Federalism in the Third World and Afghanistan: Without National Parties, It Cannot Succeed

Federalism in the Third World and Afghanistan: Without National Parties, It Cannot Succeed

Author: Dr. Najibullah Anwar

Developing countries often face challenges in building stable and effective political systems due to factors such as historical legacies, socio-economic inequalities, corruption, lack of institutional capacity, and foreign influence. These challenges hinder the development of inclusive governance structures that truly represent the interests of the people and serve them effectively.

In Afghanistan, various forms of governance have been experienced—such as republicanism, socialism, Islamism, and Western-style democracy—but none have succeeded in bringing political stability, economic prosperity, or lasting peace to the country. For over four decades, war and instability have overshadowed the country’s situation.

In recent years, some former politicians from the republic era have supported a federal system. However, they seem to forget that Afghanistan was, in practice, a federal republic from 1992 to 1996 and again during the past twenty years. In this period, each warlord established their own center of power in their respective regions and rejected the authority of the central government.

Proponents of federalism claim that such a system could solve all of the country’s problems. However, many of them seem more motivated by a desire to regain their lost privileges and political power.

They often refer to successful examples of federalism in the United States and Germany. However, it must be acknowledged that the success of a system in one country does not guarantee its success in another. In the U.S. and Germany, powerful and advanced political parties play a crucial role in the effectiveness of federalism. These parties are central in organizing, representing the diverse interests of various regions, facilitating cooperation between different levels of government, and providing mechanisms for negotiation.

Indeed, the party system is the backbone of federalism in these countries.

In the United States, since its founding, political parties have managed religious, racial, and regional differences to a significant extent. For example, eight presidents have been elected from Virginia, seven from Ohio, and five from New York; whereas from 29 other states, no president has ever been elected—or it took years for a candidate from those states to reach the presidency.

Without a strong national party system, the likelihood of internal conflicts and deep dissatisfaction among the states would have been much higher.

As a result, it is the party system that has neutralized regional and religious issues and prevented them from escalating into national crises.

It must be understood that federalism alone does not guarantee democratic and representative governance. Other factors such as the rule of law, respect for human rights, and political culture are also essential for genuine democratic development.

For example, Russia has a federal government, but due to the absence of pluralism, restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly, and concerns about electoral transparency, it has been widely criticized. Similarly, Venezuela under Nicolás Maduro, despite having a federal structure, faces challenges of authoritarianism and repression of dissent.

Therefore, federalism without strong national parties is ineffective in the Third World. The role of national parties in a federal government is to keep the states connected, protect the country from secessionist threats, and ensure the stability of the federal system.

In many African and Asian Third World countries, due to the absence of strong national parties, people have become entangled in ethnic and linguistic issues.

For example, in Nigeria, the lack of strong national parties has led to deep ethnic and linguistic divisions. Similarly, in South Sudan, weak political parties have prevented the establishment of a functional federal system.

India, however, which was a developing country at the time of its founding, managed to establish a federal system thanks to national parties like the Indian National Congress.

A prime example is Manmohan Singh, who served as India’s Prime Minister from 2004 to 2014. He was a member of the Sikh minority (only 1.7% of India’s population) and was elevated to this position by the Indian National Congress. Similarly, Muslims, who make up about 15% of India’s population, have been able to attain important positions such as the presidency.

This shows that it is the party system—not just federalism—that enables minorities to actively participate and play decision-making roles in the country.

Likewise, the election of Imran Khan as Prime Minister in Pakistan highlights the importance of democratic processes and the role of party systems in representing the country’s diverse leadership.