It's not even so much that there's an intrinsic value to being South-Asian when reporting on South Asia--I think there maybe but it's definitely debatable--as that *in fact* South Asian Americans have totally worked hard at that field.

Heads' up everyone, btw, I just posted it to the nifty news site. .but I'm afraid a bomb has gone off in Karachi outside the U.S. consulate. I don't think this is going to be a fun next few days. :-( I am particularly sad about the foreign service officer, and it makes me sympathize with all people we get angry at who list the American dead first. . .I've had several friends, including a couple of my best friends, who were State Department brats, and it pains me to contemplate the dangers their parents are in, especially when the foreign service is one of the more peaceful and friendly faces of our government abroad. It also pains me that this violence is supposededly provoked by American actions, but of course the vast majority of the people killed will be desi.

Sad times.

I just find it kind of underwhelming that there aren’t more South Asian American journalists who were deemed by their news organizations to be qualified enough to be along for this ride.

I think the SAJA board probably shares your disappointment. Always a bridesmaid...

I certainly could be mistaken about this, but my impression from my Washington press corps days is that the folks who go on the plane tend to be the folks whose regular beat is the White House, and that it wouldn't be typical for other journalists to be credentialed and rotated into the press section of the plane itself for a trip like this.

However, the press section of Air Force One won't necessarily exhaust coverage -- there may well be South Asian American journalists who are dispatched to help cover the trip and related issues in one way or another. Manish has already noted (in the new news page) Mitra Kalita's coverage for the Washington Post, and of course Somini Sengupta, the South Asia bureau chief for the Grey Lady, is already there.

Or not -- it may be that you are absolutely right about the attitudes within the news organizations. I just don't know if who's on Air Force One is the best indicator to determine that.

But all that aside, Abhi, do I perhaps hear in your post echoes of the lead story on the front page of this week's India Abroad?

President George W Bush will arrive in New Delhi on March 1 at the head of a powerful but lean delegation, sans any United States lawmaker or influential Indian American Republicans.

This is in marked contrast to his predecessor President Bill Clinton, who on his visit to India in March 2000 ... facilitated a large number of Indian Americans to travel separately under the aegis of the White House.

* * *

High profile Indian-American Republicans, some of whom are enviably close to the Bush family, made a concerted bid to be included in the party, but despite their pleas to the White House . . . the White House opted to leave them out.

* * *

[Indian American Republican Council chairman Dr Ragavendra] Vijayanagar pointed out that it was not for want of trying. "everybody called the White House and Zach (Dr Zachariah, one of the leading fund-raisers for the Republican party and a close personal friend of the Bush family) called Karl Rove and also talked to (Florida Governor and the President's younger brother Jeb (Bush), but he said thats't he White House protocol and there's nothing he can do about it.

Sounds like they're just as underwhelmed as you are. :)

This trip is all "business." No Taj Mahal, no dancing with women in rural Rajasthan, and no prominent Indian American hangers-on. What can we say? George W. Bush has no sense of eshtyle.

Another issue: the trip may be all business but is the business of consequence? It sounds like this nuclear deal may be shot down and/or gutted once it gets sent to Congress and the UN.

Amardeep, Amardeep. Haven't you learned anything about this administration? It's never his fault, and the lack of eshtyle is no exception:

In an interview with Indian reporters before the trip, Bush blamed the decision [not to visit the Taj Mahal] on his scheduler and said he'd have to come back to India to make up for it.

"Look, if I were the scheduler, perhaps I'd be doing things differently," he said. "But you want me doing one thing. I'll be the president, we've got the scheduler being the scheduler. I'm going to miss a lot of the really interesting parts of your great country."

Rule No. 1 in this White House: Always pass the buck(was).

Skipping the Taj Mahal is not a big deal. In an NPR interview with A.J. Akbar, editor of The Asian Age, he said that the Taj Mahal, while nice, is old India. He is tired of visitors remarking upon India’s glorious past, as if that is all there is to the country.

I visted it once, back in 1983. My dad never visited it, my cousins who go to India far more frequently than I do never have - most of my family in India has not visited the Taj. Visiting the Taj is like visiting the Statue of Liberty.

Turn the tables - when Singh visited Washington in Summer 2005, how many white folks were in the New Delhi press corp that accompanied him?

"seems like they would be in unique position to report on this story due to their inherent understanding of the cultures involved"

That would lead to much discrimination.

It seems like they would be in unique position to report on this story due to their inherent understanding of the cultures involved.

While the above is true, the flip side is also true in the sense that it will allow those non-desi reporters (especially those with a lot of weight) to better understand and relate to the sub-continent. After all, there is nothing like an unbiased viewpoint.

If I were NASSCOM, I would have used my clout to get Lou Dobbs on that plane. And at least ensure he gets an Elephant ride :)

Skipping the Taj Mahal is not a big deal.

Goyal sounds like some desi dudes who butt into any conversation with "......... but in India ......".
A: "The Chinese buffet is pretty cheap and lots of food."
B: "You should try the Chinese food in India..............."
A: "So and so store has a sale on jeans."
B: "In India you can get brand name jeans on the street for Rs. 100............"

Another issue: the trip may be all business but is the business of consequence? It sounds like this nuclear deal may be shot down and/or gutted once it gets sent to Congress and the UN.

When you report on South Asia, it depends what you want to say about it. If your perspective is from the majority viewpoint in America, what is the advantage in having a South Asian origin journalist?

If you want to combine it with a South Asian perspective also, it *may* be true that South Asian-origin journalists potentially have a better viewpoint.

But then nothing is as dangerous as ppl who have no understanding of the subject matter, but who think do. A (albeit non-journalist) analogy would be Bush: he is absolutely convinced he is right in invading Iraq, let everybody else's opinion be damned. That is what makes him dangerous---like a proverb in Kannada says, he has only two faults. He does not have the capability to consider the whole picture, and he does not listen to others.

Keeping this in mind, I think many (I did not say all, and I am not making a comment on the bloggers yet) sepia-inhabitants would fall into such a category. If you have to ask insightful questions, it also means you must have a genuine concern *and* awareness about the subject. Not just shout out a couple of sound-bites you hear from CNN or NYT or some other source who have only a fringe interest in India. Don't mean to offend anyone, but read the comments and you will understand.