Guerre et (re)construction de l’État en Afghanistan : conflits de tradition ou conflits de développement ?
Résumé
War and State (Re)Construction in Afghanistan: Conflicts of Tradition or Conflicts of Development?
Foreign aid provided for the (re)construction of the Afghan state since 2001 has, paradoxically, intensified the ‘ethnicisation’ and sectarianisation of economic and political relations, contradicting the criteria of good governance advocated by donors. Conflicts apparently related to tradition and identity have become more common and indeed point to more fundamental contradictions between the culturalist representation of Afghan society and the effects of the country’s integration into the world capitalist economy. Thus, viewing Islamic radicalisation, ethnic polarisation or tribal atavism as responsible for the social and political violence in Afghanistan gives an incomplete picture of the situation as it ignores transformations in society and the new challenges of this supposedly traditional conflict.
Foreign aid provided for the (re)construction of the Afghan state since 2001 has, paradoxically, intensified the ‘ethnicisation’ and sectarianisation of economic and political relations, contradicting the criteria of good governance advocated by donors. Conflicts apparently related to tradition and identity have become more common and indeed point to more fundamental contradictions between the culturalist representation of Afghan society and the effects of the country’s integration into the world capitalist economy. Thus, viewing Islamic radicalisation, ethnic polarisation or tribal atavism as responsible for the social and political violence in Afghanistan gives an incomplete picture of the situation as it ignores transformations in society and the new challenges of this supposedly traditional conflict.
L’aide étrangère destinée depuis 2001 à la (re)construction de l’État afghan a paradoxalement amplifié l’ethnicisation et la confessionnalisation des rapports économiques et politiques, en totale contradiction avec les critères de bonne gouvernance prônés par les bailleurs de fonds. Les conflits d’apparence traditionnelle ou identitaire se sont multipliés, renvoyant en fait à des contradictions plus fondamentales entre la représentation culturaliste de la société afghane et les effets de l’insertion du pays dans l’économie capitaliste mondiale. Ainsi, le fait de rendre la radicalisation islamique, la polarisation ethnique ou l’atavisme tribal responsables de la violence sociale et politique en Afghanistan dénote d’une vision incomplète de la situation, dans la mesure où celle-ci ne tient pas compte des transformations de la société et des nouveaux enjeux de cette conflictualité supposée traditionnelle.