Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Follow Carnegie
- Search
- Global Resources
Global Centers
Languages
The unfolding dynamic around Taiwan will have significant consequences for India’s Act East Policy and its emerging role in the Indo–Pacific region.
The question of leadership may have successfully diverted attention away from the state of the economy, but Modi’s honeymoon will be short-lived if he does not place it at the top of his agenda.
No other set of issues will shape India’s future global trajectory more than a pragmatic reorientation of its trade strategy and the reformation of its negotiating structures.
There are a few think tanks in DC that seem to have made conscious efforts to avoid manels. Visibility is a major component for success on the job, and the first step toward that success is speaking on panels.
It is likely that the current situation in Venezuela is going to drag on and that the only way to get rid of Maduro and to move toward free elections and begin new policies that mitigate the lethal crisis that is currently annihilating so many Venezuelans is through negotiations.
This election confirms what has been increasingly evident over the past five years: that the BJP, under Modi’s tutelage, has constructed a political hegemony that is impressively resilient.
Even in democracies like the United States, government use of facial recognition technology, in its current form, corrodes civil rights and civil liberties because its errors disproportionately impact vulnerable communities.
Using U.S. leverage to craft an Afghan settlement demands incredible deftness in both Washington and Kabul. More, certainly, than either administration has yet displayed.
The next government in India will confront significant tests in managing relations with the great powers and India's neighbors.
Moscow hopes the new European Parliament will take a softer line on rules and values that clash with Russian interests.
The Trump administration needs to stop taking Israel and Saudi advice on Iran and instead look to its own needs and interests.
There is one thing that the war avoiders and the warmongers should be able to agree on: the need to prevent an accidental or unintended conflict between the United States and Iran.
Unless the United States redirects its approach in Syria, civilian stabilization programs will not achieve their stated objective: the “enduring defeat” of the Islamic State.
Rather than pray for the success of SAARC, the new government in New Delhi should double down on informal diplomacy that could help pave the way for more purposeful regional cooperation—both bilateral and multilateral.
A compelling case could be made for the use of U.S. military force if Iran posed an immediate threat to vital American interests. But as harmful as Iran’s activities in the region may be to the United States and its friends the reality is that Tehran poses no imminent threat to America’s core interests.
The United States and North Korea are once again locked in a diplomatic standoff over denuclearization and the normalization of U.S.-North Korean relations. This has brought the promising start North and South Korea have made on building peace and security on the Korean Peninsula to a halt.
Whether President Trump is misguided in pursuing tariffs and using them as leverage with the Chinese government, America’s continued drive to levy penalties is less about fixing a trade problem than about changing China’s investment rules.
Coercive diplomacy—when both elements of the approach are carefully synchronized—can deliver. On the other hand, coercion without diplomacy can lead to huge blunders.
The confrontations between society and the authorities which are spreading across the country shouldn't be taken lightly.
As the most powerful external actor involved in the conflict, Washington’s signals matter. Trump’s call appears to rest on a mistaken but well-trodden narrative, advanced by Haftar’s forces, his Arab backers, and his western sympathizers.