After unveiling a new regional strategy last summer that included additional commitments of forces to Afghanistan and a promise to “no longer be silent” on disputes with Pakistan over militant sanctuaries on its territory, the Trump administration began the year with an announcement that it was suspending military assistance to Pakistan. What are the pros and cons and likely results of the administration’s approach to Pakistan, and how are Pakistani leaders responding to increased U.S. pressure?

On February 12 at the U.S. Institute of Peace, regional experts assessed the current state of U.S.-Pakistan relations and discuss how the United States’ security concerns in the region are likely to shape future ties. Review the conversation on Twitter with #USPakWhatsNext.

Speakers

Andrew Wilder, moderator
Vice President, U.S. Institute of Peace

Tanvi Madan
Director, Brookings Institute India Project

Ambassador Richard Olson
Former Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan

David Sedney
Senior Associate, International Security Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies

Moeed Yusuf
Associate Vice President, U.S. Institute of Peace

Related Publications

Displacement and the Vulnerability to Mobilize for Violence: Evidence from Afghanistan

Displacement and the Vulnerability to Mobilize for Violence: Evidence from Afghanistan

Wednesday, January 8, 2020

By: Sadaf Lakhani; Rahmatullah Amiri

Forced displacement affects over 70 million people worldwide and is among the most pressing humanitarian and development challenges today. This report attempts to ascertain whether a relationship exists between displacement in Afghanistan and vulnerability to recruitment to violence by militant organizations. The report leverages an understanding of this relationship to provide recommendations to government, international donors, and others working with Afghanistan’s displaced populations to formulate more effective policies and programs.

Type: Peaceworks

Violent Extremism

What ‘The Afghanistan Papers’ Got Wrong

What ‘The Afghanistan Papers’ Got Wrong

Thursday, December 19, 2019

By: Scott Smith

The Washington Post last week published a series, “The Afghanistan Papers,” that made the case that U.S. officials consistently lied about the prospects for success in Afghanistan and deliberately misled the public. As someone with an intimate knowledge of the effort described in the reporting, there is a recurring line I find particularly problematic: that officials hid “unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable.” That was not the problem. The problem was that for so long many officials believed that the war was winnable.

Type: Blog

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications