Capacity building outside the state-building framework? A post-Afghanistan analysis

State-building has been severely criticized over the past two decades for being an externally led intervention based on a liberal democratic blueprint that has led to top-down centralized state institutions with little to no buy-in from local actors. The rapid collapse of the internationally backed Afghan state to the Taliban in 2021 came to epitomize the failures of international state-building. The answer, many have argued, is to support bottom-up and locally led state-building which is far more likely to galvanize its citizens. Although for many areas of capacity-building this may indeed be a much-improved approach, it remains unclear what this local turn means for defence-related activities and in particular military capacity building. This research paper, based on documentary analysis and interviews with officials in relevant UK government and international institutions, examines what locally focused military capacity building initiatives may look like. It argues that such interventions are likely to result in capacity-building interventions with non-state armed groups that do not promote and may indeed directly oppose state-building. What does military capacity building outside of state-building logics imply and what are the principal risks and benefits of adopting such an approach?

Publication Details

Journal
CentAUR (University of Reading)
Published
2025-06-16
Primary Topic
Peacebuilding and International Security
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Capacity building outside the state-building framework? A post-Afghanistan analysis

CentAUR (University of Reading)
Peacebuilding and International Security
article

Capacity building outside the state-building framework? A post-Afghanistan analysis

article en

Abstract

State-building has been severely criticized over the past two decades for being an externally led intervention based on a liberal democratic blueprint that has led to top-down centralized state institutions with little to no buy-in from local actors. The rapid collapse of the internationally backed Afghan state to the Taliban in 2021 came to epitomize the failures of international state-building. The answer, many have argued, is to support bottom-up and locally led state-building which is far more likely to galvanize its citizens. Although for many areas of capacity-building this may indeed be a much-improved approach, it remains unclear what this local turn means for defence-related activities and in particular military capacity building. This research paper, based on documentary analysis and interviews with officials in relevant UK government and international institutions, examines what locally focused military capacity building initiatives may look like. It argues that such interventions are likely to result in capacity-building interventions with non-state armed groups that do not promote and may indeed directly oppose state-building. What does military capacity building outside of state-building logics imply and what are the principal risks and benefits of adopting such an approach?

CentAUR (University of Reading)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Peacebuilding and International Security
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Capacity building outside the state-building framework? A post-Afghanistan analysis · CentAUR (University of Reading) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS