Stability and Economic Growth in Afghanistan

Introduction 

It is a fact that the Afghan economy has dramatically taken a toll from the 22 years of war. The country had hope that its free enterprise would have taken hold to develop the economy into a modern market. Afghanistan’s economy was stimulated by both the United States and the Soviet Union in the 1950s. Industrialization was just beginning to play a major role in the country’s economic development, while irrigation schemes increased the nation’s activities in agriculture. The norm created a profitable surplus in agriculture that could be exported to other countries. Economic growth from the government was a promise to its people with facilitation from foreign governments like the US and the Soviet Union. However, the promise was taken away with the engagement of the Soviet invasion into the nation as well as the ensuing wars such as the civil war and the war propagated by the Taliban against its government. Today, the Afghan economy is in shambles, and the country ranks among the poorest nations in the world. In 2002, its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita was only $700, while its troubled neighbor Iran had a GDP of $7,000 in the same year. The establishment of a central government in Afghanistan brought with it hope that the economy could be revived and also illusioned by some people that it would be easy (Otfinoski, 2004). Revival of the economy was not easy. Afghanistan’s economy was predominantly agricultural for centuries. Seven out of ten people worked for a farm while the rest three would be based in industry and service. Those involved in farming were mainly grain growers and herdsmen. Going into the 19 th century, the country was synonymous with growing the largest amount of opium. Afghanistan also has a scape of untapped treasures in natural resources such as minerals. It used to have large swabs of natural forests, but a lot was cut during the wars. However, Afghanistan still has other resources that can gear it towards economic growth. They include but not limited to natural gases directed to Russia to pay off their Soviet debt. The country also has a small oil deposit they can tap into for economic growth. 

The United States has taken particular interests in helping Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban influence in 2001 (Katzman, 2014). They have been particularly instrumental in trying to rebuild the influence of the local governance, which had faded with over 30 years of conflict in favor of the central government. It is believed that the local structure is better off in helping the country find its footing towards political stability and economic growth. It is envisioned that this can only happen through a democratic system highly contested against the defunct Taliban ideals. However, the local structure is in accordance with ethnic Islamic rulers who followed governance chosen by the elders. The sense of stability has helped grow the economy but at a very slow pace because of the constant conflicts and instability brought with it. Private investors are not particularly confident that investing in the country is a wise choice because of the country’s track record in resolving issues. By 2019, the Afghan economy had grown by 2.9%, which was mainly driven by Afghanistan’s comeback in agriculture following its recovery from drought. Through an international community’s financial commitment to Afghanistan that was effected in October 2016 via the Brussels Ministerial Conference on Afghanistan, the country has seen great development such expanded access to clean water, better healthcare, sanitation, educations and access to electricity. The commitment ends in 2020 set to be renewed in November 2020 (World Bank, 2020). Overly, social amenities access has improved, and infrastructure greatly destroyed during the wars has been developed. However, the looming security situation of insurgents in different parts of the nation still bears down on such development, meaning that development could be greater and effective for the people of Afghanistan if the situation was calm. 

Amid the current security situation, there needs to be the urge to go back to the drawing board and see how conflict and instability can be completely eliminated from the country. Majority of the stakeholders to the Afghani crisis would agree that while the current security situation in Afghanistan erodes the nation’s economic gains, the country is geographically situated in a historical trade route, and the support of international investors still may be able to overcome obstacles that lay in its path to becoming a prosperous nation. 

Background 

It is important to look into the history of Afghanistan with the aim of defining its current situation of insecurity, instability, and poor economy. Afghanistan was spared the large-scale disturbances happening in the region. The influx of wars around the region is attributed to the need for superpowers like the Russian and the United States wanting to spread their influence in the name of protecting such nations from hostile countries. The region can be assumed to be a war playground between the Soviet Union (Russia) to the North and British conquests to the south. Afghanistan was not involved, although between 1839 and 1842, the British deposed their rule and left. The Soviet Union started warming up to the nation to act as a protector, just as Britain was doing for India. The Soviets had interests in developing a relationship with Afghanistan following its impact on the soviet’s national security. Therefore, the Soviets began looking at Afghanistan in the 1950s (History.com Editors, 2019). This is where USSR began working diligently to establish a close relationship with its neighbor through economic assistance and military aid. 

The relationship grew and fostered better relationships between the two nations. Afghanistan received better equipment and machinery from the soviets, and the soviets got to propagate their communist influences in the region. The assumption was Afghanistan would continue to benefit economically while the soviets got to spread their communist ways clandestinely. The soviet’s true intentions were brought to light when Nur Muhammad Taraki was overthrown by his deputy Hafizullah Amin. The Soviets were surprised and quite surprised by the move because they did not expect Amin to go rogue. The Russians decided that the move was unacceptable and agreed to invade the nation and kill Amin. The move was against the majority of United Nations member states because the soviets attack was on Afghanistan’s sovereignty. Rebel groups in Afghanistan were also opposed to the soviet’s attack as well as their communist ways, which went against traditional Muslim culture, for instance, compulsory education for Muslim girls. It is their dislike to the soviets that culminated in the religious mujahidin movement. Mujahidin connotes religious warriors against people who were against the religion. The mujahidin were the only way through which the Pakistani government and the United States could assist Afghanistan’s conquest against the Soviet invasion. They, therefore, facilitated the faction with Pakistani fighters and American weapons procured from the British. 

After the Soviets were defeated, the mujahideen faction remained and splintered into other groups, which continued to fight the government under different ideals. The phenomenon kept Afghanistan unstable and always under conflict, which was not an ideal environment for economic activities. Initially, Afghanistan was a major trade route for the region and its environs. Before the Soviet invasion, the economy was almost entirely controlled by the government. Most investments took place in the public sector, and the private sector constituted agriculture and trade. After the soviet and the civil war, the country continues to grapple with developmental tendencies. From the backdrop of soviet influence to spats of influence from the western world, the greatest deterrence of Afghanistan’s stability has been on the way of rule by the Afghanistan rulers. Afghanistan leaders like Nur Muhammad Taraki and Hafizullah Amin collaborated with the Soviets, meant that they had to be accustomed to some of the soviet’s way, like allowing some forms of communism in Afghanistan. It is unlike the Arab nature and culture as it depicts democracy and education for women. Something that the religious entities deeply entrenched in Islam are against. Arab countries sought its leadership as decreed by the elder’s contingent in a community. The elders were religious and stood for the justice system in most Muslim communities. Since leadership was chosen from them, it had to bear traditional religious norms that were against the western way of life. Therefore, the continuous arise of mujahideen in the region. Just like terrorism is pegged on its ideology, it is difficult to eliminate the actors if the ideology continues to exist. Hence, mujahideen will continue to destabilize Afghanistan if governance sways the western way. The existence of mujahideen gives other idealistic groups impetus to continue financing the groups to fight the government and cause instability in the region to deter western-supported development. To give the Afghani government more pressure, the Taliban granted access to Al Qaeda – an Arab terror organization to use Afghanistan as a recruiting and training base. Al Qaeda committed several terror attacks, among them targeting US personnel in Afghanistan and the biggest being the September 9/11 attack in the US homeland. The US responded by taking the war to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban and pressure them into surrendering Al Qaeda’s supreme leader, a mastermind for the 9/11 attacks Osama bin Laden. The US and its allies may have attacked the Taliban and Al Qaeda in 2001 and brought down its government, but the leaders managed to escape, and their ideals remained intact. A United States-led International Security Assistance Force began an occupation that was still in place in 2008. 

The combination of over 30 years of wars and a continuous spat of mujahideen is what has caused instability in Afghanistan. The years of war in the country has led to the fall of the nation. For a nation to prosper, it needs certain aspects in place such as national security, the economy needs to be working and its people ready to work. The situation is reversed in Afghanistan because the economy is not working, and its national security is hanging in the balance. The economy cannot thrive because there is no infrastructure to support it. During the war, a lot of infrastructures was destroyed. Road, communication and cities fell to the ground, which means the backbone of trade was incapacitated. Without infrastructure, resources like agricultural produce could not get from one place to another; without the buildings, then businesses could not exist to trade, and without communication, trade with neighboring regions and countries was impossible. People who would have participated in growing the economy were either consumed by the war or had fled to neighboring countries as refugees or investors in those nations. The phenomenon from the wars is how the country continued to remain poor. After the soviet and civil wars ended, conflict continued from the mujahideen factions, including the Taliban. The insecurity and instability propagated by the insurgents were still not enough stability to allow Afghanis who had fled the country to return and invest in their motherland. The intervention of the international community, even though it has made some movement in the economy, is still not enough without stability in government and the entire region. The standoff has enabled stakeholders to agree that Afghanistan has entered a pivotal but highly uncertain time where military intervention is no longer the solution. The solution is to have the country’s economy grow, which is only possible if peace is achieved. And the best solution for stability to be attained is through political intervention beginning at the grassroots level. Currently, the US has the greatest to gain from Afghanistan’s stability because it would seize to be an evolution ground for terror factions against the US and also stop the infiltration of narcotics from the country (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2020). The US’s position has, therefore, pitted it at the forefront of negotiations with Taliban representatives. The situation has heightened anticipation that a breakthrough could be at hand, though vital negotiations among Afghans on ending the war and mapping the country’s political future have not yet begun. A concern is also spreading about what sacrifices peace might entail. 

Analysis 

Little stability and the intervention of the international community has brought some improvement to the economy, such as economic growth of 2.9% in 2019 and improved access to social amenities and services offered by the government amid the stability (World Bank, 2020). However, the central government’s control in the region is pegged at 50%, while the other 50% influence belongs to the insurgent’s groups (Coface, 2020). The government’s control is facilitated by financial and military support from the international community. The US has been one of the biggest players in such support but realized that further military intervention is expensive and yields no solid results. It is why the US, though Trump’s administration, decided that the way forward is to achieve peace through negotiations. Currently, the US and the Taliban have signed an agreement towards obtaining peace (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2020). If the militants uphold their end of the deal, then America and its allies will consider conceiting to their actions in Afghanistan and remove their troops. Following the signing of the agreement, The US is set to go into peace talks with the Afghanistan government. If all moves according to plan, then a long-lasting peace solution in Afghanistan is imminent, although it is a tall order. It is risky with the expiration of most support mechanism from the international community coming to expiration at the end of 2020. The Taliban insurgency may play nice wedging to see the outcome of the Afghanistan government after the international community has left. 

Afghanistan has continued to face numerous challenges following the Soviet Union invasion, the Taliban civil war and the instability brought about by insurgent activities aimed at destabilizing the central government. Despite the insecurity and with the help of the international community, the country has managed to make some developmental strides. Focusing on the period between 2017 and 2020, it can be seen that the economy has been growing on a positive note. In 2017, the growth was marked at 2.7%; in 2018, it remained at 2.7%. In 2019, economic growth jumped to 2.9% and 2020 is expected to reach the 3.5% mark (Coface, 2020). Although the government is weak, it has been able to propagate its rule in the majority of the regions that were once controlled by the Taliban. The government held its first round of the presidential election in September 2019, and the fourth set since the fall of the Taliban government seemed to be rife with irregularities; however, is considered a great move towards a democratic nation. Definitely, the insurgent’s position on the matter is negative because they recognize no such government – a reason why the faction will not hold talks with the Afghani government but gladly hold talks with the US government. Therefore, once the US government is done with talks with the Afghani government, it remains to be seen whether dialogue will be facilitated between the insurgents and the Afghani government. The Afghani government has also made efforts to eradicate corruption systemically and systematically across all Afghani national and subnational institutions (Haidari, 2017). Corruption is one of the major vices that introduces instability in the government. It is one of the weaknesses that the wealthy insurgents can use against the government amongst underpaid soldiers and weak governance systems. 

Peace is fundamental to stability in Afghanistan. All stakeholders are growing weary of the interventions they have to take in order to restore stability in the region. The insurgents have spent a lot of their resources gotten from illegal opium sales in the region and abroad. The Afghanistan government has grown weary of their expenditure of resources to avert insurgent activities instead of concentrating on developmental activities and moving the country forward. The international community is weary of committing its resources for another country’s benefit while there may be other countries in need of the same resources. Altogether, having a nation in the predicament of a series of war for over 30 years while its neighbors enjoy calmness elicits some form of exhaustion on Afghanistan’s side. The phenomenon is likely to instigate all stakeholders to forge towards peace and stability. However, the issue has to be approached diligently as the matter is a conundrum that has developed over 40 years. The US has done a good deed by bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table and signed an agreement with them. Bringing the Afghanistan government to the table will not be a hard task for the US government. However, the challenge is getting the Afghani government to meet with the Taliban insurgents. The pressure to get the two parties to meet lies with the international community, especially the US. If all goes well, then Afghanistan is assured of stability, and it can begin to grow as envisioned. 

If security and stability are restored in Afghanistan, then the country needs to think in the line of the resources it currently has and how it could partner with both internal and external investors to grow the country’s economy at record speed. Afghanistan’s agricultural sector remains the most predominant economic activity that the country can use to grow its economy. Agriculture accounts for over half the country’s GDP. 75% of Afghanistan’s citizens reside in rural areas where agriculture is the primary activity of livelihood. 8.5 million hectares constitute the land available for crops. 3.2 million hectares of that land is under irrigation, which supports the areas that don’t have access to enough farming water. Manufacturing and industrial parks were common in Afghanistan in the 1970s, which comprised of primary goods processing plants. They dealt in cotton textiles, fertilizer, agro-processing, construction material and other small-scale production of handicrafts. Afghanistan can look to crucial partners like China and India to partner and revive the industrial sector in the country. India has already been involved in the development and economic assistance, even though it was not enough (D’Souza, 2016). However, stability can help India invest more in Afghanistan’s industrialization program, especially because they are good with low-cost manufacturing and processing concepts available in the market. China, on the other hand, has a better bargain on industrialization infrastructure and machines important for industrialization. Roads and infrastructure development are other key areas that the Afghani government needs to focus on. Roads and infrastructure were completely destroyed in the over 30 years of war and conflict, and they play a key role in facilitating development as well as the country’s economy. China is a big multi-billion investor that has helped third world countries, especially in Africa, with roads and infrastructure development. It is already interested in investing in Afghanistan and would make a formidable partner (Haider, 2020). Afghanistan also has a rich deposit of minerals and natural gases. The minerals and natural gases are a source of economic gain that the country can use to grow its economy. The mentioned resources are enough and critical to Afghanistan’s economic growth. The government is tasked with managing the resources adequately so that they may not be a new source of conflict. 

Afghanistan government has the biggest responsibility to consolidate the country and govern it once the international community moves out. However, the majority of the stakeholders in Afghanistan’s stability and development do not have full confidence in the government. The government is riddled with rampant official corruption even in the time that the international community is supporting it. The phenomenon has made it difficult for a group of international donors who would have donated to the course to halt and hold back. The situation, therefore, raises questions about whether development is possible after the country attains security stability. Another risk is with the presence of warlords. Warlords are regional faction leaders who attract a lot of influence from the Afghani people in the different regions they originate from. It is difficult for the government to have an influence in different areas without considering the interests of regional leaders, which sometimes calls for corruptive ways (Katzman, 2014). The government has also been relying on international aid, meaning that the country is generally poor. The only viable economic activity that does not require a massive input in agriculture which the government cannot rely upon because agriculture is dependent on climate (Coface, 2020). In 2018, the nation was faced with drought, and the agricultural sector did not perform as required putting the country at a setback. Therefore, if the international community was to pull out entirely from the troubled nation, it would be left to the mercies of the opium trafficking Taliban. 

A larger percentage of the Afghan government has been labeled corrupt, which implies that most of the leaders in government lookout for their interests. The phenomenon has influenced international donors to lose hope in the system to prefer to work with other factions like the local government, which has proved more effective in getting the work done. The same analogy is shared with the people of Afghanistan who have lost hope with their leaders from the central government. They prefer regional leaders who have most of their issues at heart. Therefore, the government has also failed to secure favor from its subjects. The presence of corrupt and unskilled government officials relays that they are not equipped to handle country issues, especially those to do with development and negotiations. The current impasse between the Taliban and the government is attributed to both parties being unwilling to sit together and negotiate. Part of the problem is on government as they do not want to compromise or facilitate any of the wishes or conditions presented by the Taliban. Such an approach is capable of collapsing talks and negotiations that could grant the national peace. 

A possibility and more likely if the government does not change its ways is for the stalemate between the Taliban insurgents and the Taliban continues. The US has gone through great lengths to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table to reach the recent agreement they signed that would see the Taliban forces halt in its advances and the US with its allies pull out its troops. However, the next round is on the Afghani government. They have to be willing to come to the table and compromise on their stance against the Taliban, and the Taliban do the same towards the Afghan government. If the situation fails, then more donors in the international community is likely to fall out from supporting the nation which would give impetus for the Taliban to continue propagating insecurity in the country. Their ultimate goal is to achieve control and install a strict sharia law according to the customs of Islam. Looking at it, the government has only a 50% influence in the country. Corruption has already pitted 50% of the donors against contributing, and continuous corruption and unwillingness to resolve the stalemate would further cause donor dropout. The above counts as the first wave of failure by the government, and the second wave account for the failure of development already made in the region. The country will not be able to build on its developmental goals but sink back into conflict with the Taliban. 

Conclusion 

Looking back on the literature discussed, it empowers stakeholders to understand that there is hope for Afghanistan to attain stability and peace, especially under its current impasse with the Taliban insurgents (Brown, 1996). The calmness and potential of the nation’s abilities, when anchored to the contributions of the international community, is likely to help foment stability and security for a nation that has longed suffered to the detriment of the wars it has gone through (United Nations, 2020). Once stability is achieved in governance and the whole of Afghanistan, the whole country can embark on exploring its economic growth given the presence of numerous resources like agriculture, minerals, natural gas and infrastructure. However, this is only possible with the staunch support of the international community while the Afghan government and Taliban also have to be willing to commit. Lack of a larger portion of commitment from the Afghan government and Taliban insurgents is likely to render the international community’s commitment useless. Therefore, the majority of the international community is likely to pull out as donors leaving the Afghan government in a precarious position. It will not be able to defend itself against the Taliban advances which have 100% backing from Pakistani insurgents and government. The overall outcome looks like the Taliban will gain control after years of conflict and make the nation a hostile one. The success of the nation’s predicament lies in the international community’s interventions in the area. 

Understanding the two scenarios helps broaden the scope of analysis into the situation that Afghanistan now lies in. The aspects are clear to the interpretation of stakeholders to the situation currently happening to the country. The analysis offers a clearer picture upon which an informed recommendation can be made to assist Afghanistan and its people or let it be to self-correct into whatever situation it will come to. 

Recommendations 

The possibilities into Afghanistan’s stability is ripe, considering the over 40 years the nation has been unstable due to insecurity and low-level economies. Interventions from the international community have proved that it is possible to attain peace and stability in the region. The US, as a key benefactor, has been on the foreground in holding negotiations with the Taliban to the extent of signing an agreement and having the Taliban pull back on their advances (Mashal, 2020). The US should rally other international countries with the capability of intervening to do so in order not to undo the great strides that Afghanistan has made after 2002. 

References 

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2020, February 29). Afghan conflict: US and Taliban sign deal to end 18-year war . BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51689443. 

British Broadcasting Corporation. (2020, February 29). Why is there a war in Afghanistan? The short, medium and long story . BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-49192495. 

Brown, H. (1996). Afghanistan: Is there hope for peace?: hearings before the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, One Hundred Fourth Congress, second session, June 6, 25, 26 and 27, 1996 . US Gov. Print. Off. 

Coface. (2020, February). Afghanistan . Coface. https://www.coface.com/Economic-Studies-and-Country-Risks/Afghanistan. 

D'Souza, S. M. (2016). India’s role in the economic stabilisation of Afghanistan . Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/kabul/12959.pdf. 

Haidari , A. M. (2017, December 28). Afghanistan in 2017: Achievements and Challenges . – The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2017/12/afghanistan-in-2017-achievements-and-challenges/. 

Haider, S. F.-e. (2020, April 1). China’s Deepening Diplomatic and Economic Engagement in Afghanistan . Jamestown. https://jamestown.org/program/chinas-deepening-diplomatic-and-economic-engagement-in-afghanistan/. 

History.com Editors. (2019, December 2). USSR and Afghanistan sign “friendship treaty” . https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/ussr-and-afghanistan-sign-friendship-treaty. 

Katzman, K. (2014). Afghanistan: Politics, Elections, and Government Performance . Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service. 

Mashal, M. (2020, June 19). US Troops in Afghanistan Reduced to 8,600, General Says . The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/19/world/asia/afghanistan-us-troop-withdrawal.html. 

Otfinoski, S. (2004). Afghanistan . Facts On File. 

United Nations. (2020). Afghanistan Approaching’ Defining Moment’ as Peace Talks Lag, COVID-19 Pandemic Looms, Deputy Special Representative Tells Security Council | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases . United Nations. https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/sc14154.doc.htm. 

World Bank. (2020, April). Overview . World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/afghanistan/overview.