Hello Pietro

Thanks for an interesting email; there are so many things one could say in
response! Additionally, it is interesting responding to an approach/set of
ideas/discourse that would be pretty much unheard of in the UK development
community, which is, I think, sceptical about most forms of external
'expert' intervention; the rhetoric doesn't always match the reality of
course, as there continue to be myriad consultants jetting around the world!
My initial response is contradictory - I admire your commitment, but would
want to urge very very considerable caution. Thus, I would urge reflection
on two areas of concern.

I think there are overriding practical, safety and strategic issues; I am
surprised at the timing of your plans, particularly re your forthcoming son
(congratulations by the way!). From what I have heard, Kabul remains very
very unstable, and a seriously dangerous place in which to work,
particularly as an American Christian; as a non religious Brit it is
definitely not a risk I would personally take. Should Lizzie encounter any
difficulties in the build up to birth, one really cannot assume that it will
be possible to get home. Security alerts (e.g. unanticipated evacuations),
limited availability of flights, transit difficulties, etc. might present
you with a desparate and upsetting situation. Into the melting pot one
should also add issues around Iraq; for example, my research in Mauritania
(Islamic republic) will be suspended in the event of any uncertainty at all
in this area.

Aside from serious personal safety and related issues, the benchmark I tend
to use is to assess whether any potential harm to myself, or any incident
involving me, would actually exacerbate an already difficult issue. What
diplomatic incident might arise from one's involvement, who might this
involve and who could it injure? Whilst you may wish to ameliorate some of
the harm of past US policy, you could run the risk of engendering its
escalation.

In the light of these concerns, I am tempted to ask, why Kabul? There are
myriad places in the world which I am sure would welcome your support, but
which would not present such very significant risks. Admittedly, Kabul is
very prominent at the moment - and I know you have always been interested in
the area - but the current rush is in a sense a product of the imbalance of
global politics and the global media that one might be trying to challenge.

The second set of issues are no doubt things you will have already heard and
considered, and centre around the appropriateness of external interventions
and 'expertise'; most of the development literature suggests this as one of
the key factors in considering the failures of development since WWII. This
is not to suggest that experts don't have relevant ideas, but the idea of
the expert is very problematic. Putting my sociologist hat on, I would also
want to highlight the importance of considering how problems in Afghanistan
are embedded in complex and long-standing social relations, questioning the
relevance of technical fixes.

I do detect a tension between wanting to listen and wanting to tell. For
example, how will you know which ideas from California are relevant, and how
might these be received; is it possible within the project context you are
discussing, to escape imposing one's own culturally biased view, what right
does one have to do this, and does Afghanistan need any more of it? I guess
one might argue that the development context is different, but most involved
in development have always claimed to have people's best interests at heart.
This does connect to the short length of your proposed visit; if you want to
be able to reflect and take into account Afghan perspectives, and to root
the teaching in the experiences of the students, which I detect that you do,
then this will take a very long time (many months). To this I think one
needs to factor in how long it will take you to find your feet, the security
issues outlined above, issues of language, cultural concerns, and all the
other difficulties one encounters when teaching! I suppose this raises
issues about what can be achieved in a short period of time.

I suppose a final key issue for me is to try and disentangle one's emotional
interest and commitment, and the politics of the possible and practical. In
other words, why take this approach? For example, why not invite trainee
planners - or a single planner - to be trained in the US to offer training
back in Kabul, giving a stronger multiplier element, avoiding many of the
problems just outlined?

Blimey - this has turned into a long and rambling piece, and not entirely
focused on the proposed course. I spend a lot of my time discussing these
kinds of issues - indeed, my research is centred on many of them - sorry I
find it hard to stop myself going on (I could suggest some readings if you
need). Please do give me a call if you want to question/lambast/tickle me on
any of these things.

best wishes

matt