Pakistanis are outraged by the American Ambassador behaving like the Vecoroy of Pakistan. Mr. Boucher is an assistant Secretary of State, about a grade 18 officer of the Pakistani government. He is not the govornor of Pakistan. 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. Typical of the anger was an editorial published Sunday by The News, an English-language newspaper, with the headline “Hands Off, Please!”

This is the polite one. Others say “Yankee Go Home”! 

The US embassy has been busy. Pakistani politicians are coming in and out of the diplomatic enclave in Islamabad. 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. The post election meetings between American Embassy officials and Asif Ali Zardari, the head of the victorious Pakistan Peoples Party, have also been criticized. Mr. Amin Fahim may have lost his nomination becuase of his meeting with the US Ambassador.

Publicly the American officials urged both leaders to work with moderate forces and Mr. Musharraf, according to officials from the two parties and the United States. Pakistanis are leery of such claims and see American pressure on the politicians to reveal the location of Pakistani nukes, give access to Abdul Qadir Khan and keep tap on the movements of the Pakistani army viz a viz China.

American officials said the meetings were routine. “This is standard diplomacy,” said an American official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Pakistanis are angry!

Nasim Zehra a Harvard graduate in an interview with the New York times explains.”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.”

American have bee taken aback by the intense criticism of US interference. Some disclaimers have been issued.”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.”

The denails are at a fever pitch. Americans are not used to be scrutinized by 50 Television channels in Pakistan and being followed out by the Pakistani paparazzi. There are more than 50 channels in Pakistan. Hundreds of newspapers do investigative journalism. Each American statement has been dissected in the media and widely perceived as overt American pressure.

 According to the New York Times “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.

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.

“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.”

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.”

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.”

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.”

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.”

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.

Source: New York Times and news agencies