Photo Credit: The New York Times/ Doug Mills

The New Year may bring renewed attention in Washington to the Afghanistan drawdown, especially with the scheduled visit of President Hamid Karzai next week. Most U.S. and other NATO troops are due to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014, and the country’s future stability may rest on negotiations in and around both capitals over how many forces to leave behind and how to support Afghanistan’s transition. USIP has been stressing that the political transition is as important as the military shifts. In examining the domestic political considerations and the potential national security issues facing the U.S., The New York Times’s Thom Shanker drew parallels to the Soviet Union’s withdrawal in 1989 in a Jan. 1 article.

USIP expert William Byrd, a former World Bank country manager in Afghanistan, examines the lessons history provides for the transition in a recent report. He flags the need for attention to security risks, Afghanistan’s economic challenges and the role of its neighbors. It’s “important not to overlearn lessons from history,” Byrd cautions. Afghanistan’s “poor experience with divisive, ideologically and ethnically oriented political parties during the 1960s to the 1990s” doesn’t necessarily portend a recurrence of the pattern. Political parties have been found to be vital to successful democracies, he wrote.

The relative stability of the decades between 1933 and 1973, despite the challenges of the time, “was anchored in a centralized but weak monarchial state and traditional informal local governance,” Byrd said.  “Significant efforts have been made since 2001 to rebuild a unitary, centralized state, albeit with mixed progress,” he wrote. “Little headway, however, has been made in restoring or replacing informal local governance” to re-establish some legitimacy and a sense of either formal or informal rule of law.”

Byrd also dispels some common myths about Afghanistan that sometimes get in the way of decision-making. He notes, for example, that despite concerns about the permanence of the “Durand Line” that demarcates the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, “Afghanistan has a far longer history as a distinct national entity with continuity to the present than most of its neighbors.”

Check out his report, and tell us how apt you think the most common historical parallels are to Afghanistan’s current transition? How much influence are they likely to have on decision-making there and in the U.S. and other NATO countries involved?

Viola Gienger is a senior writer for USIP.

Related Publications

Violent Conflict and Vital Interests: Keeping Focus

Violent Conflict and Vital Interests: Keeping Focus

Thursday, February 16, 2017

By: Fred Strasser

Over the next decade, the United States can expect to face complex foreign challenges from terrorism, insurgencies and internal conflicts fanned by external sponsorship, but the threat of conventional state-on-state wars, including direct assaults on the American homeland, have significantly diminished, according to retired Lt. General Douglas Lute, the former ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Global Policy; Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Civilian-Military Relations

U.S. Leadership and the Challenge of ‘State Fragility’

U.S. Leadership and the Challenge of ‘State Fragility’

Monday, September 12, 2016

By: William J. Burns; Michèle Flournoy; Nancy Lindborg

The new administration, a coming change in leadership at the United Nations, and an emerging global consensus about the fragility challenge make this an opportune moment to recalibrate our approach. The United States cannot and should not try to “fix” every fragile state. Nor can we ignore this challenge; all fragility has the potential to affect U.S. interests to some extent, especially when left to fester. There is simply too much at stake for our interests, our partners, and the global ord...

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Violent Extremism; Economics & Environment; Education & Training; Gender; Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue; Justice, Security & Rule of Law; Education & Training; Youth; Fragility and Resilience; Global Policy; Human Rights

Deploying Art Against War

Deploying Art Against War

Friday, August 5, 2016

By: Joshua Levkowitz

Artists and peace advocates are using public art to oppose violence, notably in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Middle East. The results have varied, advocates say, but the art campaigns have worked to undermine extremists’ calls to violence, and helped communities heal the divisions of war. They have ignited public discussion of local conflicts and even triggered peacebuilding efforts. Art campaigners and peace advocates who have worked across the Middle East and South Asia discussed the uses—and the limits—of public art as a peacebuilding tool, in a recent forum at USIP. 

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Violent Extremism; Non-Violent Movements

Panel Urges New View of Middle East Refugees

Panel Urges New View of Middle East Refugees

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

By: Fred Strasser

The refugee crisis that has spread to Europe and the breakdown of the Middle East’s century-old political order demand new thinking about the economic role of displaced people and a reassessment of donor strategies to rebuild societies in conflict, a working group convened by the U.S. Institute of Peace concluded. The panel’s report, developed under USIP’s Manal Omar and Elie Abouaoun as part of Atlantic Council’s Middle East Strategy Task Force, calls for refugees to be viewed as potential e...

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Violent Extremism; Economics & Environment; Fragility and Resilience; Human Rights

View All Publications