Wealthy Afganistan

Has everyone read or heard the news story from yesterday about the large deposit of copper, gold and other minerals under the soil in Afghanistan. How would things have changed if those resources had been developed in the 1950s or 60s? I don't think in a third world monarchy that the wealth would be shared equally. But much of it would have trickled down to the many of the Afghan people and a middle class emerges. I am thinking that means a stable government. No Soviet invasion, no Taliban and that means no haven for Osama Bin Laden. Of course we would not see the US invasion. On Othertimelines a fellow member thought that Afganistan would become a third world kleptocracy with ethnic civil wars. So what does everyone else think?
 
Afghanistan was screwed the moment that the Soviets invaded the country and upon their departure, another war that brought in the Taliban.
 
I think PVMcNutt is suggesting that this mineral wealth is discovered a bit earlier and it buoys a moderate but strong regime, keeping out fundamentalists and tribalism, keeping a unitary state that Russia cannot so easily invade since it is not a 'failed state.'
 

Hendryk

Banned
I don't think in a third world monarchy that the wealth would be shared equally. But much of it would have trickled down to the many of the Afghan people and a middle class emerges.
How much of a middle class do the oil sheikdoms have? You don't build a developed economy, let alone a developed society, solely from extractive industries. Those simply turn a country into a bunch of rentiers who live off wealth generated by others; the results are endemic corruption, the entrenchment of despotism, and a general sense of entitlement. Human capital, the only capital that really matters in the long run, ends up completely neglected, since you neither need an education nor marketable skills to cash in your check from the oil industry at the end of the month.
 

Bearcat

Banned
1. What Hendryk said.

2. No matter how much mineral wealth there is, the Afghanis cannot withstand the Soviet Red Army of 1980. No chance whatsoever.
 
Well, the minerals and etc worth a lot of money *now* but back then? not much need for Lithium, etc when (a) there is maybe a handful of "computers" back then and (b) I'm not sure how the infrastructure was but right now are practically non-existent aside from the roads to the cities.
 
Well, the minerals and etc worth a lot of money *now* but back then? not much need for Lithium, etc when (a) there is maybe a handful of "computers" back then and (b) I'm not sure how the infrastructure was but right now are practically non-existent aside from the roads to the cities.

It's not just lithium, but gold as well. So it would be still worthwhile for whichever superpower wants to step in and exploit the hell out of it. More likely is a DRC-type situation, with wacky dictators, warlords who preach the Koran but fight for "blood gold," and general suffering for the average man with the shovel. Classic resource curse scenario.
 
While I was probably hasty with my vision of an Afganistan, the mineral wealth would stenghten the Afgan government. The monarchy probably is not overthrown. There is no friendly government to invite a Soviet invasion.
 
The Shah of Iran was the head of a state based on resource extraction and he was toppled. That said if there are multiple resources in multip0le places then it should strengthen the central govt because local warlords can't grab the entire wealth of the country.
 
Right, but did they even have anywhere near the survey abilities and technolgies available to us in 2010? Unlikley IMO, though I do grant it is an interesting scenerio and I'm not trying to "rain on your parade" so to speak.
 
No matter how much mineral wealth there is, the Afghanis cannot withstand the Soviet Red Army of 1980. No chance whatsoever.

If there is no pressure to save face, the Soviet Army will not get deployed there at all.

The war was a bad deal for the USSR from the start and many knew it. If there's a friendly-neutral government that's not begging for help, they'd let it be, regardless of ideology.
 
I'd rather go for no Soviet invasion and a successful reforming government, which continues the massive number of tourists coming to Afghanistan, which will gradually propel Afghanistan's economy into First World status, along with help from its mineral resources.
 

Bearcat

Banned
If there is no pressure to save face, the Soviet Army will not get deployed there at all.

The war was a bad deal for the USSR from the start and many knew it. If there's a friendly-neutral government that's not begging for help, they'd let it be, regardless of ideology.

No.

The Soviets will seek any chance to subvert or invade a treasure house country with a more or less healthy economy right on their border. They tried in Iran, but the Tudeh came up craps when Khomenei won the revolution. And Afghanistan, even with minerals, will never be as healthy or stable after just ten or twenty years than Iran. Especially one that moves them one step from warm water ports on the Persian Gulf. It won't happen as in OTL, but the Soviets will likely find a way to go in there.
 

cw1865

Endowments

How much of a middle class do the oil sheikdoms have? You don't build a developed economy, let alone a developed society, solely from extractive industries. Those simply turn a country into a bunch of rentiers who live off wealth generated by others; the results are endemic corruption, the entrenchment of despotism, and a general sense of entitlement. Human capital, the only capital that really matters in the long run, ends up completely neglected, since you neither need an education nor marketable skills to cash in your check from the oil industry at the end of the month.

Also, when you become an exporter of a primary product, you need to concern yourself with 'Dutch disease' - demand for your exports leads to increased demand for your currency which makes your other exports less competitive. If the Afghans are looking for a model of how to manage such mineral wealth, they should at least look at how the Norwegians deal with their oil wealth.
 
I'd rather go for no Soviet invasion and a successful reforming government, which continues the massive number of tourists coming to Afghanistan, which will gradually propel Afghanistan's economy into First World status, along with help from its mineral resources.
You don't make a first world economy from raw mineral wealth. You need the human capital and the export markets for products made from those raw materials. If those deposits were discovered and exploited by the 1960s, that might or might not have strengthened the central government and might or might not have prevented the Soviet invasion. But it wouldn't be a first world economy. I'd say it might end up like Saudi Arabia, Nigeria or, in a worst case scenario, like Congo (the one formerly known as Zaire).
 
No.

The Soviets will seek any chance to subvert or invade a treasure house country with a more or less healthy economy right on their border. They tried in Iran, but the Tudeh came up craps when Khomenei won the revolution. And Afghanistan, even with minerals, will never be as healthy or stable after just ten or twenty years than Iran. Especially one that moves them one step from warm water ports on the Persian Gulf. It won't happen as in OTL, but the Soviets will likely find a way to go in there.

Subvert yes, invade no. The Soviets for all their many faults were fairly cautious, and outright invasion is always risky, as per OTL!

Now it is possible the if subversion works then fails you might still get a invasion (butterfles effective cancell out).
 
No.

The Soviets will seek any chance to subvert or invade a treasure house country with a more or less healthy economy right on their border. They tried in Iran, but the Tudeh came up craps when Khomenei won the revolution. And Afghanistan, even with minerals, will never be as healthy or stable after just ten or twenty years than Iran. Especially one that moves them one step from warm water ports on the Persian Gulf. It won't happen as in OTL, but the Soviets will likely find a way to go in there.

Hello?
Afghanistan was in the Soviet influence zone since the 1920s. It was effectively finlandized before Finland. In comparison, the Shah has proclaimed enmity to the Soviets time and again, and came to the power via coup against a Soviet-supported government. The USSR never actively sought to install a communist government there; just propped up any one that was friendly to them. The invasion of 1980 has taken place because after a bloody palace coup the new dictator pretty much publicly announced that he is going to look for a new sponsor (wink, wink, USA).

An AH Afghanistan where the wealth was discovered in the 1960s would be more and more drawn into Soviet sphere - but not by military means. Who would be called to provide the mining technology? The Soviets. Who would build the smelters and refining sites? the Soviets. And all this requires infrastructure - roads, railways, pipelines - which would be built with Soviet help and technology. Possibly pieces of Western technology would be blended in, but only after a consultation with the Soviets.

What I rather foresee is an increasingly centralized Afghan government that pays less and less heed to the needs and wishes of the tribal chiefs, just as the mining infrastructure eats away the traditional ways of life in the mountain villages (usually along with the actual mountains). The result would be tribal insurrection against which the central government loses ground; at that point, the Soviets are called in to support their investment and precious metal supplies.

Along the same lines - not only Afghanistan has a newly found mineral wealth. There are huge untapped copper and nickel deposits under Mongolia, with possibly a high platinum/palladium content. Chinese mining companies are starting to move now, although no ground has been broken yet. I wonder what would happen if these reserves would have been found in the 1960s - at the height of the Sino-Soviet split, in a country which was traditionally in Chinese zone of influence for centuries, but now a Soviet satellite... Damanski island would have been kid's play.
 
Prevent either the overthrow of Muhammad Zahir Shah by Mohammad Daoud Khan in 1973, or the overthrow of Daoud Khan by the Communists in 1978 (Zahir Shah would probably be better, IMO-he was more progressive than Daoud Khan and allowed a measure of Democracy, albeit one that didn't threaten royal power). Have Zahir Shah pursue a conciliatory policy towards the Soviets and you likely prevent the invasion and subsequent civil war which wrecked most of Afghanistan's infrastructure and sent much of the country back into the stone age.

In the late 1970's-early 1980's, the minerals get discovered. This provides the incentive for greater infrastructure (a fully fledged rail network, for instance) to be built, and mines begin to open. Then, have the Afghan government use the money it gets from the mines to start building an industrial base (which would first be smelters, refineries, and processing plants for the metals, and might later expand to manufacturing that uses them). In a best case scenario, you might be able to get Afghanistan up to lower-middle income status (on the same level as much of the Middle East, South America, or Pakistan, and above sub-Saharan Africa) by 2010.
 
Last edited:
Top