Anxious, that’s how he describes the current mood in Britain following the recession and the Eurozone crisis. ?The new coalition government has announced that cuts of up to 44% are going to be proposed. We have to pay debts of about 160 billion pounds. It’s going to be tough. So there is a lot of anxiety, particularly in the public sector about whether people would lose jobs and even though the deficit needs to be brought down, the measures needed to bring it down could send Britain into a slump,? he says. In India to cover British Prime Minister David Cameron’s visit and to shoot his signature show The Hub’, Nik Gowing, one of the most prolific international news anchors of BBC World News, talks to Sukalp Sharma about journalism, south Asia, future of relations between Britain and India and more. Excerpts:
First, tell us about your journey and your experience as a leading international anchor over the years.
I am doing exactly what I set out to do many many years ago. Of course, none of us knew what the technology would be like. When I wanted to get into this job, those were the days of film and telex machines. Now the fact that what you can record on the back of your mobile phone, for example, has transformed the way we do our business. I had set out to become a television news presenter and I?m here, but it just doesn?t naturally happen and you have to fight all the way. Sometimes you climb the greasy pole, sometimes you slide down the greasy pole. I joined the BBC 15 years ago when we had maybe five million people watching BBC World. In those days a 24×7 news channel was not something which people naturally thought about. In fact, my former editor at ITN said I don?t know why you?re leaving and going to a 24×7 news channel because there is no future for it. And he was wrong. We have now proved it with kind of figures that we have got and with the kind of reception that we have got. And there are a number of other channels that have arrived there who are also competing in the space, but our viewing figures keep going up. So I?m doing what I set out to do; it doesn?t come easy though.
You are renowned the world over for coverage of Princess Diana’s death and the 9/11 attacks in the US. What do you feel when you look back at these two momentous events?
In retrospect, obviously they were big days. I was in bed when Princess Diana had that accident. I was called at 10 past one and at half past two in the morning, I was on air. In those days we didn?t have a full 24-hour channel. Obviously, the impact was enormous around the world. It was the same with 9/11. I was on a bus going into work and someone texted me ?Are you on your way in? Big things are happening.? You can feel the enormity of what is happening but there are other major events like the Mumbai terror attacks. I think it?s wrong to see one?s career through just two major events because almost everyday there?s a major event… so much goes on and so much happens. Everyday I?m still astonished at the speed at which the pictures come in and the vivid nature of what has happened is there on our television sets. I stayed in the Taj Mahal Hotel two weeks before 26/11, so I had a vivid awareness of what the pictures were showing, particularly when a couple of bodies were being brought out on luggage trolleys. I was there in Poland shortly after the Polish President was killed on a plane with 95 other people. That?s a bit like 9/11, that was the Polish 9/11. In London, when we had major bombings on July 7, 2005. That was a 9/11 moment for us like 26/11, and all of these were great enormous journalistic challenges.
Often people accuse the Western media of holding biases against the east. How would you react to that?
Every channel in every country will always show the news in a slightly different way. I don?t think there is any bias at all. There may be occasional, and I am emphasising on that, occasional misinterpretation. I think there?s an awakening going on about just how dynamic things are in the east. Two weeks ago I was in Hong Kong and in Korea at the IMF meeting, three weeks ago I was in Singapore chairing a debate on water. At the IMF meeting, there were financial representatives from many eastern countries saying their growth is guaranteed and that America and Europe are not the forces that they were. I don?t see how you can call it bias. I feel there is a lot of lack of understanding. Look what happened when Manmohan Singh went to America last year as the first official guest after Obama took over. Most Americans didn?t know anything about India. Is that bias? It?s not bias, it?s just lack of understanding, lack of awareness. You will find that in India. You also have people who have lack of awareness about what?s happening in many parts of the world. I wouldn?t call that bias.
In India, news media, especially television, has been criticised for running after ratings and compromising on quality. How would you compare it to the scenario in the UK?
They are the same accusations against the British news media. We have a standards authority called Ofcom (Office of Communications) which regulates and maintains certain standards. I work for an organisation where we have very tough editorial guidelines. I work for a part of the organisation that is commercial. Therefore, we have to think about ratings, we have to think about the way we are viewed or how many people view us. But in my view that doesn’t mean compromising on standards. I know there are several broadcasters for whom commercial survival is a challenge. But I think it’s an inevitable hazard of the business. You are always going to be accused of dumbing down, exaggerating or misreporting. But let’s remember that after 26/11, there was a lot of soul searching in this country about the way the networks covered it. About how you deal with information, about whether a rumour could be news and the government almost threatened to shut down some of the channels or suspend their transmission. I would say these are a part of the growing process in any new media environment. I’m not dodging your question; I’m just saying that it’s not for me to pass a view on dramatic exaggeration or chasing ratings. Let’s remember that you’ve got a choice here. You can choose to go to another channel. That’s what competition is about. There’s probably going to be a shakedown at some point. But you’re a vibrant economy with people wanting to advertise, so it’s hard to say when that will happen.
You have extensively covered foreign affairs, especially south Asia. So what do you make of the current situation with regard to the India-Pakistan relations and the role of international powers?
I think there is room for a degree of cautious optimism after the meeting in Islamabad. Both Krishna and Qureshi said in their press briefings that there are major differences, that the challenge is to keep talking. That’s very different language to a year ago. Certainly very different to the months immediately after 26/11. However, six hours of talks and there were clear lines of difference. Look at the body language?smiles, handshakes, a joke or two?but there was a lot of pressure on Qureshi from his own journalists. Remember after Sharm el-Sheikh, the kind of pressure that was put on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Parliament, saying, ?what kind of deal have you done?? At least there isn’t that kind of push at the moment. But then if there were to be another attack, there would be a danger of it going back into the ice chamber again.
I think that’s a fascinating issue (role of international powers). I am fascinated that so many Americans come here and go to Islamabad, like chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen, Holbrooke, Bob Gates, the defence secretary, and they end up in Islamabad. I don’t believe there is chance to these kind of trips. My assumption is that certainly the Americans have been encouraging, saying, ?look, maintain a dialogue because with a dialogue you at least have a process?. As to Britain, I think the UK has been active, but ultimately it’s America that counts. We’ll wait and see after David Cameron’s visit that how important the British voice is.
And where does the international media stand on the dynamics of India-Pakistan relations?
We can?t say that the international media speaks with one voice. I think it?s obviously coloured by what is happening in Afghanistan. And now that 2014 is being defined as the time when a large number of international troops ideally should leave Afghanistan, obviously that has enormous impact on the Indian and Pakistani ambitions there. So, it’s a reason for India to be planning, as you are committed to a significant amount of economic development there. There is hope that things could be settled between India and Pakistan. The word is that the Indian government believes there is more infiltration of Pakistanis into Indian-administered Kashmir. So, there?s a lot to play for at the moment. The whole thing is now becoming so conflicted by the pressures from Afghanistan, the new insurgent and militant pressures inside Pakistan?there are not just attacks originating in Pakistan against India, but there are attacks originating inside Pakistan against Pakistan almost everyday. So the dynamics are changing and potentially becoming more radical.
There has been a talk of contradictory signals being sent out to India by the new dispensation in London, where on one hand there are issues like immigration and yet Mr Cameron seems to be excited about having good relations with India. How would you analyse this situation?
It is a very real contradiction. I think it’s going to be a serious difficulty. We recently did a televised debate about the skill shortage around the world and Britain has a major skill shortage. I think it is a conundrum which is going to be difficult to resolve because there is an emotive feeling or a paranoia, not just in Britain but in many countries, that if you allow migrants in, they’re going to take our jobs. But actually that is not the issue. You can’t have economic growth if you don’t have the right people. And Britain needs certain kind of skills and if there are Indians who have those skills, why shouldn’t they be let in? My daughter is a doctor and I know some Indian doctors who have had to leave because their contracts were not renewed. Migration is a very emotive issue in many European countries, particularly because of the problems of economy. In many ways, governments are being far too populist, because they have been elected on the platform of ?don?t let people in this country?. Julia Gillard, Australia’s new Prime Minister, announced a cap on migration within days of taking office, now that is because of an election coming up. But Australia needs migrants. I think there is a very strong economic and analytical view that governments have to be far more broadminded about migration. I have had this conversation with one or two government ministers in Britain and they are absolutely firm, saying that people do not want more migrants into the country and that’s what they are going to do. The economic argument tends to be lost.
How is David Cameron going to be different from his Labour Party predecessors, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair?
Well he is already. We have a chequered history here really. Robin Cook came here as foreign secretary and was uncomfortable about a number of things, same with David Milliband over Kashmir, and Gordon Brown didn?t leave much of an impression. Here you have Cameron coming within three months of taking office with a coalition ministerial delegation, including quite a few liberal democrats. I think that gives a very clear message. The reality of two or three years ago is different from now where you have survived the economic recession due to tougher banking regulations, your growth rate is predicted to be 10%, you have cash-rich companies on a buying spree in Britain…okay, there is a lot of poverty, but you are a very successful country. This is Cameron being extremely pragmatic and saying let’s build a special relationship. How special is it going to be when you have Obama, Medvedev and Sarkozy coming in the autumn? There’s another competition out there to have a special relationship with India.
Quite surprisingly, Britain now has a coalition government? Still early days, but how would you rate the alliance?
Our coalition government in the UK looks like it’s going to survive five years. We have not had a coalition government before really to talk about and all the signs after 10 weeks are that it is working rather well. I can’t believe that it will stay like that but I am just a natural cynic. I think it will become difficult on a number of issues. And some very very brutal decisions are going to be taken about the economy.
