Reflections on the July 29, 2008 USIP panel discussion: Thwarting Afghanistan’s Insurgency: A Pragmatic Approach to Peace and Reconciliation.

By Bob Spencer (Creative Commons rights apply)

I was anticipating that someone could identify a reconciliation approach for Afghanistan that would provide peace and growth. What I found was plenty of discouragement; then at the end---a spark of hope.

After one and a half hours of listening to highly motivated and deep thinking specialists, it was clear that we, in the West, have only begun to scratch the surface of identifying the “challenges” and dynamics of Afghanistan’s complex politics. On top of that, I began to wonder if the western mind might not ever adapt to, let alone comprehend, Afghanistan’s complex ways.

The lead speaker was Mohammad M. Stanekzai, a research fellow at USIP and a former advisor to President Karzai. My first impression is that he holds the results of many years of thought about the parts, pieces and interrelated dynamics of Afghan politics. His talk confirmed that impression. Then, after the day was done and everyone had gone home, I saw him outside taking the time to talk at great length to a couple of Afghan refugees. Most likely, they were not part of any economic or political elite, but his body language showed the same sincerity and passion that I saw during the panel discussion.

A couple of discussion highlights stick in my mind. Perhaps the most telling and symbolic part of the afternoon was Mr. Stanekzai’s presentation delivery. He or someone had organized his thoughts into a neatly dressed Power Point presentation.

It didn’t fit.

He told about how many challenges and factors build upon each other and how they are always different in different parts of the country and how they are constantly changing. The dynamics of person-to-person networks probably are more like a kaleidoscope than a Power Point presentation. Then, add 10,000 Al Qaeda fighters along with the Pakistan factor and how India has a real interest and the kaleidoscope spins out of control with many more colors.

The organization of Power Point could not contain or do justice to the flow of factors in Afghanistan. While he was describing subtle political nuances, some of the westerners were actually squirming in their seats because he did not follow the Power Point outline, and then when he went over a few minutes, they really stiffened and looked at each other with expressions approaching distress.

Another telling moment came when John Dempsey, the USIP Chief in Afghanistan mentioned that “reconciliation” is a frequent topic in Afghanistan. He then said that while it is a popular topic, he can not find anyone that knows who to talk to within the Taliban. At the same time, nobody or organization or institution on the government’s side has enough power or organizational authority to lead any negotiations. The international support is no different. Several times, speakers used the word “chaos” to describe the international effort.

I was sitting there thinking, “Man, this is a bummer.” When or how will the Afghans find relief?

Then, just when it looked like we had exhausted all options, a young Afghan man from the audience asked why more of the nation building efforts did not focus upon localities. While everything is centralized, many of the sources of conflict and Taliban recruitment come from local land disputes, intra tribal disputes and factional competitions and so forth.

Alexander Their, a USIP rule of law senior advisor, led a response that did offer hope. He again described how the Afghan legal system was either non-existent or simply part of the web of ever changing factional alliances. He and others did say, however, that the traditional system of tribal council conflict resolution and traditional mediation methods have repeatedly produced good results. When they are allowed to flourish, the locality finds more peace and stability.

Well, I’ll bet those tribal councils do not have to use Power Point either. “Power to the people!”