We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
For years, India’s Adani Group, an Indian conglomerate and the world’s largest private developer of coal plants, faced repeated allegations of corruption, money laundering, and theft of taxpayer funds. Those claims tended to be of local origin, and they triggered low-level investigations that usually went away. Meanwhile, Gautam Adani, 60, continued to amass his wealth, becoming critical to India’s infrastructural expansion under powerful Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Known as “Modi’s Rockefeller,” Adani is now Asia’s wealthiest man.
US probe leads to scandal. Now, Adani’s family-run energy and transport empire has been slammed with a US-based investigation by Hindenburg Research. The New York-based financial forensics investigator has cited evidence of suspected money laundering, stock manipulation, and tax fraud, causing Adani Group’s market value to tumble. Crucially, the report also raises questions about Adani’s proximity to his friend and ally, Modi.
Starting off with diamonds and commodities, Adani is now the coal king of India. Despite protests and regulations against the use of dirty fossil fuel, the first-generation entrepreneur has also expanded into defense, media, and cement, but much of his money has come from energy and infrastructure contracts, many of them tendered during the Modi era. While the relationship between the two men has been under scrutiny for years, the widely cited Hindenburg investigation doesn’t just detail the extent of Adani’s misdoings, but it also claims he couldn’t have gotten so far without the government stonewalling regulators and supporting his expansion.
Modi’s been silent about his ties to Adani, but he has reportedly nurtured a connection with him since the 1990s. Before Modi was PM, he was the chief minister of Gujarat, the same state where Adani got his start and where one of Modi’s major gifts to him was land at a throwaway price, which essentially became the launchpad for Adani’s biggest power moves.
The fallout. The scandal has triggered a run on Adani’s companies, clouding prospects for India’s excellent emerging market potential, but their immense size and role in India’s recent growth spurt still have analysts convinced that Adani is too unique to fail.
With elections due next year, the bigger question is whether it will hurt Modi’s prospects for a third term. The Hindenburg findings prompted India’s divided opposition to demand an investigation into how regulators let Adani get this far. Many analysts claim that he and Modi have scratched each other’s backs for over two decades, noting that Adani was worth a mere $2.8 billion in 2014, when Modi became PM, and that he’s now worth $119 billion.
Still, analysts are doubtful the PM will be hurt by the fallout.
“I don’t expect these revelations about the Adani Group to harm Modi politically,” says Michael Kugelman, the director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center in Washington. “He remains remarkably popular and can easily withstand the types of challenges that would doom more vulnerable politicians.”
Teflon Modi. Modi’s popularity is amongst the highest in the world. Despite recent and not-so-recent failures – from bungling India’s COVID response to not reigning in anti-Muslim policies of his Bharatiya Janata Party – Modi seems to be India’s Teflon Man.
“One reason why Modi doesn’t suffer politically from these episodes is that these challenges can be depicted as a reflection of his victimhood,” says Kugelman, referring to Modi’s often-used “they’re gunning for us” brand of Hindutva politics. Modi alleges that “powerful forces are unfairly conspiring to impugn and weaken him, and that can’t stand," he says.
Last week, Adani’s spokespersons took a similar nationalist approach against his American naysayers, claiming that an attack on the group was an attack on India. But while Adani is threatening legal action against the US-based investigators, Modi might not need to go on the defensive just yet.
“India lacks a strong and united opposition with the capacity to exploit these moments, and the main opposition group remains quite weak,” says Kugelman.
For now, Modi is popular enough at home that he doesn’t need to worry too much about the hits to his image.
“The Adani scandal will come and go like the others before it and will have little lasting political impact on Modi,” says Kugelman, noting that the PM can “easily withstand these political shocks.”
What We're Watching: Iran weapons depot targeted, fierce battles in eastern Ukraine, Czechs back pro-EU president, McCarthy-Biden debt limit meeting
What we know about the Isfahan attack
In what’s broadly believed to have been an Israeli attack, three drones hit an Iranian ammunition factory in the central city of Isfahan, Iran, on Saturday night. Iranian state media said damage to the site was “minor,” but phone footage suggests that the compound – used to produce advanced weapons and home to its Nuclear Fuel Research and Production Center – took a serious blow. An oil refinery in the country's northwest also broke out in flames on Saturday, though the cause remains unknown. Then, on Sunday night, a weapons convoy traveling from Syria to Iraq was also targeted by airstrikes. US reports attributed the Isfahan attack to Israel – which has in the past targeted nuclear sites in Natanz and hit Iranian convoys transporting weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Indeed, this comes after Russia purchased hundreds of Iranian-made “suicide drones,” which it has used to pummel Ukrainian cities. While the deepening military alliance between Iran and Russia is a growing concern for Washington, it’s unclear if Uncle Sam played a role in the Isfahan hit – or whether Israel, which has to date refused to deliver heavy arms to Kyiv, agreed to carry out this attack in part to frustrate Iranian drone deliveries to the Russians. The escalation comes just days after CIA Director William Burns flew to Israel for meetings with his Israeli counterparts – and as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken heads to Israel and the West Bank this week. Crucially, it highlights the increasing overlap between Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the longtime shadow war between Iran and Israel.
The battle for Bakhmut
Days after securing commitments from Germany and the US for advanced battle tanks, Kyiv says it’s engaged in “fast-track” talks with its Western counterparts for long-range missiles and military aircraft to provide cover for tanks in action. This comes after a weekend of heavy fighting outside Bakhmut, a flashpoint in eastern Ukraine and a critical supply route for the Russian military. However, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz does not seem to be on board with these arms deliveries – at least for now. Ukraine, for its part, has been targeting train lines around Bakhmut, specifically in villages that are well-positioned to act as hubs for Russia to bring reinforcements into southern Ukraine. Meanwhile, as the Russians pummeled the village of Kostyantnivka on Saturday, Ukraine reportedly hit a hospital in occupied Luhansk, saying it was being used as Russian military headquarters. As heavy fighting continues – and Russia reportedly prepares to call up more troops – Kyiv says it’s having increasing difficulty fending off Russian advances.
Czechs choose "calm"
In a second-round run-off, the Czech Republic elected retired general Petr Pavel as its new president. The pro-Europe, former NATO four-star officer beat populist Andrej Babis, a former PM, reaping 58.32% of the vote compared to his opponent's 42%. Three of the candidates who dropped out after the first-round backed Pavel in a contest marred by threats and disinformation – and cast as a fight between Pavel’s pro-Europe multilateralism and Babis’ populism, which resonated largely with rural voters. Pavel, a former chief of general staff of the Czech military, who vowed to "lead with experience and calm" wants to continue aiding Ukraine in lockstep with the West. Babis, who would have likely adopted many of the same policies as current populist President Milos Zeman, recently said he would not honor NATO’s mutual defense clause, but later walked that back. Even though the role of the president is largely ceremonial, the office still carries weight, including being responsible for choosing the prime minister and the central bank chief. Indeed, Pavel’s win reiterates the country’s pro-Western leanings and will be music to the ears of bureaucrats in Brussels.
Can Biden and McCarthy solve the debt limit crisis?
Newly confirmed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said on Sunday that he will meet President Joe Biden at the White House on Wednesday to try and chart a path on raising the debt ceiling to avoid default. (For context on what the debt ceiling is and why it matters, see this GZERO explainer.) Interestingly, McCarthy said that cuts to Medicare and Social Security – which some fiscal hawks in his party had been pushing for – were “off the table.” Indeed, it’s a good sign that the two are set to meet face-to-face to try and solve a looming catastrophe, but they are still miles apart in finding common ground. Biden, for his part, says he won’t negotiate and that the Republican-controlled House needs to raise the debt limit without preconditions in order to avoid an economic crisis. But McCarthy – who is being held hostage by the far-right faction of his party that nearly torpedoed his speakership bid – can’t make many concessions on increasing the federal government’s borrowing capacity without putting himself at risk of being booted out by his own caucus. While neither side has much political wiggle room, emergency measures put in place by the US Treasury to avoid default will expire in June.
What We’re Watching: Israel’s mass anti-corruption protests, Sweden’s NATO own goal, Germany's mixed signals
Israelis protest proposed judiciary changes
Israelis took to the streets of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Haifa, and Beersheba on Saturday to protest judicial changes proposed by PM Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu’s new government, the country’s most right-wing coalition to date. While demonstrations have been underway for weeks, more than 100,000 people gathered in Tel Aviv in the biggest rally yet to oppose the proposed reforms that they fear will weaken the High Court of Justice’s power and independence. Bibi’s government feels the judiciary is biased against it and interfering with its ability to govern, and the PM is vowing to push through the reforms despite the outcry. On Sunday, meanwhile, Bibi finally dismissed key ally Aryeh Deri as interior and health minister, days after the high court ruled he was ineligible to hold a senior cabinet post due to a previous criminal conviction. Deri is head of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, some of whose members had threatened to turn away from Bibi's wobbly government if the PM fired their boss. Just weeks in, this is another sign that Bibi is going to have a hell of a time keeping his coalition together.
Sweden’s NATO bid in trouble after Quran-burning protest
Sweden is scrambling to contain the political fallout from Saturday’s far-right, Quran-burning protest outside the Turkish embassy in Stockholm, which triggered rallies near the Swedish consulate in Istanbul. Because the Swedish government had given the go-ahead for the demonstration, Turkey had already canceled planned bilateral talks about Sweden’s NATO bid before the rally. Now, Ankara is condemning the burning of the holy book for Muslims as an Islamophobic hate crime. The incident gives President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan fodder for whipping up nationalist sentiment in Turkey ahead of the country’s general election in May or June, as well as extra leverage over other NATO members, all of whom are hoping Ankara relents. The Turks have been using the joint bid by Finland and Sweden to join NATO — which requires unanimous approval — to force the two countries to tighten laws that allow Turkish and Kurdish dissidents to go there. Erdogan is now expected to further delay his consent — perhaps until after the election.
Did Germany change its mind on tanks for Ukraine?
What is Germany's official position on sending German-made Leopard 2 battle tanks to Ukraine? Good question. Kyiv has been asking the West for the German-made tanks for months, but Berlin has so far refused to send them – and has withheld its required approval for other NATO countries to do so. But late Sunday, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock signaled a possible shift, telling French TV that her government would not stand in the way if Poland made an official request. Warsaw responded early Monday by announcing it would do just that. What's more, Polish PM Mateusz Morawiecki warned that even if there's no green light from Berlin, Poland will "make its own decisions" on the tanks. Right now, it's unclear if the Germans have changed their official position or if Baerbock jumped the gun. We’ll be watching to see what they and the Poles do next.Cold War rivals Russia and Pakistan are negotiating an agreement for the Russians to start selling cheap oil to energy-starved Pakistan in March.
This will make Islamabad yet another Asian customer of Russian crude at a time when Moscow’s cash inflows are limited by a G7/EU oil cap and sanctions. Also, considering Pakistan is dead broke, payments might be made through a “friendly” country, presumably China – a power play for Beijing, whose yuan will be used for the transactions, giving the currency more sway as an alternative to the US dollar.
How is this deal going to affect American interests in the region? And why is Pakistan, which wants to balance its ties with Washington, giving business to the Russians perhaps through China?
First, some history. Although the agreement isn’t finalized, it’ll be geopolitically novel when it is because Pakistan is an unlikely destination for Russian business. Unlike India, Islamabad and Moscow have had no commercial ties for decades.
Considering Pakistan spent the Cold War spying on the USSR and/or attacking its troops in Afghanistan (the Soviet Union paid back in kind by arming India, Pakistan’s arch-rival), the two sides haven’t exactly behaved like partner-material.
Enter China. Pakistan and China have been “Iron Brothers” for decades. Even though Islamabad was a non-treaty US ally until not too long ago, the Pakistanis and the Chinese have always remained “all-weather friends.”
However, as India settled into the role of becoming America’s strategic partner in the region, displacing Pakistan as the preferred South Asian ally over the last two decades, the Chinese encouraged Pakistan to open up to the Russians, and vice versa. Now, a once hesitant Islamabad doesn’t just want Russian oil, but also natural gas, weapons and more. Still, Islamabad wants to stay aligned with the American camp.
Why is Pakistan doing this? Islamabad’s energy bills make the biggest chunk of its imports. Cheaper oil from Russia will obviously help its escalating balance of payments crisis and ballooning trade deficit.
But the biggest issue is with dwindling foreign exchange reserves. A year ago, Pakistan had $17 billion in the bank. Today, foreign reserves have dwindled to $4.3 billion, which will pay for less than a month of imports.
To manage the dollar crunch, Pakistan could use the Chinese yuan in a swap with China to pay Russia once the oil flows in (it expects to get 35% of its annual crude oil imports from 70 million barrels of Russian crude), putting its import-regime firmly in the China-Russia camp.
Pakistan thus finds itself between a rock and a hard place: It needs the cheap Russian oil but also wants to avoid antagonizing the US and its friends in the Gulf, Pakistan’s main energy suppliers — especially considering that Islamabad has been negotiating bailouts with the Washington-backed IMF and deferred oil payments from the Saudis and the Emiratis.
While the Pakistanis defend their position by citing neighboring India as an example of a country that buys Russian oil even as it tilts towards the US and deals with the Gulf states, Islamabad is in a very different position compared to New Delhi because Pakistan is crawling toward default.
But that’s exactly how Washington and Beijing might find confluence to stop Pakistan from failing. “The US view on this is that countries like Pakistan may at times be strategically important, but in the great power competition between China and US, it doesn’t matter a whole lot,” says Uzair Younus, director of the Pakistan Initiative at the Atlantic Council.
Beyond Pakistan’s limited importance as a partner for counterterrorism in Afghanistan, he assesses that the view from Washington is that if others want to share the burden of propping up Pakistan and stabilizing its economy, so be it.
“The US remains a strategic market for Pakistan and that is not going away any time soon. So there will be a relationship there,” says Younus, with the caveat that Washington is likely to prioritize its strategic interests elsewhere for the time being.
Or maybe the Russia-Pakistan oil deal won’t matter that much to the US and its Gulf buddies. For Tamanna Salikuddin, director of South Asia programs at the US Institute of Peace, although the deal will be watched with much interest in Washington, it is going to reinforce the views of American policymakers who already believe that Pakistan is on the Chinese side versus the US camp.
“That Pakistan is now on the ‘China-Russia side’ versus the ‘US-India side’ will be further evident,” she explains. “Even if we're not trying to create political blocs, they emerge sometimes without any effort on our part.”
The world’s longest-ruling female leader is facing the most serious threat to her power in years.
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who has run Bangladesh since 2009 and has been lauded as the Iron Lady of South Asia for her firm decision-making and economic prowess, faces a united opposition, an economic downturn, and international pressure against her regime’s deteriorating human rights record as fresh protests have swelled in the country over the past few days.
How did we get here? Having ruled one of South Asia’s most dynamic economies for almost 20 of its 51 years of independence (she had an earlier stint as PM in the 1990s too), Hasina is accused of increasing attacks on the political opposition as well as cracking down on civil society. The head of the largest opposition party has been detained for corruption, leaders of the biggest religious party have been executed, and scores of dissidents have vanished, triggering US sanctions against Dhaka.
Even though elections are slated for Jan. 2024, the opposition is demanding Hasina step down and let a caretaker government hold fresh elections. Previous elections held under her watch — like the one which gave her a third consecutive term in 2018 — were marred by irregularities, violence, voter intimidation, and opposition boycotts. And as she faces a fresh wave of protests to preempt her regime’s handling of the next elections, Hasina is responding with force, continuing to arrest opposition leaders and dissidents.
The PM, however, had been able to claim credit for strengthening the economy. Once rated a “basket case” by Henry Kissinger, Bangladesh — one of the world's most densely populated countries, with 170 million living in an area slightly smaller than the US state of Iowa — emerged as an economic success story. It transformed itself into a garment manufacturing and export hub with the highest GDP per capita across South Asia.
But the economy is now in trouble. High energy prices triggered by the Russia-Ukraine war have reduced export orders, and the local currency has devalued. Foreign exchange reserves have dwindled by almost half to $26 billion in just one year.
The government has responded by hiking fuel prices, which in turn have raised food prices, creating a cost of living crisis. Opposition parties, long weakened by a strong Hasina and a once buoyant economy, have channeled public anger against increased prices into growing protests against the PM.
Still, is Hasina going to go? Good question.
“The opposition has reawakened, and these multiple protests show a level of sustained strength,” says Michael Kugelman, director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center in Washington, DC. “But I would strongly caution against talk of an early exit for Hasina.”
Given her track record, Kugelman projects that Hasina is likely to crack down even harder when faced with such resistance. For now, the unrest is partisan, not comprising mass protests, with those on the streets being mostly members or close supporters of opposition parties, not necessarily suggesting a broader anti-government movement.
Also, he adds, Hasina’s Awami League still enjoys high levels of public support, especially for its earlier successes on the economic front and on reducing terrorism risks.
But the area to watch in the coming months is, again, the economy. “If it worsens and the government struggles to ease a growing economic crisis, then the Awami League runs the risk of seeing the emergence of a mass movement. But we’re not there yet, not even close,” says Kugelman.
Under Hasina, Bangladesh has skillfully walked the diplomat tightrope. It has balanced the rivalries between India and China as well as China and the US and even the US and Russia. Yet the PM seems to be slipping when it comes to controlling the police and handling domestic human rights. Her security forces and laws have targeted the indigenous population, civil dissidents, the press, and even ordinary netizens and the Rohingya refugees from neighboring Myanmar.
For now, Hasina’s plan looks likely to push through toward the vote, cracking down if necessary. But as the year goes on, the operative question is a simple one.
Will the election be free and fair? “I wouldn’t count on it,” Kugelman says.
Given that the 2018 vote went through despite international observers crying foul over rigging, that the opposition National Party remains divided about who will lead it, and that regional heavyweights India and China still support the regime, it’s all but assured that South Asia’s Iron Lady will keep gunning for her detractors as she goes for a fourth consecutive term — whether she’s duly elected or not.What We're Watching: Catalan separatist off the hook, Biden's special counsel, Oz-PNG deal, Czech election, nukes for South Korea?
Spanish justice gives up on Catalan fugitive
After trying for more than five years to bring fugitive ex-Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont to trial for sedition, on Thursday a Spanish judge threw in the towel and dropped the charge. Why? The left-wing government of PM Pedro Sánchez has watered down the crime of sedition so much that it no longer covers what Puigdemont did in Oct. 2017: declare Catalonia an independent republic before skipping town when he was about to get arrested. And why did Sánchez tweak the law? Because he needs the votes of Catalan separatist parties in the national parliament to stay in power (which also explains why he pardoned the other politicians who tried to secede along with Puigdemont.) The judge's decision has big political implications in an election year. On the one hand, it's vindication for the Catalan independence movement, which has been losing steam since its failed secession bid. But on the other, it's a poison pill for Sánchez, whom the the Spanish right has long accused of pandering to Catalan separatists. The PM will get a sense of what Spanish voters think of his Catalonia policy in local and regional elections in late May, a dress rehearsal for a general vote in December.
Biden gets a special counsel, too
US Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday appointed a special counsel to lead the investigation into the discovery of two batches of classified files allegedly taken by President Joe Biden when he was VP. The White House has promised full cooperation. Garland has followed his playbook from a similar probe involving former President Donald Trump, who stashed 300+ classified files from the White House at his Mar-a-Lago pad and gave the Feds a hard time about it. While Garland’s move is unsurprising, the appointment of the special counsel can hurt Biden in two ways. First, it gives Republicans fodder to investigate the president in the House, regardless of Trump's own mishandling of sensitive government information. Second — and perhaps more importantly — it might mess with the Justice Department's own case against Trump and weaken the political argument to prosecute him as a presidential candidate in 2024. Even if the probe ends up not recommending charges for Biden, expect it to drag on for months and for the GOP to make a big stink about the whole thing. On another note, seriously, what's up with US presidents/veeps and classified files? Is it so hard to leave office without taking your past homework with you? Let us know what you think.
Oz & PNG working on security agreement
It's an open market for security pacts in the Pacific. Nine months after China clinched a controversial deal with the Solomon Islands, Australia is negotiating its own with Papua New Guinea and expecting to sign a security pact by June. This comes at a time when the US and its allies in the region are worried about Beijing's growing clout in a part of the world the West has long neglected. The leaders of the two countries promised transparency to contrast with China's secrecy, but so far the Aussies are keeping the details as much under wraps as the Chinese did. Regardless, the talks are quite a milestone for Australia-PNG relations given the messy legacy of Canberra's colonial rule. What's more, striking a deal would be a big win for Australia in its race to counter China because PNG has a lot of natural resources — fossil fuels, minerals, you name it — that Beijing is eager to get its hands on. We'll keep an eye on this in case the deal has any effect on Australia-China ties, now enjoying a warm-ish spell after years of frostiness.
Czech elections: round one, fight!
Czechs vote this weekend in the first round of a presidential election featuring three very distinct frontrunners. Leading the polls is Petr Pavel (“Peter Paul”!), a retired general and former top NATO official who’s running as a safe, Europhile pair of hands and a strong supporter of Ukraine. Just behind him is Andrej Babiš, a Eurosceptic populist agriculture tycoon who was prime minister from 2017-2021. Babiš has been dogged by allegations of corruption, though he was cleared this week by a Czech court. His ANO party, popular with older and more rural voters, remains the largest in parliament. Lastly, economics professor Danuše Nerudová, a progressive on social issues, has highlighted the importance of electing her as the country’s first female president. Czech presidents have limited powers, but they play a role in forming governments and represent the country abroad. Outgoing President Miloš Zeman, an ally of Babiš, fomented controversy throughout his 10 years in power, not least because of his overt sympathies for Russia. No one is expected to win outright in the first round — a runoff will be held in late January.
Wait, why did “Czechoslovakia” split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia 30 years ago? Read our recent explainer here.
South Korea mulls nuclear weapons ... again!
Nuclear rhetoric is heating up again on the Korean Peninsula, but this time the push is coming from South Korea. President Yoon Suk Yeol says that if the threat from the North continues, Seoul could develop its own nukes, or push the US to deploy them. Washington pulled its tactical nukes from South Korea in the 1990s, and it is unlikely to redeploy them. But Yoon isn’t coming out of left field. He has serious public support for developing nukes, and he’s not the first South Korean leader to have such ambitions. But considering the last time a South Korean leader proposed nuclear proliferation was in the 1970s, Yoon is the first one in decades to do so. He was elected last year with a mandate for a tough stance against Pyongyang, which has been amping up its missile tests and even flying drones into the South. Analysts say it’s unlikely that Yoon will actually go down the nuclear route. It’s more likely this stance could trigger China to convince its friends in the North to tone down the aggression, while also possibly push the US to extend its deterrence umbrella to the South.
Afghanistan and Pakistan are on the brink of direct conflict.
Terror attacks from the Pakistani Taliban — aka the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan or the TTP, who are ideologically affiliated with and politically backed by the Afghan Taliban — are increasing across Pakistan. In the last two weeks, Pakistani intelligence operatives have been gunned down in the country’s biggest province, and a detention facility has been overtaken and officials held hostage.
To defend itself, Islamabad has hinted that it might attack TTP hideouts in Afghanistan … with Washington’s blessing.
Indeed, in a rare show of direct support for Islamabad, the US publicly backed Pakistan’s position. What does this mean, and what might happen next?
Violence is escalating. There has been an uptick in terrorist attacks in Pakistan since the Taliban decided to release many TTP members from prison upon returning to power in Afghanistan in August 2021.
Many of those insurgents have since pivoted to Pakistan or staged attacks against the country from launchpads in Afghanistan. While much of the fighting has been limited to the border, the last few weeks have seen brazen attacks in Pakistan’s heartland, including a suicide bombing in the capital.
Pakistan-Taliban tensions have been compounded by increased US-Pakistan cooperation. While the Americans have no boots on the ground in Afghanistan, they have been conducting over-the-horizon counterterrorist operations in the country, most notably killing former al-Qaida chief, Ayman al-Zawahri in Aug. 2022 (it is believed that Pakistani help was vital for that operation).
The top US military commander in the region recently spent three days in Pakistan, discussing enhancing counter-terrorism cooperation as well as touring the violent border area. America may have left the region, but it’s still watching this part of the world — and despite its pro-China leaning, Pakistan seems willing to play partner again.
“The stakes are high for Washington,” says Michael Kugelman, deputy director of the Asia Program at the Wilson Center. “Its interests are best served by an Afghanistan that doesn’t house domestic, regional, or international terrorists. The US and Pakistan are both threatened by terrorists on Afghan soil that the Taliban are unable or unwilling to curb.”
While Pakistan damaged its relationship with Washington by supporting segments of the Taliban for much of the 20 years of the US occupation of Afghanistan, it broke 75 years of precedent by conducting air strikes inside Afghanistan last April against what it claimed were TTP safe havens.
The responses from Kabul and Washington showed where they stand now vis-à-vis Islamabad. While the Taliban threatened Pakistan with retaliation if Afghanistan’s sovereignty was breached again, they continued to harbor TTP elements. Meanwhile, considering those strikes were conducted with US-supplied F-16 fighter jets, the Pentagon announced an aircraft upgrade for Pakistan over the protests of India, Pakistan’s archrival and Washington’s strategic partner.
“The US, to the extent that Afghanistan figures in its policy considerations, looks at Afghanistan through the lens of counterterrorism,” says Kugelman. “So this all means the US would want to see a Pakistani counterterrorist mission succeed.”
But this time, the US isn’t going all in when it comes to fighting terrorism in Afghanistan. So far, assistance to Islamabad has been limited, and Kugelman predicts that further assistance to Pakistan for a potential counterterrorism mission will likely be modest. He assesses that some intelligence sharing and public messages of support should be expected, but not much beyond that.
However, Pakistan’s security is only deteriorating. The weekend saw thousands protest for better policing in Pakistan’s terror-struck town of Wana, near the Afghan border. Moreover, Pakistan’s military, police, and civilians haven’t just been attacked at home, but also targeted in Afghanistan.
There’s a larger problem, too: Pakistan is dead broke. Nearing default, the country isn’t in a position to launch a large-scale military campaign or even carry out an extensive counterterrorist mission at home. If pushed into war, it will need help to finance such an operation, too. Kugelman thinks that it’s more likely to get that from Beijing or the Gulf states than from Washington.
“Let’s be clear: The US has left Afghanistan. Its foreign policy interests and strategic priorities lie elsewhere,” says Kugelman.
Although Washington worries about what the local offshoot of the Taliban might do to Pakistan — a nation that US President Joe Biden has called one of the “most dangerous” in the world — it does not consider it a direct threat for America. Not yet, anyway.
The upshot: Yes, the TTP is a problem. But for the most part, it’s a Pakistani problem.Biden goes to El Paso
President Joe Biden on Sunday visited the US-Mexico border for the first time since taking office and at a time when he's getting flak from all sides for his immigration policies. Biden did the usual stuff: He toured a busy port of entry, walked along the border fence, and met with officials like Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who chided the president for taking so long to show up — feeding into the Republican narrative that blames Biden for the surge of migrant arrivals in recent months. But the president has also upset the left wing of his Democratic Party after failing to deliver on many of his promises to undo the Trump administration's harshest immigration curbs — especially by being wishy-washy on ending Title 42, a Trump-era rule that allows US authorities to expel asylum-seekers on public health grounds that the Supreme Court is now sitting on. What's more, last week Biden announced that migrants from Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela would be required to apply from outside the US and be punished if they don't. While the president is otherwise benefiting from the GOP's civil war in Congress, his immigration headache won't go away anytime soon.
Biden, AMLO & Trudeau meet in Mexico City
After his border visit, Biden will travel to Mexico City on Monday for the annual meeting of North American leaders known as the "Three Amigos Summit." Of course, there’s an immigration angle: Biden hopes to get buy-in from Mexico's President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, known as AMLO, for his “safe third country” policy for asylum-seekers who enter the US through Mexico. Under the scheme, first floated by the Trump administration in 2019, the US would automatically deny asylum to migrants who haven't applied for the same status first in Mexico. That's a non-starter for AMLO because Mexico can hardly protect foreigners from gang violence while its own citizens are fleeing similar violence from drug cartels, as seen by the bloodbath following the arrest of Ovidio Guzmán, son of "El Chapo.” Biden and AMLO will also discuss the surge of fentanyl flowing into the US from Mexico, with the DEA having seized enough pills last year to kill every single American. Finally, Biden and AMLO, along with Canadian PM Justin Trudeau, will attempt to make progress on multiple USMCA trade disputes like GMO corn or rules of origin in the US auto industry.