Dynamics of Trust and Mistrust in the Afghanistan–Pakistan Relationship
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12349056 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Safiullah Taye (Deakin University, corresponding author), Zahid Shahab Ahmed (0000-0003-2084-0253, Deakin University) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 45 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 557-575 |
| Publication date | 2021-04-28 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Asian Studies Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1035-7823 • E-ISSN: 1467-8403 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/10357823.2021.1910798 |
| OpenAlex | W3159433125 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 34 |
Following its independence from Britain in 1947, Pakistan inherited territorial disputes with Afghanistan and India. The conflicts over the Durand Line demarcation and Pashtunistan became guiding factors in Afghanistan’s opposition to Pakistan’s membership of the United Nations. Since then, relations have been more conflictual than cooperative. The nature of the bilateral relationship has been overshadowed by mutual mistrust, despite the two nations’ cultural links and Pakistan being home to the world’s largest number of Afghan refugees. This article employs trust theory to explain why the two states continue to have less cooperative, more conflictual relations. Based on the analysis, this paper accepts that bilateral interactions between the two states are dominated more by the long legacy of mistrust than by a perceived need for cooperation, but argues that they act more “rationally” when they interact with each other in negotiations involving other countries (e.g., trustworthy hegemons), whether in connection with trade or security matters. This article argues that the manifestations of strategic trust in multi-party negotiations are largely due to the fear of losing enormous economic and geopolitical benefits from other actors, such as China and India, in case of non-cooperation
Afghan · China · Development economics · Economics · Geopolitics · Independence (probability theory · Negotiation · Opposition (politics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Territorial dispute · Law · Peacebuilding and International Security · Political Conflict and Governance · Politics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East
Pakistan's Foreign Policy from 2018 to 2022
A New Hadrian’s Wall
The Taliban’s Takeover of Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Non‐traditional Security Challenges
The Role of the McMahon, Radcliffe and Durand Lines in Shaping Regional Security Complexes in South Asia
Geopolitical Dynamics in the Afghanistan–India–Pakistan Triangle
Revisiting Friends & Foes
Geopolitics of interconnectivity
Borderland struggles
Afghanistan
Trust and Mistrust in International Relations
Trust in International Relations
The Moral Foundations of Trust
Trust in international relations – A useful tool
Going global
Impact of the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor on Nation-Building in Pakistan
The India-Iran-Pakistan Triad
Geopolitics of landlocked states in South Asia
Afghanistan–Pakistan relations
The Economics of Pakistan–Afghanistan Relations
Pakistan and Afghanistan, 2014 and Beyond
The Afghan Refugee in Pakistan
Pashtun Jirgas , Their Potential in Pak-Afghan Reconciliation and National Reconstruction
Regional powers and their strategies
The Pashtunistan Issue and Politics in Afghanistan, 1947–1952
The Role of Saarc and EU in Managing Refugees in South Asia and Beyond
Business as Usual? Economic Responses to Political Tensions
Multilateral Cooperation in an Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
State Control and the Effects of Foreign Relations on Bilateral Trade
International relations theory and multilateralism
The trust deficit in Sino-Japanese relations
A Conceptualization of Trust in International Relations
The Durand Line
Geopolitics on the Pakistan-Afghanistan Borderland
The puzzle of trusting relationships in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Pakistan
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |