Afghanistan a Failing State by Real Economic Measures

[ComradePashtun]

Please offer a practical solution Barakzai which is what can be counted for its worth.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

BA,

I think any one with an ounce of brain would know that of course much of the socio-economic progress so far fostered in Afghanistan over the decade has to do with external assistance and if to sustain this into another 10 years as it has leapfrogged towards becoming self-sufficient and a viable state by the 21st century standard it would require external assistance for some time to come.

Thats the problem. People need to use past experience to understand and project the possibility of success. This has to be refined based on historical comparison that makes sense. For instance take a look at Joyner's assessments where he terms the notion of a Marshall Plan for Afghanistan as ludicrous and utterly bereft of common sense:
http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/...an-afghanistan

The Brits were masters of nation building. The Peshawar they built served the Kuli Khan Khattaks and Karzai equivalents and for a while things appeared on the up and up. Yet look at the product of British largesse. If the Brits could barely build up Peshawar during their occupation, history more likely supports a worse failure for the Americans (look at our disasterous Iraq endeavor)

Can you otherwise tell us how the situation would have been different had we the opposite and you beloved apocalyptic Puritan Talibanis running the show, the so called rural representatives of Afghans?

I first of all, am not Talib nor are they beloved to me. Im basically making historical observations and similitudes.

I have repeatedly stated that when you study the history of America, the superpower for instance you cannot ignore its puritanical roots. These Puritans set up the very first colony in the Americas and here is what they were known for:

1. Burning women alive and hanging them - as well as pressing them to death with heavy stones:
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/project...alem/salem.htm

2. Banning Christmas celebrations and replacing it with a mandatory day of fasting
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/op...s.html?hp&_r=1&

3. Having repeated clashes with the red indians

4. Imposing a strict theocratic order on Salem

Eventually socities evolve in their own time. It took America nearly 400 years to reach this point through a lot of trial and travail. But it did it all autonomously

The point is that there has been tremendous progress over the past 10 years, granted that there are challenges be it politics, corruption, lack of state capacity etc.

Progress as you define it which means business for Kabul or Aino Mina for Karzai. And the trade of is MORE valuable than all the goods and G8 porfolios in the world: autonomy. That is a priceless commodity

I am just hoping that Afghanistan does not revert to the barbaric era of your friends and actually comes out of it and actually make it despite the current mess and challenges.

The evidence unfortunately is pointing in the opposite direction. Each gain, when examined critically is a set back with a series of excuses from the technocrats. Their usual go to is Pakistan. That ends up backfiring often. More likely, after a decade more of exhausting war - Western backers will begin to pullback and what will result is the installation of something that resembles a NeoTaliban state.

The analysis I referred you to was based on the assumption that external support is maintained, corruption taken out, and good governance promoted then the future could be something much brighter and Afghanistan to make it to become a viable and self-sufficient state.

Thats where you come in and I hope you take STRONG stands and honest ones. I expect that of you and more.

It is a prediction of course. You take your wild guess under the pre-intervention mode scenario. Go for it we are all ears.

You are entitled to your criticism but I think that it is not fair anything that has gone awry is to blame it on Karzai, Ashraf Ghani, Amin Arsala etc. and based on what you are saying that they don't belong to Afghanistan in the first place and the real Afghan are the rural population.

How can one not conclude this when you have someone like Karzai who sheltered himself in relative safety, then railed against Pakistan while living in it, and now leads a corrupt kleptocracy mired in Ghost Money? But I know from our other discussion that we agree on this to an extent.

So which rural fella would you recommend to run Afghanistan, not Mullah Omar please?

What we did with this intervention was interrupt the nidus for the beginnings of hundreds of years of development. Emigres want a quick fix and a rapid jolt of development in a way that renders complete dependency. For development to occur and for Afghanistan's Nathaniel hawthorne to be born, these phases and extremes have to be dealt with patiently.

Hawthorne was the great grandson of the Puritan Mullah Omar and with just a few generations he rejected the extremes of his forefathers. That is why all of his stories (e.g Scarlet Letter) are about apologies in a sense for the wrongs of his ancestors.

With this intervention, we radicalized the divide further and set back progress by decades. This is sociology 101; foreign ideals being imposed are bound to result in resentment and blowback.

lol Do you really thing that these guys literally control everything in Afghanistan? Surely you must be not making a case for the zombies called Taliban.

No, I am saying whatever body that represents the masses and is free of truly imposed ideologies (as opposed to the false belief held by marxist pashtuns in Pakistan that every Afghan insurgent is a panjabi wahhabi) is healthier for long term development.

While we can rightly criticise Karzai and his government, but it is by far a pluralistic and representative of most strata of the Afghan society.

That is simply not the case. Here is the pew polling data. Read where Afghanistan stands on this issue. Its not me that holds Talibanistic ideals. Rather, its the large portion of Afghan society:
http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...anistan-37467/


While Ahadi, Ashraf Ghani and Ludins might be what you have as the technocrats in Afghanistan, surely a bum like Mullah Omar could not run finance, trade and foreign ministry.

I sure dont see them doing a good job at it. But my general point is that had Ghani and Ahadi and others done the heavy lifting for Afghanistan against the Russians instead of munching almonds and drinking shnaay chai then Afghans wouldnt have had to turn to Omar to do that stuff.

Rest assured there are not many of these technocrats in Afghanistan and nor do they I think control everything in Afghanistan.

Thank goodness, they are a plague.

Anything outside Kabul the rurals which is majority of the Afghans and those who have never left Afghanistan are in control of. Of course Talibs and other splinter groups like the HIA and Hqanis excluded. That is a fact. Many are here to be blamed which would easily surpass just the soft-hand people you like to talk up and have scorn for? What is this obsession? :-(

I deeply dislike folks who subvert meritocracy in any form. I agree with your statement that the Taliban and these other groups did excesses in their own vein. The latter was in the context of a civil war and the former is in the context of sustaining rabid interventionalism for personal benefit.

I have always maintained that the conflict has its inside Afghanistan dynamics and I do not ascribe to views of the likes of Soldat etc. But the Pakistani factor and it being abetting the insurgency and destabilizing Afghanistan cannot be turned blind eye to either.

But once again, even this discussion is a nonstarter because of the history behind it. Pakistan's strategic depth policy is a response to a disasterous set of policies devised in Afghanistan:
http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...1/wowra-37575/


So far neither the government and its foreign backers nor the Taliban have been reasonable to find a solution to the conflict. But this is a different discussion.

Yet they do not understand that if they work together they can re-establish some semblance of a stable society. If the government establishes some legitimacy by finally standing up for its people DEFINITIVELY and not worrying about which funder and which backer they will anger - they trade the support for backer x and y for the support of the people. What is a more precious commodity than that? In the past the village mullah had his place, the village elite had his place and the urban dweller had his place with some societal role assigned to each. Currently, these players all distrust one another and have their own agendas. If all stand for the singular purpose of Afghanistan you will see brother accepting brother within short time.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Please offer a practical solution Barakzai which is what can be counted for its worth.

http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...lection-37650/

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Dont troll Toramana. I know the election loss has made you frantic but keep your cool.

[Admin Khan]

For what has been spent, Afghanistan can't show progress in PROPORTION to the aid it has received, but the nation has progressed ten-folds since the Taliban era, I mean Afghanistan went from practically no telecommunications sector to now over 80% having phone, and about half the population with access to internet, and a ton of folks in school(albeit the teachers could be better); nevertheless this is progress by all real measures, and it should continue.

[Kushan Prince]

For what has been spent, Afghanistan can't show progress in PROPORTION to the aid it has received, but the nation has progressed ten-folds since the Taliban era, I mean Afghanistan went from practically no telecommunications sector to now over 80% having phone, and about half the population with access to internet, and a ton of folks in school(albeit the teachers could be better); nevertheless this is progress by all real measures, and it should continue.

How has it developed under the taliban rule? I think it has gotten worser because they don't allow anyone to do anything. Afghanistan was in its golden age during the pre-soviet era. It was a blooming and economical country that flourished in the medical and engineering field. This made the soviets jealous and of course jumped on the parade. Cellphones are a recent thing btw.

[Admin Khan]

How has it developed under the taliban rule? I think it has gotten worser because they don't allow anyone to do anything. Afghanistan was in its golden age during the pre-soviet era. It was a blooming and economical country that flourished in the medical and engineering field. This made the soviets jealous and of course jumped on the parade. Cellphones are a recent thing btw.

I never said Afghanistan developed under the Taliban era.

Lets use numbers, Afghanistan was in the 20th century prior to Soviet invasion, the Taliban took the nation to the stone age, and know it is back in the 19th century, although the aid it received should have brought the nation up to par with many regional countries. It will take a long time to reverse the damage the Taliban did, and for an efficient government to recognize its potential.

[khushal]

I never said Afghanistan developed under the Taliban era.

Lets use numbers, Afghanistan was in the 20th century prior to Soviet invasion, the Taliban took the nation to the stone age, and know it is back in the 19th century, although the aid it received should have brought the nation up to par with many regional countries. It will take a long time to reverse the damage the Taliban did, and for an efficient government to recognize its potential.

Come on Admina,
You know well this is false. I am not coming to the defense of the Taliban but the truth should be told if you want to move forward correctly. The country was destroyed and going into a downward spiral before the Taliban came into the picture, all the Taliban did was stop the spiral and bring in some law and order although harsh, that's it. They did not destroy the country. This is false.

Taliban this and Taliban that is all BS. The people that took afghanistan to the stone age are in the Afghan government.

[Talal]

I never said Afghanistan developed under the Taliban era.

Lets use numbers, Afghanistan was in the 20th century prior to Soviet invasion, the Taliban took the nation to the stone age, and know it is back in the 19th century, although the aid it received should have brought the nation up to par with many regional countries. It will take a long time to reverse the damage the Taliban did, and for an efficient government to recognize its potential.

A lot of people will disagree with that Admin Khan, Taliban may have ruled with an iron hand but they did bring some sense of stability. The developments you speak of are mere specks if you put them up against the destruction, instability and corruption that has been wrought since 2001 especially if you consider 100 billion USD aid that has been given to the country since then.

[JAMALUDEEN]

Come on Admina,
You know well this is false. I am not coming to the defense of the Taliban but the truth should be told if you want to move forward correctly. The country was destroyed and going into a downward spiral before the Taliban came into the picture, all the Taliban did was stop the spiral and bring in some law and order although harsh, that's it. They did not destroy the country. This is false.

Taliban this and Taliban that is all BS. The people that took afghanistan to the stone age are in the Afghan government.

lol.. here is a simple question..

Why did they destroy the bhuddas?

[JAMALUDEEN]

A lot of people will disagree with that Admin Khan, Taliban may have ruled with an iron hand but they did bring some sense of stability. The developments you speak of are mere specks if you put them up against the destruction, instability and corruption that has been wrought since 2001 especially if you consider 100 billion USD aid that has been given to the country since then.

Would you live under the taleban? lol.. seriously..

If any of you lived under the taleban.. we wouldn't be having this conversation in here.. since you wouldn't have been allowed to use a computer... let alone get on the internet and post your views on pashtunforums.com.

[ډګروال]

lol.. here is a simple question..

Why did they destroy the bhuddas?

why do you care about statues more than human beings?

[JAMALUDEEN]

why do you care about statues more than human beings?

fine fine...

Why were they chopping peoples hands off for stealing..when they couldn't feed them, give them a job?

Happy.. Mr Dagarwal saib.. lol

[ډګروال]

fine fine...

Why were they chopping peoples hands off for stealing..when they couldn't feed them, give them a job?

Happy.. Mr Dagarwal saib.. lol

this is your and the problem of those who want to justify the war in Afghanistan.
you think you can make up an excuse and than play ignorant.
Afghans back home have other priorities than you and it seems they arent going to compromise their sovereignty for internet connection.

[JAMALUDEEN]

this is your and the problem of those who want to justify the war in Afghanistan.
you think you can make up an excuse and than play ignorant.
Afghans back home have other priorities than you and it seems they arent going to compromise their sovereignty for internet connection.

what was that? I didn't hear you answering my question..

that's right... move along son..

Oh yes.. they were so sovereign..when pakistanis, arabs..and what not came down..

Killed your president..

who was also a pashtun.. with all the respect they gave him... inside your country.. true story...

i wonder where your ghairat is gone.. lol