Afghanistan and the Articles of Confederation

Greg noted recent efforts to arm local leaders to fight the Taliban and recently, George Gavrilis at Foreign Policy called for a less centralized state in Afghanistan along the Tajikistan model. Indeed, it is likely that the problem with Afghanistan is actually the government's structure.

Right now Afghanistan has something it never has had in the past: a strong central government. That means that the stakes are very high both internally and externally for those who control the government. However, by empowering and arming local leaders, we might be able to successfully create a system which is at least externally stable.

Put another way, the United States currently has a strong central government because the first system, the Articles of Confederation was viewed as too weak to prevent a takeover by the British or the French. However, in the case of Afghanistan, we are playing the role of the British and the French. It may well behoove us to encourage a more decentralized model wherein the Taliban do control some territory, but not enough that they are externally a threat. Western air power and special forces could intervene as needed if the balance ever tipped too far towards the Taliban, without requiring the troop commitment we have now.

Such a solution would not turn Afghanistan into the Colorado of the Himalayas that American politicians hope for, but it would probably be much more sustainable in the long term, and it may allow the U.S. to contain Salafist threats in the region.