While it is indeed
possible that the state - building as the U.S. has been doing in various parts
of the world to date is based on democracy and the rule of law, it might be
reasonable to mention at this point the "rule of law" language could
be overdone just a bit by policy makers.
Here's why: In the utilitarian
world, that is, the world espoused with utopian goals along the lines of what
we know essentially to be modern or neo - liberalism even along hegelian lines,
the rule of law is reduced to and atomized into the norms we all learn as
individuals in school and in our experience in society on the one hand. On the other hand, the rule of law as a
principle that is elevated to overriding deity status for those who believe
there is the law and only the law as enforcing the edicts of the international
state and its rules and norms as pushed out to media, other states and their
statesmen, and other, interested parties.
This again, is a strictly liberal view and one of systemic totemism, and the author here contrasts
the global utilitarianism behind this principle with the overall conservative
belief in the functions of the state in our own village as rule - maker and
rule - enforcer among other things - bicameral legislature, a judiciary based
upon principles such as the Bill of Rights and human rights, and a chief
executive that is elected (for starters.)
I might be citing
some high - school history book without really knowing it here, but the
normativeness and the relativeness that are sometimes bred into the state as
adopting above all the principle of the rule of law do engender meta -
juridical functions in society and in the state in which judicial officials can
abuse the overall legal considerations - those of business, culture, the arts,
economics and finance, science and so on, even sports and entertainment -
between society and the state as built - up that discourage proper legal
procedure and action in what we see as appropriate within our scope of people
living in a free society. The unbounded
legalism of the former soviet union is one such example of improper
administration as brought about by the institution of utilitarian socialist
superstructures, especially the judicial.
There are other, less obvious examples and though the principle of
upholding the morals and norms of society has great merit, the concentration of
any state administration on legal(istic) principles and practices throws it out
of balance; sort of like when Beria was at the head of the party in one way or
another in soviet times.
Many of the
difficulties in the open conflict in Afghanistan at this time call for
diffusing the apparent and glaring administrative / political issues that prevent the
government there from gaining more legitimacy among its people. There are issues as well like making sure the
police are properly trained to handle terrorist situations, and diffusing again
the influence of the Taliban in many places.
There is also the international relationship with Pakistan and
Afghanistan that has U.S. politicians worried about the stability of both
countries. Efforts so far have been to
try to win hearts and minds with U.S. personnel taking the lead, though terrorism
continues to be a fearful danger to everyone there and in neighboring states
right now. The Taliban as well continues
to engage in violence while summarily avoiding truces and alliances with the
Afghani government or provincial governments under Kabul, much less do the
Taliban take part in peaceful fine - tuning as it should be at this point. All of this might be avoided in some way or
another through the recognition of some traits in Afghan society by its leaders
and some cession on the topic of territoriality and provincial groups (not the
Taliban here) to Kabul might be in order.
The nightly news
features Western - style photo opportunities for Afghani leaders, something
that might be irksome to their sometimes ultra - liberal citizenry in some
places, and the influences of the Western powers in the present administration
there are palpable and might be annoying as popularized as well - this attempt
to bring some decent organisation to the chaos in the country that has reigned
for so long, even from before the soviet invasion in the 1970's, is highly
commendable, though to some Afghanis the values and culture(s) of the country's
society might obviously conflict with the type of legalism introduced into
their system by the presumably foreign allies under our latest polity. Another difficulty is the U.S. policy -
makers up to this point have only too well understood the issues of the Middle
East and Central Asia as they have been there for a long time, and through the
lens of the policy - making of our own governments, the Afghanis are only too
quick to point out the fissures and faults.
This has resulted apparently in an over - reliance on security forces
and legal proceedings that are not equipped nor prepared on a domestic front to
support the level of criminal activities that take place there, including the
terrorism. Another sub - plot in the
story of the "Frog and the Scorpion," and / or the social and
societal pains of state - building in foreign places where some of the citizens
might not actually be interested in the "Federalist Papers" or
Western norms and rules, and not out of simple ethno - centrism or cultural
refutation.