Central Asia’s digital ambitions are achievable, but only if policy is aligned with the region’s physical constraints.
Aruzhan Meirkhanova
REQUIRED IMAGE
Source: Carnegie
Summary
For much of the past half century, U.S. relations with India and Pakistan were perceived in the region and by Washington as part of the same equation. Improvements in U.S. relations with one were generally perceived (and sometimes intended) to come at the expense of the other. Since last September’s attacks, however, the United States has found itself in the unaccustomed position of having good relations with India and Pakistan at the same time. The Afghan crisis is testing whether Delhi and Islamabad can adjust to this new reality. It is also a test for Washington and whether it can leverage its new position to address core concerns, including the dispute over Kashmir, Pakistan’s crisis of governance, and the evolving nuclear and missile rivalry in the region.
These essays focus on the interconnected challenges for U.S. policy in and around the subcontinent in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Yet they address longstanding concerns which, in light of the current crisis, may now get the attention they require.
Click on the link above for full text of this Carnegie Paper.
About the Authors
Lee Feinstein, a former visiting scholar at the Carnege Endowment's Non-Proliferation Project, is a Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund. James Clad holds the Henry R. Luce Foundation Research Professorship of Southeast Asian Studies in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Lewis A. Dunn is senior vice president at Science Applications International Corporation. David Albright is president and founder of the Institute for Science and International Security.
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.
Central Asia’s digital ambitions are achievable, but only if policy is aligned with the region’s physical constraints.
Aruzhan Meirkhanova
Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.
Ruslan Suleymanov
Moldova’s reintegration plan was drawn up to demonstrate to Brussels that Chișinău is serious about the Transnistria issue—and to get the West to react.
Vladimir Solovyov
Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.
Artyom Shraibman
The future trajectory of the U.S.-Iran war remains uncertain, but its impact on global energy trade flows and ties will be far-reaching. Moscow is likely to become a key beneficiary of these changes; the crisis in the Gulf also strengthens Russia’s hand in its relationships with China and India, where advantages might prove more durable.
Sergey Vakulenko