Step 1: Decentralize Afghanistan

[tequila]

If you want to see what a loose confederation of provinces, etc. looks like, how it doesn't work but instead creates and encourages corruption & despotic warlords, take a hard look at FATA, Waziristan, the NWFP, all in Pakistan.

Mr. Singleton, what do you think about the theory that the overall state of FATA and the NWFP is not due to decentralization, but rather excessive centralization on the part of the Pakistani state?

A friend of mine's father (a former Senator of Pakistan for the PPP) once expounded at great length to me on how federalism in Pakistan was a dead letter due to the Pakistani military's fondness for coups. Military governments naturally centralized power rather than distributed it outwards to the provinces, and Pakistan has spent as much time under such governments as under civilian rule. Sindh's complaints about inequitable distribution of funds have existed since Partition, and the NWFP and Balochistan have been more often treated like colonies rather than actual provinces with rights and representations, especially given how often their provincial governments were dismissed by the center. With an eye towards exploitation of Balochistan's resources and simple maintenance of control in the NWFP rather than making either integral parts of the state, Pakistan's center instead created violent insurgencies in both.

[davidbfpo]

In view of the complexities described here and that we are debating reform, can I suggest there are plenty of models to follow. Personally I'd follow the Swiss route, not the German; better still give Afghanistan to the Swiss to administer. Two highly individual, conservative populations - there must be more in common.

Given the common perception in Kabul recently that the West was not staying around, it is all a bit "blue sky" thinking.

davidbfpo

[George L. Singleton]

In view of the complexities described here and that we are debating reform, can I suggest there are plenty of models to follow. Personally I'd follow the Swiss route, not the German; better still give Afghanistan to the Swiss to administer. Two highly individual, conservative populations - there must be more in common.

Given the common perception in Kabul recently that the West was not staying around, it is all a bit "blue sky" thinking.

davidbfpo

You guys are again causing me to repeat my parochial 40 years ago point of view updated to 2009...bring back the monarchy in Afghanistan, it was there for hundreds of years and actually did a rather objective and good job.

Democracy cannot take root where there is a vacuum and such a huge illteracy rate among the people nationwide as is the case in Afghanistan.

My simplistic view.

[Entropy]

You guys are again causing me to repeat my parochial 40 years ago point of view updated to 2009...bring back the monarchy in Afghanistan, it was there for hundreds of years and actually did a rather objective and good job.

Democracy cannot take root where there is a vacuum and such a huge illteracy rate among the people nationwide as is the case in Afghanistan.

My simplistic view.

You're right, but the monarchy wasn't a very centralized system and the monarch usually had limited power. He still had to play the great Afghan game of tribal politics and even then monarchy wasn't exactly peaceful.

[George L. Singleton]

Mr. Singleton, what do you think about the theory that the overall state of FATA and the NWFP is not due to decentralization, but rather excessive centralization on the part of the Pakistani state?

A friend of mine's father (a former Senator of Pakistan for the PPP) once expounded at great length to me on how federalism in Pakistan was a dead letter due to the Pakistani military's fondness for coups. Military governments naturally centralized power rather than distributed it outwards to the provinces, and Pakistan has spent as much time under such governments as under civilian rule. Sindh's complaints about inequitable distribution of funds have existed since Partition, and the NWFP and Balochistan have been more often treated like colonies rather than actual provinces with rights and representations, especially given how often their provincial governments were dismissed by the center. With an eye towards exploitation of Balochistan's resources and simple maintenance of control in the NWFP rather than making either integral parts of the state, Pakistan's center instead created violent insurgencies in both.

Apologies for the long delay to your question(s).

It was my experience when serving there (long ago) in Pakistan, and today, from here looking over there, that the loose federation of provinces and areas in all of Pakistan, but particularly in FATA, NWFP, N. and S. Waziristan, Balochistan, etc. is self evident. Loose, more like a weak confederation instead of a nation. Lack of a unified civil law standard for all parts of Pakistan itself proves loose confederation instead of centralization.

This decentralization historically since the founding of Pakistan in 1947 is in part due to the heavy influence of some Pakhtuns who culturally see themselves as apart from the other ethnic identities of all of Pakistan.

Pakhtuns in my opinion are of three categories:

1. Those loyal to their provincial areas but who are also loyal to the nation of Pakistan and who serve well in both the government and military of Pakistan, as well as being very good business people.

2. Other Pakhtuns, many illiterate, others educated, who have chosen the route of the Taliban and al Qaida to misuse and misapply Islamiac oral traditions (the Pakhtuwana Constitution) which they in my view have heretically misrepresented vs. peaceful Islam, using their false interprestations (oral only) to misguide and mislead thousands into the terrorist guerilla war.

3. A third grouping of Pakhtuns are the overseas Pakhtuns who kibitz from afar but who have found democracy and freedom of enterprise and thought to suit them in the West, Australia, and other more democratic regions of our globe.

Pakistan's line of military dictators, I was there when Field Marshal Ayub Khan was President, have made "deals" with Pakhtun tribes in years gone by which these deal making Pakthuns helped "keep the peace" loosely speaking in the Northern parts of Pakistan, without the Government of Pakistan in fact having any heavy, centralized control in those areas. Anyone who has ever lived and worked inside Pakistan knows this to be a fact and true.

Ayub Khan while I was in Pakistan was opposed in a national election by Miss Jinnah, the daughter of the founder of Pakistan. Even my same age then young Pakistani friends in the Pakistan government service privately felt Miss Jinnah won the Presidential election, but the results were about 60-40 in favor of Ayub Khan "as reported" by his in power national government at the conclusion of that election.

The recent 2008 victory of the PPP, and to a lesser extent the ANP (which of course represents most closely the interests of the Pakhtuns in Northern Pakistan) over the more religious parties that backed Musharraf... was in my view a good new beginning...but it like all events in Pakistan gets muddled frequently with so many compromises, jirgas in the north, you name it, all of which again prove there is no strong, centralized governance of FATA, the NWFP, Swat, etc.

Not to duck your toughest question: Yes, the people of both Wazirisatan and Balochistan provinces have been flatly dumped on by absentee ownership and economic exploitation of natural resources there without fair and equitable economic reinvestment into jobs and other basic infrastructure needs within these provinces.

But, I have to add that the value of the plundered natural resources, as is all too often the case historically in Pakistan, are hugely exaggered and distorted to the point that you would think we are talking about one of the richest nations in the world instead of in fact one of the poorer nations in the world in terms of it's aggregate economy. This does not change the fact that these poor people have been ripped off, but not a Rockefeller level fortune...but any money into one's poor local economy is a great improvement, in a relative sense.

My suggestion is to direct your discussion(s) in addition to here on the SWJ to the Alternate Solutions Institute in Lahore, on line, which is the single but a very good "think tank" in Pakistan:

http://asinstitute.org/

Getting many non-Pakhtun academics and business folks to talk openly in a clear forum designed for thinking through cool headed solutions is always time and effort well spent on your part.

Again, my apologies for the delay of several weeks in attempting to answer your questions. Good luck to you.

[Entropy]

Great comment George, thanks!