The very term "failed state" evokes a sense of hopelessness and despair, and should therefore be used as sparingly as possible.
Some years
ago,
Between
2001 and 2004, I was closely involved with
But what is
the real meaning of the term, or, to put it differently, what precisely is needed
for a Nation to qualify for that dubious title? Should
I remember
Two lengthy
and brutal foreign invasions, interrupted by years of particularly violent civil
war would suffice to bring any human social structure to its knees, and would
have succeeded to do so in Afghanistan if it weren't for the extraordinary
pride, resilience and courage of the Afghan people (I refer to both men and
women) and their refusal, over the past
centuries, to submit to outside domination, even in the presence of a
foreign-imposed government. This happened in the days of Shah Shujah Durrani,
during the 1840's, it has repeated itself since, and could well determine
events in that obscure future when the foreign troops now occupying Afghanistan
will presumably have left.
The
information, fragmentary as it is, that this land, once considered hopelessly
condemned to perennial poverty might
actually possess considerable mineral wealth does not necessarily constitute a
blessing. If true it would greatly complicate matters, as the already ruthless
quest for power will receive support and backing from foreign sources the
interests of which will, at best, coincide only with those of a very small minority
of the power structure. All this risks being
presented in an old fashioned ideological form, a post-Cold War
resurrection of Manichean dualism, in which the presumably libertarian forces
of "free market" capitalism will attempt to wrest power from the more "socialist" oriented ones, in the name of a
questionable version of Democracy.
Recent
history leaves little room for optimism, and the feeling prevails that any
National Government structure left behind by the occupying forces will give way to a repetition -- or perhaps a
resumption -- of the preceding civil war, with ultimate results that are impossible to foresee, considering
the additional burden of a much wider overt or covert international
involvement, precisely because of the riches presumably hidden in this
inhospitable soil.
Time is
really very short, and one does not read or hear of any intention, on the part
of the NATO Allies, to review their negotiating stance in order to take these
new factors into due account.
In my
experience, Afghans are skilful negotiators, often a step ahead of their
interlocutors. It would seem worthwhile testing the responses to ideas along
the lines of sharing not only political but also economic power, in a type of
regionally oriented framework which, by opening up new, entirely legitimate
vistas, could also diminish the constant threat posed by the exportation of
opium to the outside world through
neighbouring countries.
The people
of
The
ultimate answer to
Those who
love
Carlo
Ungaro
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
