Carr Center Hosts Discussions on Future of Afghanistan

More than 100 high-level policymakers, analysts, donors, Afghans and Pakistanis gathered in Washington last Thursday (April 23) for a series of closed-door discussions focusing on regional security, governance and economic issues. The conference was co-sponsored by Harvard Kennedy School’s Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, Asia Society, the United States Institute of Peace and NYU’s Center on International Cooperation.

"This conference epitomized the best values of the Carr Center and the Kennedy School," said Carr Center director Rory Stewart. "It brought the best-known scholars in the world – such as Barney Rubin and Marvin Weinbaum – together with Afghans, Pakistanis and foreigners who have worked in the region for decades. It was preceded by a three-hour private discussion with Ambassador Richard Holbrooke and General David Petraeus. The analysis was uniquely concrete, nuanced and practical."

Panelists and participants began the proceedings with analysis of the Obama Administration's "Af-Pak" 60-day policy review. The focus then shifted to a macro-historical overview of the region, with debate about whether or not democratic countries would be willing to sustain support for medium to long-term engagement in the region.

Subsequent discussions covered regional relations between Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India; agricultural development; counter-narcotics efforts; and the nature of the private sector, international consultants and the ways in which donor countries could make funding more effective.

The Taliban and its growing influence in the region was also a major topic of discussion throughout the day. Participants debated what a potential political solution would look like, and whether it could be achieved without compromising fundamental human rights and particularly women’s rights.

The final discussion focused on larger questions of governance and politics. Participants outlined detailed ways local politics affects citizens in villages and cities and promoted a more micro-level, nuanced approach to understanding Afghan politics. A few speakers questioned if there was a cohesive strategy and goal for developing the Afghan state or if Western governments were more interested in counter-terrorism than long-term state building.

Several of those involved in the conference praised the quality of the discussions.

"With that amount of intellectual energy and combined experience, it seemed the whole place might lift off its foundations," said Diana Rowan Rockefeller, founder and chair of the Afghan Women Leaders Connect. "But the wealth of hard facts presented, the collective grasp of the several regions' sprawling history, ethnic and political complexity kept the work at hand firmly rooted in reality. One had the sense that 'the work' – of many of the most thoughtful minds grappling with these thorny and intractable issues – had come down in a new place."

Stewart said the DC meeting has set the stage for further discussions.

"The overwhelming impression was positive – positive in what it suggested that the best thinkers and practitioners could produce – and positive in real terms for Afghanistan – showing in case after case that if we cannot always do what we pretend, we can always do more than we fear," said Stewart.