PRESIDENT Zardari's reported response to a letter he had received from President Obama last month underlines some of those ground realities of the war on terror, which if defied as asked for by the US, would not serve Pakistan's national interests. According to a report published in The Washington Post, Mr Zardari has turned down Mr Obama's demand to extend the military operation to Balochistan and North Waziristan in FATA. Whether the Pakistani leader has "a weakening hold on power" and does not want to be seen as "kowtowing to US pressure" that has led him to disagree with the US President or, concluding from this line of thought, left to himself he would have replied in different terms is not relevant. He has conveyed the sense of the nation, and that is what a democratically elected leader ought to be doing. The noises about the need to expand the military operation could only be answered through a forthright communication at the highest level. The assurance contained in Mr Zardari's letter that his government is committed to fighting Al-Qaeda and the Taliban and other insurgent groups attacking US and NATO forces from Pakistan's side can hardly be questioned. That is because these very militants have created havoc within the country and made the lives of its citizens so insecure. Also, he is right in saying that Islamabad's decision would be based on "its own timeline and operational needs". Mr Obama would do well to listen to the Pentagon official who told the paper that Pakistan was "already doing an extraordinary amount" of job. But turning a deaf ear to the actual situation, the US pressurises Pakistan to "do more" because that would serve its interests. On the other hand, it defrays even the committed amount of money after agonising delays under the pretext of 'time-consuming' legislative procedure. Mr Obama should also pay heed to Mr Zardari's remark that the Swat campaign has caused an expenditure of $2.5 billion and there is need for Washington to come forward with increased assistance. It is an undeniable fact that involvement in the war on terror has created a host of problems for us and given rise to greater dangers. Indian machinations to destabilise Pakistan through its presence in Afghanistan is one instance of that danger. If the US really esteems Pakistan's friendship President Obama should actively pursue his own thoughts about the resolution of Indo-Pakistan disputes as a prerequisite to peace and stability in the region. President Zardari's reference to "historical conflicts" and call for their settlement should, therefore, be taken in right earnest.