Secure and stable conditions remain crucial prerequisites for
development and growth of economy. Though there are some analysts who
believe that development and growth can take place without necessarily
ensuring security first. However, that could be a self-serving argument
without any solid basis for its support. Afghanistan which remains in
turmoil and where plans for withdrawal of NATO/ISAF and US forces have
been announced has started experiencing the adverse impact of the
drawdown in both security and economy related areas.
While several statistics are given out about decrease in number of
violent attacks by the Taliban yet it is also well known that the area
of operations of Taliban has been expanding to cover areas in the North
and the West where Taliban activity had been absent hitherto before.
Though it might also be true that the number of attacks by the Taliban
has decreased yet it might be a ploy of the Taliban to lie low till the
western forces withdraw and thereafter test the mettle of Afghan
National Security Forces which, sadly, is unlikely to be up to the mark
for quite some time to come.
Meanwhile, the capital amassed by the private Afghan entrepreneurial
class and wealthy Afghans has been flying out of Kabul to places in the
Middle-East. Further, with draw down of the western forces and drying up
of civil aid the Afghan economy is expected to suffer in a great
measure. The World Bank has estimated that Afghanistan will face a
projected financing gap of 25 percent of GDP by 2021-22. This in turn
could impact security situation and development adversely.
There is another view that draw down of the western forces may not
impact the Afghan economy much as most of the international funds do not
stay in Afghanistan and find a way out in the shape as expatriated
profits, salaries and imports. According to the latest Asian
Development Bank Outlook, the planned foreign troop pullout by 2014 may
lower growth by at least 2-3 percentage points which is being considered
as not much of a decline in growth. There is also a belief that while
the short-term impact of decline in aid could be disruptive there would
be benefits in the long term. The World Bank has also presented a
similar picture.
The international/ world wide experience is that political
stability has been one of the key factors or rather a crucial factor for
a successful transition. In this regard the examples of Cambodia,
Mozambique, Rwanda, South Africa and Vietnam have been cited where the
countries transitioned from conflict to stability and development.
However, what needs to be remembered is that political, security and
economic environment prevailing in every conflict-ridden country are
usually unique and therefore unique solutions need to be found.
Afghanistan in recent years has seen rapid economic growth which could
be due to exogenous factors; what is yet to be seen is whether
Afghanistan can create an economy which is self-sustaining. For its
economy to become self-sustaining it would require international help
for many years to come.
Along with stability, security remains another crucial factor for
foreign investment and development. Unless there is a degree of security
there will be little incentive for investment especially from private
sector. On the other hand lack of development is also one of the major
causes for insurgency and conflict. Thus it may be difficult to decide
on priority between security and development. But with the planned
exit (and that too at somewhat faster pace than announced earlier) there
are anxieties and apprehensions that security situation is likely to
worsen rather than improve and this would have negative impact on the
investment climate. Can ANSF ensure security considering their yet to be
developed capacities? The answer would most probably be in the
negative.
It is also well-accepted that Afghanistan has large deposits of
mineral and hydrocarbon resources exploitation of which could generate
enough revenue for Afghanistan to move towards becoming
self-sustainable. The gestation period for most of these projects,
however is going to be long- thus full benefits would accrue only in the
long run. To evacuate the finished products or ore from such resources
would require building of the infrastructure in terms of roads, railway
lines and pipelines which would also be adversely impacted by the
geo-political interests of the stakeholders.
While China has planned to develop Aynak copper mines it is yet to
start digging or commence this project in a meaningful way. Security
remains the paramount concern. So far as its exploitation of hydro
carbon reserves is concerned China National Petroleum Corporation has
started production of oil in a small way in Amu Darya basin in
Northern Afghanistan; the production is expected to rise to 25,000 to
40,000 barrels a day by end of the year. However, there appear to be
some local rivalries and interests of the local warlords etc. which do
not appear have to be taken into account. If everything turns out as
planned the Chinese would also be setting up a refinery which would
further add to government’s revenues and possibly create more job
opportunities for the local populace.
Similarly, if and when India’s Hajigak iron ore mine project is
realised it is expected to create 200 million US dollars per year
revenue for the government. Hajigak's contract details include building
of rail road, steel industry, power plant and others infra structure.
There are plans to build railway line with linkages to Chabahar port;
the other alternative could be trucking the products out which would
slow down the rate of exploitation resulting into reduced volumes and
lower economic activity and revenues- all this would depend on a number
of factors including the expected returns from the project. Easier
alternative would have been by transportation of products overland
through Pakistan but obtuse policies of Pakistan prevent it from
granting direct access to India.
India had also hosted an investors’ conference in June 2012 that
focussed on inviting companies and businessmen to invest in Afghanistan.
The conference was attended by private investors from 40 countries. The
conference was timely as it was held between the Chicago and Tokyo
conferences (May and July 2012)- one was about security funding i.e. for
ANSF and the other for development aid (16 billion US $ over 4 years).
Five senior ministers handling mining, commerce and finance were in
attendance. And they went out of their way to assure potential
investors. As Anwar-ul-Haq Ahady, Afghanistan’s commerce minister said: “When
you take into account the high level of risk, the return on investing
in Afghanistan is much greater than most other parts of the world … Your
investment will not only benefit you and your employees but also create
conditions that will promote peace and stability in Afghanistan and the
wider region.”
But investors who got a fair idea of opportunities for investment in
Afghanistan seem to have adopted wait and watch stance. They appear to
be waiting for the outcome of Presidential elections set for April 2014
and the impact of troops’ withdrawal on security and stability. No
substantial commitments seem to have been made though the Afghan reps
made good presentations about the incentives offered in terms of tax
breaks, 100 percent ownership, easy repatriation of profits etc.
And of course, there is the question of Afghanistan’s geo-strategic
location as a hub of multi-modal corridors in all directions. If the
benefits of such a location are to be realised then regional cooperation
is imperative. Presently, many of the regional players have their own
versions of Silk Road strategies. America, China, Russia, Pakistan and
even India have their own visions of such a strategy. While many
initiatives for regional cooperation in building infrastructure through
Afghanistan have been announced there is very little that has been
accomplished on ground.
According to one Indian estimate if even 20 percent of the South and
South East Asian trade were to pass through Afghanistan to Central Asia
and beyond to Europe it would generate sufficient revenues for
Afghanistan to become self-sustainable in the long run.
Further, traditional sectors that would aid economy are agricultural,
health and education sectors- the agricultural and human resource
potential are underdeveloped. They all need careful attention by the
government and donors for accelerating growth, skill development
and generating more jobs.
Thus, for the Afghan economy to stand on its own feet at least one to
two decades would be required when all such projects could possibly be
realised. Meanwhile, there is a serious risk of Afghan economy
witnessing a down turn and therefore, the foreign aid and assistance
would continue to be needed if the gains made so far are not to be lost.
Providing Security for the Projects
Foreign investment, especially by the private sector remains
inhibited due to security concerns. Karzai has admitted that security
situation was still fragile and attacks by Taliban are likely to
continue post-2014.
So what are the alternatives or options available for providing security?
(a) It is business of the government to provide security for
business enterprises in their territory- so ANSF would need to take on
the task. Alternatively, a para military force could be created from
demobilised ANA soldiers especially for this task. In any case over next
few years the strength of ANSF is planned to be reduced from peak
strength of 352,000(195,000 ANA, 157,000 ANP) to 228,500 by 2017; a
large number of soldiers also leave after finishing their terms of
engagement. (Planning for a $4.1 billion ANSF budget during
2017-2024, the United States expects to contribute about $2.3 billion
yearly, and $500 million per year would be provided by the Afghan
government, with that figure to rise steadily until 2024, at which time
Afghans would have the capacity to provide funding themselves.)
(b) The second model is provision of security personnel by the
country investing in Afghanistan which again is fraught with risks and
additional costs in terms possible lives lost and money. This was tried
out by India during construction of Zeranj-Delaram road in Nimroz
province where the construction costs rose many fold and there were loss
of lives in terms of security personnel and workers killed.
(c) Third possible alternative could be to provide international
guarantees to the foreign investors to mitigate the risks of investing.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.