China and the “AfPak” Issue

{
  "authors": [
    "Michael D. Swaine"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "South Asia",
    "Afghanistan",
    "Pakistan",
    "East Asia",
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Military",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

In The Media

China and the “AfPak” Issue

In gauging the prospects for U.S. strategy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan, it is important to understand and take into account China’s deep-rooted strategic interests in the region.

By Michael D. Swaine

Published on Feb 23, 2010

Source: China Leadership Monitor

China and the “AfPak” IssueIn gauging the prospects for U.S. strategy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan, it is important to understand the interests and motives, specific policies, actual and potential influence, and possible future orientation and behavior of the Chinese leadership with regard to each of the above areas, as well as possible lines of internal debate. This essay offers an analysis of these factors and concludes with some speculations on whether and how China’s stance toward the AfPak issue might be modified to lend greater support to the Obama strategy.

About the Author

Michael D. Swaine

Former Senior Fellow, Asia Program

Swaine was a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and one of the most prominent American analysts in Chinese security studies.

Recent Work

Other
What Kind of Global Order Should Washington and Beijing Strive For?
- Michael D. Swaine
Commentary
A Smarter U.S. Strategy for China in Four Steps
- Michael D. Swaine

Security Military Foreign Policy South Asia Afghanistan Pakistan East Asia China

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 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Research
India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era
Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.
+6
Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Lukashenko’s Bromance With Trump Has a Sell-By Date
Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.
Artyom Shraibman
Collection
The Middle Power Moment?
The world has entered an era of upheaval—a period of heightened geopolitical rivalry, deepening political polarization, quickening technological change, glaring economic inequality, accelerating environmental crises, and eroding respect for international law. This moment of disruption and fluidity is also one of opportunity, however. It provides openings for middle powers, both established and emerging, to exercise unaccustomed agency and influence the future of global order.
Carnegie scholars are analyzing middle power responses to this moment of upheaval and assessing whether—and under what conditions—these states can contribute to practical problem solving. They are asking critical, concrete questions: What countries, precisely, are we talking about when we refer to middle powers? In what issue areas do their priorities converge and diverge, including across North-South divides? In what domains can middle powers pack a punch, rather than produce a whimper? Are they willing to shoulder actual burdens and responsibility? Finally, how can middle powers assert themselves globally, without running afoul of or threatening their relations with the United States or China?
Commentary
Emissary
Can Mullin Revive FEMA?
Restoring competence and trust to the anemic, neglected disaster recovery agency is a matter of national security.
Sarah Labowitz, Debbra Goh
Commentary
Emissary
Europe’s New Industrial Policy Can Learn From U.S. Mistakes
Although the IAA often differs from the IRA, European policymakers can still take note of the U.S. act’s shortcomings.
Milo McBride

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Research

India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era

Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.

- +6
Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Lukashenko’s Bromance With Trump Has a Sell-By Date

Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.

Artyom Shraibman

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, wearing an orange cap, and the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, dressed in saffron robes, are greeting supporters of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) during a roadshow ahead of the Indian General Elections in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India, on April 6, 2024.

Collection

The Middle Power Moment?

The world has entered an era of upheaval—a period of heightened geopolitical rivalry, deepening political polarization, quickening technological change, glaring economic inequality, accelerating environmental crises, and eroding respect for international law. This moment of disruption and fluidity is also one of opportunity, however. It provides openings for middle powers, both established and emerging, to exercise unaccustomed agency and influence the future of global order.

Carnegie scholars are analyzing middle power responses to this moment of upheaval and assessing whether—and under what conditions—these states can contribute to practical problem solving. They are asking critical, concrete questions: What countries, precisely, are we talking about when we refer to middle powers? In what issue areas do their priorities converge and diverge, including across North-South divides? In what domains can middle powers pack a punch, rather than produce a whimper? Are they willing to shoulder actual burdens and responsibility? Finally, how can middle powers assert themselves globally, without running afoul of or threatening their relations with the United States or China?

Mullin with his hand raised, taking an oath

Commentary

Emissary

Can Mullin Revive FEMA?

Restoring competence and trust to the anemic, neglected disaster recovery agency is a matter of national security.

Sarah Labowitz, Debbra Goh

Worker pushing machinery toward a car frame

Commentary

Emissary

Europe’s New Industrial Policy Can Learn From U.S. Mistakes

Although the IAA often differs from the IRA, European policymakers can still take note of the U.S. act’s shortcomings.

Milo McBride