Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

I wonder what was the need for this? People of Pakistan have given a mandate to PPP, but why does Zardari believe he needs support from the USA rather the act on the mandate given to him by the people of Pakistan? Interesting times ahead.

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=13108

**Should Zardari have called on US ambassador? **

ISLAMABAD: The more things change the more they remain the same. This is especially true of Wednesday’s meeting between PPP Co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari and US Ambassador Anne W Patterson.

Eyebrows were raised in Islamabad as to why Zardari, in his present position when his party has received the people’s mandate, felt it necessary to drive all the way and call on the US envoy?

“Have you ever heard of or seen India’s Sonia Gandhi going to the American Embassy even while in the opposition? I think it is unfortunate that the leader of a major political party felt it necessary to rush and meet the American envoy in Pakistan before he met fellow politicians. I have nothing against meetings with diplomats but they must call on party leaders”, says Dr Shireen Mazari, DG of the Institute of Strategic Studies.

That the US is still working on its original plan of supporting President Pervez Musharraf is also quite apparent and this is the message that is being conveyed to both Asif Ali Zardari and Nawaz Sharif. In fact Senator John Kerry was quite blunt in his remarks on Tuesday when he said that Zardari, Sharif and Musharraf had no qualms about working with each other.

“I’m not aware of any lobbying by the Americans and it is certainly the first time that I am hearing about it”, responded Maj Gen.(retd) Rashid Qureshi, the president’s spokesman when approached by ‘The News’.

A number of American congressmen who have been meeting Musharraf have all publicly supported him. “Certainly the Americans have not abandoned their original game plan but there was a setback after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. The recent election results have also taken them by surprise and at the moment I see the Americans ‘exploring’ what their next move should be”, says former foreign secretary Tanvir Ahmed Khan.

Former ISI chief Gen(retd) Hamid Gul also appears unhappy at the call on the American ambassador. “This is never done. Our party leaders, whom the people have returned with heavy mandate, should be respected. Arm-twisting them at a time like this when Pakistan is at a difficult stage clearly shows that they are not really our true friends. We have paid with our blood and today our politicians should at least respect the wishes of the people of Pakistan”, he said.

Mazari feels that the Americans are not very comfortable with the leader of another political party (without naming Nawaz Sharif) who has a more ‘nationalist’ view. “Obviously they are intervening and this will undermine our democratic process and it is certainly no service to Pakistan”, she says.

But Tanveer Khan says it is not only the Americans but also the European diplomats who are quite active in ‘exploring’ the lay of the land before, with the Americans, they finalize their policy.

“The Americans’ first preference would be a coalition of the PPP and the PML (N) working with Musharraf. After all they had initially convinced Benazir Bhutto to work with Musharraf and they would like this to continue with Zardari. Their second preference is to work on Nawaz Sharif. In these last 72 hours these ‘exploratory’ meetings have been continuing. They are still testing the waters,” Khan said.

2 Likes

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Aalsi, don't be naive. These elections would have never taken place had USA not forced Mush. Mush is still in power because of USA. Otherwise he would have gone long time ago.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

And now Zardari is forced to act as the God of Gods impose him to do!
I wish this suffering under B/Mush has an end soon!

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Are you saying that PPP and PML (N) with all the votes they have received from the people cannot get rid of President Musharaf? Interesting.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

People mandate is one power while army power is different, we all know very well who overcomes what.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Why is Zardari then rushig to the US Ambassador? So, from what you are saying, people power is not enough of a madate in Pakistan?

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

^ is what I said too difficult to understand? or are you trying to be Mushy? :p

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Ehtasab bhaijan. Are you saying that it is not a big deal that Zardari rushes off to meet the US Ambassador as soon as he realises he has the most seats? :p

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Allah, Amreeka, Army

What else can we say. Its true :)

We don't see any "Awaam" in this equation.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Faisal bhai. Why then go through the motions of an election? So, basically you are saying people will not get what they want from the people they voted for on Monday.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

What else were you expecting? I told you PPP folks are America's chamchay for the time being. Zardari will not make a move beyond what the US tells him, and Pakistan's people were ridiculously overly hopeful thinking it would be otherwise, ESPECIALLY given Zardari's history of running after the gold. Why did anyone think he was an average pakistani's guy?

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Faisal bro! Awaam is very much in this equation. Haven't you seen this

Awaam's firmest belief = Allah gives power to Amreekan Army

Pakistani, Indian and all NATO armies are just an extension of Amreekan army.

How else Americans would be threatening all those axis-of-evil?

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?


In Pakistan (not else where in the world), people line up and vote every now and then, and that gives them the perception that they are important, and that they are powerful, and that they are electing their leaders ... and they do. However, what we see so often is that while people vote for something or someone, the results are hijacked and Amreeka and Army decide. For example, Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia ul Haq, Musharraf, Moin Qureshi, Shaukat Aziz... all these guys were imposed upon us because in their infinite wisdom Amreeka and Army knows best.

Whether Monday's election will end up similarly, I don't know. Time will tell.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

But Faisl bro! All of these examples of yours include Army officers, and technocrats. None of them was a leader of PML-N or PPP.

PM Aziz was "selected" into office, but he had been a minister beforehand. Then Aziz replaced people who were much less competent.

Why this doom and gloom about Amreeka and Amreekan Army?

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

I am not talking about Amreekan Army. I am talking about the basic perception that no one gets to be a ruler in Pakistan (for long) unless he or she enjoys support (overt or covert) from the American government. And in some instances, people came to power solely because of American pressure/recommendation/insistence. You want to argue this point? Or better yet, dispute it? :)

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Well now, what happened to nearly everyone who was praising the elections for reflecting what the people want, and that there was no rigging, and that these people will do better than Musharraf and the Army?

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

PCG, please do not have double standards when posting. I cannot recall the last time when you have had blamed Musharraf for being Americas chamcha.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?


The reason I support democracy is not that democracy guarantees better immediate results or the democratic-candidates will revolutionalize country. Rather to have a setup free of army interference, let the setup evolve, let the democratic institutions strengthen, let the judiciary/media/accountability system settle its root. Once that happens then you will start seeing the results. If we continue to have army-rule then we will be relying on personal goodness/talent of the dictator (in short our "good luck") who takes-over without people having a choice, voice etc. And God forbid if we get someone like Saddam/Hitler/Castro.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

Faisal bro! Perception is perception and reality is well! Reality.

Perception - Amreeka happy-Pak government survives
Reality - Amreeka happy - dollars come to Pak - Economy better - People of Pak happy - Pak government survives.

This is basically true for every pro-Amreekan country. Just think about other examples.

If China takes on Amreeka, and Walmart stops importing $billion toys, China's economy will collapse. Chinese will be angry with their government and possibly throw it out.

If Indian government messes up with Amreeka, all the IT will be a gonnar. NASSCOM will start a campaign against Manmohan and guess what?

I hope you see the reality and not perception.

Re: Should Zardari have rushed to go meet the US ambassador?

^ Actually both examples that you gave, don't fly. Both countries have a relationship with US that is based on quid pro quo. Walmart is not doing a favor to China by importing $ billion toys. Walmart is buying stuff because it is cheap. China hold multi trillion $ treasury bonds of US govt. And thats how China treats US however it wants to treat US. Remember the spy plane incident, where China literally teared the plane apart and put it on a cargo ship for US to take back.

Anyway, thats not the point. Pakistan has this unhealthy obsession about obeying US, come what may.

By the way, hardly any dollars that come from US, go to help common people in Pakistan. Most go to military or to fill the coffers of select few. So, its a lose-lose for the most part. Remember the example of Shah of Iran, who was an American puppet. When things go beyond a limit, people rebel, as they did in Iran, consequently, US lost all influence over Iran since '79 revolution. Anyway, again, thats just a lesson in history. America obviously has learnt nothing from history. Not sure if Pakistan leaders have learnt anything either.