Cash that flows in as tribute from foreign sources replaces the authentic source of governing authority and capacity: taxes. A regime’s ability to collect taxes from its own people is one of the key indicators that it has legitimacy. A regime that depends on taxes to function and retain power will seek to assure that it retains legitimacy, by carrying out the necessary functions of governance. “Legitimacy” need not stem from democracy; a stable authoritarian regime, like China, can have one without the other. But it does require that the government govern, as Samuel Huntington used to put it.

…Even feudal rulers must safeguard their subjects’ interests to some extent, since they derive their incomes from those subjects. The more America funnels money to warlords, the more it turns them into something even worse than feudal rulers: satraps, with incomes drawn from the imperial centre. It may be that there is no way for the West to establish a legitimate government in Afghanistan at this point. But more bribes are definitely not the way to do it.

Regards, Steve

The only way to get a handle on the corruption would be to remove the international military presence, the civilian presence and the NGOs. Oh, the corruption would still be there, but the amount of money available to steal would be much smaller. As long as international funds flow into Afghanistan, much of it will be diverted (stolen) by those with the power to do so…

mikey