A stable Afghanistan is critical for security in much of Asia and internationally, yet continued violence in the country has prevented key states from building the economic opportunities, and the transport links and energy trade with the region, that Afghanistan desperately needs. The United States, China, India and Pakistan all have proposed investment projects that could help Afghanistan, but these efforts continue to come up short. As the Trump administration weighs an increase in the U.S. military effort in the country, any such decision must be part of a comprehensive approach that also boosts Afghanistan’s economic growth, notably by connecting it to neighbors and promoting trade and investment in the region.

An undated photo of painters beginning to add color to the front of a home on a hillside in Kabul, Afghanistan, an attempt by the municipality to make the sprawl look nicer. The city, one of the fastest growing in the world, has already expanded to more than five times its intended size.
Photo courtesy of the New York Times/Fahim Abed

The most high-profile opportunity to promote investment in Afghanistan is China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative. At an international forum on that project last month, China announced several agreements with Afghanistan on cooperation in trade and information technology. China has promised roughly $50 billion of investment in Pakistan as part of its China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, but has been hesitant to commit to projects in Afghanistan or explain how Afghanistan might link to and benefit from the corridor.

India also has pledged support for Afghanistan’s economic connectivity and development. New Delhi boycotted the Belt and Road forum in Beijing and has raised significant concerns about the China-Pakistan corridor, but India is developing its own connectivity projects in South Asia that will benefit Afghanistan. Last year, India, Afghanistan and Iran signed an agreement to develop Iran’s port of Chabahar to improve landlocked Afghanistan’s access to sea routes.  Further, India and Afghanistan are this summer inaugurating an air cargo service that will help Afghanistan connect to markets, avoiding its often difficult export of goods through Pakistan.

The United States also has sought a role. In 2011, the State Department introduced its New Silk Road plan to help Afghanistan integrate with its neighbors through increased trade, infrastructure investment and public-private partnerships. That project has been hampered by Afghanistan’s continued instability and violence—a problem that the Trump administration is aiming to reduce in the near term as it considers U.S. troop levels.

As the United States and Afghanistan seek better short-term security, the U.S. New Silk Road plan still can be pursued alongside China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Future funding levels are uncertain, but if it receives the financial backing it needs, the New Silk Road can support Afghanistan’s access to energy markets, improve infrastructure and institutions to boost trade and transport, streamline customs and border operations, and increase people-to-people ties between Afghanistan and its neighbors.

Security concerns have slowed progress, and mutual suspicion and mistrust have prevented the key partners from cooperating directly. But these proposals can all succeed without being formally linked. The United States and India have not formally joined China’s Belt and Road Initiative, but they can use their own investments to complement it. Further, reviving the New Silk Road will allow Washington to promote peace and stability in ways that demonstrate American leadership and best support American interests and values.

This is not a zero-sum game. India, China, Pakistan and the United States should look for opportunities to align their projects to ensure that they will improve connectivity in Afghanistan as part of a comprehensive plan. If implemented correctly, these efforts could effectively promote transparent investment, economic growth, good governance, and greater stability and security in Afghanistan. 

Related Publications

China’s Security Force Posture in Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia

China’s Security Force Posture in Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia

Wednesday, December 15, 2021

By: John Bradford

China’s geo-economic influence is empowering the expansion of its security force posture in the Lower Mekong region, which should be of concern to both maritime Southeast Asia and the United States. While Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia—the geographic core of mainland Southeast Asia—are demonstrating resilience and sustaining some strategic autonomy, several trends indicate that their options may be increasingly limited. This report looks at China’s security force posture in these nations, the possible ramifications of that posture, and considerations for balancing U.S. policy and outreach. 

Type: Special Report

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

U.S. Diplomatic Boycott of Beijing Olympics: No Longer 'Business as Usual'

U.S. Diplomatic Boycott of Beijing Olympics: No Longer 'Business as Usual'

Thursday, December 9, 2021

By: Lauren Baillie;  Mirna Galic;  Rachel Vandenbrink

On Monday the Biden administration announced it would not send an official United States delegation to the Beijing Winter Olympic Games as a statement against China's "ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang," as well as other human rights abuses such as in Hong Kong. U.S. athletes will still be allowed to compete in the Games, which start in February. USIP’s Lauren Baillie, Mirna Galic and Rachel Vandenbrink discuss the rationale behind the decision, how the boycott fits into the U.S. strategy surrounding the Uyghur crisis and how China and U.S. allies are responding.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global PolicyHuman Rights

Neither Summit, nor Sidebar: Assessing the Biden-Xi ‘Virtual Meeting’

Neither Summit, nor Sidebar: Assessing the Biden-Xi ‘Virtual Meeting’

Wednesday, November 17, 2021

By: Carla Freeman, Ph.D.;  Andrew Scobell, Ph.D.;  Jennifer Staats, Ph.D.

To address growing tensions between the United States and China, particularly over Taiwan, President Joe Biden and General Secretary Xi Jinping met virtually on Monday night (Tuesday morning in Beijing) for a three-hour discussion that covered a wide array of contentious issues. Both sides downplayed expectations for the session beforehand and have been relatively subdued albeit somewhat positive in their respective post-meeting statements and spins. Less formal than a summit and more structured than a sidebar, what if anything did the extended virtual top-level bilateral discussion achieve?

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global Policy

How China Responds to Instability on Its Periphery: Lessons from Afghanistan and Myanmar

How China Responds to Instability on Its Periphery: Lessons from Afghanistan and Myanmar

Monday, November 1, 2021

By: Alison McFarland;  Andrew Scobell, Ph.D.

China’s timid rhetoric and underwhelming actions vis-à-vis recent political upheaval in two different neighboring countries belie the image of a confident and assertive Beijing. What explains this apparent paradox? Despite the ruling Chinese Communist Party’s outward bravado, combined with unprecedented expansion of China’s regional and global activities and presence, Xi Jinping and his Politburo colleagues remain wary when it comes to taking risks abroad. Certainly, when China believes its interests are being directly attacked, such as in recent disputes with Australia and India, the state has opted for riskier, more aggressive moves. But where Beijing is not a direct party to the conflict, caution can override its willingness to take action that would show its hand or put China in a situation where it is not guaranteed to avoid a messy exit, à la the United States in Afghanistan.

Global PolicyConflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications