The $3 billion aid pledged to Pakistan during President Pervez Musharraf's Camp David meeting with his American counterpart George W Bush has evoked mixed reaction among the Pakistani media.
Though the meeting was 'positive' in terms of economic aid and improvement of bilateral ties, 'on the key issue of Indo-Pak relations, there has been nothing more than an assurance from the US that it will remain engaged with South Asia', the daily Dawn said.
"All that President Bush said was that he hoped Pakistan and India would continue to work to ease tension and resolve all issues, including Kashmir," it said.
There was no indication that the US would pressure India to end its 'human rights violations' in J&K and work to resolve the Kashmir issue, it added.
"In fact, there was implied criticism of Pakistan when President Bush referred to the need for checking 'extremism and cross-border infiltration,'" the daily said adding it showed the limits of US engagement with Pakistan.
"The US has no doubt helped Pakistan economically in the wake of Islamabad's decision to throw in its lot with America in the latter's war on terror. But this has by no means made America change the broad contours of its South Asia policy.
"It continues to attach priority to its relations with India, and while Washington did play a key role in averting a war last summer, it has made Islamabad realise that there are limits beyond which America cannot go to help Pakistan in its disputes with India.
"These harsh realities should make the government and the opposition realise the need for a domestic rapprochement and for making the country politically stable and economically strong by focusing on internal stability and progress instead of keeping the country troubled through politics of confrontation," the Dawn said.
Another daily, The Nation, commented that the aid package stretching over five years would be equally divided between defence and economic components and was 'plainly not enough', as it was less than what the previous military ruler, General Zia
ul Haq, got in 1981.
"Adding to that the setback on F-16s, the package becomes disappointing, and considering Washington's recent nod to Tel Aviv to give AWACs to New Delhi, is a dampener on the mutual protestations of long-lasting friendship.
"... Pakistan has been denied any hardware that could ruffle Indian feathers," it said.
The daily said that the Bush-Musharraf meeting was also a disappointment from the perspective of restoration of democracy in Pakistan.
"It is also remarkable that not a single politician accompanied the President, the only minister being Senator Shaukat Aziz, a technocrat with a strong US connection. Is the distaste for politicians Bush's or Musharraf's?
"Bush's reluctance to address Pakistan's democracy issues publicly is likely strengthen Musharraf's hands in dealing with the dissenting opposition however he deems fit. The President's logic of implanting 'sustainable' in place of 'dysfunctional' democracy clearly indicates that the US is not pushed about the type of government here as long as its own interests are served," it said.
In its editorial, the Daily Times said Musharraf's assurance that Pakistan will not join an arms race and seek only a minimal nuclear deterrence vis-à-vis India had gone down well in Washington.
"On the other hand, looking at India's 11 per cent budget deficit, New Delhi's splurge on nuclear and conventional weapons looks less praiseworthy to its international critics," it said.
"In fact, politically speaking, Pakistan under Musharraf has scored much better in Washington than India did when Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani visited last month. Indeed, Pakistan has broken out of the isolation that jihad had imposed on it over the past decade."