Envisioning A Comprehensive Peace Agreement For Afghanistan

"Throughout years of halting attempts to negotiate an end to the war in Afghanistan, the conflict parties articulated only the barest outlines of envisioned outcomes. By not spelling out their preferred terms for peace, the parties reinforced resistance to a peace process and fed fears of what compromise with the enemy might bring. An effective peace process will require filling this gap. With the aim of sparking the imaginations of policymakers on all sides of the conflict and others interested in encouraging negotiations, this report paints a detailed picture of a plausible political settlement. To provide concrete ideas, the authors chose to write a peace agreement rather than write about one, translating their research and analysis into the format of a comprehensive peace accord. Their intent is to lay out realistic compromises that could satisfy the parties' interests and stand some chance of actually being implemented for the most important issues. The issues addressed include cessation of hostilities, political and security power-sharing, foreign troop withdrawal, constitutional reform, transitional mechanisms, and monitoring and verification. The authors researched the probable negotiation goals of the conflict parties; studied past peace agreements, both for Afghanistan and for many other countries around the world; and conducted extensive in-person confidential consultations with people associated with all sides of the conflict and with states neighboring Afghanistan, as well as experts on Afghanistan and peace processes. Beyond the report's main purpose, its methodology and supporting comparative analysis will benefit conflict resolution practitioners broadly."--

An informed modern plan for post-2020 American foreign policy that avoids the opposing dangers of retrenchment and overextension Russia and China are both believed to have "grand strategies"--detailed sets of national security goals backed by means, and plans, to pursue them. In the United States, policy makers have tried to articulate similar concepts but have failed to reach a widespread consensus since the Cold War ended. While the United States has been the world's prominent superpower for over a generation, much American thinking has oscillated between the extremes of isolationist agendas versus interventionist and overly assertive ones. Drawing on historical precedents and weighing issues such as Russia's resurgence, China's great rise, North Korea's nuclear machinations, and Middle East turmoil, Michael O'Hanlon presents a well-researched, ethically sound, and politically viable vision for American national security policy. He also proposes complementing the Pentagon's set of "4+1" pre-existing threats with a new "4+1" biological, nuclear, digital, climatic, and internal dangers.

A whole generation has grown up in Afghanistan knowing little but the ravages of war. The dramatic overthrow of the Taliban regime in 2001 was simply one event in a series of interrelated struggles which have blighted ordinary people's lives over the last three decades, and which continue to interfere with reconciliation and reconstruction. This new edition of The Afghanistan Wars provides a meticulously-documented history of these successive waves of conflict. From the roots of Afghanistan's slide into disorder in the late 1970s to the challenges faced by Afghan leaders following the substantial withdrawal of international forces in 2014, it explores military and diplomatic history while also offering valuable insight on humanitarian action, gender, medical and cultural themes. Thoroughly revised in the light of the latest research, the third edition also features a new final chapter which examines recent developments in Afghanistan, bringing the story up to the present day and mounting a strong case for continuing support for this troubled country. New to this Edition: - A final chapter on the recent developments in Afghanistan up to the present day - Revised to take into account the considerable amount of new material published on this topic since 2009 - Refreshed and updated throughout

This study explores Iranian influence in Afghanistan and the implications for the United States after most U.S. forces depart Afghanistan in 2016. Iran has substantial economic, political, cultural, and religious leverage in Afghanistan. Although Iran will attempt to shape a post-2014 Afghanistan, Iran and the United States share core interests: to prevent the country from again becoming dominated by the Taliban and a safe haven for al Qaeda.

The Council on Foreign Relations sponsors Independent Task Forces to assess issues of current and critical importance to U.S. foreign policy and provide policymakers with concrete judgments and recommendations. Diverse in backgrounds and perspectives, Task Force members aim to reach a meaningful consensus on policy through private and non-partisan deliberations. Once launched, Task Forces are independent of CFR and solely responsible for the content of their reports. Task Force members are asked to join a consensus signifying that they endorse "the general policy thrust and judgments reached by the group, though not necessarily every finding and recommendation." Each Task Force member also has the option of putting forward an additional or a dissenting view. Members' affiliations are listed for identification purposes only and do not imply institutional endorsement. Task Force observers participate in discussions, but are not asked to join the consensus. --Book Jacket.

The recent efforts to reach a settlement of the enduring and tragic conflict in Darfur demonstrate how important it is to understand what factors contribute most to the success of such efforts. In this book, Caroline Hartzell and Matthew Hoddie review data from all negotiated civil war settlements between 1945 and 1999 in order to identify these factors. What they find is that settlements are more likely to produce an enduring peace if they involve construction of a diversity of power-sharing and power-dividing arrangements between former adversaries. The strongest negotiated settlements prove to be those in which former rivals agree to share or divide state power across its economic, military, political, and territorial dimensions. This finding is a significant addition to the existing literature, which tends to focus more on the role that third parties play in mediating and enforcing agreements. Beyond the quantitative analyses, the authors include a chapter comparing contrasting cases of successful and unsuccessful settlements in the Philippines and Angola, respectively.