M.A. (History) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

No description available.

This study consisted of qualitative interviews with six Afghan political leaders who served as cabinet members in the Afghan government prior to the Soviet invasion. The study sought to report the political conditions in Afghanistan based on the direct experiences and the reflections of these leaders whose titles and names remain anonymous.The data were collected and analyzed using a modified version of Spradley's Developmental Research Sequence Writing methodology. The data included field notes gathered from numerous interviews, casual conversations, tape recording, library research and documents provided by the informants.The rivalries that prevented political unity during the war of resistance have exacerbated the quest for power now that the common enemy, the Soviet Union and Afghan-Marxist regimes, has disappeared from the scene. No credible social or political within the country to initiate and promote political reconciliation. Each group appears to be attempting a unilateral solution to the national crisis. The great majority of Afghans are not only left out of the political process, but are also held hostage to the confrontation between competing groups whose political and military strategies is the elimination, or at best exclusion, of other competing groups. Dangerously, none of the powerful group's adversaries has given up the idea of war as the institution or nationally acceptable leadership is available instrument of political settlement. Among political leaders there is still much in Afghan political culture that is basically hostile to open and competitive politics. / Department of Educational Leadership

No description available.

Promoting the rule of law is vital for the success of domestic and international postconflict state-building efforts. Yet in post-conflict settings, non-state justice systems handle most disputes, retaining substantial autonomy and authority. Legal pluralism's importance, however, is rarely recognized and dramatically under-theorized. This thesis demonstrates that multiple justice systems can co-exist and contribute to the development of a democratic state bound by the rule of law. Domestic and international efforts, however, must be cognizant of the overarching legal pluralism paradigm that exists when trying to build the rule of law and tailor their strategies accordingly. By drawing on two divergent case studies, Timor-Leste and Afghanistan, this dissertation examines the conditions under which the rule of law can be advanced in post-conflict settings featuring a high degree of legal pluralism and substantial international involvement. Four distinct legal pluralism paradigms are proposed - combative, competitive, cooperative, and benign - in order to understand how legal pluralism functions in practice. Timor-Leste successfully advanced the rule of law because the major parties remained committed to democracy and developed institutions promoting accountability, inclusivity, and legality. The state meaningfully collaborated with key non-state actors. While the process was imperfect, Timorese state-officials effectively mediated between the international community and local-level figures. This contributed to the effective transformation of a competitive legal pluralist environment into a cooperative one. The international community largely reinforced these positive trends. Conversely, Afghanistan's post-2001 regime squandered the opportunity to build a democratic state bound by the rule of law. Simultaneously, it failed to mediate between the international community and the tribal and religious authorities essential for legitimate rule. Despite international actor's substantial influence, external aid did little good and was often counter-productive. These divergent approaches helps explain judicial state-building's failure and the corresponding slide from competitive into combative legal pluralism against the Taliban.