In the past decade, the United States and its allies have invested billions of dollars on assistance in Afghanistan, Iraq and other conflict zones. In Afghanistan, the U.S. Agency for International Development has implemented projects to help stabilize the country as part of a counterinsurgency strategy. Making sure that such efforts are effective is vital to national security and efficient spending. To evaluate such stabilization-related assistance, USAID commissioned a study by the Empirical Studies of Conflict Project at Princeton University. On June 21, USIP took a first look at the results, which can inform more effective stabilization work in future conflicts.

Among the findings of the forthcoming study is evidence that smaller, targeted projects tend to work better—an idea that will challenge policymakers to address how the U.S. government can best manage hundreds of smaller projects that are sensitive to local conditions amid a country at war. The study also finds that stabilization aid should account for the ways in which insurgents in a conflict are likely to undermine such projects. It also underscores that better data collection and monitoring are essential to calibrate stabilization activities to be most effective.

On June 21, USIP and USAID specialists on Afghanistan and stabilization efforts held a public discussion of this study which provides lessons to improve U.S. policies and practices in calming conflicts abroad that threaten U.S. security and international stability.

A recording of the event can be found on this event page.


Andrew Wilder
Asia Center Vice President, USIP

William Byrd
Senior Expert-Afghanistan, USIP

Jason Foley
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Afghanistan and Pakistan, USAID

Rob Jenkins
Deputy Assistant Administrator of the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, USAID

Radha Iyengar Plumb
Senior Economist, RAND

Related Publications

South Sudan’s Pitfalls of Power Sharing

South Sudan’s Pitfalls of Power Sharing

Friday, February 16, 2018

By: USIP Staff; Susan Stigant; Aly Verjee

This week, a new proposal for a power sharing government was tabled at the ongoing Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) High Level Revitalization Forum (HLRF) peace talks for South Sudan. An earlier, 2015 peace deal also contained a formula for power sharing; that arrangement failed and the civil war re-ignited a year later. Power sharing arrangements are appropriate if certain conditions are met, but not enough has been done to ensure the latest proposal will overcome the obstacles present in South Sudan, according to Susan Stigant, USIP’s director for Africa programs and Aly Verjee, a visiting expert at USIP and a former senior advisor to the IGAD mediation, who comment on the proposal and suggest how it could be improved.

Democracy & Governance; Fragility and Resilience; Global Policy

Redefining Masculinity in Afghanistan

Redefining Masculinity in Afghanistan

Thursday, February 15, 2018

By: Belquis Ahmadi; Rafiullah Stanikzai

Following more than three decades of political instability, violent conflicts, and foreign invasions, Afghanistan is home to nearly two generations that have grown up knowing only conflict and war. As a result, violent and aggressive behavior—particularly from young men—has become an accepted norm of...


View All Publications