Q&A
Stephen Tankel
{
"authors": [
"Stephen Tankel"
],
"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",
"Pakistan"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
The Future of U.S.-Pakistan Relations
Following Pakistan’s recent decision to reopen its border crossings to U.S. and NATO military transit into Afghanistan, the U.S.-Pakistani relationship has improved, but significant challenges remain.
Published on Jul 8, 2012
Source: Washington Journal
Speaking on the Washington Journal, Carnegie's Stephen Tankel discussed some of the context and consequences of Pakistan's recent decision to re-open its border crossings for U.S. and NATO military transit into Afghanistan. He argued that while this decision was a step forward, the bilateral relationship was still a troubled one. Pakistan desperately needs to normalize its relations with its neighbors and enter into a more transactional, distanced relationship with the United States, he asserted. Tankel also discussed Lashkar-e-Taiba, the jihadi group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai attack, and stated that it may gain increasing staying power in Pakistani society if the Pakistani state does not stop its support soon.
About the Author
Stephen Tankel
Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program
Tankel was a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment, where his research focuses on insurgency, terrorism, and the evolution of nonstate armed groups.
- Restoring Trust: U.S.-Pakistan Relations
- LeT’s Global RiseQ&A
Stephen Tankel
Recent Work
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
- Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is InsaneCommentary
The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.
Michael Young
- Corrupted by Absolute PowerCommentary
In an interview, Marc Lynch discusses his new book decrying the post-1990 U.S.-dominated order in the Middle East.
Michael Young
- Why Does the Middle East Suffer “Forever Wars”?Commentary
Because perpetual conflict enhances control, offers economic benefits, and allows leaders to ignore popular preferences.
Angie Omar
- Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?Commentary
A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.
Michael Young
- A Military Balance Sheet in the U.S. and Israeli War With IranCommentary
In an interview, Jim Lamson discusses the ongoing regional conflict and sees an unclear picture when it comes to winners and losers.
Michael Young
