SECRETARY Clintons visit to Islamabad might have rendered the prospects of executing development projects in certain essential fields more attainable, but the political mileage that, in the process, the Pakistan government has ceded to the Americans more than offsets the gains that might accrue from these projects, some time in the unspecified future. While the benefits are subject to the stipulation that the development process does really take off and is taken to its logical conclusion - and does not wither away amid petty technicalities like the much-hyped 'reconstruction opportunity zones announced in March 2006 - the vital concessions that we have given to the US in deciding about our policies are quite tangible at the present. It is time that we remembered the golden principle of falling back on our own resources to meet our needs; for if the price of aid to help us stand on our own feet and be counted among the advanced nations of the world is sovereignty, we had better summarily dispense with such an aid. Let us also not forget that Hillary Clinton set the tone of her visit by declaring that should there be another incident similar to the one of New York's Times Square, the consequences for Pakistan would be very severe. To quote her words uttered in a BBC interview, it would have a very devastating impact on our relationship. The threat does not deliberately take into account the predicament of the key ally in the war on terror that the menace, largely created or at least accentuated by the US policies in the region, is not entirely under Islamabads control. It can, therefore, be interpreted as plain and simple pressure to bring Pakistan into line with Americans wishes in pursuit of their strategic goals. Our leaderships pusillanimity could not bring them round to telling the US that they would not brook interference in Pakistans internal affairs. Resultantly, Secretary Clinton made bold to suggest the extension in the service of the Army Chief of Staff, something unheard of in the annals of relations between sovereign states. General Kayanis retirement on due date or extension has been debated for some time past, and though the principle of timely retirement and promotion of the next senior most to the vacant post should be adopted, under the present system it should be up to the government to make the decision, suiting the interests of the country, and not on foreign advice. The Americans also arm-twisted Pakistan to follow its dictate and allow access of Indian goods to Afghanistan through Pakistan, a policy strategically harmful to our interests that demand the resolution of Kashmir to precede such a concession. Although the US-Pakistan talks were named strategic dialogue, our strategic interests were neglected: the water dispute with India was not considered worthy enough to be taken up and the proposal to acquire nuclear power plants from China was taken exception to by the Secretary. The question boils down to need for courage to give a decisive 'No to US dictates.