AHSAN NISAR William Francis Butler once said: The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards. While most of you would think that there has been a typographical mistake in the title of this article, it would be difficult to find any other title that aptly describes the situation post 9/11. What started off as a war on (t)error by the then President Bush, after nine long years, has not brought the desired results for the US; instead it has resulted in deteriorating its economic conditions. By making it a yes, we can war and hiding behind the flagship health care reform bill, Obama loses his own popularity, while his troops continue losing ground to the Taliban. The participation of thousands of anti-war protestors on the 7th anniversary of the US-led war in Iraq bears testimony to this fact. After nine years of bloody conflict in Afghanistan, the US administration under Obama announced the new AfPak strategy on December 2, 2009. With 68,000 US and 35,000 European troops already deployed in Afghanistan, he announced a surge of another 30,000 US troops during 2010. This would bring the total number of US forces there to 98,000 and that of NATO countries to 45,000. This way, in 2010, the total allied forces would number 143,000. For the US troops alone, there would be an expenditure of $30 billion annually. The second important decision under the AfPak strategy was the deadline for the withdrawal of the US troops from this war-ravaged country. Although complete withdrawal was set to take place in three years time, indications are that the US and its allies would start pulling out their troops in 2011. This seems to closely follow the pattern of Vietnam and Iraq: the surge and its follow up. But every war is different, fought under different political and geographical conditions. It remains to be seen what the US aims to accomplish in three years that it has failed to do in nine years. Oil lies at the centre of the war on (t)error, and for this, the real objective of the US is to achieve complete military domination over oil resources and routes. The US has spent billions of dollars on pursuing the oil wars. One has to be completely blind to the rationale of the war to believe that the US is spending this huge amount just to fight terrorism or bring democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan. In its pursuit of achieving military primacy, the Pentagon has devastated these two countries. Now, Pakistan is in danger of becoming a collateral damage of the US pursuit of global energy control and military domination, if Pakistan army and establishment continue to fight its so-called war on (t)error. This war has brought Pakistan to the greatest crisis since 1971, a crisis that can result in serious consequences for its integrity and solidarity. Having said that, opposing Talibanisation without condemning the Americans war for oil will not bring democracy to Pakistan. Would moderate Pakistan wake up and smell coffee? The national hostility to America is at all time high. The issues of drone attacks, presence of Blackwater and the threats by US to attack Quetta are adding fuel to the fire. The people of Pakistan will not tolerate foreign hegemony under any circumstances, On the basis of the self-same logic, they would never agree to an internal hegemony by any single institution of the state. The two hegemonies compliment each other. If our people meekly submit to internal hegemony, they will have to submit to external hegemony. This is so because the strength and power of external hegemony is far greater than that of internal hegemony. If the people are too terrified to resist the weaker force, it is not possible for them to resist the stronger force. The acceptance of or acquiescence in internal hegemony means submission to external hegemony. The opposition to Talibanisation, without the condemnation of the US policy in that context, is hypocritical and will not serve the purpose of finding a solution to the fallout of blundering and disastrous policies of Bush and Musharraf, which they followed after 2001. Pakistans educated classes must start to think beyond their immediate self-interest if they want to prevent their country from becoming another Iraq. Pakistan is not there yet...and could be there unless resisted. The writer is a freelance columnist.