The exposure in the form of the latest WikiLeaks bombshell, containing a big cache of information on the conduct of affairs in Pakistan, constitutes an abiding shame not only for the whole range of our leadership, but also the nation itself. That our top political and military hierarchies should be agreeing to let the countrys sovereignty be compromised, as reflected in the attitude towards the drone attacks and the stationing of US troops on its soil; looking up to Washington for getting a high office; trying to prove their pro-American credentials; and sharing with it their preferences about who should hold the top political slot in the country or, for that matter, would be better suited for it demonstrates the sheer bankruptcy of the courage to take decisions that no foreign country or agent should have the temerity to interfere with, let alone the power to influence. The only person who stands out of this crowd is the sportsman turned politician Imran Khan. He remained steadfast in his views against the US interference in the region, in private conversation with the US as in his public pronouncements. But, sadly, his political clout, as against his wide philanthropist appeal, is too limited to cast an influence over the countrys policies or direction. The subtly demeaning characterisation of our leaders that the US diplomats and interlocutors have done would, in the backdrop of the above scenario, be difficult to question; for assessing the characters of foreign officials with whom diplomats and important official visitors come into contact is part of their assignment. The tragic reality is that their account more or less tallies with the views the politically wide-awake public holds of them. Although the impression about Pakistan leaders subservience to the American wishes, even in matters of appointments of top political and military officials, gets entrenched in the public mind through the legitimacy that WikiLeaks provides, it is not something that the people did not feel already. Even our leaderships open acts lead one to such an interpretation. The view that the release of secret cables has raised questions in the public mind about the trustworthiness of our leadership is a bit puerile; they had little doubt about their unreliability even before the leakage. The damage already done to the reputation of our leaders and to the country itself cannot be completely undone. Historians would revel in pointing to foreign observers view of them, maybe with a fair dose of embellishment. Yet, the mirror that has been shown to our leaders should shake them out of a false sense of complacency. It is time for them to revisit their attitude and begin afresh with the mission of setting things right or suffer further humiliation and ignominy.