[Halfway through a presidency that promised to bring reform and modernization, the country is still struggling with the same problems that have plagued it through 16 years of flawed democratic rule, subsidized by billions in foreign aid: a determined Taliban insurgency, pervasive public corruption, desperate poverty and leaders consumed by political quarrels.]
By Pamela Constable
 |
|
Afghan police officers
eap from a vehicle as they arrive outside a military hospital
during an attack in Kabul on
March 8. (Shah Marai/AFP/Getty Images)
|
KABUL — To find a bright spot on
Afghanistan’s political horizon, one must travel to the edge of the capital,
follow a pitted road to a half-constructed building with no sign, and walk up
four flights of stairs to a large office where an eager man in a new suit is
still arranging the furniture.
“I’m fired up,” exclaims Nader Nadery, the
recently named head of Afghanistan’s civil service commission. His goal, he
says, is to turn a power center of political favors into an institution that
offers all candidates a fair chance, rather than finding sinecures for
C-average nephews of legislators and ex-warlords.
Nadery, 42, a former human rights activist, says
that if he succeeds in building a merit-based job system, it may help revive
public confidence in Afghan democracy. Otherwise, he says, “I will be failing
all those who believe in fighting for reforms, in the vision of a new
generation, in the future of the country.”
At the moment, though, this promising
appointment feels like a small, belated footnote in a long and grueling war
that is going badly on most fronts, leaving many Afghans fearing that the
future they once hoped for is slipping away.
Halfway through a presidency that promised to
bring reform and modernization, the country is still struggling with the same
problems that have plagued it through 16 years of flawed democratic rule,
subsidized by billions in foreign aid: a determined Taliban insurgency,
pervasive public corruption, desperate poverty and leaders consumed by
political quarrels.
And while some Afghans are keenly awaiting
supportive signals from the new administration in Washington, others have
already lost faith in the international community, even questioning whether a
new influx of foreign military and economic aid is what their country really
needs.
“We’ve been hearing about reforms for 16
years, but we still see the same mind-set, where the leaders try to manipulate
everything,” said Davood Moradian, director of the Afghan Institute for
Strategic Studies. “Things are far more polarized and dangerous now. If I had
to choose between getting another 20,000 American troops or a real government
commitment to reforms, I would choose the latter.”
The protracted conflict with the Taliban and
other insurgents continues to dominate Afghans’ concerns about the future. The
guerrillas’ persistence on the battlefield continues to force larger and
better-equipped Afghan forces into tactical retreats, and their stealthy
invasion of Kabul’s military hospital last month stunned the public and nearly
got three security ministers impeached.
With spring fighting season about to begin
and the prospect of peace talks virtually nil, Afghan and U.S. military
officials predict 2017 will be another year of hard combat, territorial
setbacks and heavy casualties. Military morale has been undercut by corruption,
and a devastating new report from the U.S. Inspector General for Afghan
Reconstruction described officers selling food and supplies intended for
troops.
The economy has been moribund since most NATO
troops withdrew two years ago, taking away contracts and cottage industries that
created a false sense of prosperity. The World Bank reported a dramatic drop in
growth, just 1.6 percent last year. The government has focused on long-term
development projects, including dams and regional trade, but unemployment has
soared to 40 percent, with the capital full of beggars, addicts and returned
refugees.
Already one of the world’s poorest countries,
with a per capita income of $1,800, Afghanistan still has extremely low
literacy rates and poor health. In the countryside, violence has scared off
investors in mining, while the U.N. reports that opium production soared by 43
percent in the past year, becoming a major source of financing for the
insurgents.
“We are fighting on three fronts at once —
terrorism, poverty and corruption — and they are all interconnected,” Hanif
Atmar, the national security adviser, said in an interview. “It is not easy,
but we are making progress on all three, and those who paint a grim and
hopeless picture are not right. We are struggling, but we are determined. It is
no longer a matter of political will. It is a matter of capacity, and that will
be increased.”
Asked what Afghanistan needs most from the
United States, Atmar’s only specific request was for expanded air combat
support, which he said would transform a war effort that Afghan forces are
fighting virtually alone. “We appreciate your efforts to help rebuild our
country,” he said, “but the more important thing is that we are partners
fighting a common enemy.”
But it is not the international community
that President Ashraf Ghani and his team most need to convince. The depth of
domestic disillusionment is evident everywhere, from parliamentary debates to
radio talk shows to corners where jobless men sit and wait. The feeling many
Afghans express is intense frustration; a sense that democracy has failed to
take root, that powerful people can still get away with anything, and that
leaders who pledged to solve the nation’s problems have become consumed by
their own.
Much of the criticism focuses on the
president, who has never made himself popular in public and is notorious for
flying off the handle in private. But the rap on the ex-World Bank official is
changing. For the past two years, Ghani was accused of being too aloof and
wonky, relying on a small circle of trusted technocrats rather than reaching
out to other leaders in the large, ethnically diverse society.
Now, by making an effort to become more political
as he eyes the 2019 election, Ghani has ended up acting less presidential,
cutting deals with unsavory ethnic bosses and offering senior posts to outside
critics. This has sidelined Abdullah Abdullah, his embittered partner in the
National Unity Government, which was brokered by the Obama administration after
a fraud-plagued contest in 2014.
“This government is no longer about
principles and reforms, it is about accommodation,” said Anwar Haq Ahady, a
former cabinet minister. “Ghani’s focus is now on reelection, and he is moving
the pieces around the board, but the whole game could backfire. We need fresh
elections, transparent ones, to build a democratic state, but I’m getting
worried the next one will be as fraudulent as the last.”
With elections offering the promise of
deliverance or the specter of disaster, Afghans are torn between wanting to
speed up the much-delayed electoral process and wanting to make sure it
produces a credible result. Local and parliamentary elections were supposed to be
held by November, but that seems unlikely. Experts are debating proposals to
introduce electronic voter ID cards, ballots and result tabulations, but that
could take many months.
Meanwhile, as the sense of disappointment
deepens and the prospect of another violent spring looms, more and more Afghans
are looking for an exit. Officials have sent dependents abroad, business
executives are buying property in Turkey, and students exchange tips with
cousins overseas on how to get visas to Germany or sneak into Canada.
Some, though, say they are committed to
staying and pushing for reforms. Nadery, for one, says he is confident of
Ghani’s support and invigorated by the strong demand from ordinary Afghans for
a responsive, honest government.
“The public has high expectations, and Afghan
troops are sacrificing their lives in battle, but if we can’t make our
institutions serve the people, those sacrifices are in vain,” Nadery said.”
Already flooded with calls from prominent people seeking favors, he is
“practicing various polite ways of saying no.”
Read more
