Afghanistan's Misguided Economy

[MtnGoat]

This is a really good..no great article.

As far as any kind of sustainable economic reconstruction in AFG has been less than 10%. Most of it has or was in the form of handouts and money giving to the key people. Which used some of it but pocketed most of it.

I think what could have worked it look at what the neighbors of Afghanistan to the north Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan; and to the south Pakistan are doing have been doing. Most have a sustainable economic in the form of incentives to former military and political leaders running major businesses. There is a tie between these leaders and DoS USAID and how it all ties back to making money or as part of a retirement plan. Yes you can say there is SOoo much corruption in Afghanistan, well sorry to break it to you, American is just as bad. But I people just care more about what will be reported and we do send our politicians to jail for it. Afghanistan has no sustainable economic because Afghans don't want it because most of Afghanistan is an agricultural based economics and has no real industrial based business. Yet if you look South and North; Pakistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have almost the same and cane export agricultural produces to where? Afghanistan!!! NATO and all the economic reconstruction partners failed at developing anything along these lines. U.S. NG Agribusiness Development Team (ADT) did a great job of teaching locals and farmers how to be real farmers instead of being survivor farmers. Yet IMO USAID didn't do much for overall development. Yes the built some schools and updated the hospitals, but minimal outside of that.

The main issue is with Afghanistan is the psychology of the people. To many uneducated and the few that are educated how nothing to work for. The will of the people is built on a ancient system that is still like the caveman of this is mine and you can't have it. I could write on and on, but I don't care about that country. I pray what we have done will endure the test of time.

Once the NATO and US forces pull out, I would hate to see how bad it gets.

[Guy]

Originally Posted by MtnGoat

The main issue is with Afghanistan is the psychology of the people.

No it's not! The issue is "western" civilization assuming that a culture can be changed in a generation.

To many uneducated and the few that are educated how nothing to work for.

I'd reverse that and say: Many "western" educated people are institutionalized into the theory of: "What works for us, will work for everyone..."

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Guy

No it's not! The issue is "western" civilization assuming that a culture can be changed in a generation.
I'd reverse that and say: Many "western" educated people are institutionalized into the theory of: "What works for us, will work for everyone..."

An intelligent culture, yes, just look at what we did with Japan and Germany......

The religious fanatics of A-Stan/Iraq and the rest of the Middle East with 99% of them possessing the education of a second grader, no, ain't going to happen.

[mark46th]

"An intelligent culture, yes, just look at what we did with Japan and Germany......" TS

... and South Korea. There has to be a willing acceptance of an idea. In the countries Team Sergeant and I have mentioned, the governments were pretty much destroyed so it was a little easier to institute a new culture of government. That being said...

[MtnGoat]

I say it not the Western thing, I say it is the mindset, religion along with most not wanting to change. A Pashtun in the mountains along the AF/PK border thinks different from one that lives in a city. The same can be said from one living in Kandahar to Kabul. This plays true to a hazaran, Uzbek and tajiki. Hazarans are a different breed of people in that country.

Back to my thought over this, it's not a western thinking to trying to change a country in a way of thinking or a economy system or a whatever. Afghanistan will never change as a country as a whole. Most Afghani leaders could never do it. Amanullah tried social and economic reform in the late twenties, this continued to the soviet invasion. They have never had no real commerce that is developed within the country is always been a through fare for exports through the silk Road or the ancients into the current soak road of the drug trade. No no one from history till current has ever developed that country economically and in my opinion it will never happen.

I say this, if you look at when the British partitioned their Britished in 1947, Afghanistan wanted the Pathans of what would become the North-West Frontier Province. If we could go back and look at what the Afghanis had wanted in 1955, the creation of an autonomous Pathan state, Pushtunistan (Pakhtunistan). Gee what does Pakistan call the North-West Frontier Province when? Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

Now why didn't USAID or other European and world bank partners not invest more in the afghan he economy? I say the history in the Afghanistan religion separatist within this country, over a period of time, plays out to the answer of why.

Guy is right. I say it will not change in a generation nor IMO will it be changed in two generations.

[mark46th]

I said something simialr in an old thread. If you really want to change Afghanistan, it would have to be a multi-generational commitment. We would have to close all the medrassas and educate them in secular schools.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by mark46th

"An intelligent culture, yes, just look at what we did with Japan and Germany......" TS

... and South Korea. There has to be a willing acceptance of an idea. In the countries Team Sergeant and I have mentioned, the governments were pretty much destroyed so it was a little easier to institute a new culture of government. That being said...

We pretty much destroyed Vietnam too but there's that culture/education barrier thingy again...... oh, and that pesky communism issue......

[MtnGoat]

Well we were talking about the upcoming elections in Afghanistan. With the state of Afghanistan Economy and its democracy or whatever you want to call the government and how they are basically in the same state. Well if you are looking at how both impact each other and without a strong economy means nothing if the government collapses after it's formed.

Someone had brought up Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai is a politician in Afghanistan who is currently running in the 2014 presidential election. A guy brought up how he won a government scholarship in 1977 to Columbia University.

I remembered how He stayed at Columbia University and he had worked at University of California, Berkeley and Johns Hopkins University.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashraf_Ghani_Ahmadzai

I remembered him from a book he wrote titled: “Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured World.” This book discussing how a countries that could be in danger of collapsing or has collapsed already and how it impacts could be based off the roles that the country or state plays in building, internal societies and other factors.

I had picked the book up to see how it could be in analyzing these countries and what Geo-political elements can learned from them and find what they did wrong for current and future countries. I felt "Fixing Failed States" is a great book and is informative for Analyst, Civil Affairs leaders, Battalion level leaders and above.

Hopefully with Ashraf Ghani having a great base on Cultural Anthropology and understanding what a State needs to do to succeed would help him. Yet if Ashraf Ghani has been in Afghanistan for over ten years, then he is likely just like all the rest of the leaders in that country. Which mean, not a damn thing will be done under his terms if he wins this year’s election.

I will say this; NATO is doing it smart by only looking at the "Kabul-Centric" governing. It is the same thing that worked 40-50 years ago to some degree in Afghanistan.

[Flagg]

Originally Posted by MtnGoat

Well we were talking about the upcoming elections in Afghanistan. With the state of Afghanistan Economy and its democracy or whatever you want to call the government and how they are basically in the same state. Well if you are looking at how both impact each other and without a strong economy means nothing if the government collapses after it's formed.

Someone had brought up Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai is a politician in Afghanistan who is currently running in the 2014 presidential election. A guy brought up how he won a government scholarship in 1977 to Columbia University.

I remembered how He stayed at Columbia University and he had worked at University of California, Berkeley and Johns Hopkins University.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashraf_Ghani_Ahmadzai

I remembered him from a book he wrote titled: “Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured World.” This book discussing how a countries that could be in danger of collapsing or has collapsed already and how it impacts could be based off the roles that the country or state plays in building, internal societies and other factors.

I had picked the book up to see how it could be in analyzing these countries and what Geo-political elements can learned from them and find what they did wrong for current and future countries. I felt "Fixing Failed States" is a great book and is informative for Analyst, Civil Affairs leaders, Battalion level leaders and above.

Hopefully with Ashraf Ghani having a great base on Cultural Anthropology and understanding what a State needs to do to succeed would help him. Yet if Ashraf Ghani has been in Afghanistan for over ten years, then he is likely just like all the rest of the leaders in that country. Which mean, not a damn thing will be done under his terms if he wins this year’s election.

I will say this; NATO is doing it smart by only looking at the "Kabul-Centric" governing. It is the same thing that worked 40-50 years ago to some degree in Afghanistan.

I believe he previously ran for president at the last election and polled quite poorly(like 1% poorly IIRC).

Interestingly enough his brother Hashmat Ghani is the leader of the Kuchis and was also a candidate in the 2014 election, but since Hashmat holds US citizenship is unable to run(or so I'm told my peers who have met him).

Hashmat has had a long and interesting relationship with the US and seems like a pretty switched on and politically/economically/tribally savvy(internally and externally) individual.

I get the sense that Ashraf is an academic without influence/control over any tribal groups unless it is by proxy through his brother's control of the Kuchis and a coalition of others.

I'm guessing he is unlikely to poll any higher than single digits and wonder why his brother Hashmat was originally running in opposition to Ashraf.

My understanding of Afghan politics is extremely limited and am happy to defer to those with a better understanding.

It's simply a very lucky coincidence that between my two closest peers and myself working in Afghan on and off the last 1-2 years we've had some direct run ins with a number of the 2014 candidates/players.

I seriously wonder how it's all going to work and hold together when the strongest candidate will probably be lucky to pull 30%(Abdullah Abdullah).

Hopefully a weak federal and strong provincial system will eventually evolve(and be recognized as such) without too much bloodshed.

For the record, I offer my opinion for free....and as such....is probably worth less than what you paid to read it! So caveat emptor

[mojaveman]

The main issue with Afghanistan is the psychology of the people.

Once the NATO and US forces pull out, I would hate to see how bad it gets.

I've been thinking the same thing all along with both Iraq and Afghanistan. Those people have been doing it their way for thousands of years. How can one culture get involved with another one that is completely different and in only a few years expect to turn it both right side up and inside out?

I really question the future of both countries.

[Flagg]

The numbers I've read on Afghanistan's economy seem to show a REAL economy of approx $2 billion in genuine government revenue for spending, with an additional approx $14 billion in foreign aid/assistance spent annually.

I just do not see how Afghanistan's government revenue will grow at a rate fast enough to counteract a significant decline in foreign aid/assistance.

A big factor in that would be how much of that money has been going straight to Dubai...I'm guessing the worse the corruption the lower the impact of declining foreign aid as the money never got properly injected into the local economy in the first place.

But still.....even with rampant corruption, a decent chunk of that foreign aid drying up that WAS partially injected into the local economy will likely lead to an economic depression/convulsions/seizures which is a poor diagnosis for a 1st world country with good security and stability, but a death sentence for a country with extremely poor security and stability.

I haven't been to Afghanistan in nearly a year, but heading back again shortly.

My last time in Kabul it appeared(anecdotally) that things such as real estate prices/rentals were beginning to plummet.

It will be interesting to see how places like Herat and Mazar hold up(or don't) and if they go the way of city-states within the "country" of Afghanistan.