The price of peace

Avoiding failure in Afghanistan means embracing its patronage politics—bribes and all

by Alex De Waal / November 17, 2009 / Leave a comment

Published in December 2009 issue of Prospect Magazine

Afghanistan: “a political souk where buyers and sellers haggle over the going rate for renting allegiances”

When Nato concedes a draw in Afghanistan, it will be because of its failure to understand the country’s politics. But a deeper failure will lurk in the background. In the past decade the west has launched a huge experiment to build capable states in the world’s most difficult countries. Troops, technical advisers and aid budgets are the tools of choice. The experiment is said to have worked in East Timor, Kosovo and Sierra Leone; now Afghanistan, Congo and Sudan are top of the target list. All are failed or fragile states where patronage is paramount and where the political arena is a marketplace, not a debating chamber.

The problem is that Nato and the UN are terribly bad at patronage politics. Their operations are run from green-zone ghettoes and their representatives are risk averse, obsessed with procedures and rarely interacting with their hosts. No one in Afghanistan gets promoted for bending the rules to fit the reality of patron-client relations and the exchange of favours.

YOU'VE HIT THE LIMIT

You have now reached your limit of 3 free articles in the last 30 days.
But don't worry! You can get another 7 articles absolutely free, simply by entering your email address in the box below.

When you register we'll also send you a free e-book—Writing with punch—which includes some of the finest writing from our archive of 22 years. And we'll also send you a weekly newsletter with the best new ideas in politics and philosophy of culture, which you can of course unsubscribe from at any time

Prospect takes your privacy seriously. We promise never to rent or sell your e-mail address to any third party.
You can unsubscribe from the Prospect e-mail newsletter at any time.

DEBUG messsage: regular

Trump’s strategy on Pakistan is fraught with risk

Rupert Stone / January 10, 2018

The US is to suspend all security assistance to the country. But if Trump continues to...

The growing backlash to Chinese power

Shashank Joshi / February 13, 2018

As China presses ahead with its controversial Belt and Road initiative, international...

Share with friends

Comments

Afghanistan: buying our way out of trouble | Alex de Waal | World BB News
November 17, 2009 at 18:01
[...] is an edited version of an article that appears in full in the December edition of Prospect [...]
Alex DeWaal Advocates Pragmatism in Afghanistan « the professional nostalgic
November 17, 2009 at 18:13
[...] mine at the Social Science Research Council, has just published an interesting piece called, “The Price of Peace” in Prospect. In it he argues that if NATO and the western powers are to achieve their [...]
Photomaniacal » Blog Archive » Afghanistan: buying our way out of trouble | Alex de Waal
November 17, 2009 at 20:51
[...] to understand the country’s politics. But a deeper failure will lurk in the background. As I argue in more detail in an article in Prospect, in the past decade, the west has launched a huge experiment to build capable states in the [...]
The Rise of ‘Algorithmic Authority’ - Idea of the Day Blog - NYTimes.com
November 18, 2009 at 12:35
[...] Avoiding Afghan Failure Means Embracing Corrupt Politics – Alex de Waal, Prospect [...]
The Rise of ‘Algorithmic Authority’ - Idea of the Day Blog - NYTimes.com
November 18, 2009 at 12:35
[...] Avoiding Afghan Failure Means Embracing Corrupt Politics – Alex de Waal, Prospect [...]
John Ellis
November 22, 2009 at 00:38
The conventional reading of Afghan history is that all 'invaders' will eventually be humbled by the doughty fighters in their hostile terrain. I can believe that but also have half an ear to the fact that the country has been exposed to a lot more information from outside its borders and all those conflicting new facts and sensations will have started to ferment amongst the population. I emphatically disagree with the wads of money approach, largely because that is behind the mess that exists at the moment. But I would agree that the standard UN template for 'nation-building' is inappropriate. What is needed is for NATO to get out and hand over to the UN. The UN needs to be ready for a long haul and the objective of letting the country reach some sort of political stability that excludes a military seizure of power by the Taliban and a re-establishment of a state of terror using Sharia law.
Phil Vernon
November 23, 2009 at 13:18
This is very welcome. Too many of the speeches and articles about corruption in Afghanistan are confusing and incomplete. Yes, the government of Afghanistan is corrupt. That is to say that whoever is governing Afghanistan – whether President Karzai or anyone else – has no choice but to do so through a diverse and disparate coalition which of necessity uses public funds to finance and hold together a complex system of patronage to stay in power. A look at British politics in the eighteenth century provides a few clues as to how this works – though Afghanistan is far more complex and difficult to hold together than the Britain of Walpole and George I. What was surprising about the recent election was not the vote-rigging itself, but rather the shock expressed by observers and commentators. What did they expect? Perhaps instead of railing about corrupt politics in Afghanistan, commentators should explore how they propose to help the Afghan government govern well despite the reality of corruption. Looking again at British history there may be lessons from the eighteenth century, when Pitt the Younger used the corrupt political system which he disliked, to pursue foreign and domestic policies which he regarded as essential. He knew that if he had opted simply to rail against or fight a chronically corrupt system, it would have merely rejected him; and his policies too. Nevertheless his time in office laid some of the foundations for the more transparent and “cleaner” political system which developed in subsequent decades. I am not suggesting that we should simply accept and turn a blind eye to corruption. I have no doubt that transparent and representative governance promotes and reinforces peace. But in trying to help reduce corruption, we need to understand that it is not just fraud and theft but also a fundamental feature of Afghan governance. Afghanistan is a very complex political environment, and the British public deserve a higher standard of political debate and reporting which reflects this. Well done to Prospect for publishing this.
From Poverty to Power by Duncan Green » Blog Archive » Should aid support patronage politics?
December 2, 2009 at 10:08
[...] this month’s Prospect, Alex de Waal wrestles with the problems posed by state-building in countries where patronage [...]
Going rate for democracy « ……random…noise……
December 6, 2009 at 09:56
[...] in their minds, things are not quite as simple as they may seem. Alex de Waal has published a very interesting article in the Prospect Magazine on how trying to force what we believe is the integral component of good democratic governance on [...]