Article
Japan’s revision of its three strategic documents reflects an intention to keep the United States engaged in the region while Japan fills any vacuums of U.S. power to preserve the Indo-Pacific order.
Ryo Sahashi
{
"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": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Press Release
Military, not diplomatic, action needed to end war in Afghanistan
Osama bin Laden’s death will intensify the debate in Washington over U.S. strategy and plans in Afghanistan. While U.S. policy makers generally agree that a regional solution is essential for transitioning security in Afghanistan, meaningful cooperation among its neighbors remains elusive.
Published on May 5, 2011
WASHINGTON—Osama bin Laden’s death will intensify the debate in Washington over U.S. strategy and plans in Afghanistan. While U.S. policy makers generally agree that a regional solution is essential for transitioning security in Afghanistan, meaningful cooperation among its neighbors remains elusive.
Ashley J. Tellis explains in a new policy brief that continued U.S. military action—more than the promised American diplomatic surge—is the best hope for building a successful regional solution and ultimately ending the Afghan war. Only by altering realities on the ground can the United States induce the Taliban to consider reconciliation and neutralize the Pakistani strategy that is preventing a regional solution.
Conclusions:
- Pakistan’s strategies are exacerbating regional instability. Pakistan’s troubled relationship with Afghanistan—which includes a longstanding border dispute—remains at the core of regional discord. By supporting the Taliban insurgency, Islamabad has earned Kabul’s distrust and deepened the relationship between Afghanistan and India, Pakistan’s rival.
- Afghanistan’s neighbors need to transform their strategies. As long as Afghanistan’s neighbors, including India, perceive Islamabad as bent on holding Kabul in a choking embrace, a regional solution is unlikely. The United States must secure sufficient success in Afghanistan in order to force Rawalpindi, home of army headquarters, to change its current approach to Kabul.
- United States must maintain surge levels. President Obama must forgo the politically calculated drawdown of combat troops this summer and instead follow the advice of field commanders to maintain the largest possible contingent for the coming campaign in eastern Afghanistan.
While a large continued military presence might be difficult and unpalatable for President Obama, “this course alone offers a solution that will protect the recent gains in Afghanistan and advance American interests over the long term,” Tellis writes.
NOTES
Click here to read the full policy brief.
Ashley J. Tellis is a senior associate in the Carnegie South Asia Program. He specializes in international security, defense, and Asian strategic issues and was intimately involved in the negotiations associated with the U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement. Previously, he was a senior adviser to the U.S. ambassador to India and was a special assistant to the president and senior director for strategic planning and Southwest Asia in the National Security Council.
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: Karly Schledwitz, +1 202 939 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.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Two Logics Driving Japan’s Security Policy
- Inside the Global Race to Erode a Battery Manufacturing MonopolyCommentary
Over the past decade, China has moved from marginal player to major producer of all things batteries. The United States, Europe, and others are aiming to balance the market.
Milo McBride
- A Geothermal and Nuclear Strategy for the U.S. International Development Finance CorporationPaper
The DFC should focus on advanced, low-carbon energy sources, prioritizing areas where the United States has comparative advantages.
Noah Gordon, Liana Schmitter-Emerson
- Is the Russia-Ukraine War Vibe Shift Real?Commentary
Media coverage suggests Kyiv’s fortunes have changed. That shift may be important, but it only goes so far.
Dara Massicot, Aaron David Miller, Andrew S. Weiss
- Why Korea’s President Skipped Washington for Silicon Valley and BrasíliaCommentary
Lee’s tour shows how Seoul is reorganizing its diplomacy away from Pyongyang and toward industrial networks and the geography of the compute economy.
Darcie Draudt-Véjares
