A conflict launched in the name of American security is producing the opposite effect.
Sarah Yerkes
{
"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",
"Pakistan"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
The next U.S. president must pursue a balanced strategy toward Pakistan that simultaneously strengthens the civilian government—the best hope for Pakistan’s long-term stability—without alienating the Pakistani army, warns a new policy brief by South Asia expert Ashley J. Tellis.
WASHINGTON, Sept 3—The next U.S. president must pursue a balanced strategy toward Pakistan that simultaneously strengthens the civilian government—the best hope for Pakistan’s long-term stability—without alienating the Pakistani army, warns a new policy brief by South Asia expert Ashley J. Tellis.
While strong U.S. support for Pakistan’s civilian government risks undermining military cooperation in U.S. counterterrorism efforts, recognizing the military as the preeminent center of power reinforces a status quo that allowed the Afghan–Pakistan border region to become a sanctuary for terrorist organizations. Managing this dilemma will be difficult but necessary for the success of U.S. engagement with Pakistan.
Recommendations for the next U.S. president:
On Governance:
On Military Cooperation:
On Regional Relations:
Tellis concludes:
“Even if Islamabad were to overcome the immediate problems related to terrorism, the permanent transformation of Pakistan would be decades away. Consequently, the United States should be patient and satisfied in the interim merely if the trend lines in Pakistan pertaining to good governance, stable macroeconomic management, focused investments in human capital, responsible foreign and strategic policy, and temperate ideological orientations are all at least relatively positive.”
###

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.
A conflict launched in the name of American security is producing the opposite effect.
Sarah Yerkes
For AI to capture the public’s policy concerns, people need to know that the models are elevating human concerns in human words, not generating their own.
Micah Weinberg
From anime heroes to online gaming communities, Morocco’s Gen Z is building a new protest culture. What does this digital imagination reveal about youth politics, and how should institutions respond?
Abdelilah Farah
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 front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.
Bashir Kitachaev