OpinionOp-Ed
Op-Ed

Undoing Afghanistan's resource curse

CommentaryOpinionAfghanistanIraqConservationNatural ResourcesPolitics
The resource curse could undermine everything the U.S. has invested in Afghanistan since 2001

Afghanistan is teetering on the edge. A little-known bill just passed the upper house of its parliament that could help counter threats to the country's stability and future development, but only if the U.S. government works with Afghanistan to ensure that it is fixed before it becomes law.

The United States hopes that Afghanistan's $1-trillion mineral wealth will kick-start the economy, reduce dependency on U.S. aid and ultimately fund Afghan security forces that can stand up to the Taliban. However, there is a serious risk this measure would instead fuel corruption and conflict, while generating little revenue for the government but a lot for insurgents and warlords.

A significant part of the last 30 years of conflict has been funded from the proceeds of natural resources, including emeralds and rubies. Initial research by Global Witness confirms that the Taliban and other armed groups are still taking a significant cut from mining in many parts of the country.

So the mining law matters. What the proposed law, which would replace an existing one, is supposed to do is set out how contracts for the vast mineral riches are granted, who is eligible to get them, what taxes they will pay and what protections there are for the environment and local communities. It should help determine whether the Afghan people receive their fair share of revenue from their natural wealth, or whether power brokers and corrupt officials will pocket the funds in dirty deals. It should spell out whether ordinary Afghans have any right to know who owns the contracts.

Yet as it stands, the proposed law has serious weaknesses. It does not require the publication of contracts or the real ownership of mining companies, has no clear criteria for bidding and does not even forbid informal militias from being involved in mining. These are fundamental transparency and accountability safeguards, increasingly accepted around the world. Despite some positive provisions, such as the requirement for companies to sign a development agreement to help communities around the mines, overall the law simply does not do the job.

Many people in the Afghan and U.S. governments recognize this. But that has not been translated into serious action. In practice, the driving concern behind the bill has been to fix a few provisions in the existing law that might deter investment by international mining companies, rather than create a law that would most effectively shield against abuses. Given the threats Afghanistan faces, this is an incredibly shortsighted approach.

The Obama administration should work with the Afghan government to encourage reform of the bill before it becomes law, and, more broadly, to build up effective oversight of the country's natural resources. If U.S. interests are not enough justification, Afghan interests surely are. With more than 1 in 3 people living below the poverty line, Afghanistan desperately needs its resources to drive growth and foster stability.

President Obama warned recently that the Al Qaeda-inspired militants who have seized territory in Iraq pose a serious threat to the United States. After the U.S. exited Iraq and Americans thought they had escaped the conflict, Washington has had to pledge sustained support to the Iraqi government. If the U.S. wants to avoid a similar outcome in Afghanistan, it has to treat management of natural resources as a core strategic priority — not an optional extra — and as a basic condition for stability.

The resource curse could undermine everything the U.S. has invested in Afghanistan since 2001: 14 years of fighting, hundreds of billions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost. The law is one obvious tool that could help prevent that fate from becoming a reality. The Obama administration, and its Afghan partners, cannot claim to be blind to the risks if this is not done right. They must act now.

Jodi Vittori is the Afghan policy advisor at London-based Global Witness, an international NGO campaigning to prevent natural resource-related conflict and corruption. She retired this year from the U.S. Air Force after 20 years. Most recently, she served in the anti-corruption task force of the NATO International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
CommentaryOpinionAfghanistanIraqConservationNatural ResourcesPolitics
  • From John Kerry: We need more visas, now, for our Afghan allies
    From John Kerry: We need more visas, now, for our Afghan allies

    The way a country winds down a war in a faraway place and stands with those who risked their own safety to help in the fight sends a message to the world that is not soon forgotten.

  • Saving a dog, L.A. freeway style

    On the I-5 Freeway on Tuesday, just north of Commerce, the northbound traffic was finally starting to pick up when the silver Mercedes came to a dead stop in front of me in the fast lane. And then the driver got out. Oh, great, I thought. What looniness have we got here?

  • No more Mr. News Guy -- L.A. anchor Kent Shocknek signs off
    No more Mr. News Guy -- L.A. anchor Kent Shocknek signs off

    Notice something missing from your TV news this week? It's Kent Shocknek, who spoke to The Times two days before signing off Friday, after 31 years in the anchor chair on two stations, KNBC and KCBS/KCAL. He so fits the role, he got anchor cameos in the movies. His tenure, one of the...

  • California's initiative process could become more enlightened under this new law
    California's initiative process could become more enlightened under this new law

    It turns out that a legislative hearing can be simultaneously enlightening and pointless. Take, for example, Monday's hearing in Sacramento on Proposition 46, the measure on the Nov. 4 ballot to increase the cap on medical malpractice damages, and Thursday's on Proposition 47, the...

  • No on Proposition 45
    No on Proposition 45

    Angered by rapidly rising premiums for automobile insurance, voters approved Proposition 103 in 1988 to give the state insurance commissioner the power to veto unreasonable rate hikes for auto policies. Now, after years of premium hikes in health insurance, voters have the chance to extend...

  • Why so many voters care so little about the midterm elections
    Why so many voters care so little about the midterm elections

    The looming midterm elections, which will decide whether the U.S. Senate is run by Democrats or Republicans, has been called "the Seinfeld election," because so much of the campaign seems to be about nothing.

  • Congress should fund fires for what they are -- disasters
    Congress should fund fires for what they are -- disasters

    Californians are all too familiar with the devastation forest fires bring. The state has already had more than 1,000 wildfires this year, and the worst of the fire season is just beginning. More than 350,000 acres of national forest have burned in Northern California so far in 2014. And each...

  • A silver lining from the Isla Vista tragedy: New power to take guns from the unstable
    A silver lining from the Isla Vista tragedy: New power to take guns from the unstable

    The pro-gun crowd will be foaming, but Gov. Jerry Brown today signed into law AB 1014, by Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), that will let family members or police seek a court order to temporarily remove lawfully owned weapons from the home of someone deemed at risk of committing...

Comments
Loading