{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "SAP",
"programs": [
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"South Asia",
"Afghanistan"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
The current strategy of defeating the Taliban is unrealistic and headed swiftly toward an impasse, writes Gilles Dorronsoro in a new report on the war in Afghanistan.
WASHINGTON, November 30—The current strategy of defeating the Taliban is unrealistic and headed swiftly toward an impasse, writes Gilles Dorronsoro in a new report on the war in Afghanistan. Just retaining the areas controlled by the coalition will require significant additional American troops next year, but escalation is politically untenable given the impending departure of European forces and dwindling public support for the war at home.
Dorronsoro argues that the United States should adopt a new strategy before it’s too late. Rather than committing more troops, U.S. leaders need to pursue a political solution to the conflict—including a cease-fire and negotiations with insurgents—to prevent al-Qaeda’s return.
Key Findings and Recommendations:
"The United States must act quickly," Dorronsoro writes. "Given the rapidly deteriorating security situation, every passing month strengthens the position of the Taliban. A viable exit strategy is still possible, but time is not on America’s side."
NOTES
Click here to read the full report
Gilles Dorronsoro, a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment, is an expert on Afghanistan, Turkey, and South Asia. His research focuses on security and political development in Afghanistan, particularly the role of the International Security Assistance Force, the necessary steps for a viable government in Kabul, and the conditions necessary for withdrawal scenarios. He is the co-founder and editor of South Asian Multidisciplinary Academic Journal and the European Journal of Turkish Studies.
The Carnegie South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region's security, economy, and political development. From the war in Afghanistan to Pakistan's internal dynamics to U.S. engagement with India, the Program's renowned team of experts offer in-depth analysis derived from their unique access to the people and places defining South Asia's most critical challenges.
Press Contact: Kendra Galante, 202-939-2233, pressoffice@ceip.org
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
Donald Trump’s repudiation of NATO goes against the Make America Great Again vision of a U.S.-centered foreign policy. If the goal is to preserve the alliance by boosting Europe’s commitments, leaning into France’s vision is the most America First way forward.
Rym Momtaz
The wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are existential threats to Europe as a peace project. Leaders and citizens alike must reaffirm their solidarity to face up to today’s multifaceted challenges.
Marc Pierini
The U.S.-sponsored TRIPP deal is driving the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process forward. But foreign and domestic hurdles remain before connectivity and economic interdependence can open up the South Caucasus.
Thomas de Waal, Areg Kochinyan, Zaur Shiriyev
Donald Trump has demanded that European allies send ships to the Strait of Hormuz while his war of choice in Iran rages on. He has constantly berated NATO while the alliance’s secretary-general has emphatically supported him.
Rym Momtaz, ed.
The EU is structurally incapable of reacting to today’s foreign policy crises. The union must fold the EEAS into the European Commission and create a security council better prepared to take action on the global stage.
Stefan Lehne