Implications of Warlordism on Establishment of a Formal Constitutional Government in Post 2001 Afghanistan

Abstract

Post 2001, former warlords remain as major actors in politics of Afghanistan. This has left Afghanistan with a messy mix of both formal and informal power, leaving mixed feelings among the population over the possible outcomes of accommodating former warlords into the formal offices. Some argue accommodation of former warlords into political life of the country is a step back while others argue it is a necessary step, considering the power and influence former warlords maintain among the people. This study aimed to answer what are the implications of presence of former warlords into formal structure of the state and consequently on establishment of formal constitutional government in post 2001 Afghanistan. To answer the question, I undergone in-depth study of warlordism and their involvement in politics of Afghanistan since 2001. As a result, I came to conclusion that presence of former warlords in today’s Afghan politics is not necessarily a challenge to state-building. Former warlords themselves do not pose a direct threat to state-building, instead there are several other factors such as exclusiveness of the state, which make the warlord struggle real. Post 2001, considering weakness and inability of state and its institutions, warlords have been able to provide a lot and contribute to reconstruction, development, and last but not least security of Afghanistan. Hence, they have proved to be efficient too. However, it should be understood that there are threats to presence of former warlords in today’s Afghan politics. The threats come from their access to strong military, support groups, financial resources, etc