Search

Begin New Search Topic State Building Political Geography Afghanistan

1. When Interventions Fail: Lessons from the U.S. Experience in Latin America

Author:
Leticia Abad and Noel Maurer
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
In the middle of 2021, despite two decades of effort, the Afghan government collapsed in just nine days. The United States failed to create a state with the capacity to control its own armed forces or local officials. As early as 2009, eight years into the intervention, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry had already noted that the Afghan government could not carry out most state functions and that its leadership showed little interest in trying. U.S. civilians and soldiers tried to fill the gap.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, State Building, and Intervention
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Latin America, and United States of America

2. WHY STATEBUILDING DIDN’T WORK IN AFGHANISTAN

Author:
David A. Lake
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
The collapse of the Afghan government illustrates the larger dilemma in all statebuilding attempts. The statebuilder wants to build a government strong enough to stand on its own. To do this, the new state must win the support of the people it hopes to rule. This need not be the entire population of a country—no government wins universal praise—but it must be a sufficiently large share of the population that it has room to maneuver, favoring some groups with a policy, and other groups with another policy, but not always sitting on the knife’s edge between repression and rebellion. In short, the statebuilder wants to build a state that is legitimate.
Topic:
War, Military Affairs, Counter-terrorism, Afghanistan, War on Terror, and State Building
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Asia

3. Afghanistan and the Rise of the Islamic Emirate: A Tragic Inevitability

Author:
Olli Ruohomäki
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
It is time to come to terms with the inevitable fact that the Taliban is here to stay for the foreseeable future. The international community must not abandon ordinary Afghans and resign them to a bleak future with hard-line Islamists in power.
Topic:
Governance, Taliban, Violent Extremism, State Building, and Militant Islam
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Middle East

4. Starr Forum: US, Afghanistan, 9/11: Finished or Unfinished Business?

Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Chair: Barry Posen, Ford International Professor of Political Science, MIT. He studies US grand strategy and national security policy. His most recent book is Restraint: A New Foundation for US Grand Strategy. Panelists: Juan Cole, Richard P Mitchell Collegiate Professor of History, University of Michigan. He is an expert on the modern Middle East, Muslim South Asia, and social and intellectual history. His most recent book is Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires. Carol Saivetz, Senior Advisor, MIT Security Studies Program. She is an expert on Soviet and now Russian foreign policy issues; and on topics ranging from energy politics in the Caspian and Black Sea regions, questions of stability in Central Asia, to Russian policy toward Iran. Vanda Felbab-Brown, Senior Fellow, Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology, Brookings. She is the director of the Initiative on Nonstate Armed Actors and the co-director of the Africa Security Initiative. She recently co-authored The fate of women’s rights in Afghanistan. She received her PhD from MIT.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Counter-terrorism, State Building, and Intervention
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

5. 2020 Country Brief: Afghanistan

Author:
Third Way
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
After 19 years of war in Afghanistan and a peace agreement signed with the Taliban, it’s time for the United States to withdraw. Although the United States has slowly reduced troops in Afghanistan, the Trump Administration has left the remaining troops vulnerable to the Taliban and to Putin’s Russia, which is paying bounties to Afghans for murdering American soldiers.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Political stability, Military Intervention, Peace, and State Building
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Russia, Europe, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

6. Finishing Strong: Seeking a Proper Exit from Afghanistan

Author:
Daniel F. Runde and Earl Anthony Wayne
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
A precipitous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan would endanger many of the social, political, economic, and health gains that have been achieved in Afghanistan over nearly 20 years. Afghanistan has a myriad of problems, including corruption, violence, and poverty, but these challenges often overshadow improvements in mortality rates, media and cellular access, tax collection, and women and girls’ education and political freedoms, among others. To prevent these gains from dissipating, the international community should encourage the Afghan government to meet certain governance benchmarks and continue on its path to self-reliance. The United States and its international allies should also consider a gradual withdrawal of troops, funding for the Afghan security forces, and economic assistance, based on a timeline that reflects facts on the ground and progress on peace negotiations.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Military Strategy, State Building, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Middle East

7. Pathologies of Centralized State-Building

Author:
Jennifer Murtazashvili
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
The international community, led by the United States, has invested trillions of dollars in state-building efforts during the past two decades. Yet despite this commitment of substantial resources, conflict and violence remain a challenge in fragile states. It therefore seems especially important to consider the reasons why state-building has not lived up to its expectations. One plausible explanation for the failure of state-building in Afghanistan is that the government remains extremely centralized in all critical dimensions, including the power of the executive, subnational governance, judicial institutions, public budgeting and finance, and the national security forces. Of these, only the Afghan National Army has implemented meaningful reforms. In the other areas, almost no reform has occurred compared to the institutional status quo before 2001. A consequence is that most Afghans continue to experience the same type of centralized, predatory state that they endured prior to 2001. Paradoxically, by resurrecting the centralized, predatory state, the stabilization effort continues to give rise to an antigovernment insurgency across the country.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Governance, and State Building
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Middle East

8. Warlords, Intervention, and State Consolidation: A Typology of Political Orders in Weak and Failed States

Author:
Romain Malejacq
Publication Date:
02-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security Studies
Institution:
Security Studies
Abstract:
Despite efforts to bolster failed states over the past two decades, many states in the international system still exhibit endemic weakness. External intervention often leads to political instability and in most cases fails to foster state consolidation, instead empowering and creating ties with the ones it aims to weaken. Using the case of Afghanistan, I develop a typology of political orders that explains variation in degrees of state consolidation and provides the basis for more systematic comparative analysis. I demonstrate the resilience of a political logic according to which non-state armed actors (warlords) “shape-shift” and constantly reinvent themselves to adapt to changing political environments. This article, based on extensive field research in Afghanistan, shows why failed states are unlikely to consolidate and exhibit Western-style state building, as a result of intervention or otherwise.
Topic:
Fragile/Failed State, Non State Actors, State Building, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Middle East

9. The Rules of the Game: Towards a Theory of Networks of Access

Author:
Ashley Jackson
Publication Date:
06-2016
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit (AREU)
Abstract:
The post-Taliban state-building process began earnestly and with great optimism at the Bonn conference in 2001. At Bonn, the international community brought together a carefully selected group of Afghan stakeholders and created a new vision for the country’s future, premised on democratic governance, de-personalised state institutions and markets. Yet, even as the implementation of these ideals clashed with realities inside Afghanistan in the ensuing years, very few dared to question the rationale underpinning state-building and governance efforts. Fifteen years on from Bonn, Afghanistan is a ‘failed’ state.1 The National Unity Government hinges on a highly contentious, precarious political settlement. State institutions at all levels are fragile and nepotistic, with tenuous links to the population and limited capacity to deliver security, governance or basic services. The government is heavily reliant on donor largesse and aid agency capacity to fulfil basic functions, including paying government salaries and providing basic services such as healthcare and education.
Topic:
Governance, Democracy, State Formation, State Building, and Social Services
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and Middle East

10. Remaking Bagram: The Creation of an Afghan Internment Regime and the Divide over U.S. Detention Power

Publication Date:
09-2012
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Open Society Foundations
Abstract:
This report by the Open Society Foundations highlights concerns about the transition of the U.S. detention facility in Bagram, Afghanistan, from U.S. to Afghan control. Remaking Bagram exposes a deep divide between U.S. and Afghan officials on the eve of the planned handover that puts U.S. intentions to maintain detention authority in Afghanistan against the Afghan government’s insistence that Afghans can no longer be detained by the United States on “Afghan soil.” Remaking Bagram, which was released on September 6, also highlights the Afghan government’s efforts to take custody of detainees held by the United States by creating an Afghan internment regime that would detain individuals without trial. Many Afghan legal experts call this new system unconstitutional and have expressed fears that it is susceptible to abuse.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, Military Intervention, State Building, and Detention
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and United States