The U.S. designation of the Haqqani network as a foreign terrorist organization may heighten tensions with Islamabad, but was the "right decision" because it provides clarity within the U.S. government and to Pakistani authorities, says CFR's Daniel Markey
Authors: Stanford Clinic and New York University Clinic
This report from the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of Stanford Law School and the Global Justice Clinic and New York University School of Law studies the extent to which drone strikes in Pakistan have conformed to international law and caused harm or injury to civilians.
The tension between Washington and Islamabad over the former's drone assaults on targets in Pakistan is rising. But a prospective geopolitical rivalry involving both countries has even wider ramifications.
The United States has tried cracking down on Pakistan before. It did not work then, and it will not work now, writes Alexander Evans. The difference, counters Stephen Krasner, is that this time the United States has real leverage.
Leading Pakistani journalist and bestselling author Ahmed Rashid analyzes the current state of Afghanistan and Pakistan, prospects for U.S. government negotiation with the Taliban, and the potential ramifications of U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The National Assembly of Pakistan passed the resolution on April 12, 2012 and revised it on December 2012. The guidelines include policy on Pakistani airspace and territory and unmanned aerial vehicle (drones).
Authors: Peter Lampert Bergen and Jennifer Rowland
The CIA's drone program, while successful, has been largely unpopular in Pakistan. But drone strikes are decreasing since they peaked in 2010. Peter Bergen and Jennifer Rowland of CNNask: Is it because of politics or because we're running out of real targets?
Reports that Pakistan-based militant groups may be moving to unite could help clarify U.S. talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan. But CFR's Daniel Markey calls it a tricky game, complicated by unclear U.S. intentions in the region.
Targeted killings have become a central component of U.S. counterterrorism operations around the globe. Despite pointed criticism over transparency and accountability issues, analysts say the controversial practice seems likely to expand in the future.
The Council on Foreign Relations' David Rockefeller Studies Program—CFR's "think tank"—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.
Koblentz argues that the United States should work with other nuclear-armed states to manage threats to nuclear stability in the near term and establish processes for multilateral arms control efforts over the longer term.
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 »