Khisraw Amini
اصل همکاری منطقوی / خسرو امینی
فشرده: همکاری منطقوی اکنون به عنوان یک راه حل برای مشکل افغانستان بر سر زبان هاست. تمام جوانب درگیر در مساله افغانستان اکنون زبان جانب داری از این پالیسی را انتخاب نموده اند. یک دلیل آن، نمود اخلاقی این پالیسی است: اینکه همکاری کردن از همکاری نکردن در هر حال بهتر است. دلیل دیگر آن می تواند نمونه های موفق همکاری منطقوی در سطح جهان باشد، به خصوص پروسه همگرایی اروپا. با وجود این، در پس این نمود اخلاقی احساسات و سیاست های ملی قوی نهفته است که می خواهد از پروسه همکاری منطقوی نیز به عنوان صحنه تبارز خود استفاده نماید. الگوی همگرایی اروپا مانند پروسه شکل گیری دولت ها در اروپا از بنیاد با پروسه های موجود در منطقه ما تفاوت دارد. این مقاله کوششی است برای باز کردن این مسایل به خاطر یافتن راه حل های بهتر.
Among many solutions and policies that are being proposed
for Afghanistan, regional cooperation is a popular one now. One reason for this
is perhaps its plausibility of projecting a moral appeal: that to
cooperate is better than not to cooperate. This moral form has made all parties involved in Afghanistan, from the Afghan government, to the regional countries, to the international community, choose a language in favor to this idea. A part from this moral connotation, successful models of regional integration, namely the European Union, has been another motivation for the prevalence of this concept.
Yet this disarming moral truth might also be an indicator of the poor content of this concept, i.e. there is little into the idea of regional cooperation to debate and divide about. Unlike the simplicity of this concept, the problem of Afghanistan is a sophisticated one. The diversity of the dimensions of the problem seems sometimes to be beyond the capture of the policy makers. On one hand, we have the resilience of the regional and global terrorism, the structure of which seems also not that simple to put it in conventional models. On the other hand, we have the trouble making neighboring countries of Afghanistan and their uneasiness about establishing a stable order in this country. In a broader context, we have the influence of anti-Western sentiments which even goes beyond the region. Not the least, we have the ineffective, corrupt and undecided government of Afghanistan which continues to disappoint expectations.
In such circumstances, the idea of regional cooperation is raised and often is perceived as the one simple solution to make things work in Afghanistan. No wonder that the application of this policy also has been only simple diplomatic performances. Afghanistan, as well as other countries, do all they can to attend regional meetings and become members of regional organizations, which are numerous. Afghanistan, for instance, is a member of ECO, SAARC, and an observer of Shanghai Cooperation Organization. In addition, other multilateral initiatives are being introduced in various combinations between Afghanistan and its neighboring countries. In such multiplicity of regional cooperation initiatives, the strategic vision of the future has become more distorted than clear.
We have seen little impact from these initiatives, to make things better at the very basics of regional relations. Security in Afghanistan is still a threatening challenge and trade between Afghanistan and the region is still problematic at the very basic level. Several trade agreements between Afghanistan and Pakistan have been negotiated, but have failed to give some stability to transit and trade between the two countries. The same instances of trouble have been made by Iran. Despite its poor impact on the tangible aspects of life, the idea of regional cooperation in being used in political performances. At certain level one can analyze such political games in terms of short-term cynical strategies of survival for the ruling parties. But one may engage more with the question, seeking for structural and historical trends, i.e. the context in which it is explained why the idea of regional cooperation is not a serious agenda of paving the ground for long-term regional integration, but it is more about finding breakthroughs for emergencies.
Successful regional cooperation models, namely the European integration, cannot be applied in this context. After the two great wars in Europe inflamed by nationalism, the Europeans decided to mitigate nationalistic sentiments, in favor of a European identity. Therefore, it was a measure to correct and supplement the system of national states in Europe which had proven to be catastrophic. However, in the context of the region in question, we do not see such a trend of mitigating nationalism for the sake of peace and development, but rather we are facing states that are using every means to strongly express themselves. Historically, the process of state-building in this region has started late and with a distorted vision. The motivation behind this process has not been to establish a modern mechanism of governance. To a great extent this process was not even a completely conscious choice. Before the 20th century, it was the formation of international society in the form of the system of states that required the imperative of sovereignty for a community, in order to deserve dignity, recognition and identity. In the 20th century, during the cold war, it was the implication of the bi-polar world order to use the system of states, with its attendant principles of self-determination and non-interference, as proxies for super powers' political performances. Lisa Anderson notes1:
A part from the role of international structures in the formation of the states, which proved to be mostly vehicles for performing rent-seeking games, the legacy of the so called colonialism era is also relevant to the specific type of state and nationalism that we see in this region. The era of colonialism as it is apparent from the literature on that experience, is characterized by indignity and humiliation for the colonized. The colonized people were not dealt with as human beings but as peculiar ones either with extraordinary immorality, or talents. Edward Said’s book “Orientalism”, is an example of projection and critique of this experience. Also, the practice of application of customary law instead of modern one for the colonized societies, as Mahmood Mamdani argues2, was another facet of this exceptionalism and exclusion.
Such structures and sentiments have been the constituents of the resilient nationalistic feelings for being a unified state in the region. That to be a state and nation is the question of having dignity and therefore it must be kept strong at the any cost, sacrificing the lives of millions of people and accommodating suicidal terrorist establishments. Therefore, we can see that behind the guise of regional cooperation agenda, there are states and nations that are seeking any means to express themselves as powerful and dignified national units. It is not about caring for human rights, good governance, economic prosperity of people and creating a better condition for them to have a decent life.
Regional cooperation gets, therefore, a more specific and clearer meaning in such a context beyond its primary universal moral projection. Particularly, it is at the face of the question of international presence in Afghanistan, and considering the increasing pressure from the imperatives of international and human rights norms, that regional cooperation is raised as an alternative, rather than a genuine will to more economic integration. In another word, regional cooperation is not a positive concept but a reaction to the international affairs in the region, and this explains its simple and shallow dimensions in practice. Perhaps, that the so-called imperatives of sovereignty and self-determination have become too common place to be enough to justify the black boxes of irresponsible states, there is a need for such a resort.
The question of what to do in such an unbearably complex situation is a critical and difficult one to answer. It requires a more engagement in terms of using policy resources in order to capture the mechanics of the situation. Policy intervention must be conscious of the differences they make at the mechanism level. For instance, institution building efforts must be cautious of leading to strengthening corrupt state performances at the cost of people’s suffering, democracy and human rights. Perhaps we may distinguish between two areas of policy action: corrective/emergency and positive policy prescriptions. The corrective measures are necessary to correct the existing states of affairs, in terms of national and regional state politics, that are going in the wrong direction. In such a context a variety of measures, including regional cooperation initiatives, could be used but with more modest expectations.
The positive prescriptions are also necessary to make an agenda for fostering universal values, including human rights and democracy, by empowering civil society and effective mechanisms at the human level. These efforts have already been somehow in place, but they must not be framed with state-building or regional cooperation agendas; rather, they must be given a broader vision in order to unleash their power.
Yet this disarming moral truth might also be an indicator of the poor content of this concept, i.e. there is little into the idea of regional cooperation to debate and divide about. Unlike the simplicity of this concept, the problem of Afghanistan is a sophisticated one. The diversity of the dimensions of the problem seems sometimes to be beyond the capture of the policy makers. On one hand, we have the resilience of the regional and global terrorism, the structure of which seems also not that simple to put it in conventional models. On the other hand, we have the trouble making neighboring countries of Afghanistan and their uneasiness about establishing a stable order in this country. In a broader context, we have the influence of anti-Western sentiments which even goes beyond the region. Not the least, we have the ineffective, corrupt and undecided government of Afghanistan which continues to disappoint expectations.
In such circumstances, the idea of regional cooperation is raised and often is perceived as the one simple solution to make things work in Afghanistan. No wonder that the application of this policy also has been only simple diplomatic performances. Afghanistan, as well as other countries, do all they can to attend regional meetings and become members of regional organizations, which are numerous. Afghanistan, for instance, is a member of ECO, SAARC, and an observer of Shanghai Cooperation Organization. In addition, other multilateral initiatives are being introduced in various combinations between Afghanistan and its neighboring countries. In such multiplicity of regional cooperation initiatives, the strategic vision of the future has become more distorted than clear.
We have seen little impact from these initiatives, to make things better at the very basics of regional relations. Security in Afghanistan is still a threatening challenge and trade between Afghanistan and the region is still problematic at the very basic level. Several trade agreements between Afghanistan and Pakistan have been negotiated, but have failed to give some stability to transit and trade between the two countries. The same instances of trouble have been made by Iran. Despite its poor impact on the tangible aspects of life, the idea of regional cooperation in being used in political performances. At certain level one can analyze such political games in terms of short-term cynical strategies of survival for the ruling parties. But one may engage more with the question, seeking for structural and historical trends, i.e. the context in which it is explained why the idea of regional cooperation is not a serious agenda of paving the ground for long-term regional integration, but it is more about finding breakthroughs for emergencies.
Successful regional cooperation models, namely the European integration, cannot be applied in this context. After the two great wars in Europe inflamed by nationalism, the Europeans decided to mitigate nationalistic sentiments, in favor of a European identity. Therefore, it was a measure to correct and supplement the system of national states in Europe which had proven to be catastrophic. However, in the context of the region in question, we do not see such a trend of mitigating nationalism for the sake of peace and development, but rather we are facing states that are using every means to strongly express themselves. Historically, the process of state-building in this region has started late and with a distorted vision. The motivation behind this process has not been to establish a modern mechanism of governance. To a great extent this process was not even a completely conscious choice. Before the 20th century, it was the formation of international society in the form of the system of states that required the imperative of sovereignty for a community, in order to deserve dignity, recognition and identity. In the 20th century, during the cold war, it was the implication of the bi-polar world order to use the system of states, with its attendant principles of self-determination and non-interference, as proxies for super powers' political performances. Lisa Anderson notes1:
On one hand, the US and the Soviet Union insisted, particularly for each other, on observance of the norm of noninterference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. Often honored in the breach, this norm was nonetheless a cornerstone of the Westphalian interstate system. On the other hand, both superpowers routinely manipulated domestic politics in countries around the world, particularly post-colonial countries, with foreign aid, technical assistance, access to markets and a variety of other ostensibly liberal, or at least arm's length, devices. This meant that rulers were often accountable to international patrons who constructed and sustained these states instead of to domestic constituencies. As a result, the incentives to develop the classic attributes of states, such as professional militaries, strong fiscal systems and other administrative bureaucracies, were weak while inducements to maintain the appearance of stability were strong.
A part from the role of international structures in the formation of the states, which proved to be mostly vehicles for performing rent-seeking games, the legacy of the so called colonialism era is also relevant to the specific type of state and nationalism that we see in this region. The era of colonialism as it is apparent from the literature on that experience, is characterized by indignity and humiliation for the colonized. The colonized people were not dealt with as human beings but as peculiar ones either with extraordinary immorality, or talents. Edward Said’s book “Orientalism”, is an example of projection and critique of this experience. Also, the practice of application of customary law instead of modern one for the colonized societies, as Mahmood Mamdani argues2, was another facet of this exceptionalism and exclusion.
Such structures and sentiments have been the constituents of the resilient nationalistic feelings for being a unified state in the region. That to be a state and nation is the question of having dignity and therefore it must be kept strong at the any cost, sacrificing the lives of millions of people and accommodating suicidal terrorist establishments. Therefore, we can see that behind the guise of regional cooperation agenda, there are states and nations that are seeking any means to express themselves as powerful and dignified national units. It is not about caring for human rights, good governance, economic prosperity of people and creating a better condition for them to have a decent life.
Regional cooperation gets, therefore, a more specific and clearer meaning in such a context beyond its primary universal moral projection. Particularly, it is at the face of the question of international presence in Afghanistan, and considering the increasing pressure from the imperatives of international and human rights norms, that regional cooperation is raised as an alternative, rather than a genuine will to more economic integration. In another word, regional cooperation is not a positive concept but a reaction to the international affairs in the region, and this explains its simple and shallow dimensions in practice. Perhaps, that the so-called imperatives of sovereignty and self-determination have become too common place to be enough to justify the black boxes of irresponsible states, there is a need for such a resort.
The question of what to do in such an unbearably complex situation is a critical and difficult one to answer. It requires a more engagement in terms of using policy resources in order to capture the mechanics of the situation. Policy intervention must be conscious of the differences they make at the mechanism level. For instance, institution building efforts must be cautious of leading to strengthening corrupt state performances at the cost of people’s suffering, democracy and human rights. Perhaps we may distinguish between two areas of policy action: corrective/emergency and positive policy prescriptions. The corrective measures are necessary to correct the existing states of affairs, in terms of national and regional state politics, that are going in the wrong direction. In such a context a variety of measures, including regional cooperation initiatives, could be used but with more modest expectations.
The positive prescriptions are also necessary to make an agenda for fostering universal values, including human rights and democracy, by empowering civil society and effective mechanisms at the human level. These efforts have already been somehow in place, but they must not be framed with state-building or regional cooperation agendas; rather, they must be given a broader vision in order to unleash their power.
Reference
1. Lisa Anderson, "Antiquated Before They Can Ossify: States That Fail Before They Form," Journal of International Affairs, 58:1 (Fall 2004).
2. Mahmood Mamdani, Citizen and Subject: Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1996).
1. Lisa Anderson, "Antiquated Before They Can Ossify: States That Fail Before They Form," Journal of International Affairs, 58:1 (Fall 2004).
2. Mahmood Mamdani, Citizen and Subject: Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1996).
