Many countries
have been involved in Afghanistan in the past decade. However, one would be
pressed to say that their presence has brought or greatly contributed to
achieving stability in the country. Nevertheless, some progress has been made. For
instance, USA`s biggest achievement in Afghanistan was establishing fairly ethnically representative defence and police forces. This post will analyze the method used to attain this ethnic representation.
In Afghanistan,
prior to the past few years, the dominant ethnic group, the Pashtun, was
under-represented in both the Afghan National Army (ANA) and the Afghan
National Police (ANP). Based on the
ethnic representation of the general population, the USA set ethnic targets for
the defence and the police forces as follows:
Pashtun – 44%, Tajik – 25%, Hazara -10%, Uzbek – 8%,
and others 13%.
The USA has
clearly made some significant gains in this area. For instance, in 2009, the Tajik
made up 70% of ANA officer corps. Today, they make up 39.6% of the officer corps and are moving closer to the 25% target. They are still over-represented in the police force, at the expense of the Hazara, the Uzbek, and the other smaller ethnic
groups. Moreover, the largest ethnic group the Pashtun still falls short of the 44% target, both in the ANA and the ANP. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the
establishment of ethnic quotas has greatly increased the ethnic representation
in the defence and police forces.
Yet, one has to
question the utility of using ethnic quotas for the ANP. Since ethnic quotas
ensure that the force represents the general population of the country rather
that of the community, it means a unit might not be ethnically representative
of the community in which it is stationed. To illustrate, in the case of Afghanistan, ethnic
group dominate certain territories: the Pashtun occupy the majority of the
south, while the Tajik are found in the north. Currently, the ANP is
representative of the general population as mentioned above; however, it would
be more beneficial if the ANP units were ethnically representative of the
community they are located in. Thus in a Pashtun dominated territory, police
officers would be mostly Pashtun. As a result, they would be better able to relate
to the community and would be better positioned to gain its trust. Conversely,
if a police unit meets the current ethnic quotas, the majority of officers in
that unit will be Pashtun. However, the unit could still be based in a Tajik-dominated
area. Consequently, a Pashtun dominated police unit in a Tajik dominated area
can be a recipe for police abuse and ethnic predation.
On the other hand, ethnic quotas still work well in
the ANA (or in any military). Since the army protects all citizens, it should
be ethnically representative of the general population especially if there are
ethnic tensions in the country. An ethnically representative army will
demonstrate to the population that people from different ethnic groups can work
together thus, hopefully, inspiring cooperation between groups. Moreover, by
requiring soldiers from different ethnic groups to work together, it teaches
them to put aside their ethnic differences and regard each other as brothers in
arms. As a result, the approach will promote loyalty to the army thus enhancing its cohesiveness and efficiency.
Furthermore, if each unit is ethnically representative of the general
population, then the unit will have a link to the community in any area of
operation.
However, some criticize this approach by pointing out that if an ethnic group was to rebel then it would
undermine a part of each unit. They propose the British regimental system as a solution: small units (battalions)
are ethnically homogenous, while the encompassing larger group (a brigade) is
ethnically representative. For
example, in the case of Afghanistan, an ethnically representative brigade would
be made up of four ethnically homogenous battalions: the Pashtun, the Tajik, the
Hazara, and the Uzbek. Proponents of this method claim that ethnic links
within the unit can improve morale and the efficiency of battalions, while enabling the brigade to
exercise control over them when it engages in combat against the ethnic kin of
that battalion.
However, the homogenous battalions would have to be
different sizes in order to proportionally represent the size of an ethnic
group in general population, which could lead to issues such as abuse of the
smaller battalions. Moreover, this approach promotes stark separation, which
could lead to competition or tensions between the battalions. Any such tensions
would hinder the ability of the army to work harmoniously as a unit. In
addition, the approach would forgo the benefits of having an army that is as a
whole ethnically representative of the general population.
Therefore, the ANP should be representative of the
community where its posts are located, while the ANA should be ethnically
representative as a whole of the general population. Furthermore, the above
reasoning could also apply to other countries where majority and minority
ethnic groups dominate certain territories (as is the case in Afghanistan), and
there are tensions between them.
