Pakistans 10-year long, unconditional alliance with the USA in the war on terror has failed to generate any mutual confidence. In Americas perception, Pakistan still cannot be trusted. These are the words of Texas Governor Rick Perry, Republican Party Presidential hopeful, who, in a candidates debate on foreign policy, said: Until Pakistan clearly shows that they have Americas best interest in mind, I would not send them a penny. Another Republican, Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann calls Pakistan the most violent, unstable nation that has a cache of nuclear weapons and had to be taken seriously. The most bizarre observation of Congresswoman Bachmann is that Al-Qaeda could get hold of these weapons and they could find their way into NY City or Washington DC. Two things stand out from these observations. The alliance that Pakistan built with the USA under Musharraf was an ambiguous one; it seems that the Americans were given an impression that Pakistan will do anything and go to any length to satisfy their demands. In their perception, Pakistan would sacrifice its own national interests for the sake of American interests. In Rick Perrys words, Pakistan should be willing and ready to sell its national interests for US dollars. If that was the understanding that Musharraf conveyed and our present government has maintained, then they have sold this nation in bondage. It is important to mention that the man declaring this perception is not an ordinary person; he holds a responsible office and is aspiring to be the most powerful man in the world. But Ms Bachmann seems to have been influenced by Hollywood propaganda thrillers that portray terrorists carrying nuclear bombs in their backpacks to plant them in the US cities. In her perception, Al-Qaeda operatives can steal nuclear bombs from Pakistan, pack them in their rucksacks, travel around the globe, enter the USA and plant them in major cities. However, this may happen in an action-thriller; in reality, it is only a scare tactic. It seems that the hype being created against Pakistan has a definite purpose. So many Americans holding responsible positions are making statements and showing concern about Pakistan that the American people, in particular, and the world, in general, are bound to listen. For instance, the former US Ambassador to China, Jon M. Huntsman, said that the dangers posed by Pakistan are of significant concerns; thats the country that ought to keep everyone up at night. Huntsman is also wary of Pak-China friendship and its growing diplomatic and military relationship. Why has Pakistan failed to gain American trust? We Pakistanis being of an extrovert nature take everything on face value; we take promises seriously and never learn from history. During the so-called jihad against the USSR, Pakistan was lured in on tall promises only to be left alone when the job was done. Some people did get rich, but the entire nation paid the price of that alliance and is still paying. The ongoing alliance is no different. Despite our best cooperation, we remain untrustworthy. Actually, Pakistan can never be trusted by the Zionist-dominated United States of America. It is a Muslim country with credible military potential, besides possessing nuclear weapons. Such a Muslim country will always remain suspect in the Zionist perception and a danger to Israel. I may be sounding paranoid, but in my assessment the US adventure in Afghanistan had and still has an ulterior agenda. Pakistans nuclear facilities and its weapon arsenal are on their hit list. In their superpower arrogance, they have even declared their intentions. They have built many hypothetical scenarios and even laid down plans how this aim can be achieved. They may placate Pakistan and its politico-military leadership on this account, but they are consistent in their objective. Israel will keep the pressure on to have its objective achieved. The names Bachmann and Huntsman stated above point towards this pressure. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is also a presidential contender, insists that the US-Pak relationship has to change; he advises the State Department to tell the Pakistanis help us or get out of the way, but dont complain if we kill the people on your soil you are not willing to go after. This, in fact, is a demand to give the Americans an unlimited blanket sanction to kill anyone they want on Pakistan soil. The gunship attack on Salalah in Mohmand Agency in which 24 Pakistani soldiers died seems to be the outcome of Gingrichs advice. This attack came in response to a call for close support from Isaf troops, who had launched a ground attack in the area. This has been revealed by an Isaf spokesman. If that is correct, then it means that the Isaf and Nato troops have launched a planned attack on Pakistani soil and that is an act of war. The response shown by our military and civil leadership is most humiliating. Launching a 'strong protest is showing moral and physical weakness; we have been launching such protests and saying 'no more prior to this attack too without any impact. The Abbottabad raid had generated a similar response, even an APC resolution was developed without any material effect on the actions and designs of the USA. A flurry of diplomatic and military movements lulls us to sleep again. In reality, the USA under Zionist pressure is provoking us to retaliate against the military excursions on Pakistani soil where they kill our military personnel at will. Any retaliation will be declared an act of war against the USA for which the public opinion is being built at home by those who hope to take the American leadership in the coming year. The statements quoted above are an exercise in this direction. In previous years, the US military and intelligence agencies deployed an army of spies in Pakistan; though Raymond Davis blew this clandestine operation away no one knows what these secret operatives were doing in the country - they might have been collecting data and information about our nuclear assets. There is an eerie feeling that these operatives have collected some reasonable information about our nuclear assets and the USA feels confident that in the event of an open conflict, they can possibly take out this capability. They hope that open hostile acts that kill people on our soil are provocations, which can and may evoke a military response from Pakistan providing them a reason to openly attack. Pakistan has played along the USA for 10 years and paid a heavy price in human lives and loss of property. We are an unsafe and unstable country reeling under poverty and economic chaos. We should be bold enough to tell the USA that it is not our war; they should fight it alone. The decisions to review the bilateral ties on the war on terror should be followed to its logical conclusion. The withdrawal of base facility and use of supply routes should not be re-granted under pressure that will come our way. This time our military and political leadership should show some spine and demonstrate the will and resolve to stand by the decisions made. The military leadership should be mindful of the morale at lower echelons of all three services. Junior ranks look up to their seniors for courage and leadership; in its absence despondency and dejection sets in. If we defy the US demands, worst that can happen is that they may become diplomatically hostile; however, embarking on a war path is not an easy option. Pakistanis as a nation have the potential to stand up against the odds; the leadership must put its trust in the nation. Dying for a cause is a noble gesture and there is no bigger cause than protecting national integrity. The writer is a retired brigadier and political analyst. Email: