Khobragarde issue: US softens stand after India backlash

However, questions remain on why the Indian govt did not act earlier if it was warned Khobragade may be involved in visa fraud

Aditi Phadnis New Delhi
Last Updated : Dec 19 2013 | 3:16 PM IST
Surprised by the frontal assault launched by India, the US State Department today hemmed and hawed at the circumstances in which Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade was arrested, strip searched and questioned.

The State Department spokesperson tried to pass the buck to the US Marshal (who, according to the State Department is the 'intake authority') and tried to backtrack on whether Khobragade really needed to have been treated the way she was. The State Department went on about how India and the US are strategic allies and was generally defensive about the disrespect to Khobragade.

While not exactly saying they were sorry, the State Department basically said sorry.

The new point to come out of the briefing was that the Indian government was warned in September that Khobragade may be involved in visa fraud. The question is: what did our government do about this warning? Was there a warning at all? Did the government conduct its own investigation? Did it inform US Authorities that Khobragade's housekeeper had decamped with papers, money, passport and was at large, somewhere in the US?

So the conclusion from this is inescapable that the Indian Foreign Office is telling us only half the facts: that it wasn't as if Khobragade was arrested out of the blue when she was dropping her children to school, it was that the Indian government got a fair warning in September 2013 that something was afoot.

So if the Indian government had acted on time, maybe this whole sorry episode might not have happened.

Another matter: the State Department should really ask its spokespersons to read the Vienna Convention before coming to brief on such an important matter. The Convention is so clearly drafted that there is no room for ambiguity. Equally clearly drafted is the guidebook issued to law enforcement officers in New York where immunities are clearly explained because this is something they have to come up against all the time, on account of the UN Headquarters located in that area of New York.

ALSO READ: Why Khobragade did not enjoy diplomatic immunity

Read the edited transcript of the State Department's Deputy spokesperson, Marie Harf's daily briefing, dated 17 December 2013. You can judge for yourself what the US is trying to say about the Khobragade episode.


*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Dec 18 2013 | 9:12 AM IST

Next Story