News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Karl Eikenberry 
Photo Credit: Rod Searcey

President Barack Obama has announced he will send several hundred troops to help secure the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad as militants aligned with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria - known as ISIS - take neighborhoods in Baquba, only 44 miles from the Iraqi capital.

Former Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security, is interviewed by the Australian Broadcast Corporation. He says the advances by Islamic militants in Iraq in the last week "have been absolutely stunning." The retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen., however, thinks the ISIS advancement will end quickly. "The bigger worry that we have though is ISIS crossing over to the Iraqi and the Syrian frontier and the possibility of them establishing a sanctuary for international terrorists," Eikenberry says.

You can watch Eikenberry's interview here. and ready an interview in The Australian here.

 

Martha Crenshaw 
Photo Credit: Rod Searcey

Martha Crenshaw, a senior fellow at CISAC and its parent organization, the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, is one of the world's leading experts on terrorism. She joined a panel on the public radio program KQED Forum to discuss the political situation and what the militants envision for an Islamic state.

"The ISIS is a group that is even more radical than al-Qaida itself," Crenshaw says. 
"Syria provided a launching board for them, which allowed them to become sort of a caliphate linking Syria and Iraq."

Crenshaw estimates there are between 5,000 to 6,000 members of the ISIS fighting in Iraq and that new recruits are coming in all the time. "But the source of their strength is not merely in numbers," she says. They have gained strength through discipline and communicating what an Islamic state would look like.

Listen to KQED panel discussion here.

  

Arash Aramesh, a national security analyst at Stanford Law School, discusses the crisis through the prism of Iran on Al Jazeera English.

All News button
1
Paragraphs

Governments and multi-lateral donor organizations are increasingly targeting development aid to conflict affected areas with the hope that this aid will help government efforts to reduce conflict and stabilize these areas. 

The expectation is that implementing development projects such as roads, schools, and hospitals will increase popular support for the government – effectively  “winning hearts and minds” of the people- and reduce popular support for insurgents making it more difficult for them to recruit rebels and carry out attacks.

Joe Felter, a Senior Research Scholar at CISAC, with Benjamin Crost at the University of Illinois and Patrick Johnston from the RAND Corporation published Aid Under Fire: Development Projects and Civil Conflict in the June edition of the American Economic Review that challenges this conventional wisdom.

In this article, Felter and his coauthors provide evidence that a “winning hearts and minds” strategy can backfire in some cases. When insurgents believe that that the successful implementation of government sponsored development projects will lead to an increase in support for the government and undermine their position they have incentives to attack or otherwise sabotage them thus exacerbating conflict in the near term.  

Ironically, increases in violence associated with government sponsored development efforts can in some cases be interpreted as an indicator that these efforts are targeting insurgent vulnerabilities effectively.

This article adds to Felter’s previously published research on the challenges of stabilizing conflict areas through development aid and economic assistance. See

Modest, Secure and Informed: Successful Development in Conflict Zones with Eli Berman, Jacob Shapiro and Erin Troland in American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 2013

Can Hearts and Minds be Bought? The Economics of Counterinsurgency in Iraq with Eli Berman and Jacob Shapiro in the Journal of Political Economy 2011

Do Working Men Rebel? Insurgency and Unemployment in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Philippines with Eli Berman, Jacob Shapiro and Michael Callen Journal of Conflict Resolution 2011.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
American Economic Review
Authors
Authors
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs

President Barack Obama announced this week that the United States would complete its pullout of troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2016, leaving 9,800 troops by the end of this year and cutting that in half by 2015. A small force will remain to protect the U.S. embassy in Kabul and help with local security. The president said this would free up combat troops for emerging terrorism threats in the Middle East and North Africa and effectively put an end to the longest war in U.S. history.

Ret. U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, who was U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan from 2009-2011, answers a few questions about the way forward. Eikenberry is the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC.

Critics say the drawdown is too dramatic and rapid and could seriously diminish the progress NATO and its allies have made in the country. What is your view?

I think the drawdown schedule is militarily sound and responsible. First, the commander on the ground has indicated his support for the timelines. Second, by the end of 2016 – the announced target date for completion of the military drawdown – our armed forces will have operated in Afghanistan for over 15 years. It will be time for the Afghan government, with continued U.S. and international material and security assistance support, to take full responsibility for the defense of its country. In fact, the president's announcement represents the culmination of combined U.S., NATO, and Afghanistan planning that began in 2010.

Third, militant extremists in distant lands often effectively exploit the presence of U.S. armed forces serving in their county to rally support for their cause. At some point, large scale U.S. military deployments can become counterproductive, undermining efforts to develop accountable responsible governance and security forces.     


 

Are the Afghans ready to take over the security operations in their country?

U.S. and NATO military forces have been complimentary about the performance of the Afghan National Army and Police since they began in 2012 to assume greater responsibility for securing their country. Certainly, the Afghan security forces did well protecting the recent April 5th presidential election. Their major challenges will be ensuring adequate international monetary support (perhaps $3 billion a year for some years to come) and adapting to a tactical environment in which they will not have access to U.S. and NATO firepower, logistics, communications, and intelligence. Combat against the Taliban will be more equal contests.

There are concerns that the Taliban is sitting in the wings, just waiting for the withdrawal of American troops. Are those concerns valid?  

I have heard this argument since I first served in Afghanistan in 2002. I don't buy it. By 2016 we'll be in the 15th year of a military mission that began in 2001. Will another 15 years be adequate to prove we can "wait them out?" It is time for the Afghans to take charge of their own destiny. Furthermore, the Taliban are not a cohesive movement; there is not a centralized Taliban command "waiting in the wings." Last, the Taliban are not the primary threat to Afghan stability.The greater challenges are Pakistan's policies towards Afghanistan, Afghanistan national political reconciliation, and massive government corruption. 

What is the legacy that the United States leaves behind?

Most Afghans have told me over the years that the greatest U.S. legacy will be democracy and all that has brought. If Afghanistan is able to strengthen its political institutions and stabilize the country in the years after foreign forces return to their homes, I would agree that the introduction of democracy will be what we are remembered for. 

 

All News button
1
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Military interventions have traditionally been a source of controversy in the United States. But America’s appetite for the dispatch of armed forces has been diminished greatly by factors that have primarily emerged in the 21st century. These include, most painfully, the protracted campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq that have made US political and military leaders more cautious about waging wars to end tyranny or internal disorder in foreign lands.

Debates on military intervention are complicated by the network of political, security and economic interests that must be balanced when contemplating this option. In this IISS commentary, Karl Eikenberry, the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC, talks about how four factors have heavily influence the current calculus.

All News button
1
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Military interventions have traditionally been a source of controversy in the United States. But America’s appetite for the dispatch of armed forces has been diminished greatly by factors that have primarily emerged in the 21st century. These include, most painfully, the protracted campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq that have made US political and military leaders more cautious about waging wars to end tyranny or internal disorder in foreign lands.

Debates on military intervention are complicated by the network of political, security and economic interests that must be balanced when contemplating this option. In this IISS commentary, Karl Eikenberry, the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC, talks about how four factors have heavily influence the current calculus.

All News button
1
-

Abstract: Weapons School is the premier USAF tactical school producing advanced air, space and cyberspace leaders/tacticians capable of transforming and inspiring the nation’s joint combat power. The school is constantly pushing the tactical envelope.  In contrast, the B-52Hs flying today are 53 years old and slated to remain in active service beyond 2040. They represent the most visible portion of the nuclear triad with a legacy of devastating conventional attacks in Vietnam, Iraq, Bosnia and Afghanistan. 

The talk begins with a brief history/mission overview of the Weapons School followed by B-52 capabilities, roles, and missions. Then Lt Col Schendzielos interweaves personal experience to highlight how the USAF’s top warriors prepare for and conduct combat while making sure the B-52H remains a potent force in tomorrow’s fight. 

Speaker Bio: Lieutenant Colonel Schendzielos is a CISAC National Defense Fellow, Weapons Instructor, Electronic Warfare Officer, Strategist, and former Orbital Analyst.   He recently commanded the 340th Weapons Squadron, the Weapons School’s B-52 squadron. He led a cadre of Weapons Instructors teaching a graduate-level 5 ½ month training and integration course consisting of 427 academic hours, 348 flying hours, 19 sorties, and 1,107 weapons.  Lt Col Schendzielos served previously as Director of 13th Air Force Commander’s Action Group; Strategy Division Deputy Director; Weapons and Tactics Flight Commander; Bomb Wing/Operations Group Executive Officer; and Space Control Analyst/Orbital Analyst, deploying three times accumulating over 270 combat flight hours. He graduated Air War College, Army School of Advanced Military Studies, Army Command and General Staff College, Air Command and Staff College, USAF Weapons School, Squadron Officer School and the USAF Academy. He holds a Master of Military Arts and Sciences in Military Space Application, Master of Military Arts and Science in Theater Operations and Bachelor of Science in Political Science.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Kurt Schendzielos USAF National Defense Fellow, CISAC Speaker
Conferences
-

The Obama administration’s “rebalance” to Asia is about much more than China’s rise and changing role in the region, but US-China relations are an integral part of the new policy and the way it is perceived and characterized by others in the Asia-Pacific region.  The keynote address and comments by American and Chinese scholars with years of government experience will examine the objectives and implications of the “rebalance” and what it means for the United States, China, and US-China relations.

Keynote Speaker:

Kenneth LieberthalDr. Kenneth Lieberthal is a senior fellow in Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development at Brookings. From 2009-2012, Lieberthal served as the director of the John L. Thornton China Center. Lieberthal was a professor at the University of Michigan for 1983-2009. He has authored 24 books and monographs and over 70 articles, mostly dealing with China. He also served as special assistant to the president for national security affairs and senior director for Asia on the National Security Council from August 1998 to October 2000. His government responsibilities encompassed U.S. policy toward Northeast, East and Southeast Asia. His latest book, Bending History: Barack Obama’s Foreign Policy (co-authored with Martin Indyk and Michael O’Hanlon), was published by the Brookings Press in March 2012. Leiberthal earned his B.A. from Darthmouth College, and his M.A. and Ph.D. from Columbia University


Panelists:

Mike ArmacostWelcome remarks - Dr. Michael Armacost is the Shorenstein Distinguished Fellow. He has been at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (Shorenstein APARC) since 2002. In the interval between 1995 and 2002, Armacost served as president of Washington, D.C.'s Brookings Institution, the nation's oldest think tank and a leader in research on politics, government, international affairs, economics, and public policy. Previously, during his twenty-four year government career, Armacost served, among other positions, as undersecretary of state for political affairs and as ambassador to Japan and the Philippines. 

 

 

 

Jean OiPanel Chair - Professor Jean Oi is the William Haas Professor in Chinese Politics in the department of political science and a senior fellow of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. Oi is the founding director of the Stanford China Program at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center. She leads Stanford's China Initiative, and is the Lee Shau Kee Director of the Stanford Center at Peking University. Oi directed Stanford's Center for East Asian Studies from 1998 to 2005. A PhD in political science from the University of Michigan, Oi first taught at Lehigh University and later in the department of government at Harvard University before joining the Stanford faculty in 1997.

 

 

Karl EikenberryAmbassador Karl Eikenberry is the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC, CDDRL, TEC, and Shorenstein APARC Distinguished Fellow; and Former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan and Retired U.S. Army Lt. General. Prior to his arrival at Stanford, he served as the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan from May 2009 until July 2011, where he led the civilian surge directed by President Obama to reverse insurgent momentum and set the conditions for transition to full Afghan sovereignty. Before appointment as Chief of Mission in Kabul, Ambassador Eikenberry had a thirty-five year career in the United States Army, retiring in April 2009 with the rank of Lieutenant General.  His military operational posts included commander and staff officer with mechanized, light, airborne, and ranger infantry units in the continental U.S., Hawaii, Korea, Italy, and Afghanistan as the Commander of the American-led Coalition forces from 2005-2007.

 

Cui LiruDr. CUI Liru is Senior Advisor to China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, a think-tank in China known for its comprehensive studies on current international affairs and prominent role in providing consulting services to the Chinese government and former President of China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR). He is a member of the Committee of Foreign Affairs of the Chinese Peoples’ Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and also serves as a member of the Foreign Policy Consulting Committee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He is Vice President of China National Association for International Studies (CNAIS) and serves as Senior Adviser to multiple institutions for the study of national security and foreign relations. As a senior researcher, his specialties cover U.S. foreign policy, U.S.-China relations, international security issues and Chinese foreign policy.

 

Tom Fingar

 

Professor Tom Fingar is the inaugural Oksenberg-Rohlen Distinguished Fellow. From May 2005 through December 2008, he served as the first deputy director of national intelligence for analysis and, concurrently, as chairman of the National Intelligence Council. He served previously as assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (2004–2005), principal deputy assistant secretary (2001–2003), deputy assistant secretary for analysis (1994–2000), director of the Office of Analysis for East Asia and the Pacific (1989–1994), and chief of the China Division (1986–1989). Between 1975 and 1986 he held a number of positions at Stanford University, including senior research associate in the Center for International Security and Arms Control.

 

The Oksenberg Lecture, held annually, honors the legacy of Professor Michel Oksenberg (1938-2001). A senior fellow at Shorenstein APARC and the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Professor Oksenberg served as a key member of the National Security Council when the United States normalized relations with China, and consistently urged that the United States engage with Asia in a more considered manner. In tribute, the Oksenberg Conference/Lecture recognizes distinguished individuals who have helped to advance understanding between the United States and the nations of the Asia-Pacific.

Please note: this event is off-the-record.

Bechtel Conference Center

Conferences
-

Due to the interest generated by this seminar, we have exceeded our seating capacity and are not able to accommodate any more guests. We apologize for the inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.

About the Topic: America’s longest war draws to an end this year with the conclusion of combat operations in Afghanistan.  The still undecided Afghan presidential election potentially marks the first successful democratic transition in that country’s history and the process thus far has been positive.  However, the political, security, and economic problems that Afghanistan’s next leader will face are daunting.  The level of American support for Afghanistan’s future development hinges on the signing of a Bilateral Security Agreement that permits the U.S. to continue pursuing intelligence and military operations against Al Qaeda and international terrorist organizations in Central and South Asia.  Karl Eikenberry, who served both as the U.S. ambassador and the commander of U.S.-led coalition forces in Afghanistan, will reflect on the American experience in Afghanistan and discuss the difficult challenges still ahead.    

About the Speaker: Karl Eikenberry is the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and is a Distinguished Fellow with the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University. He served as the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan from May 2009 until July 2011 and had a 35-year career in the United States Army, retiring with the rank of lieutenant general. His military assignments included postings with mechanized, light, airborne, and ranger infantry units in the continental United States, Hawaii, Korea, Italy, and Afghanistan as the Commander of the American-led Coalition forces from 2005–2007. He is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy, has earned master’s degrees from Harvard University in East Asian Studies and Stanford University in Political Science, was awarded an Interpreter’s Certificate in Mandarin Chinese from the British Foreign Commonwealth Office, and earned an advanced degree in Chinese History from Nanjing University. He is also the recipient of the George F. Kennan Award for Distinguished Public Service and Harvard University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Centennial Medal. Ambassador Eikenberry serves as a Trustee for the International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Asia Foundation, and the National Committee on American Foreign Policy, and is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 

CISAC Conference Room

Karl Eikenberry William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC, Former US Ambassador to Afghanistan, Retired U.S. Army Lt. General Speaker
Seminars
Date
Paragraphs

Former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, a William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at CISAC and FSI, says in this KQED radio panel that security during the elections in Afghanistan had greatly improved, but the country will still need support from the international community moving forward.

Hero Image
Eikenberry AfghanistanElections April2014 Reuters
All News button
1
Subscribe to Afghanistan