Mahatma Gandhi and his life-long commitment to nonviolent means as a means of achieving independence, dignity, and equal justice unacceptable because of Mr. Bush's commitment to the preemptive and unilateral use of American force clearly articulated in the so-called, "Bush Doctrine" and manifested in the disastrous invasion of Iraq

We note that Mr. Bush' s ill-fated decision to invade Iraq against the advise of nearly every country in the world and in the face of condemnation by a great many of the globe's citizenry, coupled with his subsequent incompetence and mismanagement of the aftermath of this unjust war, has been the proximate cause of over 30,000 Iraqi deaths, the death of nearly 2,300 American service men and women, and the maiming and disfiguring of thousands of other Iraqis and Americans

We note that Mr. Bush's visit to India may be a diplomatic necessity given the progressive deepening of Indo-American relations on mutually-beneficial economic matters, vital counter-terrorism efforts, pressing issues regarding civilian and military nuclear technology, and generally, the nascent strategic partnership between the two nations

Nonetheless, as concerned members of the South Asian community at American University, Washington College of Law, we believe that Mr. Bush's visit to the Mahatma Gandhi memorial in Rajghat is a sanctimonious affront to the life and work of one of the greatest men to walk this earth

Therefore, we condemn in the strongest possible terms any such effort by Mr. Bush to visit this site and hope that the Indian government will prevent Mr. Bush's insulting visit to Rajghat, thus preserving the inviolability of this great site from the blood-drenched hands of a man whose soul bears the burden of tens of thousands of deaths and millions of ruined lives

Posted by: Anik A. Shah | February 28, 2006 08:52 PM

America and Bush are doing what India always wanted to do. Arundhati roy does not represent even 0.001% of indian people. The likes of her, CPI are controlled by china and they should be thrown out of the country. We do need America and hope that God bless America and continue blessing India.

Posted by: | February 28, 2006 08:52 PM

All debates aside. I feel it's wrong for a utterly illiterate, imperialist, war monger to pretend to show respect to Gandhi and actually think he understands what Gandhi was all about.

Posted by: KK | February 28, 2006 09:00 PM

Just the opposite of the article of the NY Times this morning. The question posed by Pew Research will not evaluate real sentiments from Indian people. Indians are smarter than that, they do not have a problem with the US. They do have a bad opinion of the Bush Administration. Actually, they did have several demosstrations against his visit.

Posted by: MG | February 28, 2006 09:09 PM


Posted by: Deena | February 28, 2006 09:12 PM

Being an indian myself, I cant understand why there is a popular belief that left is liberal and progressive and worst of all intellectual , while right is oppressive leaving little middle ground in between. Arundati has off late being trying to be popular by being controverasial and leaning on the left there by getting endorsement for her so called intellect.

She is very out of mainstream and doesnot represent india or the so called millions she refers to

Posted by: Deepak | February 28, 2006 09:15 PM

I think we should just all stop fighting and moaning about who likes bush and who doesnt i go by the saying ' whatever happens' HAPPENS! lol but I think everyone should just be cool with each other if you dont then i dno what to do but JUST MAKE LOVE NOT WAR EH?? IDIANS DO LOVE AMERICANS THERE LIKE SO COOL WIF EACH OTHER THEY R LIKE COUZINS AND BROTHERS

Posted by: Richard | February 28, 2006 09:21 PM

Arundhati is an idiot and India is not proud of this leftist idiot. She hardly knows what the hell she is talking about. She is a moron who can only whine and talk non-sense. Ask her to come up with a list of do-goods. She has none. She has no vision, no plan and no nothing that is productive and something that will take India forward.

Please tell me which country will accept her? We are ready to outsource this idiot? Any takers from muslim countries?

Posted by: Krishna | February 28, 2006 09:24 PM

America and India need to come together NOT simply for mutual economic benefits. America IS the bastion of true liberty, despite the overblown, random aberrations and outrages, which are eventually "addressed", by internal corrective mechanisms. As a hindu, I need to get defensive here: This is not a question of kowtowing to "white" supremacy either. ;) A vast majority of today's "white" Americans have little or none of the Mayflower puritan "blood" - the breed and temperament that CREATED America. (check out the 99 signers of the declaration of Independence). A vast majority today, are descendants of Scots-irish, Germans and Celtic Irish who themselves had fled their poor, despotic homelands in despair and had known very little of "liberty" as known by the English.

However, the IDEALS that created America, were absorbed into the Indian constitution as well. The foundations of civic institutions in both countries - property rights, freedom of speech, judicial systems - they all have their roots in old England. Stronger bonds will strenghthen and continue to nourish the commitment to these universal ideals, especially on the Indian side. (considering its physical, cultural "distance" from the core states of the "free" world)

The attraction to "America" should not be limited to transient trinkets and fashions (pizza, harrison ford, and whatnot), but should be on a deeper level, that will survive centuries of transformation of other ephemeral "paraphernelia".

Hopefully Bush's visit will lay the foundations for SUCH a mutually beneficial partnership. Personally, I hope China can be embraced in this fold, somehow. Soon. It is sheer lunacy for China and India to remain "rivals".

I still think A.Roy is fishing for a book deal from the "evil , murderous, imperialist hegemonistic running-dogs" ;)

Posted by: Raj | February 28, 2006 09:25 PM

Why so much of print is being wasted on this idiot - Arundhati Roy? You see, she already achieved what she wanted: she wanted attention and she gets it. She wants to badmouth an American president who is friendly to India. She achieves that. She projects that most Indians hate Bush, though the statistics show otherwise. She achieves a bit on this score for there is an idiot in Washington post publishes what this trashy woman says.

Not only Arundhati Roy is an idiot, the Washingtonpost columnist is equally an idiot for having given importance this moron.

Posted by: Krishna | February 28, 2006 09:29 PM

i wont endorse Roy but yet i do find the the foriegn policy of USA just an extension of its great quest of OIL , specialy when Bush himself i a know OILlover . As for INDIA love BUSH/USA and vice versa , Politicaly its Pfct since both need each other with FUTURE in mind at grass root level nither amaricans nor indians care if Bush visits CUBA or United States of Moon

Posted by: | February 28, 2006 09:30 PM









Posted by: Jeremiah | February 28, 2006 09:36 PM

Didn't know Indians would go this far to cuddle up to Bush Inc. for the proposed Nuclear Technology transfer. I guess it doesn't take much to change sides!

Posted by: AH | February 28, 2006 09:40 PM

Regarding Jeremiah's jeremiad about India or USA using the other... pathetic invective

Posted by: Ayer | February 28, 2006 09:48 PM

The whole SLOGAN of "democracy" and "democracies are natural allies" is essentially an exercise in SELF-DECEPTION.

In the end people are driven by any creed that they have. Even when circumstances arise to lead them to extreme actions. In the USA, we have committed horific acts of war crimes and terrorism such as instantly decimating Hiroshima and Nagasaki and its women, infants and babies. All this, despite the BIBLE with all its lofty teachings of the "OTHER CHEEK".

If India, which is essentially in its historical roots a caste system, whose poverty, loudly clamors the callous indifference of its rich Brahmin class, and that of its government to its fellow citizen, comes to become a world power, then without any creed even resembling that of the Bible despite which we did the generous acts of Hiroshima and Nagasaki holocausts, Indian can become a real menace on the face of the earth.

Please, recall that Gandhi was killed by a high caste Hindu. Gandhi is not despised in India by the majority of Brahmins. His doctrine was evolved as a strategy in colonial yoke. It is not the true color or India.

The Hindus do not have any doctrine or arresting influence like THE HOLY BIBLE from genocidal crimes. All its neighbors, big and small hate India because they crave for revenge and domination.

We will be making India into a fascist super-power like we made Saddam and many others all over the world. Even the peaceful German people could not resist Nazi ideology. Indians and Germans (Nazi) both pride themselves on being Aryan race.

Posted by: Jesus Christ | February 28, 2006 10:05 PM

The cheneybush pig farm continue to smell. It amazes me so many of you out there deny the reality of the situation cheneybush have put us in. they are truly pigs in wolf's clothing.

It is now just a matter of time before we pass thru this dark period in our history.


Posted by: Truth | February 28, 2006 10:10 PM

Bush is the best President of the USA ever. All hail Bush.

Posted by: Bill Clinton | February 28, 2006 10:22 PM

Per advice of my buddies at America's best newspaper, counterpunch, I voted for Bush too. I know that the fastest method to bring down an empire is to place an very incompetent person with silverspoon in his mouth on the very top.

Posted by: | February 28, 2006 10:32 PM

America "a bully" duh, tell us something the world didn't know, like are westerns popular in India?

Posted by: bu | February 28, 2006 11:03 PM

The novelist quoted in this article in no way reflects the majority of Indian opinion. It's amusing you have devoted half of this article to absurd quotes from Ms. Roy after suggesting that an overwhelming majority of Indians have a friendly disposition to the US and Mr. Bush.

The US is the most admired amongst the Western countries and a successful role model for many young Indians. The polls correctly reflect that.

Posted by: Manoj | February 28, 2006 11:25 PM

"Like are westerns popular in India?"

Like brokeback mountain? Now there's an important topic arundhati roy can address, since I hear she watched it along with her "millions" of imaginary Indians. LMAO

But seriously, all modern Hollywood action heroes and hotties are very popular in urban India. Arnold Schwarzenegger probably tops the list. Westerns would be popular if Netflix opened up in India but until then Hollywood exposure is confined to the contemporary...

Posted by: Nitu | February 28, 2006 11:46 PM

Indians! Calm down People.

Don't shoot the messenger (Mr.Morley. i.e). He's just presenting both sides of the story/opinion, Though I have no doubt he is left-leaning.

Arundhati Roy is the stubborn, self-righteous, embarrassing pest here. Reserve your criticism for her misguided, juvenile pedantry.

I'm SURE she'll write such pieces against visiting Iranian, Arab, Turk, Central asian leaders, considering these nations have been the REAL villains in India's history over the last millenia. Especially if you're a hindu woman.

Perhaps these countries had high civilizations that produced Herny Stimsons and Trumans and Marshalls, who withheld their power to annihilate NATIONS, when there was no one ELSE to STOP them. The rest of us non-liberalloonies can not know. Being a genius, she can understand the "subtle" difference between what COULD have been, and what HASN'T been. ;)

Posted by: Raj | February 28, 2006 11:55 PM

As an Indian-American, someone quite proud of both sides of the hyphen, I wish Arundhati Roy would keep her damn yapper shut and quit mouthing off in the name of all Indians everywhere.

I'm a life-long Democrat, a proud liberal and I don't like the fact that GWB is my president. But saying that Dubya's visit to Rajghat is equivalent to pouring a pint of blood on Gandhi's grave stretches hyperbole to the point of absurdity.

Aren't we Indians supposed to treat guests like God?

Posted by: Vivek Sriram | March 1, 2006 12:49 AM

This is like taking a scientific poll of Americans in favor of capitalism and then quoting Michael Moore for balance...

Posted by: IndoUSPatriot | March 1, 2006 01:24 AM

I can tell you for a fact that Jeremiah is a Paki posing as an Indian Christian. I had battled with a bunch of them in Craigslist and other sites. The modus operandi is this - Pose as a third party and stir up hatred. I can spot a Paki eve in cyber space.

Posted by: Ozone_Licker | March 1, 2006 01:37 AM


Posted by: Allan David | March 1, 2006 02:11 AM

Nice try Allan David, Indians will respond to Roy's gibberish as much as Americans will respond to Michael Moore...

Posted by: Whoami | March 1, 2006 02:27 AM

Its not just Roy who hates Bush-fire, but the whole
of South America hates him and the American Oligarchy and Plutocracy.

Except Cochhoro Del Imperio, no one entertained him during his recent visit to Argentina.

The whole world cheered as Chavez spoke.

Bush came back licking his wounds from there and now he wants an aphrodisiac to heal his wounds.

One hopes India gets a really good deal and give nothing in return. That is, get the nuclear technology and the Iran gas pipe line without doing anything about China. Infact, become a China itself and give no soldiers for Iraq.

Hugo Chavez Frias

Posted by: Hugo Chavez | March 1, 2006 03:20 AM

Is it true that ACLU employs Man Mohan Singh's daughter as an attorney, who is fiercly anti-Bush ?

Posted by: Jane Kessinger | March 1, 2006 03:28 AM

To me Bush's overture to India smacks of mean-spiritedness.

We are people who the land was stolen from.

Our blood, sweat and labor runs America and financed its development.

Yet, he goes to the opposite side of the world to share his technology. Not one South American country US has shared its technology. It wants to keep us suppressed down in bondage. And it has tried to impose the minority and smaller language country, the portugese speaking Brazil over the rest of the South America.

What a Satanic and evil thinking !!!

Posted by: Poor Mexican | March 1, 2006 03:36 AM

Arundhati Roi's editorial is a strained amalgam of literature and foreign policy analysis.

Prose about the Monkeys and Crocodiles certainly paints a picture, but the article fails to explain WHY Bush's visit to Gandhi's shrine is abhorrent.

As properly stated by the South Asian Community at WCL, Bush's visit to India is meant to address certain political and economic issues while strengthening the nascent strategic partnership between the World's only Superpower and an emerging regional power.

It is important not to make too much of this. Bush is simply recognizing and paying respect to another nation's hero. It is really no different than Prime Minister Singh going to Philadelphia and paying respect to Benjamin Franklin's tomb.

As for a broader policy debate, I can find no issue with the budding economic relationship between these two countries. India is a safe economic partner for the United States and has a history of being a peaceful country with deep democratic roots. For India, the growing economic and military threat of China is very real. Mr. Singh must leverage the importance of a regional counterweight. A long-term partnership between India and the United States is the only way to limit China's influence to East Asia.

Posted by: V.I. Poster | March 1, 2006 09:46 AM

Indian people had been subjugated by foreign powers using different rhetoric that suits to the period. Moguls justified (with help of the old day sycophants)bringing culture,art etc to India; British used rhetoric of civilizing barbaric Indians; now USA is using democrazy, economic cooperation, terrorism etc. Present day sycophants are the one who supoorts Bush and USA( they do because their economic wellness depends on USA. Supporting USA is narrow minded and no good for long term interests of India.
Fortunately Indians will realize that they are exploited in the name ideals and fight against USA as it happened in the past. I can bet history is going to repeat. The same sycophants will be make 180 degree turn around! That is why they are called sycophants!!

Posted by: RAJA | March 1, 2006 10:40 AM

Since when have communist started to own Gandhi's ideology? Indian communists are in power in West Bengal and Kerala and largely depend on Islamists for vote. I haven't heard Arundhati say a word condemning terrorism. She infact has a problem with anyone who stands against it. Communists wanted the book "Lajja" depicting violence against Hindus in Bangladesh to banned. But they are all for books calling for Jihad. There duplicity beats me!

Posted by: Alok | March 1, 2006 11:34 AM

Arundhati Roy reflects the views of everyone I know here in Delhi.
Those numbers that seem favourable to Bush actually reflect his decision to wage a holy war against Islam. That's comforting to many Hindus, who view Islam as a historic rival.
But it does nothing to negate the view that the U.S. in general, and Bush in particular, are bullies and war criminals. There's a reason we refused to support your illegal war in Iraq.
Your attempts to portray Bush as popular here really smack of desperation. The man is widely despised here.

Posted by: Sanjay | March 1, 2006 11:37 AM

I havent gone through the entire list of comments here so some of it might be a repetition. Generally most of the middle class and upper class (in urban and semi urban areas) like american stuff, culture, people etc. The rural poor couldnt care less. Indian communists and their spokesperson Arundhati Roy do NOT reflect the common indian's viewpoint. I also dont think that Bush is hated or despised. Many may not support the govt's foriegn policy but dont really hate him. And the motley crew of Commies/Islamists that are trying to protest have nothing better to do anyways.

Posted by: Prashant | March 1, 2006 01:18 PM

Personally, I'm glad to have the people of India as friends. I am happy that the people of India are getting their chance to share the wealth as everyone should. There is no point in creating animosity towards one another as our leadership changes, but the people don't.

One day soon, in relation to the history of our lives, Mr. Bush will leave office. India and the US hopefully will remain friends.

We are currently stuck with the Bush administration as there is no way for Congress to challenge him at this point. Maybe that will change in the next year. Either way, we can look at this time as a representation of what not to do in the future. Also we can look at this period of history as a time when the relationships between people have become more important than the relationships between governments.

So let Bush have his ceremony, he is only one of millions and I'm sure that Ghandi would find it in his heart to accept the gesture.

If we focus on eachother, our governments will have no choice but to follow if we are the true leaders.

Posted by: Jon Adam | March 1, 2006 01:22 PM

The President will not be hated in India, infact he will be worshipped, under him calling signals, the rate at which US loses jobs to India is higher than the growth of Indian population (and that is saying something). I think India need be careful cause, the moment they start hiking BPO salaried look for American companies to run to other countries.. Agriculutre and farmers get little notice and it would ne nice for a change if India can show stability of policy across governments. As much as US thinks India will be loyal and help balance China.. look out for feeding the monster and reaping later..

Posted by: Nathan | March 1, 2006 01:26 PM

i have no idea what indians think of america but i like indians and i think that indians are the most congenial people i met among immigrants in this country .

Posted by: bob | March 1, 2006 01:50 PM

Other murderers have visited Gandhi's samadhi, including many Indian ones. But the fact that India did not stand out and oppose the Iraq war is a blot on the proud anti-imperialist tradition of the country. See The India that can no longer Say NO.

Posted by: Joe | March 1, 2006 02:54 PM

well u know what, i think its kind of cool that the potus is coming to pay respects to for his war mongering thats not a good thing..but then nobody is perfect.
i think the iraq war was an overkill in the war on terror...which dint start badly..taliban is gone for good...and the world and specially india has to thank bush for that...talibanis kidnapped an indian plane and the indian govt did not have the balls to challenge their next door neighbour...only the US could have dont what it did...saddam is also gone which is not too bad and i think much of the US and the world would think differently of bush if iraq takeover would have gone half as easy as afghanistan...the human cost has made bush unpopular...but thats more because his intelligence screwed up than bush being evil or something!!

Posted by: gandhi | March 1, 2006 03:03 PM

Michael Moore to US .....Arundhati Roy to India.

Posted by: Sidd | March 1, 2006 03:59 PM

"But the fact that India did not stand out and oppose the Iraq war is a blot on the proud anti-imperialist tradition of the country. "

Saddam didn't bribe our politicians enough to oppose the US and save his sorry regime. Us Indian's set a pretty high standard for corruption in politics.

Posted by: Buffalo Lallu | March 1, 2006 04:00 PM

I am surprised to see some indians suggesting that Islamists and Communists are the same. I will like to remind them the Indian policies in the 70's and 80's supported Russia. The Islamist fought Russia in Afghanistan. One thing is sure about some Indian for their insterest they will even lick a Bush :-)

Posted by: samar | March 1, 2006 05:23 PM

"One thing is sure about some Indian for their insterest they will even lick a Bush :-)"

Could that Indian be you, Samar? LOL

Posted by: Taz | March 1, 2006 08:46 PM

Let's hope India doesn't turn into another Iraq because of the Americans.

Posted by: tosh | March 2, 2006 12:11 AM

Polls are inaccurate, especially international polls.

Posted by: tosh | March 2, 2006 12:12 AM

well, let me put it this way: ONLY WAY TO DEFEAT ISLAM IS TO JOIN HINDUS. SO, AMERICA MUST BE A FRIEND OF INDIA. We need them, those Hindus, the killer of Islam.

Posted by: Bikram | March 2, 2006 01:17 AM

Americans should stop whining about losing jobs to Indians. We are not taking them from you. We are just GETTING them. Its not just the petty fee that we charge for our services that's doing the trick here. Consider this: An Indian will do the work of 3 americans, for 1/3 rd of what's paid for one american. This is the hard fact. If Americans want to change this they should start implementing the following.

a) Start working hard.
b) Stop wasting time on Mon and Tue's discussing how you spent the week-end at work.
c) Work the full 8 hrs that you are paid for in a day. Remember coffee breaks can be 15 min and Lunch only and hour.
d) Stop online chats at work.
e) Stop flirting at work.
f) Work more than just on Wed.
g) Stop wasting time discussing your plans for the comming week-end on Thu and Fri.

If you can do all the above, you can save yourself a pink-slip.

The president does not lose his sleep on your job loss because he knows well why you lost it!

And what are these members of South Asian Community at WCL doing, writing on a web-log. What makes Gandhi so sacred to this group? Which south asian countries do these people represent? Dont they have the courage to identify themselves are India? Do they want to give a false impression that their views are broader than just indian? What's wrong with any individual wanting to pay respects to Gandhi. What makes gandhi so sacredd? In fact both Gandhi and Bush let people die for a cause, THEY thought was noble. And both had good public support for their mission. Only, both lost support at the later stages.

Give him a break guys he's the President of the USA and is doing what's considered an obligation. Keep it cool. O.K

And I think Pat, Jeremiah and Jesus Christ (not Mother Mary's son) are sick.

Posted by: KGB | March 2, 2006 01:51 AM

Jesus Christ make me LAUGH OUT LOUD!!!

A pity they no longer recommend lobotomies for people like you who spout lunatic vitriol ...hmm..those were the days..!!

Posted by: Aadarsh | March 2, 2006 02:06 PM

Poor Mexican,

Firstly, stop crying.

Secondly..look at some facts.

Most Indians in America, are there legally.

Most are better educated than an average American.

Most of them, work for a living, have good work ethics and are tax paying law abiding citizens.

Inspite of all this, they arent exactly the most-loved ethnic group here, for very many reasons, some justifiable, and most that smack of jealosy and prejudice.

Do you now really want me to get into the statisitcs for the Mexicans in the country?

Posted by: Aadarsh | March 2, 2006 02:28 PM

So these are Arundhati's supporters. The earlier comparisons to Michael Moore seem to be justified! These poor souls sound more or less like the loony left back here...

Protesters are clueless about their protest
Syed Firdaus Ashraf in New Delhi | March 02, 2006 21:48 IST

What's that?

This is the best answer you get from the nearly one lakh people protesting against President George W Bush's visit, when they are asked about the nuclear deal.

Interestingly, this was after several leaders from the Left and Samajwadi Party launched tirades against the nuclear deal, thundering that India was compromising its sovereignty.

"I have no clue about this deal," said D S Negi, a protestor from Rohtak, Haryana.

Even as A B Bardhan, general secretary, Communist Party of India, came up on stage and started complaining about the deal being a setback to Indian sovereignty, the masses remained unaffected.

Most of them were seen scratching their heads or wearing a blank expression on their faces, while Bardhan spoke about the nuclear deal.

It was a similar situation when D Raja, national secretary of the Communist Party of India, said, "It is not a great deal because India is compromising its independent nuclear policy. Our policy is increasingly coming under the influence of USA."

And the masses showed no inclination towards cheering this statement. In fact, the only time they did applaud was when Bardhan said that America was arming itself with nuclear weapons but did not want a country like Iran to have them.

"America is an imperialist nation and wants to create a unipolar world," he said, evoking a round of applause.

Not everyone wants Bush here
One of the onlookers said that he did not think India's interests were being compromised by the nuclear deal and said he was at the protest because, 'George Bush is a killer and I hate him'.

Asked didn't he feel that India would benefit from this nuclear deal, " Idris Elahi, an electrician from NOIDA on outer skirts of New Delhi said, "I don't understand this nuclear subject. I only know that Bush has never done anything right. He has not done anything good for the world and I am sure he will never do anything good in future too."

Another interesting answer came from Sarvesh Kumar, a Samajwadi Party leader from Benares, Uttar Pradesh - "I don't know what the nuclear deal is all about. I only know that my leader, Mulayam Singh, opposes Bush's visit and so am I opposing his visit. Netaji is never wrong in politics."

Jamil Ahmed, a Communist Party of India, leader from Bijnore, Uttar Pradesh said, "I don't know the details of nuclear deal. I only know it is bad for the country because my leaders say so."

His brother, Feroz Ahmed, who had accompanied him added, "I know the nuclear deal is bad for India and we Communists will see that this Bill does not get passed in Parliament."

Posted by: AmusedDesi | March 2, 2006 05:31 PM

India should give one-way ticket to Russia to Mr. Bhardhan, sitaram yetury, prakash karat, A Roy and all other comrades. I doubt if even russia will accept them. try cuba in that case.

Posted by: dc | March 2, 2006 07:11 PM

Hah -- Arundhati Roy -- Ms Roy isn't terribly popular in India herself, actually. She's just some pontificating bigmouth who's holier-than-thou squawking has has been stoked by ego-pumping accolades from various left-wing Hollywood glitterati. Arundhati Roy can get stuffed, as far as most Indians are concerned.

Posted by: sanman | March 2, 2006 08:10 PM

Ms Roy is aginst all kind of progress.
She was against building Dam on Narmada.
She is a novalist...she does not know whats good for the people of india.

Posted by: R | March 3, 2006 03:50 PM

dear friends,having read most of the blogs,my comments,bush is doing everything right,only thing is doing it very the time all this settles he wont be in power.sadly.he should have convinced india to support him militarily,for future invasions of iran,north korea, need for pakistan,they will die themselves doing jehad.every one knows in india,the sole agenda of islam is ruling the world by conversion,its basic outlook for them,only america and india can counter and man power.if america shows complete support the way it grants israel,world will be better place.the above named nations are rogue,armed and dangerouse,pakistan is distributing nuclear tech what else can be more dangerouse.good going mr bush.

Posted by: REALhindu | March 15, 2006 03:11 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2006 The Washington Post Company