Читать книгу The State-Building Dilemma in Afghanistan - Haqmal Daudzai - Страница 16

Contemporary state-building strategies borrow their theoretical backgrounds, predominantly, from Samuel P. Huntington’s late 1960s political institutionalization or political development theory (Martinussen, 1997). According to Martinussen (1997), Huntington’s theory of political-institutional shares ‘several of its basic assumptions with the classical modernization theory’ which rests on building government institutions and their capacity that are significant to ‘order’ and to economic development in Third World countries. The essence of Huntington’s (1971) theory is concerned about the ‘balance of’ relationship between ‘political participation and political institutionalization.’ Huntington (1968) writes “urbanization, literacy, education, mass media, all expose the traditional man to new forms of life, new standards of enjoyment, new possibilities of satisfaction” (p. 53). This ‘social mobilization’ creates an ‘aspiration’ for economic development and opportunities in a newly modernizing society and if these ‘wants’ are not fulfilled; it leads to ‘social frustration.’ According to Huntington (1968), the ‘traditional structures’ in developing countries are less likely to ‘encourage’ economic mobilization ‘rather than political.’ Therefore, social frustration turns into a political drive in the form of political participation and demands for more actions by the political apparatus. If the government lacks the political institutions and the capacity through which individuals can practice their political will in a [58] more civilized way, uprisings and political instability will be the result (Huntington, 1968). Therefore, before any attempt toward promoting people participation and economic development, there is a need to build strong government institutions including public administration, law and order, and military institutions that aim to curve corruption and any possible revolt (Huntington, 1968).

Martinussen (1997) notes that although Huntington’s theory did not win popularity among the political science scholars due to his ‘conception of the military as a monolithic actor with considerable capacity for coordination and promotion of economic development’, he was ‘one of the first exponents of the many later theories and strategies concerning reaching-down state-building’ (pp. 174-175). However, Martinussen (1997) adds that while there is no doubt that a state’s institutional capacity is significant for maintaining political stability and eventually economic development, nevertheless, ‘a development-promoting state-building strategy could still never be based exclusively on these components’ (p. 175). Martinussen concludes that the ‘repressive’ or ‘top-down’ state-building approach in some of the developing countries led the political scientists to introduce ‘decentralization and popular participation’ theories and strategies which ensure a ‘genuine’ relationship between state and the people for political stability and economic development (Martinussen, 1997). For the sake of a possible policy solution in the context of Afghanistan, decentralization is discussed in the following section of this dissertation.