575 Juan Ignacio Castien Maestro Modernisation and regression in Afghanistan... whole. The tribe thus took on a more stable existence thanks to the tribal aristocrats who revitalised it in order to serve their specific interests.2 This process of hierarchisation was able to develop much more easily with the tribal system not being isolated, but rather being in contact with other more complex social systems that benefited from greater wealth, as was precisely the case in the classical Islamic world. With the tribal system in contact with more urbanised and statified areas, greater profits could be collected that were able to fuel this process of internal differentiation. These profits were very varied: commercial benefits, taxes or gains from plundering. There is a double paradox in this situation: on the one hand, contact with a non-tribal social system actually made the tribal system more powerful. And on the other, this same strengthened system became a huge barrier to consolidation of urban and state areas and, thus, became one of the key reasons for the brake on development experienced across the classical Islamic world. There is a further, even greater, paradox. The tribal system was a privileged space to develop patronage relations that could eventually result in the domination of a warrior-type aristocracy whose triumph would mean the end of traditional egalitarianism. The tribal system would then be a type of framework for the emergence of the state that, over time, would end up obstructing the whole process. After all, tribal ties continued to have a partially egalitarian nature and the traditional tribal institutions continued to maintain some of their original democratic character. So, the establishment of a pure “feudal” hierarchy was obstructed by the remnants of tribal egalitarianism. This complicated the full conversion of tribal areas to state control and kept these areas in a kind of hybrid state. Yielding urban and statified areas to tribal areas may have advanced the process and tribal aristocracies would have become fully integrated into the state system, becoming “detribalised” and “feudalised” in a progressive manner. But, right up to the present day, states have rarely been able to do this, limiting themselves to “encapsulating” tribal areas and avoiding direct confrontation with them. They have, however, promoted their differentiation and internal hierarchisation, strengthening their aristocracies by awarding them certain administrative functions and financing them in return for their cooperation. In exchange, the tribal areas also somewhat tribalised urban and statified areas. Often, ruling dynasties would make a show of their tribal origins, trying to maintain ties with their community of origin. Even more frequently, many of the administrative and military personnel were of 2 Gregorian, v. The Emergence of Modern Afghanistan. Politics of Reform and Modernization 1880-1946, Standford University Press, 1969. Pp. 39-43; Rubin, Barnett R. The Fragmentation of Afghanistan, Yale University Press, pp. 22-32. http://revista.ieee.es/index.php/ieee
REVISTA IEEE 5
To see the actual publication please follow the link above