Obama's AfPak Strategy, betrays his sense of history as a national leader, and lack of judgement to defeat the resistance in Afghanistan, knowing, fully well that: "no sane enemy will ever fight a military superpower on conventional terms," David Kilcullen. And in the same breath he talks of a comprehensive strategy: "and there gotta be an exit strategy - and not a perpetual drift." He also hopes to gain support of some new partners, such as Iran, India, China, Russia and others, who could deliver, while his European partners are showing lack of resolve to fight the war. Obama named India and Iran, as the 'contact group' to deal with terrorism. What does he mean by this? I will talk about it, in my next article. Having lost the war in Afghanistan, he has come hard on Pakistan to take-up the cudgels, whereas, Pakistan army itself has lost nerves in Swat, Dir-Bajaur and Waziristan, taking cover behind the political government, to strike accord with the tribals. Keeping the American nation in the dark is no statesmanship. The war in Afghanistan is lost and that truth must be told to the people, i.e. 'the exit strategy and the plan to implement it'. Obama has not shown the magnanimity to rise above what ordinary mortals tend to do, when they encounter the painful reality. George Bush and the neo-cons are wholly responsible for the fiasco, as well as the damage to the image of the lone superpower, besides the loss of trillions of dollars on the badly conceived adventures, which were essentially to cover the real motives to build up Pax-Americana and to control the strategic wealth of the Muslim countries. The global consciousness cannot easily be duped into accepting what is patently wrong. George Bush insulted his great nation by using "lies" to justify the immoral wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama's rhetoric of threat and intimidation is to bluff his own countrymen, so that their morale is kept intact. To claim that resistance would be wiped out from all its sanctuaries, is a 'mission impossible'. After the realisation that the resistance in Afghanistan, cannot be defeated, the task is now being transferred to Pakistan, to accomplish the mission. It is a very nave thinking, because it is not in the competence of Pak Army to defeat Taliban. Despite the best efforts made by the army, it could not achieve success in its operations within the Pakistani territory, in Waziristan, Bajaur and Swat. They rightly felt that the best option was to engage into a dialogue and come to a truce. If Pakistan follows US dictates, for the truce agreement to be quashed, then we would be repeating the mistakes, General (retd) Pervez Musharraf made. If Pakistan breaks the peace treaty, it would result into a debacle and humiliation for the army, simply stated: Pakistan cannot deliver. This is the dilemma and also a test of Zardari's calibre and sagacity. If he falls into the trap, he will not only be ruining his already sinking image, but will be bracketed with General Musharraf to have transformed Pakistan into a failing nation, despite its nuclear capability - an image that suits our enemies. Should Pakistan comply to US demands, for the carrot of 1.5 billions, it will be a disaster. To rub salt to the wound, Obama bluntly warned that it would not be a 'blank cheque' - the insinuation being that Pakistan cannot be trusted with the aid package. Therefore, the amount to be given, would be subjected to proper audit by the US authorities. Is it really worth taking the money when there is so much of trust deficit? The best and prudent response from Pakistan should be an unequivocal demand for the withdrawal of occupation forces from Afghanistan. Unless it dawns upon the bruised ego of USA, peace would elude this region till Afghanistan is freed from foreign occupation. It is not in the bones and marrows of Afghans to accept servility. Both, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda are the self-created Frankstein of USA, which played seminal role in the defeat of the Red Army. Now the US wants to reverse the process. "Chah zan ra chah darpesh," is the Persian saying, meaning that "those who dig wells for others, very often they themselves fall into it." This is the reality US faces now, but the 'phenomenal pride' nourishes a latent wish that the Taliban be destroyed so that it could be convenient to reach the Central Asian States, which possess big reservoirs of oil and gas, next only to the Gulf region. This strategic aim can never be realised through military means, but it is possible by adopting the 'policy of peace, cooperation and engagement', as the Chinese have done it practically, ensuring uninterrupted supply of oil and gas for decades to come. The Islamic Resistance emerged from the Pak-Afghan border region and is relentlessly struggling for freedom for the last thirty years, first to defeat the Soviet Union, a very formidable power, and now the USA and their allies, who are encountering the same fate in Afghanistan. The Islamic Resistance is the 'Divine Intervention' and a reality. Denying its existence has proved self-defeating. Their struggle is for the freedom of their homeland and the elements who are engaged in acts of terrorism, outside the area of conflict are a different entity. Call the freedom fighters by any name you like, but don't degrade the freedom struggle, by the name of terrorism. Get out of this obsession to gain a clearer perception of the reality. Grant freedom to Afghanistan, the resistance will gradually fade-away. But the fear that the moment, the occupying forces leave Afghanistan, Taliban would be able to form their own government, which in turn would destabilise the adjoining region, particularly Pakistan. This is a wrong assumption, which is borne by the fact that in 1990 when USA abandoned Afghanistan, after the ouster of the Soviets, the tribal areas were not disturbed. On the contrary an exemplary peace had emerged in Afghanistan and democracy got strengthened in Pakistan. Similarly peace would prevail in the region after the exit of occupation forces from Afghanistan. When USA declared its policy of vacating Iraq, there prevailed a climate of peace, which facilitated a safe exit from there. The ground realities demand that a new turn is given to the Afghan policy. A dialogue must be initiated involving all the stakeholders, like Russia, China, Iran, India and the Central Asian Republics, to determine a comprehensive peace policy for Afghanistan, which should be mandatory for UN to implement. A comprehensive plan for reconstruction and building necessary infrastructure in Afghanistan, would be essential. The PPP undoubtedly is a national party, with a huge responsibility to ensure the security of Pakistan and focus on good governance. Nawaz Sharif must also cooperate in formulating a comprehensive paradigm to salvage the country from the impending dangers, but unfortunately, the president as well as the prime minister, appear to have endorsed Obama's policy, which if implemented would be a fatal blow to Pakistan. Therefore, the matter must be referred to the Parliament to come-up with a well-deliberated response, to the challenge. The judiciary has gained an image of independence and trustworthiness. It must ensure that the common man gets affordable and quick justice. The 'Swat phenomenon' only reflects that urge of the people who need justice. If Swat delivers justice to the people, the Qazi courts would become more credible. Without a sound edifice of 'justice' no country can prosper. If judges are employed for personal ends, the system would be fully devalued. Similarly if the Parliament is reduced to a ceremonial entity, democracy shall remain a very elusive goal. Hazrat Ali, Karamullah's, message must not be lost sight of: "Failures are often the results of timidity and disappointments are the results of bashfulness." We should neither be timid nor bashful. The writer is a former chief of army staff E-mail: friendsfoundation@live.co.uk