The Pakistani General Running Washington’s Backchannel to Tehran
As Washington and Tehran edge closer to escalation, the most critical line of communication keeping the crisis from spiraling is being run not by polished diplomats, but by an unlikely figure: a Pakistani general. Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan’s powerful army chief, has quietly become the key intermediary in the U.S.-Iran standoff, managing what may be the most important backchannel between the two sides. The mediation has thrust Pakistan to the center of the crisis while exposing it to enormous risk.
Bonus Episode: Stalled Talks and Next Steps for the US and Iran
This bonus episode of Middle East Focus features a recent MEI Virtual Briefing. Director of Communications Zeina Al-Shaib is joined by MEI Distinguished Diplomatic Fellows Alan Eyre and Daniel Benaim to discuss the historic talks held in Pakistan last weekend between the United States and Iran. Tehran insists the US failed to gain its trust, while the US made its red lines clear and declared it would blockade Iranian ports in the Persian Gulf. What happens next? Eyre and Benaim offer insights into what goes on behind the scenes at such negotiations; identify the core issues at play; explore potential incentives to end the war; analyze the weaponization of energy; as well as assess the role of other regional players in this conflict.
The Pakistan-Afghanistan conflict: A strategic concern for the US
Pakistan’s relationship with the Afghan Taliban has shifted from open sponsorship in the 1990s to a silent partnership following 2001 to alienation and belligerence since 2021. Their current conflict, which comes at great cost to both countries and seems to have no easy military or political resolution, also poses a threat to the stability and prosperity of neighboring states. Although American strategic interests in the region greatly diminished following the United States’ military withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, the region’s altered political dynamics have prompted a growing American engagement with Pakistan and tentatively with Afghanistan. At the same time, the US has become a factor in how both Islamabad and Kabul have come to form their national security strategies.
Rival Afghan leaders strike a power-sharing deal, but there are plenty of other obstacles on the road to peace
There was no other way to end the political logjam in conflict-ridden Afghanistan than to make current President Ashraf Ghani and the outgoing Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah agree to share power. The deal announced on May 17 has been widely welcomed by the international community because the political tensions between the two rivals were viewed as one of the major hurdles to the advancement of an intra-Afghan reconciliation process. The political jockeying in Kabul is far from the only impediment to reconciliation though and there are deeper obstacles to the peace process.
Pakistan’s coronavirus controversies fall along familiar fault lines
Rather than being visibly engaged, the military seems content with having the civilian authorities carry the responsibility for dealing with the crisis.
Vanda Felbab-Brown, Michael Kugelman, and Marvin Weinbaum join host Alistair Taylor to discuss the recent US-Taliban agreement in Afghanistan, the political power struggle over the presidency, the challenges facing the intra-Afghan dialogue, and the effects of coronavirus.
Uncertainty and chaos as Afghanistan’s political crisis deepens
On March 9, Afghanistan’s sitting president, Ashraf Ghani, took the oath of office for a second term. However, on the same day the country’s chief executive, Abdullah Abdullah, also declared himself president at a rival swearing-in ceremony. The controversy has plunged the country into further political uncertainty and potential chaos, dashing hopes of an immediate return to peace following the historic U.S.-Taliban deal on Feb. 29.
Seizing the Moment for Change: Pathways to a Sustainable US-Pakistan Relationship
It is a near truism that U.S. relations with Pakistan have been historically unstable, waxing and waning, climbing to heights of interdependence and sinking to mutual recrimination. Yet this is presently a period unmarked by either high promise or driven by crisis. Rather than a reason, however, for leaving the relationship untouched and unexamined, this can be a time of unusual opportunity to create a more deliberative approach to thinking about the bilateral relationship and for shaping fresh initiatives.
