Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Dont say you did not know!

Se dopo una rivoluzione stile Iran, il Pakistan diventasse
aggressivamente anti-occidentale, che nessuno dica di non sapere
perche'.
(forse le cose, lentamente, migliorano: Dubito che un'articolo di
questa
franchezza fosse stato pubblicato dal NY times negli anni '70)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/29pstan.html?_r=1&ref=world&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- The Bush administration's continued backing of
President Pervez Musharraf, despite the overwhelming rejection of his
party by voters this month, is fueling a new level of frustration in
Pakistan with the United States.
That support has rankled the public, politicians and journalists here,
inciting deep anger at what is perceived as American meddling and the
refusal of Washington to embrace the new, democratically elected
government. John D. Negroponte, the deputy secretary of state, said
Thursday during a Senate panel hearing that the United States would
maintain its close ties to Mr. Musharraf.
Pakistanis say the Bush administration is grossly misjudging the
political mood in Pakistan and squandering an opportunity to win
support from the Pakistani public for its fight against terrorism. The
opposition parties that won the Feb. 18 parliamentary elections say
they are moderate and pro-American. By working with them, analysts
say, Washington could gain a vital, new ally.
The American insistence that Mr. Musharraf play a significant role,
they say, will only draw out a power struggle with the president and
distract the new government from pushing ahead with alternatives to
Mr. Musharraf's policies on the economy and terrorism, which are
widely viewed here as having failed.
"I've never seen such an irrational, impractical move on the part of
the United States," said Rasul Baksh Rais, a political scientist at
the Lahore University of Management Sciences. "The whole country has
voted against Musharraf. This was a referendum against Musharraf."
Over the last week, more than a dozen editorials and commentaries have
appeared in Pakistan's leading newspapers accusing the United States
of "meddling" in the country's affairs. Many have taken particular
umbrage at statements by President Bush and other senior officials
praising Mr. Musharraf, despite his lack of support among voters.
A series of postelection meetings between American Embassy officials
and Asif Ali Zardari, the head of the victorious Pakistan Peoples
Party, have also been criticized.
American officials have met three times with Mr. Zardari since the
election. They have met twice with Nawaz Sharif, a former prime
minister whose own opposition party won the second most seats in
Parliament.
In the meetings, American officials urged both leaders to work with
moderate forces and Mr. Musharraf, according to officials from the two
parties and the United States. It is the insistence to include Mr.
Musharraf that rankles Pakistanis.
American officials said the meetings were routine. "This is standard
diplomacy," said an American official who spoke on condition of
anonymity.
But Pakistani observers called the request that the parties work with
Mr. Musharraf inappropriate, given his sweeping defeat. Typical of the
outrage was an editorial published Sunday by The News, an English-
language newspaper, with the headline "Hands Off, Please!"
"No further efforts must be made to intervene in the democratic
process in Pakistan," the editorial read. "The man who the U.S.
continues to back has in many ways become a central part of Pakistan's
problems."
A senior American official in Washington acknowledged that there was
worry within the Bush administration about being seen as meddling. The
official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not
authorized to speak publicly on the issue, conceded that American
attempts last year to construct a power-sharing deal between Mr.
Musharraf and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto "didn't really work
out quite as we'd hoped." Differences remained between the president
and Ms. Bhutto, who was killed Dec. 27.
"The last thing we need is to be seen by the Pakistanis as interfering
again," he said.
But while American officials have sought to portray the United States
as neutral, their statements underscore that Mr. Musharraf remains at
the center of the United States policy here.
On Monday, Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman, said President
Bush continued to support Mr. Musharraf for "all of the work that he's
done to help us in counterterrorism."
"Now it will be up to the people of Pakistan to see what their new
government will look like," she said. "But the president does
certainly support him."
During his Senate hearing on Thursday, Mr. Negroponte said, "I think
we would, as a general proposition, urge that the moderate political
forces work together, and of course President Musharraf is still the
president of his country, and we look forward to continuing to work
well with him as well."
Mr. Negroponte refused to call for the reinstatement of the judges
dismissed last year by Mr. Musharraf when he imposed emergency rule.
"We have been silent on this subject," he said. Then he added, "to the
best of my knowledge."
That silence by American officials has led Pakistanis to accuse the
United States of ignoring the will of voters, analysts say. The issue
fueled anger against Mr. Musharraf and the protest vote against him.
In Pakistan, each American statement has been dissected in the media
and widely perceived as overt American pressure.
In an editorial on Monday, the Daily Business Recorder, a leading
English-language newspaper, criticized a call Mr. Bush made to Mr.
Musharraf after learning of what it called his allies' "electoral
debacle." It also cited Richard A. Boucher, an assistant secretary of
state, as saying after the election that Mr. Musharraf "remains
important to Washington."
Mr. Bush and other administration officials still regard Mr. Musharraf
as a significant player and as a force for stability in Pakistan, and
one who could regain his standing, said an official involved in the
policy deliberations.
The official said that American officials were waiting to see if the
opposition could form the two-thirds majority needed to render Mr.
Musharraf a powerless, ceremonial president, or even impeach him. The
Americans recognize that the opposition parties have long feuded and
think they could fail to unite.
"Musharraf still thinks he has options, which he does," said an
administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity. "The
administration thinks so as well, but only so long as he does not
overplay his hand."
Over the last year, American assessments have repeatedly proven wrong.
Before the Feb. 18 elections, a senior American intelligence official
predicted in a briefing to journalists that no party would win a clear
majority and that Mr. Musharraf would remain the strongest political
figure in the country.
Wamiq Zuberi, chief editor of the Daily Business Recorder, said
Washington "obviously doesn't have the correct appreciation of the
environment here." He and others said the American backing for Mr.
Musharraf had generated consternation among analysts who believe that
Mr. Musharraf is not only deeply unpopular but also that he has
performed poorly of late in the campaign against terrorism, polarizing
Pakistan and striking a series of truces with militants.
"I've followed this for years, and I've never seen it so clear,
apparent and continuous," Nasim Zehra, a Pakistani analyst and writer,
said of what she considered the American interference. "It's not
surprising, given the mindset in Washington."
Central to the Bush administration's support is the feeling that Mr.
Musharraf retains the loyalty of the Pakistani Army, even though he
stepped down as army chief in December. Current and former
administration officials say they fear that withdrawing American
support from Mr. Musharraf would alienate Pakistan's military,
country's most powerful institution.
"He is still valuable for his relationship with the army," said Daniel
Markey, who helped coordinate Pakistan policy in the State Department
from 2003 to 2007. "He is someone who the United States should work
with -- and will work with -- for fear of alienating that important
partner."
Western military officials say Pakistan's armed forces -- Mr.
Musharraf's last potential bastion of support -- have shifted loyalty
to his chosen successor, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
And they say General Kayani will choose stability over saving Mr.
Musharraf. "If Kayani and Musharraf were diametrically opposed," said
a Western military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, "I
think Kayani would prevail."
Ms. Zehra, the analyst, said that General Kayani had distanced himself
from Mr. Musharraf by issuing a surprise order in January barring all
officers from holding government posts or engaging in politics.
The move effectively prevented Mr. Musharraf from using Pakistan's
military intelligence agencies to manipulate the election. The loyalty
of Pakistan's military is irrevocably shifting behind General Kayani,
she said. "The army will be led by its chief always," she said. "The
former chief is always the former chief."
Jane Perlez and Salman Masood contributed reporting from Islamabad,
and Helene Cooper from Washington.

 perche'.
per certi nazistoidi di Washington è la situazione migliore possibile:
l'hanno detto in tutte le salse che hanno voglia di ricominciare da
dove si sono fermati a Nagasaki, un Pakistan nemico è un bersaglio
ideale, visto che la bomba ce l'ha e quindi sarebbe giustificata la
pretesa di questi criminali contro l'umanità di usare l'atomica
preventivamente. Con l'Iran è un po' più difficile, visto che a parte
i ragli di AHmadinejad contro Israele di atomiche non c'è l'ombra....

 maintain its close ties to Mr. Musharraf.
#_Spero che Musharraf si renda conto presto di cosa sia John "D.eadly" 
Negroponte...lo jettatore eccelso...dove passa lui ci sono solo guai in 
vista!!!!
Giano