Afghan Corruption
To reduce Afghan corruption, Secretary Clinton could ask for a simple-to-implement concession. Select an outside agency (a major accounting firm, for instance) to audit Afghanistan’s books and the financial records of its senior government officials and senior civil servants. For the first audit — to be conducted based on the records as of one day prior to the Afghan president’s inauguration — guarantee amnesty to leaders and civil servants associated with missing funds. Ensure that the independent audit — not controlled by the Afghan government — is repeated each year and after the first year prosecute fully any cases that are consistent with ongoing corruption and improper allocation of funds. If the punishment for corrupt practices is severe enough then leaders and civil servants will have the incentive to police themselves against corrupt practices. If the second audit shows continued corruption on a significant scale then the United States should cut off aid to the government. The risk of lost aid will further incentivize improved behavior, stimulating accountability to the people and improved performance by the government.
And if the Afghan government refuses to go along with this proposal that is a good indication that they do not mean what they say when they promise to crack down on corruption.
What do you think? Seems like this will ferret out the crooks and possibly put Afghanistan onto a healthier developmental course.
1 Comment Add your own
1. John Coghlan | December 15th, 2010 at 7:44 am
Sir,
Your idea is good. But there could be an open door for the Afghanis: NATO could threaten to cut of much aid, but the year after, if the books are cleaner, offer to increase aid again. NATO could tie the amount of aid to such accounting. If official corruption dropped below a certain low level, then NATO could offer Afghanistan a special augmented package of aid. This would keep Afghanis looking toward the long-term.
One idea: to set up an international body to study best practices in overcoming corruption and to experiment with states to find better ways to decrease corruption. Transparency International states which states are cleaner. But the problem remains: how to get there. An organization such as the one mentioned could help to show the way.
As well, Afghanis could open up a think tank and experimental body working with the UN on how to cut corruption.
A similar system could be set up in political systems. Two weeks ago, President Laurent NGabo of the Ivory Coast refused to accept Ivory Coast election results. UN and Pan African bodies could offer such people excellent retirement packages and possibly, positions on Pan African (or Pan Asian or whatever) bodies. If such people failed to heed the ballot, then the UN and all other bodies – including Pan African bodies, would cut aid.
Another suggestion: one thing that cut corruption in Porto Alegre, Brazil, was to hand over a certain portion of city tax money neighbourhood councils. These councils would then decide what priorities they wanted in their neighbourhoods. Since locals were watching the local councils closely, it cut corruption.
I’m deeply enjoying your book – especially the suggestion on reducing Palistinian-Israeli tensions by sharing tourist tax revenue.
John Coghlan
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed