Political Geography: Afghanistan - CIAO Search Results

101. We Will Die In Poverty Before Dying By COVID: Young Adults and Multi-Layered Crises in Afghanistan

Author:: Orzala Nemat, Vidya Diwakar, Ihsanullah Ghafoori, and Shukria Azadmanesh
Publication Date:: 08-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit (AREU)
Abstract:: Afghanistan experienced an extraordinary situation in 2021 that presents a complex example of how an intensified level of conflict and the global COVID-19 pandemic of added to an increasing prevalence of drought due to climate change has been affecting people’s livelihoods from different angles. In pre-August 2021, the country experienced record-level violence across the provinces. This was followed by the gradual fall of districts, provinces and finally the capital Kabul into the hands of the current de facto authorities, the Taliban. Meanwhile, like any other part of the world, Afghanistan also experienced the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, which hindered people’s access to jobs, health care and different sources of revenue. Alongside this, the second-worst drought in 4 years (IFRC, 2021) has widely affected the livelihoods of the majority of people who rely on agriculture and livestock as the sole source of income. There has been limited research into how these situations have combined to affect livelihoods and wellbeing in Afghanistan. This article attempts to advance understanding of this issue and promote research that investigates overlapped crises.
Topic:: Poverty, Violence, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and Middle East

102. Finland in Afghanistan 2001–2021: From stabilization to advancing foreign and security policy relations

Author:: Katariina Mustasilta, Tyyne Karjalainen, Timo R. Stewart, and Mathilda Salo
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:: Finland participated in the international stabilization and reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan for nearly 20 years, contributing around 2,500 soldiers and 140 civilian crisis management experts. During this period, Finland’s development cooperation funds and humanitarian assistance allocated to Afghanistan amounted to around EUR 398 million. When Finland made the decision to join the operations in Afghanistan at the turn of 2001 and 2002, the country was living in uncertain yet optimistic times. The Taliban regime had collapsed quickly after the US-led military intervention, and the international community was broadly committed to supporting the interim administration in changing the country’s course. Finland sent a CIMIC unit to Afghanistan to participate in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and support the stabilization and reconstruction efforts. It also began to channel development cooperation funds to Afghanistan, notably through UN and World Bank programmes, and soon allocated most of its civilian crisis management resources to the European Union Police Mission (EUPOL) in Afghanistan. In the second half of the 2000s, however, Afghanistan slid further into a devastating civil war. A decade into the international intervention, the early optimism had given way to Afghans’ growing distrust of their government and the international actors. The Finnish troops, now comprising around 200 soldiers, repeatedly engaged in combat as part of the military operation that was now led by NATO and had become a party in the conflict. While the security arrangements for the international actors required increasing resources, their room for manoeuvre became significantly more limited. After the ISAF mission ended, Finland continued to participate in the NATO-led Resolute Support Mission (RSM), which supported the Afghan security forces until the summer of 2021. Finland also remained one of the most important actors to support EUPOL until the end of the mission and took responsibility for co-hosting the 2020 Afghanistan pledging conference to support the country. Afghanistan was the biggest recipient of Finland’s development cooperation funds throughout the second half of the 2010s. In August 2021, Finland suspended its extensive activities in Afghanistan in chaotic circumstances as the international community left the country following the US decision to withdraw its forces and the Taliban’s seize of power. This research examines Finland’s activities in Afghanistan by focusing on why Finland decided to engage in Afghanistan, on what its activities were based, and what can be learned from them for future crises and conflicts. The research is based on the analysis of a broad set of qualitative data consisting of interviews with 64 people who were involved in the intervention in Afghanistan or employed in related activities. Workshop discussions were also held to hear the views of the Afghan diaspora in Finland and experts. In addition, the researchers analysed public documents and previous research literature and held background discussions with experts. This research report broadly examines the consequences of Finland’s objectives, the logic behind its activities and the key challenges from the perspectives of military crisis management, civilian crisis management, and development cooperation and humanitarian assistance. Our research findings suggest that Finland’s activities in Afghanistan were motivated by multiple objectives that were partly unclear and at times conflicting. Based on government reports and other public documents, Finland’s primary aim was to stabilize and support Afghanistan to enhance international peace and security. The proclaimed objectives highlighted Finland’s responsibility as part of the UN-led international community and its efforts to support the development of good governance and the rule of law and promote the rights of women and girls in particular. In our research, these objectives comprise a framework we call “Finland as a benefactor”. On the other hand, our analysis suggests that alongside – and over – these proclaimed objectives, Finland’s participation was primarily guided by its desire to maintain and strengthen its foreign and security policy relations with the US and other international partners, as well as its effort to deepen its collaboration with NATO. Within the limits of this “Finland as a partner” framework, Finland sought to position itself as a reliable benefactor but also to gain advantage by improving its national capacities. Finland’s multiple objectives in Afghanistan might not necessarily have posed a problem in terms of the appropriateness of Finland’s involvement. Indeed, at the beginning they worked in harmony as the operating environment allowed Finland to show solidarity with the US and support it in the fight against terrorism while also appearing as a humanitarian actor that promoted stability and development in Afghanistan. However, tensions emerged between the different rationales when the situation in Afghanistan deteriorated, and the nature and outcomes of the intervention became more conflicted. In the absence of clearly and transparently set objectives, it was challenging to build an action plan and assess the activities. One particular factor that made the planning and monitoring of Finland’s participation difficult was the effort to disguise the fact that it was motivated by a desire to foster transatlantic relations and partnerships. From the perspective of the international partnerships, it was enough that Finland participated in the intervention. In terms of Afghanistan and its development, the objectives of the various activities remained vague, unrealistic and unclear, and they received insufficient attention. Instead of critical analysis and strategic monitoring, both international and Finnish actors attempted to meet the stated objectives by highlighting the progress made in Afghanistan and keeping silent about the combats and difficulties. It is almost impossible to assess to what extent Finland achieved its objectives in Afghanistan, because no clear and transparent objectives had been set. Based on our interviews, Finland’s involvement benefitted its transatlantic relations, Nordic cooperation and position in the international community. Besides defence cooperation, Finland developed its national capacities and raised its profile within the EU’s civilian crisis management framework. It is however difficult to assess in retrospect how the different forms of participation deepened Finland’s relations with the US, for example, and whether Finland’s activities were cost-efficient in terms of its partnership goals and national capacities, because no expectations had been explicitly stated. While temporary successes were achieved in improving security and the conditions for education in some areas, for example, issues such as a lack of understanding of the context of the conflict, challenges related to local ownership and the absence of a coherent long-term strategy became stumbling blocks in the international intervention in Afghanistan. Previous research has already called attention to the negative impacts of the intervention: the civilian victims of the military operations, the changes in local power structures, the displacement of local activities and increased corruption are only some of the examples of the impacts for which Finland has also been partly responsible. During, and partly as a result of, the intervention in Afghanistan, Finland’s policy came to be underpinned by a comprehensive crisis management strategy. In Afghanistan, this meant that Finland participated in multiple sectors and placed emphasis on the interdependence between the development and civilian crisis management efforts and military crisis management. Overall, our interviewees assessed that the activities of Finland and Finnish actors in Afghanistan were of high quality and appreciated. Our research suggests that the comprehensive strategy adopted by Finland served to justify its participation in different areas of the intervention and especially its military participation. However, Finland failed to fulfil the strategy in terms of coordinating its various activities in Afghanistan. Finland’s experiences in Afghanistan provide lessons learned that can be used to guide its activities in future crisis and conflict situations. First, it is necessary to set clearer and more transparent objectives to enable the effective planning and strategic monitoring of activities. In the context of partnership and capacity goals, clear objectives would help to develop the resourcing and targeting of activities. As regards supporting peace and stability, clearer, context-specific objectives would make it possible to monitor the appropriateness and comprehensiveness of activities. However, adopting a comprehensive approach does not mean that Finland should engage in all activities or areas of assistance in the target country; rather, its activities should be targeted to support the overall international aid effort. It is also important to develop Finland’s advocacy and impact efforts in multilateral interventions, in particular in situations in which Finland contributes significant resources. While Finland is in principle a small player, playing an active role in issues such as drawing attention to the possible negative impacts of interventions is consistent with its value-based foreign policy. By collaborating with like-minded actors, Finland has the opportunity to promote its interests through interventions (as far as these interests have been identified). However, sufficient resources are required for effective outcomes: development cooperation funds and inputs from seconded experts will be wasted if the human resources allocated to the comprehensive planning, implementation and monitoring of Finland’s participation are insufficient. The setting and implementation of realistic objectives appropriate to the context require a continuously updated conflict analysis, which in the case of small players such as Finland must also include an analysis of the context of international aid and operations. After interventions, it is also important to effectively put to use the expertise of the people who return to Finland after working in crisis areas so as not to waste the cultural and linguistic knowledge they have acquired. The lessons identified in this research are also relevant for the future of Afghanistan and Afghan people. The international community, including Finland, has been involved in shaping the structures of Afghan society, as well as its conflict dynamics, for nearly 20 years. This means that it also continues to assume its responsibility after withdrawing from the country – all the more so because the decisions to start and terminate the intervention were primarily driven by interests other than those of Afghans themselves. In terms of Finland’s credibility as a foreign policy actor, it is particularly important that it continues to abide by its long-standing commitment to promote the rights of women and girls. In the present difficult circumstances, the cooperation and assistance efforts should be based on placing the needs and priorities of Afghans at the centre. This can be achieved by conducting a careful conflict analysis, listening to and discussing with Afghans, and promoting a strategically coordinated approach to setting the objectives and framework conditions of the cooperation at the level of the international community.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, NATO, Crisis Management, and Stabilization
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, South Asia, and Finland

103. Treading Lightly: China’s Footprint in a Taliban-led Afghanistan

Author:: Jiayi Zhou, Fei Su, and Jingdong Yuan
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
Abstract:: This SIPRI Insights Paper provides a preliminary assessment of China’s attitudes to and policies on Afghanistan since the August 2021 Taliban takeover. It examines the scope of China’s security, economic and humanitarian interests, and the depth of its engagement so far. It finds that China’s footprint has been minimal due not only to China’s non-interference policy but also to a range of broader challenges: the militant extremist groups that continue to operate on Afghan soil, the risks of investing in a country where the government remains unrecognized by any member of the international community and a fragile stability that is far from conducive to long-term planning. While there may be prospects and opportunities for China to contribute to Afghan peace and development, particularly from a broader regional perspective, current realities mean that China’s overall approach to Afghanistan will remain cautious, pragmatic and limited.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Development, Taliban, and Investment
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, China, and South Asia

104. WPS in Afghanistan: Betrayal and Renewal

Author:: Farkhondeh Akbari and Jacqui True
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: International Women's Development Agency (IWDA)
Abstract:: The Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan on 15 August 2021 unraveled significant achievements of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda in Afghanistan over the last two decades.1 Every western donor present in the country pushed the WPS agenda over the past two decades of their engagement in Afghanistan. The previous Government of Afghanistan adopted a National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security in 2015. They made concerted efforts to implement the NAP by promoting women’s participation in the peace process, the parliament, in government and the security sector, and to protect women and girls from gender-based violence and other violations of their human rights. The western forces’ withdrawal not only destabilised these achievements, but it also erased the public space of struggle for gender equality. The collapse of the Afghan Government and exit of international forces laid bare the reality of the “projectification” 2 of the WPS agenda and its impacts in Afghanistan. The return of the Taliban through force was inevitable with the signing of the Doha deal on 29 February 2020. 3 Moreover, the evacuation process revealed the lack of commitment to protecting women’s rights and women activists in the face of the Taliban takeover and attacks. Afghan women and girls are now facing a serious crisis based on their gender. 4 Future strategy and engagement to support the rights and security of women and girls in Afghanistan must be based on a frank assessment of the meaningfulness of policies and initiatives supporting the WPS agenda. Feminist foreign policy can support this objective by providing a framework towards a more explicitly feminist and transformative approach. This paper has two aims: 1) to provide a post-mortem analysis of the WPS agenda in Afghanistan as a reality check for the international community and through the lens of feminist foreign policy; 2) to assess what can be done to renew the commitment and efforts to support women’s security and human rights.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Human Rights, Taliban, Women, and Peace
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and South Asia

105. Beyond May 1: The Future of U.S. Engagement in Afghanistan

Author:: Adam Weinstein
Publication Date:: 04-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:: October 2021 will mark the 20th anniversary of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. The United States currently finds itself at an inflection point, as it determines whether to withdraw its remaining troops by May 1, as required by a 2020 agreement with the Taliban, or to remain militarily involved in the conflict. The Biden administration should take the following steps to best support a negotiated settlement to end the war, while also bringing U.S. troops home.
Topic:: Conflict Resolution, War, Military Affairs, Taliban, Peace, and Troop Deployment
Political Geography:: Afghanistan

106. Afghanistan Study Group Final Report: A Pathway for Peace in Afghanistan

Author:: Afghanistan Study Group
Publication Date:: 02-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:: In December 2019, Congress established the Afghanistan Study Group and tasked it with identifying policy recommendations that “consider the implications of a peace settlement, or the failure to reach a settlement, on U.S. policy, resources, and commitments in Afghanistan.” The Study Group’s report, released on February 3, 2021, concluded that there is a real opportunity to align U.S. policies, actions, and messaging behind achieving a durable peace settlement to end four decades of violent conflict in Afghanistan. This new approach would protect U.S. national interests in Afghanistan and the region by reducing terrorist threats, promoting regional stability, and protecting important gains in human rights and democratic institutions that have been made in Afghanistan. Active regional diplomacy could help generate a consensus among Afghanistan’s neighbors that all would benefit in both economic and security terms from supporting and sustaining peace in Afghanistan rather than fueling conflict through proxies.
Topic:: Conflict, Negotiation, Peace, and Mediation
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and South Asia

107. “No Going Backward”: Afghanistan’s Post–Peace Accord Security Sector

Author:: Annie Pforzheimer, Andrew Hyde, and Jason Criss Howk
Publication Date:: 03-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:: Failure to plan realistically for needed changes in Afghanistan’s security sector following a peace settlement—and failure to start phasing in changes now—will lead to post-settlement instability. This report examines the particular challenges Afghanistan will face, with examples from the climate following peace settlements in other parts of the world offering insight into what may occur and possibilities for response. An Afghan-owned and Afghan-led strategy that incorporates some of this report’s recommendations can help create a lasting foundation for Afghan and regional stability.
Topic:: Security, Political stability, Rule of Law, Peace, and Justice
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and South Asia

108. The Costs of Working with the Americans in Afghanistan: The United States’ Broken Special Immigrant Visa Process

Author:: Noah Coburn
Publication Date:: 04-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University
Abstract:: The United States’ Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) Program was designed to help Afghans and Iraqis who are in danger of being killed as a result of their service to the U.S. government as translators or in other civilian jobs. As of 2020, over 18,000 Afghan applicants have received U.S. visas, along with over 45,000 of their immediate family members, and immigrated to the U.S. The program has been plagued by bureaucratic inefficiencies and significant problems with the application process, resulting in a backlog of an additional 18,800 applications according to a 2019 review of the program. The lives of thousands of these applicants are currently at risk. This report on the Afghan SIV program, based on interviews with over 150 SIV applicants and recipients, as well as a review of other studies of the program, suggests that while the program is well-intentioned and beneficial to certain successful applicants, its current structure puts the lives of applicants at risk and leaves them vulnerable to exploitation before, during and after the process. The lack of a coherent, effective strategy to support these workers, and the failure to implement the program as originally envisioned, leaves applicants stranded in Afghanistan or elsewhere and vulnerable to attacks by the Taliban and criminal groups, as well as other forms of exploitation. This has further undermined the reputation of the United States government in Afghanistan while serving a relatively small percentage of those Afghans who worked closely with the U.S. The program also does little to support those who do receive visas and move to the U.S. They are ultimately disappointed in, and unprepared for, the lack of support they receive upon settling in the United States. The program could do much more to prepare and support these recipients for the challenges they are likely to face during resettlement. The Biden administration’s current review of the SIV program is a good step forward, but unless that review takes a closer look at the true human costs of its flawed processes, it is likely to result in little more than bureaucratic tinkering. The program must be seriously overhauled, based on a reconceptualization of how to best support those who put their lives at risk to assist the United States government. As it is currently structured, the SIV program may in fact be doing more harm than good.
Topic:: Immigration, Military Affairs, Violent Extremism, Counter-terrorism, and War on Terror
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, South Asia, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

109. Porosity of Tajik-Afghan Border Making Beijing’s Involvement in Region More Ominous

Author:: Paul A. Goble
Publication Date:: 02-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:: In most parts of the world, the lines on maps separating countries are true borders. That is, they are controlled by the governments on one or both sides. But in some places, they remain the quasi-open frontiers they were in the past or have reemerged as such because of recent political changes; those borders are highly porous zones, where people and goods can move more or less freely in one or both directions without much regard to the powers that be. Such situations invite outside involvement that can ramp up quickly and disturb preexisting international arrangements. One poignant example is the adjoining border area shared by Tajikistan and Afghanistan. In recent years, that frontier has attracted attention because of the danger that Islamist militants from Afghanistan could cross it to move north into Tajikistan and beyond. But another danger is emerging: China is establishing increasing control over Tajikistan and, thus, is putting itself in a position to project power southward from Tajikistan into Afghanistan. If Beijing does so, that could fundamentally change the security situation and geopolitical balance in Central and South Asia as a whole.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Territorial Disputes, and Borders
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, China, South Asia, Central Asia, Asia, and Tajikistan

110. The Jihadists’ War in Pakistan after the U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan: Lessons from Al-Qaeda’s Assassination of Benazir Bhutto

Author:: Abdul Sayed
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:: The changing narratives and operations of al-Qaeda and its Pakistani ally, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), in recent years indicate that the anti-state jihadist war in Pakistan will not end with a U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 or thereafter (The News, March 1). Recent speeches by the TTP emir, Mufti Noor Wali Mehsud, to a coalition of senior TTP commanders on the future goals of the war in Pakistan is not the only piece of evidence signifying that this war will continue (Umar Media, August 18, 2020; Umar Media, December 15, 2020). Rather, history also shows this war still has a long way to go. Pakistani Islamists are widely believed to have originally supported al-Qaeda’s war against the Pakistani state due to post-9/11 changes in Pakistan’s foreign policy, which supported the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan that expelled the Taliban regime from Kabul. However, the anti-state jihadist war in Pakistan is deeply rooted in the pre-9/11 complexities of Pakistani politics, which culminated in Islamists enabling al-Qaeda operations within Pakistan immediately after 9/11. The war against the Pakistani government is so deeply entrenched that it will remain a challenge for the country even if the widely accepted jihad against the U.S. “infidel occupier” in Afghanistan and its allies, including Pakistan, is no longer a factor.
Topic:: Terrorism, Islamism, Jihad, and Benazir Bhutto
Political Geography:: Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, and United States of America

111. The Overseen Factors Impacting the Afghan Peace Process

Author:: Sahar Khan
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:: The international community is focused on the ongoing intra-Afghan peace process, which has steadied despite several challenges. There are two developments, however, that will have a lasting impact on the process: The International Criminal Court’s investigation into war crimes committed by the Taliban, Afghan forces, and US forces, and the strategic evolution of the Taliban as a legitimate political actor.
Topic:: Security, International Law, Terrorism, Taliban, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Russia, South Asia, and Eurasia

112. November 2021 Issue

Author:: Andrew Watkins, Seth Morrow, Nicholas Tallant, Jerome P. Bjelopera, and Matthew Bamber
Publication Date:: 11-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: It has been three months since the Taliban entered Kabul and retook control of Afghanistan. According to the head of the U.N. World Food Programme, “23 million people [are now] marching toward starvation. 95% of Afghans don’t have enough food. The economy is collapsing. Winter is coming. This is going to be hell on earth.” In this month’s feature article, Andrew Watkins assesses the Taliban’s efforts to rule Afghanistan so far. He writes that “The Taliban have busied themselves consolidating control, reacting swiftly and harshly to perceived threats. They have not clearly defined the scope or structure of their state, nor have they shared long-term plans for their rank-and-file, many of which continue to operate as they did before August 15, 2021. Taliban leaders have demonstrated the continued primacy of maintaining internal cohesion, a longstanding trait that will likely stunt the group’s response to Afghanistan’s impending economic and humanitarian crises.” Watkins writes that from their perspective, “accepting aid that might sustain their state would prove worthless if doing so fueled a fissure within their own organization. The Taliban would become the very thing their origin story professes they rose up to eradicate and replace: a fractious constellation of militant bands. To put it another way, if Afghanistan’s compounding crises pose the Taliban with the prospect of either failing to provide for the desperate needs of the Afghan people or their own potential fragmentation, the Taliban will put their own organization first.” This month’s interview is with General Richard D. Clarke, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command. In a commentary, Jerome Bjelopera argues that “given that the U.S. national security establishment has taken up great power competition (GPC) as its primary concern recently, and terrorism has slipped from the top position, it is time for the security policy community to place terrorism within a new conceptual framework, one that combines terrorists, violent criminals, drug traffickers, insurgents, and others under the heading of violent non-state actors (VNSA).” Interviews that Matthew Bamber conducted with 43 former Islamic State civilian employees shed light on two distinct categories: those who became full members of the group and those who did not. He writes that “there are significant differences in how these two categories were treated by the Islamic State, the positions they were able to fill, the financial benefits they received, and the processes through which they joined and left Islamic State employment ... Understanding the nuances is important in assessing the culpability of the Islamic State’s civilian workers and the danger they may pose in the future.”
Topic:: Terrorism, Non State Actors, Military Affairs, Taliban, Counter-terrorism, Islamic State, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Middle East, and United States of America

113. October 2021 Issue

Author:: Don Rassler, Michael Knights, Michael Smith, Crispin Smith, Hamdi Malik, Sean Morrow, and Jonathan Schroden
Publication Date:: 10-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: In this month’s feature article, Michael Knights, Crispin Smith, and Hamdi Malik examine the increased discordance within the Iran Threat Network militias in Iraq (muqawama) based on their detailed tracking of recent dynamics for the “Militia Spotlight” platform at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. They find that “while the IRGC-QF (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force) still runs Iran’s covert operations inside Iraq, they face growing difficulties in controlling local militant cells. Hardline anti-U.S. militias struggle with the contending needs to de-escalate U.S.-Iran tensions, meet the demands of their base for anti-U.S. operations, and simultaneously evolve non-kinetic political and social wings.” The authors assess that, having under-performed in the recent elections, the muqawama will likely prioritize a bottom-up approach to building up their political base. And they warn that “any shift from Iran’s de-escalatory position, perhaps linked to a failure of U.S.-Iran nuclear talks—or a more significant loss of Iranian influence over muqawama factions—could trigger a sustained escalation of muqawama operations against the U.S.-led coalition in 2022 and beyond.” In this month’s interview, former U.S. National Security Advisor Lieutenant General (Ret) H.R. McMaster provides his perspective on what led to the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan. In a commentary, Don Rassler argues that the United States needs to better leverage its vast terrorism data holdings by creating a new terrorism and counterterrorism data action plan that exploits the power of data-science and artificial intelligence driven approaches. That plan, he writes, should include five key precepts: 1) reinvest in and advance core terrorism data, 2) strategically leverage captured material, 3) better develop and utilize counterterrorism data, 4) practice data alchemy, and 5) automate basic and other analytical tasks, and augment data. Jonathan Schroden looks at lessons learned from the 2021 collapse of the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces’ (ANDSF). He writes that six themes that emerge are: “the ANDSF collapse was months—if not years—in the making; the United States did not give the ANDSF everything they needed to be independently successful; the ANDSF did put up a fierce fight in many areas; the ANDSF were poorly served by Afghan political leaders; the ANDSF were poorly served by their own commanders; and the Taliban strategy overwhelmed and demoralized the ANDSF. From these themes, there are three key lessons: the ANDSF’s failure had many fathers; the U.S. model of security assistance requires reform; and greater emphasis on non-material factors (e.g., morale) is needed in future security force assessments.”
Topic:: Military Affairs, Counter-terrorism, Artificial Intelligence, Data, and Militias
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and Middle East

114. September 2021 Issue

Author:: Paul Cruickshank, Don Rassler, Kristina Hummel, Raffaello Pantucci, Asfandyar Mir, Charles Lister, Elisabeth Kendall, Tricia Bacon, Jason Warner, and Colin Clarke
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: It has been 20 years since 9/11. In the wake of the attacks, the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point (CTC) was established to provide cadets and policymakers with best-in-class research so that they could better understand and confront the threat. With the Taliban returning to power in Afghanistan, with Africa emerging as the new epicenter of global jihadi terror, and with it likely becoming more difficult for the intelligence community to track threats in jihadi conflict zones from which the United States has withdrawn militarily, objective and rigorous open-source research is more critical than ever. To mark the 20th anniversary of 9/11, this special issue of CTC Sentinel, supported by the Recrudescence Project, features interviews with five former officials who have made immense contributions to the counterterrorism enterprise: former Acting Director of the CIA Michael Morell, former CENTCOM Commander Joseph Votel, former State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism Dell Dailey, former FBI Special Agent Ali Soufan, and former Chief of the U.K. Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) Sir Alex Younger. Their reflections on 9/11 and their lessons learned across key parts of the counterterrorism spectrum—intelligence; military; diplomacy; law enforcement—and across the Atlantic are essential reading. Video highlights of several of the interviews are available on the CTC website: Michael Morell, Joseph Votel, Dell Dailey, and Ali Soufan. (Please right-click and open new tab to view.) The special issue also features five articles by leading scholars on the evolving global terror threat landscape. Asfandyar Mir focuses on Afghanistan. Charles Lister examines Syria. Tricia Bacon and Jason Warner look at Africa. Elisabeth Kendall surveys Yemen and Saudi Arabia. And Colin Clarke evaluates the future of the global jihadi movement. On this anniversary, our deepest sympathies are with those who have lost loved ones to terrorism. Responding to this threat, as General Votel puts it, has been a noble undertaking. We deeply appreciate those who have served. Their sacrifices have saved countless lives.
Topic:: Intelligence, Taliban, Counter-terrorism, 9/11, and Jihad
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Africa, Syria, Arabian Peninsula, and United States of America

115. March 2021 Issue

Author:: Audrey Alexander, Kristina Hummel, Brian Michael Jenkins, Thomas Ruttig, and Douglas Weeks
Publication Date:: 03-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: President Biden soon has to decide whether to withdraw the remaining 2,500 U.S. troops from Afghanistan to meet a May 1 deadline agreed to by the previous administration. With time ticking down, the Biden administration has launched a major diplomatic push to broker a peace settlement for Afghanistan. As noted by Thomas Ruttig in this month’s feature article, “Whether and how much the Taliban have changed since their repressive rule over Afghanistan before the fall of 2001 is key to whether a potential peace settlement can create a social and political landscape in Afghanistan that is acceptable to the people of Afghanistan, as well as the United States and NATO allies.” Ruttig assesses that “While the Taliban have softened their rhetoric on some issues (for example, on women’s rights and education) and there is evidence of real policy change in certain areas (for example, on the use of media, in the education sector, a greater acceptance of NGOs, and an acceptance that a future political system will need to accommodate at least some of their political rivals), their policy adjustments appear to have been largely driven by political imperatives rather than any fundamental changes in ideology.” He assesses that “Whether some changes in approach will be perpetuated will depend on the ability of Afghan communities and political groups to maintain pressure on the Taliban. This, in turn, depends on continued international attention toward Afghanistan.” Brian Michael Jenkins, in a feature commentary, examines several possible courses of action the Biden administration could take if the U.S. efforts to broker a peace settlement in Afghanistan do not result in a major breakthrough in the coming weeks. He writes: “What makes a decision on which path to follow so difficult is that each option carries a high risk of resulting in bad outcomes.” He notes that “Decisive action always looks good, but a turbulent world also means calculating risks, avoiding unintended consequences, and hedging bets.” This month’s interview is with Mary McCord, the executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at the Georgetown University Law Center, whose previous service in government included working as Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the U.S. Department of Justice from 2016 to 2017. She offers insights on the heightened threat of far-right extremist violence in the United States and how the country’s legal architecture could evolve to counter it. Douglas Weeks argues that there is “too much pessimism” in the United Kingdom about the possibility of deradicalizing terrorist offenders. He writes: “To address the root causes of the threat, the United Kingdom needs to learn lessons from what has worked for successful ‘deradicalization’ mentors and empower their efforts.”
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Affairs, Taliban, Counter-terrorism, and Radicalization
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, United Kingdom, and United States of America

116. January 2021 Issue

Author:: Bruce Hoffman, Jacob Ware, Stephen Hummel, Paul Cruickshank, Don Rassler, Jonathan Schroden, and Nodirbek Soliev
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: CTC Sentinel
Institution:: The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point
Abstract:: The violent storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, has heightened concerns about the threat posed by far-right extremism in the United States. In examining the wide range of terrorism and counterterrorism challenges facing the incoming Biden administration in this month’s feature commentary, Bruce Hoffman and Jacob Ware write that “the January 6 events at the U.S. Capitol offered a stark, frightening picture of the powerful forces fueling a conspiratorial mindset eschewing both the country’s foundational democratic values and the rule of law” and “serves as a salutary and timely reminder of the danger of potential violence to come.” Given the continued threat posed by “a stubbornly resilient Islamic State and an implacably determined al-Qa`ida,” they write that “it may be that as the United States and its allies enter the third decade of war against international salafi-jihadi terrorism, we need to recalibrate our immediate expectations away from ‘winning’ and ‘losing,’ toward ‘accepting’ and ‘managing’ this conflict. Such an admission would not be popular, but it would be a fairer reflection of the current state of the fight against terrorism, and a more honest prediction of what to expect over the next four, or more, years.” Our interview is with David Lasseter, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction. He notes that “advances in synthetic biology and other related biotechnologies hold the potential for both promise and peril in their application. And so we’ve got to be cognizant of how such technological shifts can alter the threat landscape [and] impose new defense and security challenges. We’ve heard it said that biological weapons are ‘a poor man’s nuke,’ given the potentially enormous impact of their usage. I think COVID-19 has further accelerated this mindset. The U.S. has had a watchful eye on bio threats and has elevated bio threats as a core national security priority over the past several years.” In an assessment that has far-reaching implications for the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan, Jonathan Schroden finds that if the United States were to withdraw the remainder of its troops from the country, the Taliban would have “a slight military advantage” over Afghanistan’s security forces, “which would then likely grow in a compounding fashion.” Nodirbek Soliev examines the Tajik connection in an Islamic State plot against U.S. and NATO air bases in Germany thwarted in April 2020.
Topic:: NATO, Taliban, Counter-terrorism, Islamic State, Joe Biden, and January 6
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Europe, Tajikistan, Germany, and United States of America

117. Afghanistan: The Fog at the End of the Tunnel

Author:: Carl Conetta
Publication Date:: 06-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:: What is causing the uncertainty about when US ground forces will exit Afghanistan. The Biden administration insists that logistical factors explain its breach of the 2020 US-Taliban agreement, which reset the exit date from May to September. Logistical factors are also supposed to explain why the date may now be walked back to July. Actually, logistical issues explain neither. Using current data and historical precedent, this short analysis shows why. An alternative explanation for the delay is that it gave Washington more time to pursue some of its unfinished goals regarding Afghanistan. In this, the lingering troop presence serves as leverage. What goals? Improve Kabul’s military posture, polish plans and preparations for US forces to “fight from afar,” and pursue dramatic new international initiatives aiming to lock the Taliban into a cease-fire, peace settlement, and government reform plan substantially defined by the USA. This high risk-gambit won’t succeed, but it might prolong the conflict and America’s involvement in it.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Treaties and Agreements, War, Military Strategy, Armed Forces, Taliban, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America

118. Celebrating American Diplomacy

Author:: Chris Van Hollen
Publication Date:: 11-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: American Diplomacy
Institution:: American Diplomacy
Abstract:: There’s no question that this program’s theme, what diplomacy does for Americans, is on the front of everyone’s minds especially given the current challenges in Afghanistan and the fast-paced events around the world. In recent weeks in Afghanistan, our diplomats have been on the front lines working overtime to orchestrate the safe evacuation of Americans and many of our closest Afghan partners. Even though the last American soldier has left Afghanistan, America’s diplomats are still working around the clock in capitals around the world to bring people to safety. I believe we have an obligation to ensure the safety and help those Afghans who for years have worked closely in support of our common mission. Our nation’s diplomats display extraordinary courage each and every day, often putting themselves in harm’s way for the rest of us.
Topic:: Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and United States of America

119. Russian Relations with Central Asia and Afghanistan after U.S. Withdrawal

Publication Date:: 10-2021
Content Type:: Video
Institution:: The Harriman Institute
Abstract:: Join us for a meeting of the New York-Russia Public Policy Series, co-hosted by the Harriman Institute at Columbia University and the New York University Jordan Center for the Advanced Study of Russia. In this second event of the academic year, our panelists will discuss the status of Russian relations with Central Asia and Afghanistan after the U.S. withdrawal. Moderated by Joshua Tucker (NYU Jordan Center) and Alexander Cooley (Harriman Institute). The withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan and the dramatic collapse of the U.S.-backed government in Kabul has ushered in another period of Taliban rule. Regional powers and neighbors have been anticipating the U.S. exit for some time: Russia remains a critical player in the region and, even before the U.S. withdrawal, had demonstrated a pragmatic approach to engaging with the Taliban. What is Moscow’s plan for dealing with the new Afghan government and what are its overall priorities in the region? How will this affect Russia’s relations with the Central Asian states and China? And are there any prospects for renewed cooperation between Moscow and Washington on counterterrorism issues in this period of uncertainty and potential instability? Please join this distinguished group of academic experts who will explore the new complex dynamics of a post-American Afghanistan and Central Asia. This event is supported by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York. Speakers Ivan Safranchuk, Director of the Center of Euro-Asian Research and Senior Fellow with the Institute for International Studies, MGIMO Nargis Kassenova, Senior Fellow and Director of the Program on Central Asia, Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Harvard University Artemy Kalinovsky, Professor of Russian, Soviet, and post-Soviet Studies, Temple University Ekaterina Stepanova, Director, Peace and Conflict Studies Unit, National Research Institute of the World Economy & International Relations (IMEMO), Moderated by: Alexander Cooley, Director of the Harriman Institute, Columbia University Joshua Tucker, Director of the Jordan Center for the Advanced Study of Russia, New York University
Topic:: International Relations, Military Strategy, Governance, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Russia, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

120. President Biden: Try for a Double Play on Iran and Afghanistan

Author:: Jon Greenwald
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Council on International Policy (CIP)
Abstract:: Southwest Asia is increasingly dangerous. Negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program appear stuck near a breakpoint. With the Kabul government’s precipitous collapse, President Biden’s courageous decision to remove U.S. troops from Afghanistan has gone badly. Each situation threatens grave consequences for the administration. Together they suggest more deadly chaos looms from the Middle East to China’s borders. Iran is an important common factor, central to the first case, important in the second due to geography and potential leverage. The concurrence of threat – but also perhaps opportunity – justifies a new strategy for dealing with it that cuts across both situations. Joe Biden said before taking office that it was a priority to restore the nuclear deal that was working well until Donald Trump took the U.S. out. He pledged to conclude the endless war in Afghanistan. Today neither objective appears promising. Iran has more enriched and closer to weapons level uranium than when the original deal was signed. U.S. officials acknowledge that negotiating time is limited and, by implication, that military action may be required to keep the president’s pledge never to allow an Iranian bomb. As the Taliban takes over Afghanistan, Washington is focused as it should be on safely extracting U.S. citizens and the many thousands of Afghans whose lives are at risk for having helped the Americans over 20 years. Soon, however, there will be new proposals, including preparations for off-shore responses to what many anticipate will be a revival of the kind of civil war that ravaged Afghanistan in the 1990s. Any reasonable proposal should include at the least a significant diplomatic component in which Afghanistan’s neighbors, Iran prominent among them, apply their weight to persuade the Taliban to rule more moderately than it did its first time in power and in particular to keep out international terrorists. Most acknowledge that a key weakness of that approach is U.S. inability to work with Tehran.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

121. Afghanistan: Before Time Runs Out

Author:: Owen Kirby
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Council on International Policy (CIP)
Abstract:: The withdrawal of remaining U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan is nearly complete. As they go, the country begins a new, uncertain chapter in a long uncertain history. With the U.S. and our allies having made significant investments and great sacrifices in an attempt to develop self-sustaining Afghan institutions – and the Taliban now rampaging through the countryside – this is the moment of truth for the country’s government and post-9/11 political order. Whether Afghanistan’s institutions, security forces, and civil society prove sufficiently resilient to meet current challenges is not solely a matter of local capacity and resolve (or wisdom of previous donor decisions). Nor is it a matter of free choice between competing political views, as Afghans are not going to the voting booth to decide the outcome. It is equally about the commitment of the U.S. and our allies to continue supporting the equality of Afghan women and minorities, rule of law, free speech, and basic human rights. These are not foreign impositions, as some might argue, but rather vital weapons, absent U.S. troops, in the Afghan people’s own struggle against extremism and political regression. For many, there is justifiable fatigue with America’s “forever war” and its costs; but the Taliban’s repressive rule and its consequences are not a specter of another lifetime. It has only been 20 years since Afghan girls were banned from going to school; women barred from the workforce and life outside the home; and summary justice, including stoning and decapitation, for transgressions against the Taliban’s medieval code meted out in the national stadium. It has only been 17 years since Afghans were first given the constitutional right to choose their leadership at the ballot box. Progress is recent, and the Taliban is determined to make it reversible.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Development, Military Strategy, Transition, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

122. Afghanistan and the Rise of the Islamic Emirate: A Tragic Inevitability

Author:: Olli Ruohomäki
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:: It is time to come to terms with the inevitable fact that the Taliban is here to stay for the foreseeable future. The international community must not abandon ordinary Afghans and resign them to a bleak future with hard-line Islamists in power.
Topic:: Governance, Taliban, Violent Extremism, State Building, and Militant Islam
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and Middle East

123. Afghanistan: The Possible Arena for Major Powers Inevitable Cooperation

Author:: Suman Naz and Zafar Nawaz Jaspal
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: South Asian Studies
Institution:: Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:: Afghanistan has been a center of a struggle between major powers since the 19th century. In 2001, the fight against terrorism had sparked a new power struggle among local, regional, and international Afghanistan actors. Various state and non-state players with conflicting perspectives and conflicting approaches are trying to pursue their strategic, political, and economic goals in Afghanistan. Due to similar security threats, complex economic interdependence, and economic liberalism, different scenarios may emerge in Afghanistan, leading to the potential collaboration of major global and regional powers in Afghanistan. This partnership can be expanded for several logics and reasons, among which security comes first. The peace treaty concluded between the United States and the Taliban on February 29, 2020. The continuing peace process via intra-Afghan peace talks with regional states has fortified hopes for peace in Afghanistan through cooperative measures among major regional and international powers.
Topic:: Security, International Cooperation, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and War on Terror
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and Middle East

124. China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan: Partnership for Regional Peace

Author:: Mariam Tahir and Nazir Hussain
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: South Asian Studies
Institution:: Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:: This paper examines the prospects of strategic partnership for regional peace between China, Pakistan and Afghanistan through their mutual geopolitical interests. Chinese involvement with Afghanistan serves as a key factor in the successful implementation of its economic outreach through Central and South Asian segments of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as it helps to rebalance China’s economic and political aspirations. The paper also highlights the implications of China’s relations with Pakistan and Afghanistan to counter Indian influence in the region. The trilateral relationship between these countries is of paramount importance for regional peace and security. Afghanistan is the most unstable country in the region; however Chinese constructive engagement with Afghanistan through diplomatic, political, economic and security measures can usher into a new era of peace, progress and development for the entire region.
Topic:: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Peace, and Regionalism
Political Geography:: Pakistan, Afghanistan, China, Middle East, and Asia

125. American assertiveness, UN irrelevance, Europe’s moment?

Author:: George Pagoulatos and Spyros Blavoukos
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:: The United Nations missed its opportunity to shine with the Covid-19 outbreak and was ignored over the recent Afghanistan crisis. Collective-action incapacity also happens to lie at the core of EU foreign policy weakness in the face of major recent geopolitical developments, such as Afghanistan and the AUKUS agreement. The emerging Cold War global atmospherics suggests an adverse environment for the EU to add substance to its oft-stated objective of strategic autonomy. However, intensifying great power polarization raises the need for a more assertive global Europe capable of effectively defending and sustaining a rules-based global multilateral system. The EU’s existence in the world as a trade and regulatory (super)power is best served by a well-functioning rules-based multilateral system, of which the EU is currently the most credible and ardent defender. In the escalating rivalry of the US with China there is no doubt where the European Union’s allegiance lies. Europe has been a steady pillar of the Euro-Atlantic alliance. A trade power and a global leader in combating extreme poverty and climate change, the European Union sees it in its best strategic interest to keep China engaged in the collective provision of global public goods ensuring sustainable development worldwide and preventively addressing the causes of massive migration waves. The EU should grasp the emerging opportunity and assert its own approach, aimed at a dual objective: first, to apply its moderating influence on the escalating Sino-American confrontation; and second, to breathe new energy into a visibly ageing global multilateral system and its frustrated ability to provide global public goods. Meeting this objective rests on two conditions: first, the EU should avoid introverted and short-sighted reactions to the Afghanistan and AUKUS challenges. Second, the EU should take bolder steps to enhance its own capacity to contribute to the public good of international security.
Topic:: United Nations, European Union, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Europe, and United States of America

126. A deadly exodus: Five trends to watch for in the evolving Afghanistan crisis

Author:: George Pagoulatos
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:: US failure to consult allies has created a new rift with Europe. The transatlantic rift will be bridged, because every side has an interest in repairing the damage. The Afghanistan debacle has demonstrated Europe’s virtual nonexistence as a standalone strategic actor in the security domain. It is a reminder that the EU needs to develop its strategic autonomy and a fully functioning common asylum system. Europe will focus on working with key neighboring countries, applying leverage as an economic and development aid superpower to extract conditionality. There are many losers, and only a few clear winners. Pakistan, Turkey, China and Iran emerge as main winners from regime change in Afghanistan, but not without a significant downside. Radical Islam and Jihadi movements have gained a landmark victory. Taliban II are no less zealous in their religious obscurantism than Taliban I. The Taliban will be under strong external pressure to crack down on exportable terrorism. The Taliban are unlikely to be able to establish an effective central government and will lack complete control of the land. The desperation of thousands of people struggling to leave is a potent symbol both of the West’s impotence and of the power of its values. The West retains its universal aspirational potency. So do versions of radical Islam, reverberating throughout the Muslim world as a liberation theology. A lesson in humility might well be the West’s most precious takeaway from Afghanistan’s chaotic fall.
Topic:: Taliban, Conflict, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Europe, and United States of America

127. The Terrorist Threat Forecast in 2021

Author:: Liu Chunlin and Rohan Gunaratna
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:: Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:: The pandemic year 2021 is likely to witness an overall decline in global terrorism. While the threat grew in conflict zones, it diminished off-the-battlefields. However, threat groups worldwide are expanding in cyber space during the pandemic. From Indonesia to Pakistan, Muslim majority countries, Arabization and Islamization of Muslim communities during the pandemic is disrupting national cohesion. To prevent, counter and respond to the recent developments of key terrorist organizations, governmental and non-governmental partners should understand the threat. The intelligence services, law enforcement authorities and military forces should move from counter terrorism cooperation to collaboration and partnership. Working with community, academic and private sector partners, governments should build the higher strategic and ground level operational and tactical capabilities.
Topic:: Terrorism, Cybersecurity, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and Global Focus

128. Beyond Emergency Relief: Averting Afghanistan’s Humanitarian Catastrophe

Author:: International Crisis Group
Publication Date:: 12-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: International Crisis Group
Abstract:: International donors cut off all but emergency aid to Afghanistan after the Taliban’s takeover in August. Months later, the state is collapsing and a humanitarian disaster is looming. Donors should work with the state to restore basic public services and mitigate the population’s suffering.
Topic:: Disaster Relief, Infrastructure, Governance, Humanitarian Crisis, and Public Service
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and Middle East

129. THE END OF THE WAR ON TERROR

Author:: Navin Bapat
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:: On August 15, 2021, almost twenty years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Taliban recaptured Afghanistan from the American-supported government led by Ashraf Ghani. Afghans pushed to get on American transport planes to evacuate, conjuring images of the US evacuation of Saigon at the end of the Vietnam War. Others, afraid of Taliban retaliation, turned to social media to plea for help. Meanwhile, in Kabul, militants paraded in front of the evacuated US embassy, signifying the Taliban’s total victory.
Topic:: Taliban, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, 9/11, War on Terror, Vietnam War, COVID-19, Joe Biden, Ashraf Ghani, and Hamid Karzai
Political Geography:: Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, and United States of America

130. WHY THE “TERRORIST” LABEL HELPS SOME GROUPS AND HURTS OTHERS

Author:: Rebecca Best
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:: Does adding a terrorist group to the US State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization list reduce its violence? Since 1997, the US State Department has maintained a list of designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO), or foreign organizations that use terrorism and threaten US nationals or US national security. The United States has designated a wide array of terrorist organizations and groups—including Hamas, FARC, and ISIL–Khorasan—but has refrained from using the designation for others. For example, the United States never designated the Taliban an FTO. Why not?
Topic:: Terrorism, Taliban, Islamic State, 9/11, Boko Haram, Hamas, Uyghurs, FARC, Haqqani Network, Khorasan Group, Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, and Tamil Tigers
Political Geography:: Pakistan, Afghanistan, China, Iran, South Asia, Sri Lanka, Nigeria, and United States of America

131. WHY STATEBUILDING DIDN’T WORK IN AFGHANISTAN

Author:: David A. Lake
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:: The collapse of the Afghan government illustrates the larger dilemma in all statebuilding attempts. The statebuilder wants to build a government strong enough to stand on its own. To do this, the new state must win the support of the people it hopes to rule. This need not be the entire population of a country—no government wins universal praise—but it must be a sufficiently large share of the population that it has room to maneuver, favoring some groups with a policy, and other groups with another policy, but not always sitting on the knife’s edge between repression and rebellion. In short, the statebuilder wants to build a state that is legitimate.
Topic:: War, Military Affairs, Counter-terrorism, Afghanistan, War on Terror, and State Building
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and Asia

132. Pragmatic Adaptation: American Surrender and Regional Acceptance After Taliban’s Takeover of Afghanistan

Author:: FARAS
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:: Ousted Afghan president Ashraf Ghani left Afghanistan on August 15th when the Taliban reached the outskirts of the capital Kabul. At the time, a source close to Taliban stressed that the two sides reached an agreement whereby Ghani should step down and hand over power to a transitional administration. While the United States and the European Union might well consider the use of sanctions as a weapon against the Taliban, if the movement does not live up to its commitment not to target US and European citizens leaving Afghanistan, it should be noted that most of Afghanistan’s neighbors expected the collapse of the Afghan government – although not this fast- and even began to open up to the Taliban. Irreversible US Withdrawal The United States defended its decision to pull out of Afghanistan rebuffing criticism both at home and abroad. It reiterated that kept forces in Afghanistan twice as long as the Soviets. The US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said remaining in Afghanistan is “simply not in the national interest.” He added that the US succeeded in the mission of reducing attacks on its soil and interests. The US withdrawal will leave wide repercussions both regionally and internationally.
Topic:: Military Affairs, Taliban, European Union, Refugees, Humanitarian Crisis, Adaptation, and Pragmatism
Political Geography:: Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia, Iran, South Asia, Turkey, India, and United States of America

133. "Melian Strategy": Why does Taliban fight and negotiate at the same time?

Author:: Irfan Yar
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:: As the US completes its troops’ withdrawal from Afghanistan, Taliban has seized security vacuum to launch massive assaults. The group has unleashed violent chaos across the country and captured more than two-third of the territory, as per senior EU official estimates. On one hand, the insurgents have tightened their grip on seizing the provinces through military means. On the other hand, the insurgents claim that they want to resolve the issue in peaceful ways. “We are committed to finding a diplomatic solution for Afghanistan; the US-Taliban Doha agreement and the Intra-Afghan dialogue are the proofs that the Taliban want to solve the issue through negotiations,”[ii] said Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the deputy leader of the Taliban, on Wednesday, in Doha. Furthermore, Taliban leaders urge governors, military leaders, and other Jamiat Islami party leaders to surrender and put an end to the 40-years long conflict via negotiations. So, the question is, why have the Taliban fighters intensified violence and, at the same time, stress on making peace?
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Taliban, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, South Asia, and Kabul

134. American Invasion And Withdrawals Post 9/11

Author:: Ibrahim Karatas
Publication Date:: 03-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Institution:: Transatlantic Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Abstract:: When the United States was hit by al-Qaida's terrorist attack on 11 September 2001 (hereafter 9/11 attacks), not only Americans but the whole world was shocked: The world’s only superpower was attacked at home and had lost more than three thousand people. To take revenge for the attack as well as to prevent new ones, the Bush administration decided to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq, which they claimed were sheltering and supporting al-Qaida. Afghanistan was invaded on 7 October 2001 because the US wanted (1) to eliminate Osama bin Laden (the mastermind of 9/11) and al-Qaida; (2) to remove the Taliban group from power and bring stability to Afghanistan by creating a democratic and peaceful state.[1] The US Army subsequently invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming that Saddam Hussain was supporting terrorism and producing chemical weapons. There were also allegations that the Hussain regime was behind the 9/11 attacks, but it was never proven. The US eventually removed both Taliban and Saddam Hussain from power and captured Hussain, who was later judged and executed by the new Iraqi government on 30 December 2006. US special forces killed Laden on 2 May 2011. As of today, the US has killed its two archenemies and changed regimes allegedly supporting terrorism in both Afghanistan and Iraq, yet could not bring stability. What is more, the remaining US troops are preparing to leave the two countries. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq is in better condition than the pre-invasion era as both states have failed, lack a strong authority, and cannot !ght terrorism. In Afghanistan, the Taliban was the enemy to be removed, however the US’s recent agreement with the organization has paved the way for re-control of the country by the group. On the other hand, Iraq has become a land of widespread terrorism, and the country is more divided than before, not mentioning Iranian in"uence on Baghdad. Based on the current situation, my arguments are that (1) the US is about to make the same mistake it did in Vietnam, and (2) Afghanistan and Iraq might again become the hub of terrorist organizations as well as regional rivalries. Although I do not approve of the US invasions, as Afghanistan and Iraq saw the worse with its invasion, these countries will face the worst with the US’s withdrawal.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, War on Terror, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

135. Prospects For Russia’s Policy Towards Afghanistan

Author:: Anna Maria Dyner and Arkadiusz Legieć
Publication Date:: 05-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:: Taking advantage of the withdrawal of the U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan, Russia intends to strengthen its influence in that country by increasing contacts with the Afghan government and the Taliban. The aim is to become a key mediator in the peace process, which will enable it to influence the participants, increase control over the situation in Afghanistan, and use it in relations with the countries of the region. Russia’s policy may make the stabilisation of Afghanistan more difficult and undermine the effects of the efforts made by NATO countries during the stabilisation mission.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, NATO, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Russia, South Asia, and Eurasia

136. Professionalization, Local Military Context, and Reconstruction of the Army in Afghanistan

Author:: Cenker Korhan Demir
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:: Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:: Security sector reconstruction is a long-debated topic in the peacekeeping and state-building literature. The primary goal of any reconstruction program in conflict-ridden countries is to build up security institutions, which are prerequisites for sustainable development and democratization. This study aims to examine how security sector institutions, specifically the army, have been reconstructed by intervening actors in post-conflict countries like Afghanistan. It argues that army reconstruction programs that are developed without any elaboration of the peculiar conditions of the related post-conflict countries, are unlikely to be successful. As such, initiatives aimed at security sector reconstruction need to take account of the idiosyncratic characteristics of the conflict affected country and its institutions, and the program should be devised conforming to the case-specific circumstances. This research aims to identify reliable evidence to support this argument by analyzing data collected from both primary and secondary resources. It also aims to contribute methodologically by building upon the first-hand impressions of practitioners from various countries over their reconstruction activities.
Topic:: Security, Reconstruction, Military Affairs, Army, and Professionalism
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and South Asia

137. Judicial Independence in Afghanistan: Legal Framework and Practical Challenges

Author:: Shoaib Timory
Publication Date:: 02-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit (AREU)
Abstract:: In a government with a separation of powers, independence is an indispensable feature of the judiciary. An independent judiciary gives credibility to political systems and is also the force behind reinforcing democracy and the rule of law. This watching brief briefly maps out the existing legal framework that ensures the independence of the judicial branch in Afghanistan and the reasons for the weak utilis ation of this feature which puts the judiciary in an uneven position compared to the other two branches of government. Moreover, the watching brief presents a set of recommendations for the enhancement of judicial independence in the country.
Topic:: Democracy, Rule of Law, Judiciary, and Independence
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and Middle East

138. Afghanistan – Opportunities and Challenges for the Russian Federation

Author:: Giorgio Bilanishvili
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:: Lately, the discussions about a possible weakening of US influence in international politics has become more frequent. Parallel to this, there is talk about the activation of Russia and, especially, China in this regard with their influence growing on the international stage. The increasing confrontation between these two countries and the United States has also become one of the most pressing matters. Given all of this, it is now stated more frequently that the world order is changing and a new multi-polar international system is being formed which will be followed by the redistribution of the spheres of influence in the world, leading to increased roles played by China and Russia. The US withdrawal from Afghanistan is considered to be a development of such importance that it could influence the aforementioned international processes and, therefore, commands special attention in that regard as well. Apart from this, the political and security situation in Afghanistan concerns a multitude of states which includes the great powers of the region such as India, China, Russia, Iran and Turkey that play important roles regionally or globally. The interests of these countries, including with regard to Afghanistan, converge in certain cases while diverging in others. At the moment, it is largely unclear how the relations of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan created by the Taliban may develop with its neighbors. Experts assess the prospects of Afghan-Indian and Afghan-Iranian relations especially unfavorably. The return of the Taliban in Afghanistan’s leadership is also important in terms of international security. In this regard, the main cause of concern is the threat of the activation of international terrorism. All of the things mentioned above comprise an incomplete list of the important aspects of the current situation in Afghanistan which, as a whole, create a complex and multi-dimensional picture. For Russia, therefore, Afghanistan also does not have a single dimension. It is, on the one hand, a certain opportunity for the Russian Federation in order for it to bolster influence on the international arena. At the same time, however, the threats that have increased in Afghanistan given the new realities naturally cannot stay outside of Moscow’s attention.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Conflict, and International System
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, China, South Asia, United States of America, and Russian Federation

139. US Foreign Policy Challenges and Achievements in the First 8 Months of Joseph Biden's Presidency

Author:: Nika Petriashvili
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:: September 20 will mark exactly eight months since Joseph Biden took over the presidency of the United States. The purpose of our review is to assess the activities of his administration in the international political arena, which obviously cannot be understood in isolation from the ongoing processes within the country and the decisions made in domestic politics. When assessing the steps taken by President Biden and his administration in international relations, we must first look at the legacy he inherited from the previous president and his administration. This will be one of the primary elements based upon which we will assess the performance of the 46th President of the United States and his administration. To put it very modestly, the situation that Joseph Biden faced inside the country and abroad after Donald Trump was really not simple: A polarized society within the United States and a complicated relationship with international partners. Naturally, all this was further complicated by the very difficult epidemiological state in the country precipitated by the pandemic, and the significantly deteriorating socio-economic situation. Clearly, the citizens of the United States expected the Joseph Biden administration, first and foremost, to deal quickly and effectively with the major domestic challenges. Tensions reached a peak in American society after radical and extremist groups penetrated the Capitol on January 6. As a result, Joseph Biden's main message and first steps were aimed at calming and uniting society within the country. Of course, it would not be right to discuss these dramatic processes only in a domestic context. The tensions within the country have been closely monitored by both US partners, including Georgia, as well as its rivals and enemies. We cannot really say that Joe Biden was able to heal the American public during these 8 months, as he promised in his inaugural speech, but the situation has calmed down somewhat, and the processes have indeed shifted towards a quieter and more professional course.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Politics, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and United States of America

140. The Interests of Turkey and Iran in Afghanistan: Threats and Challenges

Author:: Zurab Batiashvili
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:: In the summer of 2021, as the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan, the balance of power in the country changed rapidly, and by August 15, the Taliban was able to capture the capital, Kabul, almost without a fight. On September 7, the Taliban formed a new "government" steered by Sharia Law. The Taliban also renamed the country, and, according to them, Afghanistan is now called the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan." There are no women or members of the Shiite minority in the new government.Of the 33 members of the still-incomplete government, only three belong to ethnic minorities. Interestingly, the four new "ministers" of the country are former inmates of Guantanamo Bay, having served time there for organizing terrorist activities. Sirajuddin Haqqani, the "Minister of Internal Affairs" of the new "government" of Afghanistan, is still wanted by the FBI on the same charges. A reward of $5 million is being offered for his capture. There is already the threat of a humanitarian catastrophe (food shortages), and instability (internal strife) in Afghanistan. Tens of thousands of Afghans are fleeing their homes, many of them heading to Iran and Turkey. This poses a number of threats and challenges to these countries, especially since they have their own interests in Afghanistan.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Government, Taliban, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Iran, South Asia, Turkey, and Middle East

141. A strategic shift: The return of the Taliban in Afghanistan and its implications

Author:: Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:: The Taliban was able to establish control over Afghanistan with surprising speed due to the collapse of solidarity between the forces opposing them. Nonetheless, its leaders were keen to allay the fears of both the Afghans and external forces to gain political legitimacy internally and externally.
Topic:: Politics, Taliban, Conflict, and Legitimacy
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, South Asia, and United States of America

142. 2020 Country Brief: Afghanistan

Author:: Third Way
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Third Way
Abstract:: After 19 years of war in Afghanistan and a peace agreement signed with the Taliban, it’s time for the United States to withdraw. Although the United States has slowly reduced troops in Afghanistan, the Trump Administration has left the remaining troops vulnerable to the Taliban and to Putin’s Russia, which is paying bounties to Afghans for murdering American soldiers.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Political stability, Military Intervention, Peace, and State Building
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Russia, Europe, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

143. How the Taliban Re-took Afghanistan

Author:: Paul Rivlin
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
Abstract:: In this issue of Iqtisadi Paul Rivlin discusses the broader historical, political and economic context for the Taliban's recent return to power in Afghanistan. On 15 August 2021, Taliban forces entered the Afghan capital, Kabul, as the government collapsed and the president, Ashraf Ghani, fled the country. This brought an end to the twenty-year campaign waged by the US and its allies to remake the country. The speed with which the Afghan army collapsed shocked many, but others, who understood developments in the country better, were not surprised. On 31 August, the last US forces left the country.
Topic:: Politics, Taliban, Economy, and History
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and South Asia

144. Afghanistan offers an opportunity to repair Turkey-NATO relations

Author:: Kohei Imai
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
Abstract:: In this issue of Turkeyscope, Dr. Kohei Imai discusses the context for Turkey's planned involvement in Afghanistan even after the US-led widrawal that is currently underway. Turkey's agreement to handle security for the Kabul airport demonstrates its unique and strategic role in NATO.
Topic:: International Relations, Security, and NATO
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Turkey, and United States of America

145. R2P Monitor, Issue 55, 15 January 2021

Author:: Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:: R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 55 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, the Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria and South Sudan.
Topic:: Crisis Management, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Africa, China, South Asia, Middle East, Asia, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, South America, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

146. R2P Monitor, Issue 56, 15 March 2021

Author:: Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:: 03-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:: R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 56 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel, China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Sudan and Sudan.
Topic:: International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

147. R2P Monitor, Issue 57, 1 June 2021

Author:: Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:: 06-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:: R2P Monitor is a quarterly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 57 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Mozambique, Central African Republic, Nigeria, South Sudan and Sudan.
Topic:: International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

148. R2P Monitor, Issue 58, 1 September 2021

Author:: Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:: R2P Monitor is a quarterly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 58 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Sudan and Sudan.
Topic:: International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

149. R2P Monitor, Issue 59, 1 December 2021

Author:: Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:: 12-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:: R2P Monitor is a quarterly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 59 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Sudan, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Nigeria and South Sudan.
Topic:: International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Norms, Atrocities, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Sahel, and Central African Republic

150. US Credibility and the Afghanistan Withdrawal

Author:: Riccardo Perissich
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:: Whatever one may think of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, a decision that President Biden shared with his predecessor Donald Trump, most observers on the two sides of the Atlantic seem to agree that both the planning and the execution phases of the withdrawal were botched. Europeans in particular, including the ever-faithful US allies in the UK, complain about not having been adequately consulted or involved in the decision and execution of the withdrawal. Whatever the merits of this debate, it has inevitably led to fundamental questions about US foreign policy and its future trajectories. After four years of Trump, many in Europe are legitimately concerned. Old and by now familiar academic debates about Washington’s priorities, credibility and handling of global affairs have resurfaced as a result. The underlining question is: to what foreign policy tribe does Biden belong? Is he an optimist or a pessimist? A realist or an idealist? A liberal internationalist or a nationalist? Is he a Wilson or a Roosevelt and if the answer leans towards latter, which of the two Roosevelts’ are we referring to?
Topic:: Foreign Policy and Military Affairs
Political Geography:: Afghanistan and United States of America

« Previous
Next »
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
…
29
30

Search

Search Constraints

Search Results

Refine your search

Topic

Political Geography

Content Type

Journal

Publishing Institution

Author

Publication Year

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS