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 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic RealityArticle
Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.
Ryo Sahashi
- Kenya’s Health Deal Is a Stress Test for the America First Global Health StrategyArticle
U.S. agreements must contend with national data protection laws to make durable foreign policy instruments.
Jane Munga, Rose Mosero
- Trump’s Plan for Gaza Is Not Irrelevant. It’s Worse.Commentary
The simple conclusion is that the scheme will bring neither peace nor prosperity, but will institutionalize devastation.
Nathan J. Brown
- The Iran War Is Making America Less SafeCommentary
A conflict launched in the name of American security is producing the opposite effect.
Sarah Yerkes
- California Sees Ways AI Can Support Policymaking. Here’s What It Needs to Succeed.Commentary
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
