At the beginning of Pakistani prime minister Sharif's third term, Daniel Markey recommends that Washington work to promote "economic stabilization and improved relations with India."

The first foreign leader to visit Pakistan following its recent elections was the prime minister of China, signifying the close relations between the two countries. During the visit, Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari said, "Our top priority is to further strengthen economic linkages."

Read full answer

Daniel Markey outlines three priorities for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan as he comes in to his third non-consecutive term.

As former prime minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif looks poised to win nationwide elections, CFR's Daniel Markey highlights the vote's significance for Pakistan's democracy and foreign relations.

Daniel Markey argues that the newly elected Pakistani prime minister's core agenda, "economic reform and improved ties with India—is one the United States should cheer."

Husain Haqqani, former Pakistan ambassador to the United States, discusses the historic elections in Pakistan and their impact on U.S. foreign policy with Foreign Affairs Editor Gideon Rose.

Gayle Tzemach Lemmon outlines the biggest challenges facing recently appointed State Department Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Ambassador James Dobbins.

In the run-up to Pakistan's elections, Daniel Markey debates Ambassador Neelam Deo on the relationship between civilian and military power in Pakistan.

To date, Chinese officials have asserted that their interest in Gwadar is strictly a commercial effort to provide another energy corridor for Middle East oil, and Pakistani government officials stridently affirm this position. New Delhi, on the other hand, has expressed "concern" about the true motivations in developing Gwadar, suspecting that it is a Sino-Pak effort at encirclement.

Read full answer

For many senior Pakistani spies, the man sitting in the jail cell represented solid proof of their suspicions that the C.I.A. had sent a vast secret army to Pakistan, men who sowed chaos and violence as part of the covert American war in the country. For the C.I.A., the eventual disclosure of [Raymond] Davis's role with the agency shed an unflattering light on a post–Sept. 11 reality: that the C.I.A. had farmed out some of its most sensitive jobs to outside contractors — many of them with neither the experience nor the temperament to work in the war zones of the Islamic world.

After former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's speech on April 5, Gayle Tzemach Lemmon observes, "the Clinton megaphone no longer requires a Washington translator."

"While it was not the first country where the United States used drones, [Pakistan] became the laboratory for the targeted killing operations that have come to define a new American way of fighting, blurring the line between soldiers and spies and short-circuiting the normal mechanisms by which the United States as a nation goes to war."

Jagdish Bhagwati and Amrita Narlikar write that the only way to ensure safe working environments is to make them "legislated and pursued with zeal."

Former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan Ryan Crocker and CFR Senior Fellow Daniel Markey discuss the upcoming elections in Pakistan and the future of U.S.-Pakistan relations.

Daniel Markey writes, "The mysterious Pakistani-Canadian cleric is back, and he's shaking up the country's politics."

UN Special Rapporteur on Human rights and Counterterrorism Ben Emmerson released this statement on March 14, 2013, following his meetings in Pakistan with victims of drone strikes.

This report looks at why extremist strategic communications in Pakistan have been so successful and what it would take for the government and its allies to reverse the gains of what is sometimes called "the al-Qaeda worldview." Like all good communications campaigns, extremist messaging is grounded in a reality. In this case, that reality is the views and emotions—and the narratives that articulate them—that were born out of the establishment and subsequent conduct of the state of Pakistan.

Instead of continuing their endless battling, the United States and Pakistan should acknowledge that their interests simply do not converge enough to make them strong partners. Giving up the fiction of an alliance would free up Washington to explore new ways of achieving its goals in South Asia. And it would allow Islamabad to finally pursue its regional ambitions -- which would either succeed once and for all or, more likely, teach Pakistani officials the limitations of their country's power.

Intervening in Pakistani elections is a losing proposition, CFR Senior Fellow Daniel Markey argues. If pro-American leaders win, they will be tainted by association; if their opponents win, the United States will have alienated potential partners.