It was a grave insult and slap in the face of our parliamentarians, when the US conducted two drone strikes in North Waziristan within days of the May 13 joint session, which concluded that such drone attacks must be stopped forthwith, failing which the government will be constrained to consider taking necessary steps, including the withdrawal of transit facility allowed to NATO/ISAF forces. Meanwhile, the US arrogance was displayed in its message: More drone attacks, the more you condemn. Timed to coincide with Senator John Kerrys visit, these drone strikes challenged the writ and sovereignty of the countrys Parliament. Earlier when the NATO helicopters attacked our check post near the Pak-Afghan border few months ago, the government responded by blocking its logistic supply for almost 10 days and the Americans were forced to apologise. But the May 16 drone attacks were also followed by another US/NATO helicopter attack on the Pakistani check posts injuring two soldiers. It is indeed unfortunate that we allow the passage of fuel, oils/lubricants and spare parts through our territory to enable the foreign forces to service their drones and helicopters to attack and kill our own people. The question is: Will the parliamentary resolution be implemented in letter and in spirit? Given disrespect and contempt shown to our Parliament by the USA, it is important that the Pakistani lawmakers must force the federal government to implement the resolution seeking halt of the NATO/ISAF supplies via Pakistan. The failure to assert its authority, nevertheless, would amount to tearing apart this resolution - a fate that befell its earlier 14-point resolution passed in October 2008 about Pakistans role in the war on terror. The ISI and PAF briefings in the joint session, though in camera, did make few startling revelations. The PAF conceded that the Shamsi airbase was the property of the UAE government and not under PAFs control. This showed how successive governments had withheld the truth about this non-transparent state transaction or agreement from the nation all these years. Granted that the UAE royals have been Pakistans sincere and trusted friends, but Pakistanis are concerned that the formers leadership chose to further 'sublet the Shamsi airbase to the US for military/drone operations. But could this have been possible without the tacit approval of the Musharraf or Zardari regime? While it is being stated that Pakistan has stopped US operations from Shamsi airfield, the complete truth about it has yet to be revealed. It was also disclosed during the briefings that no written agreement exists about the drone attacks and NATO supplies. Does this imply that our country has been taken for a ride for the last many years on the basis of secret verbal agreements with the US, which our topmost leadership is not willing to own? Many eyebrows were also raised and suspicions confirmed when the House was informed that Raymond Davis was released on the orders of the President and Prime Minister. Should the Pakistanis not ask their leadership: Are you with us or against us? The setting up of an independent national commission was another notable aspect of the parliamentary resolution. Mian Nawaz Sharifs earlier demand for an independent judicial commission headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, along with all High Court Chief Justices as members, seemed ideal; however, it was overkill. For the national commission to be credible and acceptable to the nation, it needs to be headed by a serving or retired Supreme Court judge with two or three eminent and impartial personalities as members. In addition to the names proposed by the PML-N, the credentials of renowned and respected Pakistanis, like Justice (retd) Rana Bhagwandas, former Senator Javed Jabbar and Senator S.M. Zafar, justify their inclusion in the commission. A panel of serving or retired senior military or intelligence officers could also assist the commission. In addition to incorporating the findings or recommendations of separate inquiries by the army, PAF and ISI, the commissions agenda must also include: i The poor response of the countrys top political leadership and state machinery in the aftermath of Abbottabad operation. i The questionable role of the presidency, Interior Ministry and our Embassies in Washington DC and the UAE for large-scale issue or extension of visas (7,000 plus) to US officials or agents, the Indian and other foreigners, bypassing security clearances. i The CIAs covert intelligence network in Pakistan. i The transfer of the Shamsi airbase to UAE and its use by the US forces for military or drone operations. i The role of the Interior Ministry, including its under command Intelligence Bureau and FIAs elite counterterrorism group, to locate Osama bin Laden in coordination with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwas police or special branch. i Why Pakistan remains without a national security and anti-terrorism policy or strategy? Besides this, the controversial track record of the government in defying the Supreme Court decisions, lack of consensus between the Prime Minister and leader of the opposition on appointment of a neutral non-political Chairman NAB or setting up of an independent accountability commission are well known. With such a shaky relationship, will Prime Minister Gilani and Chaudhry Nisar Ali be able to strike common ground on the commissions composition and terms of reference? Will the government create hurdles in the setting up the independent national commission for fear that its non-transparent dealings with the US might get exposed? Will the recommendations of this commission like many such in the past really see the light of the day? Hopefully, the Abbottabad commissions proceedings would be open to the media. The in-camera joint parliamentary session, reinforced the public view that our political leadership seek cover behind national security to withholding truth from its citizens. Had the proceedings been telecast live, it would have exposed the true face of many at the helm of affairs. Senator Kerrys visit to Pakistan was partly motivated by the May 13 resolution that called for a revisit and review of terms of engagement with the US. His statement that the road ahead will not be defined by words but by actions, indicated a typical imperialist mindset. He also called it important to press the reset button in the Pak-US relations and forwarded a list of specific demands for us to act upon. After all those sacrifices, what more actions does the US want from Pakistan? And what about those gigantic steps that it (the US) must take to restore mutual trust and respect. The Senator vowed to write with his blood that the US has no interest in Pakistans nuclear assets. But given the history of US betrayals, can Pakistan afford to fall into the Kerry trap. Also, was the joint statement, issued at end of Kerrys visit in accordance with the spirit of the May 13 resolution? This clearly is our Parliaments hour of trial n The writer is a retired Brigadier