Think Tanks
Here's a look at documents from think tanks
Featured Stories
Jamestown Foundation Issues Commentary: State Media Signaled Purges Prior to Zhang Youxia's Demise
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on Feb. 6, 2026, in its China Brief:
* * *
State Media Signaled Purges Prior to Zhang Youxia's Demise
By Arran Hope
Executive Summary:
* Party-state media has framed anti-corruption work as a top priority since the October 2025 fourth plenum. This can be read as signaling that Central Military Commission (CMC) Vice Chair He Weidong's downfall was in fact the end of a new beginning in Xi Jinping's struggle to control the military.
* An unusually long 26-part series in PLA Daily on anti-corruption published across
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on Feb. 6, 2026, in its China Brief:
* * *
State Media Signaled Purges Prior to Zhang Youxia's Demise
By Arran Hope
Executive Summary:
* Party-state media has framed anti-corruption work as a top priority since the October 2025 fourth plenum. This can be read as signaling that Central Military Commission (CMC) Vice Chair He Weidong's downfall was in fact the end of a new beginning in Xi Jinping's struggle to control the military.
* An unusually long 26-part series in PLA Daily on anti-corruption published acrossthe last six weeks of 2025 warned of leading officials abusing their power--possibly a veiled reference to CMC Vice Chair Zhang Youxia.
* A clearer parallel to Zhang appeared in a lengthy PLA Daily article published exactly a week before the investigation into Zhang was announced. The article contained an "unimaginable" story about a Korean War hero who decades later was found guilty of corruption.
* Parsing evidence from Party-state media sources is an inexact science, and conclusions are often only verifiable after the fact. But a review of PLA Daily coverage in the run up to the investigation into Zhang suggests that his downfall may have been more readily anticipated.
Several questions have dogged analysts in the days following the downfall of the military's top operational commander. Should we have seen it coming? What precipitated Zhang Youxia's demise? How will General Secretary Xi Jinping proceed? As with all such questions, analysts must begin by discovering what is knowable before making assessments based on the available information.
In Xi Jinping's new era, available information is much harder to come by than in the preceding decades. But sufficient data exist to allow the analyst to put forward arguments underpinned by the evidentiary record. Party-state media remain critical sources. Even though we now sit at a remove of several decades from the heyday of Pekingology, experts remain convinced that these sources are "still as important as they ever were" (SAIS China Research Center, 2024). And yet this kind of analysis has largely been absent following the announcement of the investigation into Zhang Youxia and his colleague on the Central Military Commission (CMC), Liu Zhenli. Only a small number of analyses published following the announcement appear to be the result of following what official sources have been saying day in, day out, and using that evidence to support an argument./[1] Interrogating the PLA Daily archive from the months leading up to the purge suggests that those who were paying daily attention to the official messaging were likely less surprised by the recent turn of events.
Trailed in the Paper
Reading back through the principal newspaper of the People's Liberation Army (PLA), the PLA Daily, a compelling case can be made that purges of the military leadership would continue following the defenestration of former CMC vice chairman He Weidong in October 2025. From a post-purge perspective, it is easy to see confirmatory evidence in every article on corruption, each reference to upholding the "CMC chairman responsibility system," and all exhortations to achieve the PLA's centenary goal of building a world-class military by 2027. I have tried to be mindful of such biases in what follows below.
The report from the fourth plenum in October 2025, at which the Party's Central Committee adopted its "Recommendations" for the 15th Five-Year Plan, contained a single paragraph on the military. The first item it addressed was "implementing the [centenary goal] on schedule" (CCP Member's Net, October 23, 2025). The second sentence focused largely on political loyalty. It cited Xi Jinping Thought on strengthening the military, the Party's absolute leadership over the military, and thoroughly implementing the CMC chairman responsibility system. In a list of four aspects of the military that the PLA should promote, political construction in the military is listed first.
In some ways, the emphasis on political loyalty above all else at the plenum makes sense. This was the moment at which He Weidong's removal was confirmed. It was also the session at which Zhang Shengmin, the CMC's disciplinary head, was elevated to the rank of CMC vice chair. At the same time, however, the "Recommendations" released at the plenum are scoped to a five-year period, not to the Machiavellian machinations of the moment. As subsequent messaging suggests, the likelier inference was that He Weidong's downfall was not the beginning of the end, but the end of a new beginning.
Within a month of the plenum, the PLA Daily published the first article in a series of commentaries on "continuously deepening political re-education and advancing rectification and anti-corruption". Appearing on the paper's second page (but highlighted on the front), the article begins by declaring that "the PLA cannot tolerate corruption, and a mighty and civilized force must not be tarnished". It goes on to state that, "at present, our army's anti-corruption struggle has entered a new critical juncture, and the situation is severe and complex" (PLA Daily, November 11). At the time, readers might have assumed that this was referring to fallout from the He Weidong case. But in retrospect, announcing a "new and critical juncture" likely signaled that more was still to come.
This series extended to at least 26 articles, spanning more than six weeks. The sheer number of column inches allocated to this topic signals its ongoing centrality following the fourth plenum, and perhaps even its unusual significance in recent history: a cursory search has failed to find other "series" with anywhere near as many instalments./[2]
The penultimate article in the series alerted readers to the danger of being "rounded up and hunted", warning that those doing the hunting "often ... hide within friendships and familial bonds, making them highly covert" (PLA Daily, December 26). This may be a veiled reference to senior leaders like Zhang Youxia, though this is far from obvious. The article that appears most likely to point toward Zhang is the 26th, and final, instalment. It notes that "leading officials wield a certain degree of power", before going on to observe that "there remain individual leading Party members and officials who abuse public power for private gain", a phrase that has appeared elsewhere in the series. The article suggests that "this serves as a warning to us that power, regardless of how much one has ... can be abused" (PLA Daily, December 27).
Other articles outside the series have rehearsed similar themes. The leading commentary on the front page of the December 26 issue of PLA Daily describes the fight against corruption as "an ongoing process with no end in sight". Reporting the outcomes of a Christmas Day politburo meeting to hear a report from the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, it framed recent purges as representing a continuation of the Party's efforts to rectify conduct and fight corruption since 2012. It repeats the tifa that the military's anti-corruption struggle has entered a new phase, and calls for the PLA to "continue to advance the rectification of ideology, personnel appointments, organizational structures, conduct, and discipline" (PLA Daily, December 26).
A second commentary, published on January 12, appears even more relevant. Subtitled "written as the People's Army continues to deepen political rectification and consolidation in the new era and on the new journey", embedded in the article is the story of Zhao Zhili. A decorated soldier, Zhao had seen action in the Korean War before being found guilty of corruption decades later. "Nobody could have imagined" that this might happen to such a valiant and supposedly loyal soldier, the author writes (PLA Daily, January 12). Exactly one week after the article was published, the Ministry of National Defense announced that the Party Center suspected him of "serious violations of discipline and law" and had placed him under investigation (MND, January 24). Who could have imagined such a thing? Who indeed.
Conclusion
The analyst must never take the writ of the People's Daily or PLA Daily as fact, but they can treat it as a form of gospel: these outlets represent the Party's truth for the Party's audience. This audience numbers in the millions, even the tens of millions. As such, the messaging needs to be sufficiently clear to be sufficiently understood. This messaging has a clear target audience (or in some cases multiple target audiences), but it is, in one sense, a more reliable guide to what the Party thinks than other sources. The Party operates an increasingly sophisticated information warfare apparatus, in which it uses various channels, both online and offline, for misdirection and obfuscation. When comes to transmitting its intentions to its own membership, it has much less reason to communicate with such opacity.
Most preliminary conclusions that analysts draw from these sources are verifiable, but only after the fact. As with any research program, the key factor that differentiates a good hypothesis from an inferior one is the amount of data one marshals to inform it. It remains the case that there is little substitute to following what the Party says on a daily basis, tracking conversations and debates as they unfold, and becoming attuned to changes in wording. For any future analyses of Zhang Youxia, the CMC, or any other seemingly inscrutable topic, one guiding question in the production of analysis, therefore, should be: have we deeply studied the evidence, and thoroughly implemented our findings?
[1] Here I am thinking principally of the excellent work of K. Tristan Tang (China Brief, January 26, February 3).
[2] China Brief covered the first two instalments in this series back in early November (China Brief, November 14). If any readers have evidence of PLA Daily series of a similar--or even superior--length, this author would be interested to know more! Please get in touch: cbeditor@jamestown.org.
* * *
Arran Hope is the editor of China Brief at The Jamestown Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://jamestown.org/state-media-signaled-purges-prior-to-zhang-youxias-demise/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Hudson Institute Issues Commentary to Wall Street Journal: Government Won't Help the AI Job Transition
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Feb. 5, 2026, to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Government Won't Help the AI Job Transition
These safety nets have failed in the past and have the potential to idle millions of workers.
By Michael Solon and Phil Gramm
A consensus has formed that while artificial intelligence may create new and better jobs, its threat to current job holders requires massive new government training programs, unemployment assistance,
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Feb. 5, 2026, to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Government Won't Help the AI Job Transition
These safety nets have failed in the past and have the potential to idle millions of workers.
By Michael Solon and Phil Gramm
A consensus has formed that while artificial intelligence may create new and better jobs, its threat to current job holders requires massive new government training programs, unemployment assistance,income supplement programs and even a guaranteed minimum income. Missing from this rush to expand the government's social safety net is any recognition that previous efforts to cushion the transition from jobs of the past to jobs of the future have done little to benefit those making the transition--and have raised the cost for society as a whole.
Societal gains from technological change come from what the economist Joseph Schumpeter called "the wave of creative destruction." The lost jobs and investments rendered unprofitable by new technology free up labor and capital that can be redeployed to produce new and higher-valued goods and services. The more seamlessly the transition from the old to the new, the greater the gain from the new technology. "American exceptionalism," our ability to generate and sustain higher living standards, has come in part from developing new technology and benefiting from being the first to implement it, and in part from our ability to move labor and capital dislocated by the wave of creative destruction efficiently into higher and better uses.
Read the full article in The Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com/opinion/government-wont-help-the-ai-job-transition-34f17103?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqcsaZpLxYWAPxZAcEutCNw3cq6IcasPLUL1EPiFHQaB1sbIdJKlW8LZy__Ev00%3D&gaa_ts=6985e413&gaa_sig=o72JDPztEIgleV0k9rIU2nYih5jkdx-JqxYqrjKi5Ehp4oEP14US_aCGkguApRcpKMf5JegTFCs5gy6x71ddZg%3D%3D).
* * *
Michael Solon is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute. His work at Hudson focuses on federal budget policy, deficit and debt reduction strategies, trade policy, and regulatory and entitlement reform.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hudson.org/technology/government-wont-help-ai-job-transition-michael-solon
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: Is Minnesota's Paid Family and Medical Leave Scheme Running Out of Money?
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Feb. 7 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on Feb. 5, 2026, by economist John Phelan:
* * *
Is Minnesota's Paid Family and Medical Leave scheme running out of money?
We are now a little over a month into the operation of Minnesota's new Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) scheme. How is it going?
In mid-January, CBS News reported on the first round of payments being made under the scheme. It noted that:
"Since the program started on Jan. 1, the
... Show Full Article
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Feb. 7 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on Feb. 5, 2026, by economist John Phelan:
* * *
Is Minnesota's Paid Family and Medical Leave scheme running out of money?
We are now a little over a month into the operation of Minnesota's new Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) scheme. How is it going?
In mid-January, CBS News reported on the first round of payments being made under the scheme. It noted that:
"Since the program started on Jan. 1, thestate says it has received more than 25,000 applications so far. A determination has been made on more than 10,000 of those applications, with approximately two-thirds receiving approval."
So that was approximately 6,600 approvals as of January 12, or 550 a day (6,600 / 12). Over a year, that comes to 200,750 (550 x 365). CBS News also noted that:
"The department says it expects to approve around 130,000 claims from Minnesotans this year."
So, in mid-January we were running at a rate 54% higher than forecast. What might this mean for the program?
In October 2023 -- after the program had been passed into law -- Milliman, a "worldwide provider of actuarial and related products and services," conducted an actuarial analysis at the request of the state government. The key equation is:
1) Expected Benefit Payments = Expected Number of Claims x Expected Claim Duration x Assumed Average Weekly Benefit Amount
Milliman's analysis gives us two of these numbers, leaving us with:
2) $1,313,234,843 = 200,750 x Expected Claim Duration x Assumed Average Weekly Benefit Amount
CBS News told us in mid-January that "The [Department of Employment and Economic Development, DEED, which administers the scheme] reports the average approved leave duration is just under nine weeks" and that "The average payment is $1,153 this week." If we plug these into the equation, we get:
3) $1,313,234,843 = 200,750 x 9 x $1,153
And that doesn't add up. With the numbers given by CBS News, the equation becomes:
4) $2,083,182,750 = 200,750 x 9 x $1,153
"Expected Benefit Payments," the total amount of money paid out by Minnesota's PFML scheme in 2026, rises by 56% -- or $509 million -- to over $2 billion. Is there money in the fund to cover this?
Questions for DEED
I expected a surge of applications when the scheme launched and a higher daily rate of approvals because people can take time off in 2026 for events, such as having a child, which occurred in 2025. As a result, I held off writing this until more information became available: If there had been the announcement reported by CBS News, surely there would be more.
There haven't been. As far as I can tell, DEED's mid-January update is the most recent we have. And this matters: To come in at forecast, the daily rate of approvals after January 12 would have to drop by 37% to 345: Is this likely? Let us hope so.
Hopefully DEED will shed more light on this soon. If they do not, it is, no doubt, something our local newshounds will be all over.
* * *
John Phelan is an Economist at the Center of the American Experiment.
john.phelan@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/is-minnesotas-paid-family-and-medical-leave-scheme-running-out-of-money/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: How College Majors Shape Political Ideology
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Feb. 7 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on Feb. 6, 2026, by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
How college majors shape political ideology
What students study in college shapes not only their career prospects but also their political views, according to a new working paper from the Social Science Research Network.
After examining surveys of around 300,000 students across 477 U.S. colleges, the study finds that majors matter and are a significant
... Show Full Article
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, Feb. 7 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on Feb. 6, 2026, by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
How college majors shape political ideology
What students study in college shapes not only their career prospects but also their political views, according to a new working paper from the Social Science Research Network.
After examining surveys of around 300,000 students across 477 U.S. colleges, the study finds that majors matter and are a significantpredictor of the political leanings students adopt during college, even after accounting for their pre-college political views, intended majors, and demographics.
The results are consistent and striking. Relative to the natural sciences, students who major in the social sciences and humanities become more left-leaning over the course of their college careers, particularly on cultural issues. By contrast, students who major in economics and business tend to become more conservative, especially on economic policy questions such as taxation and health care.
"First, relative to the natural sciences, studying the social sciences and humanities tends to make students more left-leaning, whereas studying economics and business makes them more right-leaning. Second, the rightward effects of economics and business come from shifts on economic policy issues (taxation, healthcare), whereas the leftward effects of the humanities and social sciences come from shifts on cultural issues (LGBTQ, race). Third, these effects extend to behavior: the social sciences and humanities increase activism, while economics and business increase the emphasis on financial success. Fourth, the effects operate through teaching rather than socialization or earnings expectations."
College majors, in short, are not ideologically neutral; they are systematically shaping students' political views and how they understand public policy.
What drives these differences?
Notably, the study finds little evidence that these shifts are driven by peer influence. Instead, a student's ideological change appears to be more strongly linked to curricula and faculty instruction. What is taught -- and how it is taught -- matters more than just classmates' beliefs and socialization. This reinforces longstanding concerns that curriculum design and faculty norms, particularly in the humanities and social sciences, drive students' political views.
While selection plays a role too, as students tend to pick areas of study that align with their interests, values, or beliefs, the study finds that students in different majors end up with different political attitudes, even when they started out similar. This goes back to the above point that coursework, professors, etc. within the major itself have a real, causal influence on students' political attitudes.
Implications
The findings challenge the claim that higher education is politically neutral. Even in the absence of overt political messaging, this study shows that the structure of academic programs appears to nudge students in predictable ideological directions.
The study also suggests that higher education may intensify political polarization. Because students tend to select majors aligned with their existing beliefs, academic fields increasingly function as ideological silos. Rather than exposing students to competing viewpoints, universities often sort them into similar intellectual environments, reinforcing division rather than encouraging civic pluralism.
Finally, the study suggests that encouraging enrollment in majors aligned with free-market principles, such as business or economics, could help counterbalance the ideological gap between college graduates and non-graduates, as it could weaken or even flip the "college makes you more liberal" effect.
Policy takeaways
The findings of this study raise serious concerns about curricular balance and viewpoint diversity in American higher education. In many institutions, general education requirements are heavily weighted toward courses that reflect a narrow range of political assumptions, particularly in social theory and cultural studies. Policymakers and university leaders should prioritize curricular reform that ensures students encounter competing intellectual traditions across disciplines and degree programs. Additionally, incorporating department-level climate surveys to help identify whether certain fields discourage open debate or dismiss alternative perspectives could also help improve institutional transparency.
Finally, because ideological sorting is partly driven by who attends college and what they study, expanding and elevating high-quality alternative pathways to four-year degrees remains essential. Apprenticeships, career and technical education, and other skill-based pathways tend emphasize skills formation over worldview formation and bring together individuals from more diverse backgrounds. American Experiment has written much on the many well-paying, lucrative career pathways available outside the traditional four-year degree route, and elevating these pathways would also help reduce the increasingly politicized divide between "college-educated" and "non-college-educated" Americans.
Reforming higher education will not be quick or easy, particularly given the incentive structures that reward ideological conformity. Students and families still interested in pursuing a four-year degree should be clear-eyed about the ideological environment of modern academia and take advantage of available resources to navigate it thoughtfully.
* * *
Catrin Wigfall is a Policy Fellow at Center of the American Experiment.
catrin.wigfall@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/how-college-majors-shape-political-ideology/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Capital Research Center Issues InfluenceWatch Wrapup on Feb. 6, 2026
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The The Capital Research Center issued the following InfluenceWatch wrapup on Feb. 6, 2026:
* * *
By Jonathan Harsh
InfluenceWatch, a project of Capital Research Center, is a comprehensive and ever-evolving compilation of our research into the numerous advocacy groups, foundations, and donors working to influence the public policy process. The website offers transparency into these influencers' funding, motives, and connections while providing insight often neglected by other watchdog groups.
The information compiled in InfluenceWatch gives news outlets and other interested
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The The Capital Research Center issued the following InfluenceWatch wrapup on Feb. 6, 2026:
* * *
By Jonathan Harsh
InfluenceWatch, a project of Capital Research Center, is a comprehensive and ever-evolving compilation of our research into the numerous advocacy groups, foundations, and donors working to influence the public policy process. The website offers transparency into these influencers' funding, motives, and connections while providing insight often neglected by other watchdog groups.
The information compiled in InfluenceWatch gives news outlets and other interestedparties research to use in reporting on significant topics that are often overlooked by the American public.
CRC is pleased to present some of the most significant additions to InfluenceWatch in the past week:
* The HistoryMakers is a nonprofit organization that maintains an oral and visual archive of testimonials from African-American individuals, housed at the Library of Congress. Since its founding in 2000, the group claims to have collected over 3,000 interviews consisting of 10,000 hours of recordings from individuals including the late actor James Earl Jones, then-Illinois state senator Barack Obama, and left-wing activist Angela Davis. The HistoryMakers has received funding from several left-of-center grant makers including the Ford Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and the MacArthur Foundation.
* SustainUS is an environmental activist group that opposes traditional sources of fuel such as coal and oil. It trains activists and organizes youth delegations to attend international symposiums, including United Nations climate conferences and World Bank meetings, in order to build support for weather-dependent sources of energy. It has received funding from left-of-center grant makers including the Amalgamated Charitable Foundation, Patagonia Org, and Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
* Summer Strategies is a consulting firm that provides "crisis management, narrative development, rapid response communications and tactical execution" services for clients. The firm was founded in 2015 by Melanie Sloan, a former Democratic congressional staffer and the former executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Though Summer Strategies does not disclose clients on its website, nonprofits which have reported hiring the firm for consulting services including the Hopewell Fund, American Oversight, and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
* The Carole Kneeland Project for Responsible Television Journalism is a networking group that provides training programs for journalists and others who work in media. Its funders from have included the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation and Donor Advised Charitable Giving. The Kneeland Project's website lists other funding partners including CBS News and Stations, NBCUniversal, News-Press and Gazette, the Scripps Howard Foundation, Sinclair Broadcasting, and Univision.
* The Citizens Foundation (TCF) is a Pakistan-based organization that helps develop schools in rural parts of the country. In 2019, it partnered with the government of the Sindh province in Pakistan to operate a "Sindh Basic Education Programme," funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). TCF has received funding and support from the Open Society Foundations, founded by billionaire philanthropist George Soros.
* * *
Jonathan Harsh holds a master's degree in political science from James Madison University and a bachelor's degree in political science from Beloit College. He edits entries and content of the InfluenceWatch website and contributes new content.
* * *
Original text here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/influencewatch-friday-02-06-2026/
[Category: ThinkTank]
CSIS Issues Critical Questions Q&A: What Is Next After the Suicide Attack in Pakistan?
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following Critical Questions Q&A on Feb. 6, 2026, by Alexander Palmer, a fellow in the Warfare, Irregular Threats and Terrorism Program, and intern Alexander Margolis:
* * *
What Is Next After the Suicide Attack in Pakistan?
The morning of February 6, a suicide bomber attacked a Shia mosque in Islamabad, Pakistan. The attack risks worsening regional instability amid a deteriorating security situation in Pakistan.
Q1: What is known so far?
A1: Early reports suggest the attack was carried out by a single actor,
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following Critical Questions Q&A on Feb. 6, 2026, by Alexander Palmer, a fellow in the Warfare, Irregular Threats and Terrorism Program, and intern Alexander Margolis:
* * *
What Is Next After the Suicide Attack in Pakistan?
The morning of February 6, a suicide bomber attacked a Shia mosque in Islamabad, Pakistan. The attack risks worsening regional instability amid a deteriorating security situation in Pakistan.
Q1: What is known so far?
A1: Early reports suggest the attack was carried out by a single actor,who opened fire at security personnel outside a mosque before entering and detonating a suicide vest. In an official statement, Islamabad's deputy commissioner announced that 31 people had been killed, with another 169 people hospitalized locally, but the death toll is likely to rise.
Based on current information, the attack was the deadliest terrorist attack in Islamabad since the 2008 Marriott hotel bombing, and only the second since 2022. It follows a November 2025 attack outside of a courthouse that killed 12 and injured 27.
However, accurate information is often scarce after an attack, and new information may emerge over the next few hours or days, changing the assessment.
Q2: Who may be responsible for the attack?
A2: No group has yet claimed the attack. Pakistan is home to an enormous variety of terrorist organizations: U.S. officials have identified at least 15 groups, while the Indian nonprofit South Asian Terrorism Portal has listed 44 terrorist organizations operating in the country. Most terrorist violence in Pakistan is associated with three actors: the Islamic State, Baloch militants, and Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).
The most likely perpetrator appears to be the Islamic State-â Khorasan Province (IS-KP), which operates both in Afghanistan and Pakistan but has a significant interest in mass-casualty international attacks. The group has been implicated in a variety of recent international attacks and plots, including mass-casualty attacks against Crocus City Hall in Moscow and a memorial for Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in Tehran, and plots against the Paris Olympics, cathedrals in Cologne and Vienna, and protests outside of the Swedish parliament.
The sectarian nature of the target points toward IS-KP. The group has eagerly embraced sectarian violence, while other Pakistani militants have sought to distance themselves from such forms of violence. While the TTP has conducted attacks against sectarian targets in the past, it has taken steps to distance itself from such attacks in recent years as it sought to position itself as a viable alternative to the Pakistani government. Most Baloch militant attacks target Pakistani security forces or Pakistani and Chinese workers in Balochistan.
Two factors complicate this assessment. The first is that membership in militant groups is fluid, and the central leadership often exerts incomplete control. For example, a TTP faction claimed the 2025 Islamabad attack, but TTP leadership denied the claim. The second is that local security officials believe the Shia mosque was chosen because other harder targets closer to the city center were inaccessible, due in part to increased security associated with an official visit by the president of Uzbekistan to Islamabad. The mosque may therefore have been targeted for opportunistic rather than sectarian reasons.
Q3: What are the possible implications and responses?
A3: Pakistan has several military options on the table, some of which involve the prospect of regional escalation.
The most serious scenario--escalation between India and Pakistan--is extremely unlikely despite regular Pakistani claims that New Delhi supports IS-KP and the TTP. Although India conducted strikes against Pakistan in response to an April 2025 terrorist attack, Pakistan does not have a history of conducting conventional strikes against India in retaliation for Islamic State or TTP attacks. In contrast, India has declared that it will respond to Pakistan-linked terrorist attacks with military action. Avoiding all-out war between the two nuclear-armed states is also a vital U.S. interest, and diplomats will be working to prevent escalation.
More likely is renewed conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Whether the Islamic State or the TTP eventually claims the attack, the Pakistani military will consider strikes in Afghanistan. Although the Taliban condemned the attack, both IS-KP and the TTP operate on the Afghan side of the Durand Line, as the Afghanistan-Pakistan border is known. Pakistan has targeted the TTP in Afghanistan with increasing frequency since 2022. The attack occurred against the backdrop of frequent clashes along the Durand Line, which the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan does not recognize.
While conflict between Afghanistan and Pakistan poses a far lower escalation risk between nuclear-armed Pakistan and India, the regional instability created by the Pakistan-Taliban conflict provides international terrorist groups like IS-KP room to operate and increases the global terrorist threat.
Pakistan might also respond with large-scale military action within its borders. In early February, Pakistan conducted a week-long operation in Balochistan in response to a series of coordinated attacks by the Baloch Liberation Army. There are also indications (in the form of mass evacuations) of an impending military operation in the Tirah Valley, a long-time hotbed of TTP activity, although evacuations preceded the February 6 attack.
Even if the Pakistani response remains limited to Pakistan, however, the consequences may not remain in Pakistan. IS-KP formed partly as a result of large-scale military operations in Pakistan, which displaced militants from Pakistan to Afghanistan.
No matter the Pakistani response, terrorist violence is almost certain to continue at high rates in Pakistan. Pakistan is one of the most terrorism-affected countries in the world, and the situation has been consistently deteriorating for several years. In its counterterrorism operations, the Pakistani government has largely abandoned community engagement, a core component of effective counterterrorism.
* * *
Alexander Palmer is a fellow in the Warfare, Irregular Threats, and Terrorism (WITT) Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. Alexander Margolis is an intern with the WITT Program at CSIS.
Special thanks to Madison Bruno for editing and publication support.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-next-after-suicide-attack-pakistan
[Category: ThinkTank]
America First Policy Institute Issues Commentary: Trump Puts Seniors First By Making Drugs Affordable Again
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Feb. 6, 2026, to the Washington Examiner:
* * *
Trump Puts Seniors First By Making Drugs Affordable Again
By Bobby Jindal and Charlie Katebi
For decades, the United States has led the world in developing groundbreaking medications that allow patients to live longer and healthier lives. Despite these contributions, American families pay substantially higher prices for these breakthroughs than patients in any other country. The Trump administration just announced a major new policy to ensure
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Feb. 6, 2026, to the Washington Examiner:
* * *
Trump Puts Seniors First By Making Drugs Affordable Again
By Bobby Jindal and Charlie Katebi
For decades, the United States has led the world in developing groundbreaking medications that allow patients to live longer and healthier lives. Despite these contributions, American families pay substantially higher prices for these breakthroughs than patients in any other country. The Trump administration just announced a major new policy to ensureseniors with chronic conditions can access the medications they need at their lowest global price.
In December, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced the creation of a new Medicare pilot program, the Global Benchmark for Efficient Drug Pricing Model, to ensure millions of seniors pay the same low price for prescription drugs as individuals in other wealthy countries. Under this program, millions of Medicare enrollees who purchase brand-name drugs for conditions such as cancer, autoimmune disease, and rheumatoid arthritis will be able to buy them at the same low cost as other prosperous countries. If drug manufacturers fail to charge these selected Medicare enrollees the lower international price, they will have to repay the difference to Medicare in the form of a rebate.
This reform addresses the long-standing practices that raise U.S. drug prices and threaten the health of sick Americans. On average, patients in the U.S. pay 4.22 times higher prices for brand-name drugs than individuals in other advanced countries. Drug manufacturers charge Americans high prices to recoup their investments in inventing and developing these life-saving medications. However, other countries shirk their responsibility to pay the necessary costs of drug development by imposing price controls on medicines. In 2018 alone, foreign price controls handed $254 billion in drug discounts to other wealthy countries.
Patients abroad get sweetheart deals from drug manufacturers, while Americans get steep prices.
To read the full article, click here (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/community-family/4447232/trump-puts-seniors-first-making-drugs-affordable-again/).
* * *
Bobby Jindal is originally from Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and currently serves as the Chair of Healthy America at AFPI.
Charlie Katebi is from Princeton, Massachusetts, and serves as the Deputy Director for Healthy America at AFPI.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/trump-puts-seniors-first-by-making-drugs-affordable-again
[Category: ThinkTank]
