The Christian Science Monitor has an editorial on the debate in Washington about who shapes global rules.
'A lively debate in Washington has been over who sets the global rules: the established international organizations or the world's only superpower? Last week's US nuclear deal with India shows where that critical debate is headed. The US-India deal, which brings India only partly into the norms of the Non-proliferation Treaty, is really a bilateral pact driven by the US. It's also a US statement about the NPT's failure to block bomb-building efforts by Iran and North Korea,' it says.

The Mumbai-based DNA has this editorial on the Indo-US deal.
'Both countries have long held that they have much in common and should be closer. History had kept them apart. Now is the time for new thinking, Bush said on Thursday, and that spirit is leading the two leaders to move towards greater co-operation—in science, technology, agriculture, environment and the promotion of democracy. The nuclear deal is important. But there is much that lies beyond,' it says.

Pakistan's Daily Times has an editorial on the Bush visit.
'President George Bush has come to Pakistan and gone. In the wake of his visit, and predictably, official media and spin doctors are trying to put the best possible face on the talks and saying how the visit has added beef to US-Pakistan relations, or 'strategic partnership' as General Pervez Musharraf chose to term it during yesterday’s joint press conference. However, the reality may well lie beneath the surface bonhomie,' it says

The Independent says Bush was cool with Pakistan, while he wooed India.
Pakistan is not about to lose the US as an ally, or even see any real lessening of American support - it remains far too vital to the "war on terror". But Pakistan is extraordinarily sensitive to any disparity with India, and there is no doubt that last week India was offered far more, it says.

The Guardian says Bush signed a key terror pact with Pakistan.
An excerpt: A major concern was to ensure 'actionable' intelligence about the location of terror suspects was shared quickly, Bush told reporters. 'Pakistan needs equipment to move quickly and avoid tipping off the enemy. It's important that we stay on the hunt,' he said.

President Bush has rejected Pakistan's demand for a nuclear deal similar to the one he signed in India.

The Chicago Tribune has a irreverent look at democracy in Pakistan.
Democracy suits him finely, say the headline.
'The Pakistani leader probably wasn't too pleased when an American reporter asked Bush and Musharraf during the few questions that were permitted if Pakistan is moving quickly enough on democratic reforms. The man in the gray (not flannel) suit found himself talking about that uniform again,' it says.

The BBC has a report on the debate in Pakistan on the Bush visit.
And it has this interesting exchange between former Pakistan captain Imran Khan and a Pakistani senator on TV.
Mr Khan wanted to know why the Pakistan government was "licking the boots" of someone who had "killed tens of thousands in Iraq" and who was "bombing Pakistani territory at will".
"It is just our inferiority complex," replied government senator Mushahid Hussain.
"India has conceded far more than us but no-one here is saying the same about India," he said.
"Bah," said Mr Khan. "We are just standing around like greedy mongrels, waiting for whatever morsels he can throw our way."

The US President took a swing at cricket in Pakistan

The Houston Chronicle's report on Bush in Pakistan.
It says this:
Before leaving India on Friday, Bush made a statement certain to be widely scrutinized by Pakistanis opposed to Musharraf's military government.
"If justice is the goal, then democracy is the way," Bush said. He added, "I believe that a prosperous, democratic Pakistan will be a steadfast partner for America, a peaceful neighbor for India, and a force for freedom and moderation in the Arab world."
Acknowledging that Pakistan is not an Arab nation, the White House later said that Bush meant to say "Muslim world."