It’s not uncommon for conflicts to result in casualties and damage far beyond the front lines. The economy may grind to a halt, or at the very least incur additional costs, and the onset of profitability may be postponed if conflict breaks out with a neighbour.

Government reports on armed conflicts demonstrate that ongoing wars in impoverished nations are hampering the economic growth of their neighbours. The observable and unintentional repercussions of war demonstrate that regional warfare has a detrimental influence on development in nearby nations.

Some of Afghanistan’s neighbours seem to be seeking to take advantage of the present crisis in Afghanistan to set the stage for a new war in that nation, which they view as being in their best interests. Helpful in a variety of ways. In this piece, we want to address the fundamental issue of what kind of Afghanistan would be helpful to its neighbours and adjacent nations. One that is embroiled in conflict, slaughter, and repression; or one that is at peace with itself, relies on itself and moves forward.

In this post, we’ll look at the question, “How has Afghanistan’s conflict-affected its neighbours, and what does peace mean for them?”

Recent studies have shown that regional conflicts have a detrimental effect on economic growth and other indicators of development in adjacent nations. There are negative effects on various nations in the area and shifts in the political, military, and economic policies of the countries as a result of long-term conflicts in a country, as the expenses mount and soon lead to economic disaster.

If the fundamental costs of reconstructing the human and financial damage after the war are not incurred, these expenses should be included as key components in post-conflict reconstruction plans that demand additional financial assistance. Because of poverty, no one will be able to afford to send their kids to school, so the cycle will continue; as a result, people will continue to be forced to emigrate; unemployment will be high; health services will be weak; child malnutrition will increase; the risk of infant mortality will rise, and schools will remain closed.

Wartime unemployment and educational barriers are two issues that need to be addressed immediately and given top attention.

Because the war-torn nation is unable to provide these necessities, neighbouring countries have increased their spending to accommodate the influx of new migrants. The fact that the extra money is spent rather than saved means that it contributes nothing to the bottom line and reflects a negative light on any other revenue streams that would otherwise have been employed. Increases in both taxes and the cost of products have a negative impact on small enterprises.

However, the costs of the war’s destruction should be included in post-conflict rebuilding plans to close the economic gap and reduce regional tensions.

For this reason, it is the duty of surrounding nations to assist their neighbours in promoting economic recovery rather than resorting to war and to do all they can to eradicate the root causes and contributing factors that contribute to the outbreak of conflict.

For the simple reason that if the fighting continues, the economies of the surrounding nations would collapse. Given that recent studies on the causes and effects of lengthy civil wars have linked low wages and sluggish economic development to increasing violence, this issue must be addressed.

Paul Collier and Nicholas Sambanis’s 2016 article “Understanding Civil War, A New Agenda” in the Journal of Conflict Resolution delves deep into this very question. Based on their research, they conclude that widespread poverty and sluggish economic development are two of the most critical elements in influencing the risk of uprisings.

Earlier, Fearon and Latin (2001) and Hoefler (2000) argued that disputes always originate from outside sources, which hasn’t been taken into account by academics until now. How does this impact the participating nations?

Reconstruction efforts after a war need to recognise that the ripple effects of violence can go well beyond the boundaries of the nation directly impacted. Reconstruction and development projects that boost the likelihood of sustainable peace need the engagement of local people, women, other ethnic groups, refugees, and displaced and vulnerable families owing to poverty.

Because of the speed with which society and the economy are evolving, there may be more rivalry among merchants for scarce goods. To that end, the ongoing process of modernising institutions and development activities is crucial.

Because of the conflict, foreign investors are reluctant to set up shops in adjacent countries, fewer tourists visit, and local business owners in certain nations may feel compelled to move their operations to safer territories.

The expense to the settled refugees, the antagonism between armed factions, the degradation of the roadways, the absence of security and political stability, and the presence of military troops among the displaced people are only some of the negative effects of the conflict on the region’s economy. The nations in the area will be negatively impacted. They believe that neighbouring nations permit excessive weapons shipments because.




We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.