• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "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": [
    "United States",
    "Iran",
    "Saudi Arabia",
    "South Asia",
    "India",
    "Afghanistan",
    "Pakistan",
    "China",
    "Central Asia",
    "Russia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Military",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Press Release

Assessing a regional approach for Afghanistan

Leading experts analyze the interests of Afghanistan’s neighbors, what they mean in practice, and what it could mean for U.S. policy.

Link Copied
Published on May 7, 2010

WASHINGTON, May 7—President Obama made decisive changes to U.S. policy in Afghanistan—increasing forces on the ground, modifying the original goals, and placing a greater emphasis on the need for a regional approach. In a new report from the Carnegie Endowment, leading experts analyze the interests of Afghanistan’s neighbors, what they mean in practice, and what it could mean for U.S. policy.

“All the relevant states will continue to act in and around Afghanistan, pursuing their national interests as they see them,” writes Carnegie President Jessica Mathews in the introduction. “Whatever succession of strategies the United States and its partners adopt in the years ahead in pursuit of a peaceful and stable Afghanistan, a deep and nuanced understanding of the interests and policies of the neighboring states—not as the United States would like them to be, but as these states actually perceive them—will be essential to a successful outcome.”

Countries Analyzed:

  • Pakistan, Frédéric Grare
    “Preventing a dominant Indian influence in Afghanistan, which could evolve into an alliance between the two countries and trap Pakistan in a two-front situation, is Islamabad’s first objective.”
  • India, Ambassador Gautam Mukhopadhaya
    “There is intense political competition between India and Pakistan in Afghanistan today driven by real or imagined security concerns. But India’s larger interests in Afghanistan extend beyond Pakistan.”
  • Iran, Karim Sadjadpour
    “The current Iranian government’s deep animosity toward the United States often trumps the two countries’ shared interests in Afghanistan, motivating Tehran to undermine U.S. efforts even though the repercussions may be inimical to its own national interests.”
  • Saudi Arabia, Christopher Boucek
    “Saudi Arabia has had very real concerns with regard to Afghanistan because of the historic presence of al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Saudi Arabia also has a deep and multifaceted relationship with its close ally Pakistan and an increasingly troublesome relationship with Iran—both of which play out in Afghanistan.”
  • Central Asian Republics, Martha Brill Olcott
    “All five Central Asian Republics perceive their own national security as directly tied to developments in Afghanistan because of the transnational threats that originate in that country—or just beyond in Pakistan.”
  • China, Michael D. Swaine with Tiffany P. Ng
    “Beijing’s stance toward Afghanistan is rooted largely in fundamental Chinese strategic interests that extend well beyond Afghanistan itself: specifically, China’s suspicion toward and nascent rivalry with the United States, and its support for Pakistan in the latter’s struggle with India.”
  • Russia, Dmitri Trenin
    “Russia views Afghanistan today largely through the prism of security threats to itself and its Central Asian neighborhood, over which Moscow aspires to soft dominance.”
  • Afghanistan, Haroun Mir
    “Afghanistan is an integral part of South and Central Asia and the Greater Middle East, and could play a central role at the crossroads of the three regions. Thus, regional cooperation can serve to benefit all countries of the region.”
  • Coalition Partners, Gilles Dorronsoro
    “A regional approach favoring negotiation over war is supported by most of the European members of the coalition as a way to exit the whirlpool of conflict that is slowly destroying NATO without reasonable prospects of success.”

In the final chapter, Ashley J. Tellis concludes that “the regional approach to Afghanistan—understood as an effort to incorporate all of Kabul’s major neighbors into a cooperative enterprise led by the United States, and aimed at stabilizing Afghanistan through successful counterterrorism, reconstruction, and state-building—is unlikely to succeed, first and foremost, because the key regional stakeholders have diverging objectives within Afghanistan.”

###


NOTES

  • Click here to read the report online
  • The Carnegie South Asia Program offers in-depth expertise on a range of issues relating to South Asia, including nonproliferation, international security, and political and economic development.
  • Press Contact: David Kampf, 202/939-2233, pressoffice@ceip.org
SecurityMilitaryForeign PolicyUnited StatesIranSaudi ArabiaSouth AsiaIndiaAfghanistanPakistanChinaCentral AsiaRussia

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 Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does Central Europe’s Post-Orban Russia Policy Look Like?

    Though Orban is gone, Putin can still count on some like-minded individuals in Central and Eastern Europe. However, they will seek to avoid open confrontation with EU institutions over Ukraine and their ties with Moscow.


      Dimitar Bechev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Are Russia-Japan Relations Really Warming Up?

    The truth is that Japan’s government is seeking a degree of reengagement but at a vastly reduced level than under Abe. Most significantly, Japan has shown no willingness to ease sanctions.

      James D.J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Brussels and Baku Are Talking Again: What Next?

    Azerbaijan’s relations with the EU appear to be going from strength to strength after several years in the deep freeze following the military escalation in Karabakh in 2023 and Azerbaijan’s bitter fallout with France and several other EU member states.

      Shujaat Ahmadzada

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    In Russia, Private Companies Have Been Left to Pick Up the Tab for Ukrainian Drone Attacks

    The cost of air defense has become an unregistered tax on revenue for businesses. While military rents are consolidated in the federal budget, the costs of defense are being spread across the balance sheets of companies and regional governments.

      Alexandra Prokopenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    As Trump Threatens to Quit NATO, the Baltic States Are Playing for Time

    Governments in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania want to ensure that a U.S. military withdrawal would not leave them dangerously exposed to a Russian attack.

      Sergejs Potapkins

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.