GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Rebuilding Afghanistan: Fantasy versus Reality

Rebuilding Afghanistan: Fantasy versus Reality

Library
M Ottaway, A Lieven
2002

Summary

Can a Western reconstruction programme be successful in the context of an ethnically, tribally and religiously segmented society? What factors should be considered when designing strategies for intervention? This paper published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace examines approaches to the reconstruction of Afghanistan and argues that the over ambitious programme of democratic reconstruction cannot work. A more modest and realistic programme is required concentrating on creating peace and restoring economic functions, rather than rebuilding the entire state.

The international community has proposed ambitious plans to transform post-Taliban Afghanistan into a modern democratic state, as incorporated in the Bonn agreement of December 5th 2001. However, the chances of successfully imposing such modern state structures are extremely unlikely in a war ravaged and deeply divided country that is segmented along ethnic lines. Throughout Afghanistan’s history its leaders have failed to stimulate development or provide effective state services. In addition, through alienating tribal and ethnic groups the state contributed to the formation of radical, extremist revolts.

The international community has previously either; supported strong men who can achieve order by force; given up in despair or embarked on an ambitious project to reconstruct the country in the image of a modern secular, multiethnic and democratic state. None of these approaches are suitable. There are a number of factors the international community should consider when developing a strategy for reconstructing Afghanistan:

  • A compromise approach needs to be applied, based on an awareness of Afghanistan’s past and present conditions. Creating any unifying political structures will be extremely difficult.
  • Local tribal groups will not surrender their power, the international community has no choice but to work with them.
  • The democratic reconstruction model is both presently impossible and not representative of the majority of the population. Implementing such a strategy will cause conflict between the international force and powerful local groups.
  • The international community must initially accept a form of ordered anarchy and work to attenuate some of its shortcomings.

A strategy to assist Afghanistan should be based on the following:

  • The formation of a national mediation committee to function indefinitely. The committee should implement the minimal conditions for basic civilisation: avoidance of major conflict, security of trade routes and the safety and neutrality of the capital.
  • Aid should not be directed through the government but provided directly to regions, used as an instrument of peace keeping.
  • Focus should be placed on central administration tasks that allow a measure of normal life, economic activity and trade.
  • Working directly with regional leaders through liaison officers, who will also work with international and local NGOs. Realistic standards should be set for leaders to promote change that is more likely to be sustainable.
  • The creation of a substantial international force, mandated though the United Nations, to ensure the security and neutrality of Kabul.
  • Democratic measures, such as elections, should not be pursued as this will increase competition amongst different ethno-religious groups. Lastly, a certain amount of corruption is inevitable and should be expected when a country receives a large amount of aid.

Source

Ottaway, M. and Lieven, A., 2002, ‘Rebuilding Afghanistan: Fantasy versus Reality’, CEIP Policy Brief 12, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Related Content

Varieties of state capture
Working Papers
2023
Donor Support to Electoral Cycles
Helpdesk Report
2021
Donor support for post-conflict elections
Helpdesk Report
2017
Religious leaders and the prevention of electoral violence
Helpdesk Report
2016

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".