Question 1:

It has been announced today the Asif Ali Zardari will take of oath of office today as President of Pakistan. Does this imply that Zardari is even keener top serve the US interests than Prime Minister Gilani? If it is not so, why does the US have to support his candidature to be the president?

Answer:

1. Indeed both men, Zardari as well as Gilani, are American pawns and under their control, both of them have asserted their keenness to further develop cooperation with the United States in its most important agenda of consolidating its stronghold and hegemony in the region under the garb of the so-called ‘War on Terror'. The statements and views of these two men have very loudly, clearly and categorically been made public. Moreover, the Americans actually control the army command and they were instrumental in the appointment of Ashfaq Parvez Kiyani to succeed Parvez Musharraf as the chief of army staff.

2. Raza Gilani is of stronger personality and better placed to push American plans. As for Zardari, his weaknesses are well known and it is no secret that he is very corrupt, in fact in the political circles he is known only as the husband of Benazir Bhutto and not by his own name. By his own admission he has no political experience and has entered politics by virtue of being Benazir Bhutto's husband! There are two compelling reasons as why has America supported and brought him to presidency:

First: To placate Britain and cool down the ardent pro-British wing of the Peoples Party. Bhutto, the late wife of Zardari had spent years of her ‘exile' in Britain during which the British won over her loyalties. Thus by supporting Zardari, the US is influencing many from the leadership of the Peoples' Party. This is convenient for Britain which despite Zardari's overt declaration of cooperating with the US and going along with them, the British expect to get its work done in Pakistan.

Second: There were indications that the prime minister ship in Pakistan was heading towards concentrating power & authority to itself and clip the wings of a future president. With Zardari at the helm, it is unlikely.

Question 2:

What is the truth behind the quartet summit in Damascus? How can Qatar be a part of it, Qatar and Syria have different loyalties; while Syria & Turkey have their loyalties to the United States, Qatar is pro-British.

Answer:

The aim of this summit is to keep the region cool by continuing the process of give-&-take negotiations until a new US administration is in place. This will keep the US bother-free of any untoward incident at a time when the US is busy in its presidential elections.
Hence the US deputed Sarkozy to fill the vacuum in the region due to its preoccupation with elections. Sarkozy is very close to the Americans and their ally, the US relies on him to work for it by proxy.

Thus the most important outcome of the quartet summit in Damascus between Bashar al- Assad, Sarkozy, Erdogan, and the Amir of Qatar was to signal the Jewish state the importance of continuing the negotiations despite the resignation of Olmert. In this regard the Syrian president said: "We have proposed 6 points to Turkey and are awaiting their acceptance by Israel. Our response to the Israeli points will be positive and we will enter direct negotiations after the new US administration is in place."

Certainly Erdogan and Assad are American pawns and the US administration uses them with French patronage to enter into negotiation with the Jewish state until the new US administration takes over and the US retains its hegemony and influence.

As for Qatar, it represents the British at the summit who guard the American and Jewish interests in a way that it becomes the preferred party in any negotiations or agreement or solutions in the region.