Experts from the U.S. Institute of Peace provide the latest analysis and perspective on the world’s critical hot spots, U.S. and global security and issues involved in violent conflict, based on the Institute’s work on the ground and with key individuals, governments and organizations. They give interviews and background briefings to journalists and write for news outlets around the world.
Scott Worden, director of Afghanistan and Central Asia programs at the United States Institute of Peace, said maintaining or adding to the U.S. presence is worth the cost compared to what could happen if the U.S. pulled out.
“The review is an opportunity to send a message that, yes, the U.S. is going to send more troops, but it’s not to achieve a forever military victory,” said Andrew Wilder, an Afghanistan expert at the U.S. Institute of Peace. “Rather, it’s to try to bring about a negotiated end to this conflict.”
Security experts say that number is relatively low, especially when compared to the recruitment levels of more established terror groups like al-Qaeda or the Taliban. But they agree the threat to Pakistan is real and rising. "Clearly you can no longer say that the IS is not a problem," said Moeed Yusuf, an analyst at the United States Institute of Peace, a U.S. government-backed conflict resolution organization.
Last year, from 30th April to 6th May, 2016; I had the privilege of participating in the US Institute of Peace (USIP) Youth Leaders Exchange with the Dalai Lama in New Delhi and Dharamsala, India (along with 27 other youth leaders from India, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Somalia, Kenya, Nigeria, Sudan, South Sudan and Myanmar). The program aims to strengthen the capacity of youth leaders working to build peace in the world’s most violent countries.
William B. Taylor spoke to SiriusXM POTUS Ch. 124 about the long-term stabilization effort necessary in Afghanistan. Taylor underscored the need for a political component in the Afghanistan strategy that has been largely absent to date. Commenting on ISIS, Taylor said in both Iraq and Afghanistan that ISIS is on the defensive.
By the end of our interview, Nagl was effusive. “USIP prevents wars from happening and ends them sooner, on terms more favorable to the United States. It keeps American soldiers alive,” he annunciated slowly. “USIP understands how wars end.”
Former U.S. military commanders in Iraq describe the U.S. Institute of Peace as a cost-effective “combat multiplier” with capabilities they “could not get elsewhere,” in an article published today in The National Interest.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, who is running for a second term, is the man to beat on May 19. His opponents will likely zero in on the economy’s mixed performance since the signing of the nuclear deal, appealing to the many Iranians disappointed with the dividends that the agreement has paid so far. Iran has made some economic progress under Rouhani, but the unemployment rate is higher than it was a year ago, and foreign investors are still wary of doing business in the country. To win, Rouhani will have to defend this uneven record. So the president has been broadcasting his economic successes and appealing to voters who have not benefited from them.
The first 100 days of a new presidency predictably deliver a foreign policy crisis, and President Donald Trump was tested, right on schedule. Events in Syria and North Korea were, unfortunately, unsurprising, even as Bashar Assad’s brutal gassing of his people (again) and the bellicosity of Pyongyang’s saber-rattling are no less chilling.
How can the United States eliminate international terrorist threats emanating from Afghanistan while the Afghan government is fighting a war of attrition in which the Taliban has gained the upper hand?