Jeremi Suri

Archive for June, 2010

Geological surveys conducted recently in Afghanistan show that the impoverished country has enormous potential mineral wealth. Investigators sent to the region by the U.S. Defense Department estimate that as much as $1 trillion worth of copper, cobalt, gold, and lithium exist under the ground. The New York Times reported that one Pentagon document predicted Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a crucial material for computer batteries. Older Soviet geological surveys, apparently hidden from the Taliban by Afghan officials in the past, confirm these findings.

Afghanistan’s new mineral wealth is a potential blessing or a potential curse. The uses of this desperately needed capital will be determined by the structures of governance that are constructed for the country in the next months and years. This is a topic that numerous scholars have investigated in depth, and there are a series of insights that are very valuable moving forward.

First, scholars of the so-called “resource course” have shown that vast quantities of concentrated raw material wealth are, quite often, debilitating for governing structures. Powerful individuals and families hoard the raw materials for their personal uses and they underinvest in institutions and processes that would spread the wealth to others. The owners of the wealth become “renters” and they stand in the way of economic and political development that would democratize society and diffuse their concentrated wealth for broad social purposes. This is the story of almost all the oil-rich countries (especially Saudi Arabia), dominated by autocratic billionaire families, amidst poverty and underdevelopment.

Second, scholars have shown a parallel dynamic between raw material “renters” and foreign aid “renters.” Those who receive large quantities of foreign aid also have a tendency to hoard and under-invest in their society at large. Access to foreign aid becomes a source of personal capital and sustained political authority. Families, like the Karzai family in Afghanistan, use aid money to debilitate reidstributive and democratic institutions.

Third, amidst this discouraging evidence scholars have found a positive alternative. Raw material wealth can, in fact, contribute to broad social and political development if it is immediately integrated into representative and redistributive governing institutions. New institutions, and new mechanisms for policing those institutions in the public interest, must be constructed simultaneously with the acquisition of raw material wealth. The institutions cannot wait. Political management and rigorous public accountability must accompany the wealth. In this sense, democracy and development do indeed go hand-in-hand. Norway, with its vast discovery of oil reserves in the 1950s and 1960s, is the model. Canada and the United States are also models, at least in part.

How can we use the new raw material wealth of Afghanistan to follow the path of Norway, and not Saudi Arabia:

1. The international community, led by NATO and the United Nations, must articulate a set of broad principles for the good governance and productive uses of Afghanistan’s new mineral wealth. These principles should be made into an international covenant, obligating all foreign actors to follow them.

2. The international covenant should be used to negotiate procedures for managing raw material extraction and distribution with local Afghan actors. Local tribal leaders, not just the Karzai family, must see an incentive for good governance. They must develop trust with international actors as investors and policemen encouraging this process.

3. The Afghan public throughout the country, particularly poor farmers, must be mobilized to claim this raw material wealth for their own development. They should know the capital exists, they should recognize its potential, and they should be mobilized to demand its uses for broad social purposes. This is the only way to convince farmers to stop growing poppy for their livelihood, and invest in better lives through legitimate industry and agriculture. A mobilized Afghan public, with voice through domestic and international institutions, is the best source of accountability for raw material wealth. Norway had a strong public voice in these decisions when the country discovered oil; Saudi Arabia did not.

These are only some initial steps. They will not solve all problems, but they will begin a productive process. The discovery of Afghan mineral wealth raises great potential. The international community and the Afghan people must now begin the hard work of turning potential to broad benefit through good governance. The new mineral wealth could have its most enduring effect in spurring the social and political investment that Afghanistan has lacked for so long.

This blog post initially appeared at http://globalbrief.ca

The last two weeks have proven that foreign aid is a potent political symbol. Ships carrying food and other supplies to Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza have become more of a problem for Israel than any recent Palestinian military force. The aid ships appear benevolent, they carry human goods and international do-gooders. Israel`s efforts to survey cargo, as part of its military blockade of Gaza, appear heavy-handed. Attacks on Israeli soldiers doing this surveillance work look innocuous, or even legitimate. Israeli retaliation seems terribly out of proportion, at least at first glance.

Visiting Europe, I have watched citizens and politicians of all stripes re-tell this same story. The Israelis are the brutal Goliath, the aid workers are the idealistic humanitarians victimized by Jewish fanaticism. European newspapers and television shows convey that same simplistic message. That is what so many reasonable and intelligent people believe. It is not accurate, but that does not matter. Israel`s efforts to isolate Hamas, deter rocket attacks, and interdict military materials flowing into Gaza – all acts with some claim to legitimacy – have, in fact, isolated Israel more than ever before. To make matters worse, Israel must now oppose an international investigation of recent events for fear of biased reporting by any panel of “experts” assembled from the United Nations, the European Union, or another international body.

It is time for Israeli leaders to stop arguing about the reasons and the legitimacy of their actions. No one is listening any more. Right and wrong do not matter in such a conflict-infested context. Instead of defiance, belligerence, and isolation, Israel would be best served if it called the bluffs of its critics. Give the critics some of what they want: Show that Israel will make deals. Seize the peace agenda for Israel, not its enemies.

What does this mean in practice:

1. Israel should lift its blockade and allow open trade with Gaza. Call upon international observers from the UN and the EU to monitor against weapons shipments. Make it clear that Israel will react strongly if violence from Gaza increases.

2. Israel should recognize Hamas as the most legitimate and popular party representing the Palestinian people. Israel should also offer to talk with Hamas. Why not? Is Hamas worse than the PLO was in the years before Camp David? Give Hamas and its international advocates a reason to support peace, and hold them accountable if they do not reciprocate. That will put the onus on Hamas for a change.

3. Stop the new settlements. Israel could make a strong gesture of goodwill if it ceased all new settlement construction in occupied territories. To begin with, these settlements are counter-productive for Israeli security. They create forward positions that are difficult to defend. They also fund the most extreme, hateful, and unrepresentative elements of Israeli society. Stopping the settlements would serve Israel´s national interests, and it would show a commitment to live with its neighbors. It would also generate strong international pressure for Hamas and its international supporters to reciprocate with a significant peace gesture.

The tragic events and hyperbolic media coverage of the last few weeks have turned the world against Israel in ways that threaten the Jewish state more than any single enemy. Israel must reverse this tide of world opinion if it is going to survive. Israel needs to seize the high ground, from a position of strength that will not last much longer, and turn tragedy to opportunity. That is the true test of patriotism and statesmanship. That is the tradition of Israel, from Chaim Weizmann to Yitzhak Rabin.

It is also the tradition of the United States. As Israel`s closest friend, the United States must encourage its ally to take the diplomatic high ground and avoid irreparable descent into depths of international resentment and hostility. If Washington does not help Jerusalem to shift direction, American public support for Israel might also be in jeopardy. No one wants to defend commandoes enforcing a blockade against an occupied people. Again, this is not a question of right or wrong. This is a question of international perception, and perceptions make reality, especially in the Middle East.

This post originally appeared on http://globalbrief.ca