The 2024 Republican gains among this important constituency have not held.
- +2
Sumitra Badrinathan, Devesh Kapur, Annabel Miller, …
{
"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
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.
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:
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.
The 2024 Republican gains among this important constituency have not held.
Sumitra Badrinathan, Devesh Kapur, Annabel Miller, …
Geoengineering is becoming a geopolitical question as much as a climate one. The way states and the private sector pursue these technologies, assess risks, and drive research increasingly appears focused on gaining a strategic edge. In a field where governance in lagging behind, Europe should keep track of the geopolitical implications if it is to develop effective regulatory frameworks.
Olivia Lazard, ed.
The new Serbian leadership may have promised to keep on cooperating with Russia, but soon they will have to make a choice between fighting corruption and sealing lucrative deals with Moscow. The two are mutually exclusive, even if the new leaders in Belgrade haven’t yet realized it.
Maksim Samorukov
The six GCC members’ unity would be a valued—if not essential—asset for negotiating an end to the simmering regional conflict.
Sam Worby, Andrew Leber
Resetting relations with the EU is a central plank of the UK’s current foreign policy. Is Andy Burnham being bold enough or is he falling into the same trap as his predecessors, misreading the power dynamic?
Rym Momtaz, ed.