• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
{
  "authors": [
    "Gilles Dorronsoro"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "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",
    "Pakistan",
    "Western Europe"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Military",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Pakistan Dilemma for Obama and Europe

The idea that success in Afghanistan requires a new focus on Pakistan is misguided. Besides providing money and counterinsurgency training to the Pakistani army, international actors are powerless to influence the state.

Link Copied
By Gilles Dorronsoro
Published on May 6, 2009

Source: France 24

Pakistan Dilemma for Obama and EuropeThe security situation in Afghanistan, as a whole, continues to deteriorate. The Taliban now exercise almost complete control of the countryside in the south. The rural communities living in the south are left alone with no functional Afghan institutions or state to protect them from the increasingly violent confrontations between the Taliban insurgency, on the one hand, and the international coalition on the other.

The situation around Kabul is more complex, and there have been a few positive developments. The road to the south is more secure than it was a few months ago and the French had a tactical success in the Sarobi district in March 2009 - unfortunately an isolated win on the national grid.

Most worryingly, the Taliban are increasingly entrenched in the north of Afghanistan, once considered an insurgency-free area. Although they are still few in number, the Taliban operate efficiently in launching targeted attacks against Afghan security forces. The passivity of the international coalition forces in the north, particularly the German troops in face of this building insurgency is worrying, considering that it poses a major strategic threat to the overall success of international efforts in Afghanistan.

There are encouraging elements to be found in the Obama administration’s new strategy for Afghanistan and the surrounding region. The strategy promises more resources, more money, better reinforcements, and the promotion of a civilian surge. The newly-created position of Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan will allow for an additional dimension of international engagement in the region and redefines what the goals of the war should be.

However, when considered as a whole, this supposedly ‘new’ strategy amounts to little more than recycled policy from the late Bush years; it is a waiting strategy without any credible long-term objectives. Unfortunately, those who have so far a clear, well coordinated, and coherent strategy are the Taliban.

The idea of refocusing attention towards Pakistan is misguided. The Pakistani government has no influence in the Swat valley region and faces the constant threat of destabilisation by armed groups. Besides sending money and training to the Pakistani army to fight counterinsurgency, international actors are powerless to influence the state. It is crucial to focus immediate attention on Afghanistan; Pakistan can be negotiated with once it has been secured, and not vice-versa.

There is a role for the EU and member states in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, but current policy approaches have failed to adequately analyse the situation and devise appropriate responses. Establishing the authority of the Afghan police will bolster the state against the threat of insurgency, provide a crucial sense of security to Afghan people, and it is an area where European states can actively help. Corruption and personal bias are rampant in the judicial system in Afghanistan and any efforts to foster dialogue and cooperation between international actors and the judiciary are to be welcomed.

Ultimately, the EU and member states should focus less upon troop numbers, quotas, and aid, and should instead investigate whether the caveats of those already working on the ground in Afghanistan could be improved to allow for more robust forms of engagement in counterterrorism and reconstruction efforts.

This piece originally appeared in  France 24.

About the Author

Gilles Dorronsoro

Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program

Dorronsoro’s research focuses on security and political development in Afghanistan. He was a professor of political science at the Sorbonne in Paris and the Institute of Political Studies of Rennes.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    Waiting for the Taliban in Afghanistan

      Gilles Dorronsoro

  • Paper
    Afghanistan: The Impossible Transition

      Gilles Dorronsoro

Gilles Dorronsoro
Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program
Gilles Dorronsoro
SecurityMilitaryForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesSouth AsiaAfghanistanPakistanWestern Europe

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.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Realism and the Lebanon-Israel Talks

    Beirut’s desire to break free from Iranian hegemony may push it into a situation where it has to accept Israel’s hegemony.  

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    The United States and Iran Have Agreed to a Two-Week Ceasefire

    Spot analysis from Carnegie scholars on events relating to the Middle East and North Africa.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Iran Rewrites Its War Strategy

    In an interview, Hamidreza Azizi discusses how Tehran has adapted in real time to the conflict with the United States and Israel.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Trump’s Plan for Gaza Is Not Irrelevant. It’s Worse.

    The simple conclusion is that the scheme will bring neither peace nor prosperity, but will institutionalize devastation.

      Nathan J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    What Does the Strait of Hormuz’s Closure Mean?

    In an interview, Roger Diwan discusses where the global economy may be going in the third week of the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.

      Nur Arafeh

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.