Pakistan has been the victim of dependence syndrome for the last half a century since it entered into security agreements with the US to serve the latters global agenda in the Cold War and in return obtained economic and military assistance to accelerate its economic development and to counter the perceived security threat from India. It is true that the US assistance made available to Pakistan the much needed additional resources which, whenever put to good use, helped it in the task of economic development. The supply of advanced military equipment was an important source of strength to our armed forces. But the US aid did not come without its costs. It put definite limitations on the manoeuvrability of our foreign policy by ruling out certain policy options and dictating others in accordance with the US foreign policy goals and agenda. To that extent, the US aid resulted in the loss of our sovereignty, a fact which our ruling elite, both the civilians and the military, have been at pains to deny and to hide from the people of Pakistan. Our dependence on the US historically also resulted in the skewing of our national priorities in favour of the military at the expense of the economic development of the country and the welfare of the people. In fact, one can even argue that the coincidence of the increased availability of the US aid during the reign of military regimes in Pakistan in 1960s, 1980s and in the post-9/11 period may have strengthened the militarys domination of the countrys politics and encouraged deep inroads into its economy in the form of the militarys vast industrial, commercial, banking and real estate empire. The availability of additional resources also multiplied the opportunities for corruption on the part of the ruling establishment of the country including the civilian bureaucracy, the military and the politicians. But above all, the dependence syndrome, in which a nation develops a peculiar mindset of seeking the solutions for all its political, security and economic problems in foreign capitals, diverts attention from the full development of the national potential for progress and from the changes in the countrys economic, foreign and security policies which are necessary for accelerating its economic development and strengthening its security. In the case of Pakistan, this negative effect of the dependence syndrome has assumed particularly serious proportions. Needless to say that extreme dependence on a foreign power for our national security and economic progress also lowered our prestige in the international community. The pros and cons of the Kerry-Lugar Bill, which has been the subject of intense controversy in Pakistan recently, need to be examined in the light of the foregoing. On the positive side, the Bill triples the economic assistance for Pakistan to US $1.5 billion thus according a much higher priority to economic assistance than to security assistance as the current state of our country requires. In fact, this is the kind of high priority that we need to assign to the task of economic development domestically instead of allocating most of our budgetary resources to non-developmental sectors. Secondly, unlike the security assistance to be provided under the Kerry-Lugar Bill, the economic assistance under this Bill would be without any conditionalities. On the negative side, the Bill subjects the security assistance to Pakistan to extremely intrusive conditionalities which are repugnant to Pakistans sovereignty and an affront to its national dignity. But before we jump to any hasty conclusions, let us see what those conditionalities are under which the US would provide security assistance to Pakistan within the framework of the Kerry-Lugar Bill. Section 203(c) lays down three conditions for the provision of security assistance during the fiscal years 2011 to 2014 and the sale of major defence equipment during the fiscal years 2012 to 2014 to Pakistan: The Government of Pakistan is continuing to cooperate with the US in efforts to dismantle nuclear supplier networks (an implied reference to the alleged activities of the A Q Khan network), The Government of Pakistan has demonstrated sustained commitment and efforts to combat terrorist groups by ceasing support, including by any elements within the Pakistan military or its intelligence agency, to extremist and terrorist groups, preventing Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and associated groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad from operating in the territory of Pakistan, dismantling terrorist bases of operations in various parts of the country including Quetta and Muridke, taking action when provided with intelligence about high level terrorist targets, and strengthening counterterrorism and anti-money laundering laws, The security forces of Pakistan are not subverting the political or judicial processes of Pakistan. Under Section 205 (a), the Bill further requires that direct cash security-related assistance and non-assistance payments may be made only to the civilian authorities of a civilian government of Pakistan and that the secretary of state shall ensure that civilian authorities of a civilian government have received a copy of the final documentation provided to the US relating to non-assistance payments made to the Government of Pakistan. Finally, Section 301 (b), expresses the sense of Congress (which is recom-mendatory in nature and not legally binding), that it is critical to Pakistans long-term prosperity and security to strengthen relationships among India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. These conditionalities relating to the US security assistance amount to micromanagement of Pakistans internal and external policies. No nation with any sense of dignity would or should accept them. Despite our dependence syndrome, we cannot allow ourselves to be treated like an American colony. It is surprising that our government failed to convey effectively our reservations to the US government earlier after taking the various stakeholders into confidence through inter-ministerial consultations, something that our foreign minister is expected to do now during his forthcoming visit to the US. Having said that one should step back a little bit and try to see which of these security-related conditionalities would be objectionable if they were not part of the Bill passed by the legislature of a foreign power. Should Pakistan allow the illegal activities of nuclear supplier networks? The obvious answer to this question is an emphatic no keeping in view the likely repercussions of such a misguided policy. Considering the damage from which we have suffered from terrorism both internally and externally, shouldnt the Government of Pakistan make sustained efforts to defeat this menace which is eating into the vitals of our society? Considering our past record of repeated military takeovers, which have stunted the political evolution of the country on democratic lines and inflicted incalculable damage on the country both internally and externally, and Musharrafs attempt to subvert the countrys judicial process through the proclamation of the unconstitutional emergency on November 03, 2007 in his capacity as the chief of the army staff, why shouldnt the nation demand that henceforth the Pakistan armed forces should refrain from the violation of the constitution in accordance with their oath of honour? In a nutshell, the US is telling us how to manage our affairs primarily because we have historically failed to manage them in our own best interest in the past. So instead of criticising the US, we need to look at our past record critically to become wiser for the future. The malaise of dependence syndrome from which we have suffered for the past five decades is the other major factor responsible for the objectionable parts of the Kerry-Lugar Bill. The dependence syndrome manifests itself in various forms: in the chronic habit of a nation to live beyond its means resulting in the begging bowl diplomacy, in its unwillingness or incapability to use its own efforts to manage its affairs and resolve its problems which leads to the atrophying of its institutions, and a loss of dignity in its international conduct allowing foreign governments to take advantage of its vulnerabilities. Pakistan currently suffers from all the consequences of the dependence syndrome. One just has to look at the conduct of our governments, past and present as well as the civilian and the military, to reach this conclusion. Hopefully, the Kerry-Lugar Bill, which is like a mirror showing us our unattractive image, will shame us enough to correct our individual and collective conduct. The writer is a retired ambassador. E-mail: javid.husain@gmail.com