The US House Appropriations Committee has put special Pakistan-specific barriers to aid in its report on the House appropriations bill that will probably be passed by the House, though the contents of the Senate bill have yet to be considered even in committee. This seems to be another piece of domestic in-fighting that is spilling over into the USAs conduct of foreign relations, with a special bipartisan group to be set up to review the conduct of the war in Afghanistan. Much of the ire that US lawmakers are showing is apparently caused by the Pakistani reaction, which has been negative even from the government, of the gross violation of Pakistans sovereignty inherent in the Abbottabad raid, so the appropriations bill also has tougher oversight of this spending. This takes Pakistan back to the great crisis of 1971, when the US Seventh Fleet was to offer help to East Pakistan in the Bay of Bengal, but never did. After leaving Pakistan to be dismembered, the USA first instigated the struggle against the USSR in Afghanistan, then left Pakistan to pick up the pieces and handle the blowback from Islamic militancy, not to mention receive food aid instead of the hard cash it had paid for F-16s, only to pounce on it after 9/11, threatening it either you are with us or you are against us and warning that it would be 'bombed back into the Stone Age if it did not join the USA in its so-called War on Terror. In the War itself, not only did the USA complicate matters by occupying Muslim lands, but it also treated Pakistan with disdain, constantly calling on it to do more, killing its citizens through Drone strikes which also violated its sovereignty. Though the USA might well be celebrating the killing of Bin Laden, it would like to use his death in Pakistan, and its spy agency ISIs failure to disclose his location, to tighten the screws on Pakistan, not just through the review body, but through a mandate to the government to disclose before the release of the money where it is to be spent. There is to be a 90-day period before the release of the money. Though Pakistan is accustomed to such delays over its years of dealing with the USA, and though it is true enough that the USA has the right to give out its taxpayers money, it should also be Pakistans option whether or not it wishes to accept aid under such conditions. The USA should be made to realize that Pakistan may be poor, but it is also self-respecting. US aid is not given as a favour, and thus the conditions cannot entirely be in accordance with the wishes of the donor. It should also be remembered that it might be convenient for the donor executive to have the legislature vary the conditions of aid later, but this is against international norms. This merely provides another reason why Pakistan should end its alliance with the USA.