Neopatrimonialism in Afghanistan: Former Warlords, New Democratic Bureaucrats?

Abstract

An indispensable part of the liberal peacebuilding package is rebuilding effective and meritocratic administrative structures. This paper analyses building state institutions in Afghanistan with a focus on the role of warlords in the process. The findings are based on in-depth interviews conducted from 2012 to 2016 in five different provinces of Afghanistan. The paper uses neopatrimonialism as an analytical framework to shed light on our understanding of warlords’ influence on building state institutions in a war-torn country such as Afghanistan. The paper argues that warlords have played a major role in the formation of neopatrimonialism in the country, a system that has proven pervasive, flexible and resistant to change. Additionally, this paper contends that neopatrimonial networks centred on warlords have been relatively effective in delivering services to those within the network while excluding others, nonetheless creating enough legitimacy and support to survive. Overall, this neopatrimonial system excludes some segments of the population and is very difficult to reform to make it more inclusive.

Development Undone: Weber, Kafka and the Organisation of Supply-Side Vested Interests

“…Supply-side agencies knew that there were a ‘multiplicity of sites of informal power outside of Kabul (apart from the Taliban, warlords and some governors)’ that contested ‘control over territory and other key resources among themselves and with the centre’ and flouted its authority, threatening ‘to fragment the state and to make it ungovernable’ (Blunt et al, 2015, p. 278). This finding is confirmed by Mehran (2018, p. 102), who found that ‘the inclusion of warlords in the state-building project has contributed greatly to widespread and systematic abuse of state offices for personal and private purposes. The magnitude and extent of using office for private purposes go beyond the limited scope of corruption’.…”

Twenty-First Century Military Multilateralism: “Messy” and With Unintended Consequences

“…A significant amount of literature about the countries and regions analyzed here suggests that it is useful to operate with patrimonialism and neopatrimonialism as core analytical concepts for understanding the behaviour of those politicians and policymakers that are strongly preoccupied with regime survival (Bach, 2011;Brosig, 2017;De Waal, 2009;Mehran, 2018). Patrimonialism is characterized by mutual dependency relationships between a limited number of strongmen or patrons and their followers, called clients (Bach, 2011;De Waal, 2009;Erdman & Engel, 2007;Mehran, 2018). Neopatrimonialism refers to a mixture of patrimonial and legal-rational bureaucratic domination in political systems characterized by state officials who exercise their power and authority based on their private interests and their private concerns (Bach, 2011, pp.…”

A Construção Da Paz No Afeganistão: Uma Análise Dos Limites De Uma Paz Híbrida

“…Ainda, na província de Nangarhar, o apoio dos Estados Unidos à elite local para comandar a PLA resultou em um desequilíbrio na balança de poder da região, exacerbando a competição política e a fragmentação do governo local. Devido a esse cenário, a comunidade local de Nangarhar passou a compreender a PLA como uma força não confiável (SCHMEIDL; MISZAK, 2017, p. 10).Como mencionado, a literatura que observa a construção da paz no Afeganistão a partir de uma perspectiva da paz híbrida coloca um grande foco no aspecto clientelista resultante das interações entre o projeto da paz liberal e os atores locais(LISTER, 2007;SHARAN, 2011; MUNCH; VELT, 2017; BOSE, S.; MOTWAN, 2014;SCHMEIDL;MISZAK, 2017;MEHRAN, 2018). Essa rede clientelista é formada principalmente pelos comandantes paramilitares, que detém o controle de suas províncias, e o governo central, que deseja deter o monopólio coercitivo da força e a legitimidade nessas províncias.…”