Aziz, Asia2023-08-252023-08-252023http://hdl.handle.net/10393/45331https://doi.org/10.20381/ruor-29537This paper examines decision-making pathologies and learning models in foreign policy. More specifically, I examine the fundamental question: What does the learning and decisionmaking evidence suggest regarding why states continue to invest significant funding and resources into political strategies that are explicitly failing? I applied the existing literature on the topic to a case study of the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in order to understand why the U.S. persisted in counter-insurgency efforts after the failure of their previous strategies. I find that the best decision-making pathology that reflects U.S. decision-making in Afghanistan is the sunk cost fallacy. Keywords: Counterinsurgency, Afghanistan, United States, Sunk Costs, Decision-making, LearningenResearch Paper