Did President Obama's troop drawdown plan for Afghanistan undercut the campaign against the Taliban or was it too limited to meet U.S. goals? CFR President Richard N. Haass and Senior Fellow Max Boot offer differing takes on the new battlefield deployment.
President Obama should pursue a more sweeping troop drawdown in Afghanistan that focuses a residual force on counterterrorist operations, and helps Washington devote more resources to fixing severe domestic problems, says CFR President Richard N. Haass.
President Obama's decision to remove thirty thousand troops from Afghanistan in just over a year heightens the difficulty in securing the east and south of the country against far-from-defeated Taliban forces, writes CFR's Max Boot.
Max Boot says a large withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan would allow the Taliban to gain ground and erode the willingness of the Afghan government to provide the United States with the military bases needed to keep pressure on Al Qaeda.
Is U.S. involvement in Afghanistan a mission to build a stable Afghan state or eliminate the al-Qaeda threat? As a decision nears on U.S. troop withdrawals from Afghanistan, lawmakers are making new calls for clarity, adding to the debate over the war's endgame.
In The New York Review of Books, Ahmed Rashid sifts through the conflicting reports of U.S. forces' success in Afghanistan and the distinct perspectives of the many players involved in the Afghan conflict.
The Taliban needs to be convinced of a firm U.S. commitment in Afghanistan before it will negotiate a settlement, says CFR's Stephen Biddle, and any deal will have to also involve the Pakistani, U.S., and Afghan governments.
U.S. strategy in Afghanistan should be in line with the Obama administration's political goals of defeating al-Qaeda rather than devoting resources to long-term nation building, says CFR's Gian Gentile.
The latest review of the Afghan strategy puts U.S. troop drawdown on track for July, but experts say President Obama has to balance assuring partners in the region of U.S. commitment to the war with increasing calls for withdrawal from some Democrats.
The Council on Foreign Relations' David Rockefeller Studies Programâ€”CFR's "think tank"â€”is home to more than seventy full-time, adjunct, and visiting scholars and practitioners (called "fellows"). Their expertise covers the world's major regions as well as the critical issues shaping today's global agenda. Download the printable CFR Experts Guide.
The authors argue that the United States has responded inadequately to the rise of Chinese power and recommend placing less strategic emphasis on the goal of integrating China into the international system and more on balancing China's rise.
Campbell evaluates the implications of the Boko Haram insurgency and recommends that the United States support Nigerian efforts to address the drivers of Boko Haram, such as poverty and corruption, and to foster stronger ties with Nigerian civil society.
Learn more about CFR’s mission and its work over the past year in the 2014 Annual Report. The Annual Report spotlights new initiatives, high-profile events, and authoritative scholarship from CFR experts, and includes a message from CFR President Richard N. Haass. Read and download »