In addition to the negotiation with Taliban and other insurgent groups, the new campaign for decentralization of power launched by some major political parties and alliances has become a prevalent discussion in Afghanistan, whose translation into real political reform can determine the future course of political stability in the country.The debates about changing the existing strong presidential system into parliamentary one were triggered by the leaders of National Front of Afghanistan, who were invited by the Aspen Institute in Berlin, Germany to discuss Afghanistan 2014: Opportunities and Challenges.
There they put forward their perspectives on way out of the ongoing stalemate in the politics in the country and solution to bring an end to the lingering war. So in a joint statement, they first list the centralized power as the main cause of other challenges by stating that, ""This centralized power has led to massive corruption, disenfranchisement of a large segment of the Afghan people, obstacles to economic development, massive abuses of power, increasing political instability, poor governance, and a vast undermining of law and order." The above-mentioned ills are felt by Afghan people on a day to day basis and remain in dire need of being addressed.
These anti-Taliban leaders then describe their solution, "We call for a national dialogue on a revised Constitution to correct the inherent flaws in the present power structure by decentralizing the political system, making it more compatible with the diverse political, social and cultural nature of Afghanistan.
The Afghan people deserve and need a parliamentary form of democracy instead of a personality-centered Presidential system." This was part of the broader process of exchange of views that is going on at different state and not-state, regional and international levels on ways out of the ongoing impasse in the war against terrorists and insurgent groups and how to reduce the potential for outbreak of further conflicts.
But some circles inside and outside the government reacted to these discussions and opinion sharing dictatorially. They baselessly called the Berlin meeting as an attempt to damage national unity and disintegrate the country. But the explanation by the leaders of National Front of Afghanistan on their return from Berlin foiled the government's conspiracy against their political reform endeavors.
The drive and push for political reform appears to have been set in motion by the National Front of Afghanistan, a political coalition of several political parties and groups with millions of supporters, in reaction to uncertainty and potential instability. There are two major factors that have given rise to this uncertainty: external and internal.
Withdrawal of international community from Afghanistan is producing the feeling of uncertainty in the country, which is aid-recipient and remains to be extremely fragile in terms of potential drivers of insecurity and instability. Centralization of power in the hand of some exclusionist individuals and circles is feared to be going to serve as a source of potential instability as the pressure of international presence for representative form of government slackens.
The concern about this potential instability is vividly expressed in the joint statement of participants of Berlin conference as it reads,""We have supported the mission of the Coalition Forces in Afghanistan. It is our fervent desire that the Coalition Forces be successful. Yet, after the departure of the Coalition Forces, the enormous American, Coalition, and Afghan investment with their lives and treasure is currently in great peril of having been in vain. Our concern is that the present political system is dysfunctional because all the power is centralized in a way that no American would tolerate in the United States.
The current system has fatally concentrated decision-making to whoever is President of the country. The Afghan President appoints the governors of each province and district, the mayor of every town, every provincial chief of police, one third of the entire Senate, and even every judge in Afghanistan."Centralization of power in a diverse society is potentially dangerous because it leads to a feeling of being excluded among political actors representing different identity groups.
Such a sense of exclusion brings about divergence and consequently leaves no incentives for cooperation and accommodation among the political actors. Moreover, this trend carries the risk of leading to a decline the country into a chaotic situation and derailing of democratic process. In the era of new waves of democratization, Afghanistan cannot return to a form of political system and government other than democracy. After the fall of Taliban regime in late 2001, the country opted for democratic system and process to manage the differences and diversity that fortunately exist in this territorial part of the world, and serve its people.
Almost ten years have elapsed but daunting problems and challenges persist, posing serious threats to the future course of peace in the country. In fact, Afghanistan is catapulted into a new complex situation that requires prudent leadership to continue to make the country more democratic to accommodate the interests of all different political groups. In fact, the current problems are not down to democratization process; they rather stem from insufficient democracy and inefficiency on the part of the government and those who rule the country. Problems range from the corruption in the government to absence of good governance and rule of law.
One can therefore say that Afghanistan is going through a very critical juncture. International community has begun withdrawing their forces from the country, while the above-mentioned problems continue to hamper provision of security, economic development and efforts to bring tangible changes to Afghans' life. This in fact demonstrates a very often-ignored point that the last ten years were wasted due to lack of a prudent leadership, which is very crucial for an emerging democracy.
As a result both international community and Afghans are concerned about the reversal of the whole achievements made over the last ten years of joint struggle and international assistance. The failures of last ten years are down to a lack of prudent leadership coupled with a dysfunctional structure and institutional arrangements.
Added to this, centralization of power in the hand of a few has led to a mono-ethnic power configuration, which in turns causes polarized pluralism. Experiences show that under such circumstance the key to prevent potential conflict is to bring changes to the institutional designs in order to create conditions to encourage cooperation and accommodation among different ethnic groups and political players. This is the only way for managing a conflicting diverse society. Afghanistan is not different.
These explanations show that the campaign being carried out by the main political opposition, National Front of Afghanistan, is based both on theoretical foundations and ground reality of the country. This campaign must, therefore, be espoused by national and international stakeholders as a long-term and durable solution to the country's issue.