Tweet
US-Pak conflict risk higher than India-Pak face-off: CFR survey
The Washington-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) sees a greater possibility of a conflict between the United States and Pakistan in 2012 than an encounter between traditional rivals, India and Pakistan.
In a listing of 10 top-tier plausible conflicts for the US in 2012, the influential think tank includes “a US-Pakistan military confrontation, triggered by a terror attack, or in response to US counter-terror operations”.
As for an India-Pakistan face-off, the CFR includes it in a second tier of 10 plausible conflicts, under the head: “A severe Indo-Pak crisis that carries risk of military escalation, triggered by major terror attack.”
The 10 “Tier One” contingencies feature one more dealing with Pakistan, namely a “major internal instability, triggered by a civil-military crisis or terror attack”.
The other top-tier contingencies include a mass casualty attack on US homeland or on an ally, a highly disruptive cyberattack on US critical infrastructure, an Iranian nuclear crisis, a severe North Korean crisis and political instability in Saudi Arabia, endangering global oil supplies.
The “hot spots” form part of CFR’s annual “Preventive Priorities Survey”, ranking the most plausible conflicts on which the US Government should focus in the year ahead. In all, 30 threats or risks have been grouped into three different tiers.
The “Tier Two” contingencies that include the possibility of Indo-Pak conflict are reckoned to be ones that affect countries of strategic importance to the United States but do not involve a mutual defence treaty commitment.
Others in this category include a major erosion of security and governance gains in Afghanistan with intensification of insurgency or terror attacks, a mass casualty attack on Israel, political instability in Egypt with wider regional implications, and a South China Sea armed confrontation over competing territorial claims.
According to Micah Zenko, CFR fellow and author of the survey, the United States has “a dismal record of forecasting instability and conflicts”.
“Presently there is no systematic US Government process linking forecasting to contingency planning,” Zenko claimed, adding the survey is intended to meet that need. It is the fourth annual survey conducted by CFR.
The Washington-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) sees a greater possibility of a conflict between the United States and Pakistan in 2012 than an encounter between traditional rivals, India and Pakistan.
In a listing of 10 top-tier plausible conflicts for the US in 2012, the influential think tank includes “a US-Pakistan military confrontation, triggered by a terror attack, or in response to US counter-terror operations”.
As for an India-Pakistan face-off, the CFR includes it in a second tier of 10 plausible conflicts, under the head: “A severe Indo-Pak crisis that carries risk of military escalation, triggered by major terror attack.”
The 10 “Tier One” contingencies feature one more dealing with Pakistan, namely a “major internal instability, triggered by a civil-military crisis or terror attack”.
The other top-tier contingencies include a mass casualty attack on US homeland or on an ally, a highly disruptive cyberattack on US critical infrastructure, an Iranian nuclear crisis, a severe North Korean crisis and political instability in Saudi Arabia, endangering global oil supplies.
The “hot spots” form part of CFR’s annual “Preventive Priorities Survey”, ranking the most plausible conflicts on which the US Government should focus in the year ahead. In all, 30 threats or risks have been grouped into three different tiers.
The “Tier Two” contingencies that include the possibility of Indo-Pak conflict are reckoned to be ones that affect countries of strategic importance to the United States but do not involve a mutual defence treaty commitment.
Others in this category include a major erosion of security and governance gains in Afghanistan with intensification of insurgency or terror attacks, a mass casualty attack on Israel, political instability in Egypt with wider regional implications, and a South China Sea armed confrontation over competing territorial claims.
According to Micah Zenko, CFR fellow and author of the survey, the United States has “a dismal record of forecasting instability and conflicts”.
“Presently there is no systematic US Government process linking forecasting to contingency planning,” Zenko claimed, adding the survey is intended to meet that need. It is the fourth annual survey conducted by CFR.
