“Washington should stop pouring money into a black hole,” Tom Harkin, a member of the Senate appropriations committee, said. While a member of the Senate Foreign Relation Committee, Sen. Robert blaming the Bush administration said that it cares so little about the hunt for Osama bin Laden that it is barely paying attention to how the Pakistani military is carrying out the fight. “It’s dangerous to treat the battle against al-Qaeda so casually and it’s unfair with the American taxpayers to be so careless with billions of their dollars,” he maintained.   
More disheartening is the debate on congressional auditor’s report, published in the Washington Post, which says, “It seems as the Pakistani military went on a spending spree with American taxpayer’s wallets and no one bothered to investigate the charges” and any US embassy officials working in Pakistan to verify these enormous cost. The recently published RAND Corporation report is just continuation of such a perception about Pakistan. Now it is becoming a big question that whether Pakistan is really the “front line ally for the war on terror”.
It is quite surprising as well as disappointing for Pakistan to see the aides of Bush administration and member of Congress continuously criticising its role and underestimating efforts on the “war on terror”. To say Pakistan is not doing enough is too irritating for the ally.
The Pak-US strategic partnership is not confined only to the war on terror; rather its scope goes beyond it. US evolving strategic relationship with South Asia, supports the process for democracy in the Muslim world, countering the growing problems of religious extremism, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, eradication of anti-US sentiments in Muslim world is part of US’s grand regional policy, and on top of all this stands, US economic interests and trade within this part of the world.
War on terror is not only the concern of the US. It is also the problem of Pakistan too. But fact of the matter is that the misperceptions and deficit of trust between the two governments persist on these sensitive issues, which have been reflected through the different statements that come most of the time from US side and in reaction even from Pakistan.
The US government and its political aides need to understand the complexity of the environment of the region. In the context of Pakistan, the statements of the US political leaders, reports of the different think tanks, have impacts on the relationship, because that hits the emotional side of the Pakistani nation and finally leads to national resentment which curtails the efforts of the government and generates criticism on its policies, and eventually turns the performance and affects the specific policy direction.
It is also a fact that the anti-Americanism does exists within Pakistan. Unbalanced history of past relations of “hate and love” has also aggravated such sentiments. Further the one sided and biased opinion and statements especially from US government or any person who matters, creates confusion and strengthens the antagonistic feelings. Continuous pressure on Pakistan’s armed forces to excel its operations in the northern and border areas to counter the insurgents and militants activity, without realising the ground realities that the complex environment of the area will not produce fruitful results.
The US repeatedly insists for doing more efforts to counter the militant activities, and infiltration of Taliban from Pakistan borders that support the attacks on collision forces. The prime objective of America is the end of insurgency in Afghanistan and to stop its support from Pakistani-controlled territory. As far as future dimension of US policy is concerned its secondary objective is to support Pakistan to eradicate the religious extremism and militancy, which is due to the violent mindset of certain groups within the society.
There is no ambiguity on the broader sense of the objectives on “war on terror”, yes that matches, but the methods and priority do not.     
But the question is who will pay for the price of lives or the gone smiles of family members of the soldiers and civilians who died during the “war on terror” which in fact is not a local product rather it has been imposed, by the regional political players, or it is there for the fulfillment of uni-power agenda.
The emergence of militants and terrorist groups, religious extremism and other several groups are the result of US war in Afghanistan. Their ideology is that they are fighting against foreign occupation. First it was against the Russians and now against the allied forces. Pakistan is paying the price of US invasion on Afghanistan, by having trouble in its North West Frontier Province and the tribal areas.      
US should consider the sacrifices faced by the Pakistani people and its defence forces. Not only are our solders giving their lives but the general public and even the people from friendly countries have also been targeted by the militants. After 9/11 and since 2001 Pakistani nation has faced the disastrous consequences of the war on terror. All together about more then 200 times security forces have been ambushed by the militants.
More than 1,100 soldiers and security forces personnel have been killed which even include officers of the highest rank of service. The dinner tables of our special forces have been targeted where senior officers have lost their lives. Training institute of military academy has been targeted; naval staff college has been targeted, so much so the headquarters of intelligence agencies have been targeted. This sacrifice of trained manpower is no less than any of the coalition forces operating in Afghanistan. More than 60 bomb blasts and 28 suicide attacks have taken place.
During all these episodes about 1,500 civilians including foreigners have lost their precious lives and hundreds were injured and disabled. Mines have been fixed on road sides where convoys of security personnel and foreigners were moving resulting in blasts and causalities. Many times civilians and security forces personnel have been kidnapped and checkposts targeted. There have been attempts on political leaders, Benazir Bhutto, the leader of Pakistan People’s Party, has been assassinated. There also have been three life attempts on the president and one on the prime minister of the country.
So many times the terrorists have launched attacks and are destroying the infrastructure of the state. They are targeting oil pipelines, gas pipelines, power transmission lines. These damages run into millions of dollars. Who is going to pay for this loss? Pakistan has faced the most unjust and unethical action of collision forces when in the near past they attacked on the frontier out post resulting in causalities of about 11 Pakistani solders.  
Pakistan has cooperated with US on other strategic fronts and showed its determination on “war on terror” by sharing intelligence, capturing and handing over the al-Qaeda terrorists, launching number of successful operations against foreign terrorists. Pakistan arrested more than 700 terror suspects, also banned and placed on watch list large number of sectarian and militant organisations and enacted anti-terrorist laws and froze the bank accounts of suspected terrorist organisations. The government is also working on national criminal database and terrorist-interdiction programme at airports. Pakistan defence forces have established “special operation force” to meet the challenges.
The US should consider the fact that stable and secure Pakistan is vital for US security and its policy for the region while realising the unstable and insecure conditions of Pakistan’s internal dynamics. The need of the hour is to resolve the differences between the two governments and defence forces. Both should address the deficit of trust among the two partners.
US and Pakistan cooperation for the development of socioeconomic structure, promotion of education, eradication of poverty, encouragement of moderation, modernisation of democratic institution and modernisation of security services will definitely not only change the conditions of Pakistan but will change the regional environment too.
Richard Bocher, Joseph Biden, Richard Lugar and Mark Ward have forwarded their opinion on the same parameters, which is appreciable and would result in better and stronger relation between the two countries. People to people contact and interaction between think-tanks and intellectuals are also essential.   

CONCLUSION: To achieve the outcome of the policy of “War on Terror” and other related issues, the political aide of both countries should interact on regular basis and on operational and tactical objectives, coordination between the defence forces of both countries is vital. Synergizing both would ensure the achievement of the policy and its end results