the U.S. on International Anticorruption Day

Last week marked International Anticorruption Day. Such days, designated with purportedly global values, are at best an opportunity for press releases that might otherwise go unnoticed, and often are no more than an annual event for relevant NGOs to preach to the choir while feeling like someone is finally listening.


The Obama administration chose to recognize the day with a video statement by Secretary Clinton released on the web. In addition to general approbation for the fight against corruption, Clinton mentioned the two major U.S. priorities in this battle: reducing corruption in international aid, and stopping private sector bribery through the OECD convention. Both of these goals are lofty but relevant and genuinely important, as they are the major ways in which rich countries perpetuate corruption around the world. It is truly admirable how the U.S. has promoted the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention and upheld it at home. Its efforts to fight corruption in development aid have faced a broader range of challenges, such as how to reach vulnerable populations in highly corrupt countries or how to balance other national interests against this aspect of foreign policy. Still, it is important that Clinton took the time to make the statement, and that U.S. priorities remain appropriate to the problem at hand.

the Karzai government

Perhaps the most high-profile government associated with corruption these days is that of Afghanistan. The Karzai government has been solidly supported by the Americans and their allies since its original appointment, and some people considered the evidence of corruption in the recent elections as a blow to the entire U.S.-led effort there. After all, if the coalition allies are supporting a president who rigs elections, how are we to have any credibility ourselves?

It was not surprising that the elections were riddled with corruption. And while vote rigging does not automatically mean that an entire system is plagued, in Afghanistan's case the accusation holds water. In the absence of infrastructure, education, and industry, it is natural that Afghanistan would remain a very tribal country. However, local norms are no excuse for using one's power to take advantage of ordinary people. Tribal leaders can provide guidance and cohesiveness without skimming off the top and condemning their people to continued poverty.

Corruption can only be fought from the top. Unless the Karzai government is prepared to take some serious risks and make some new enemies, the kind of systemic change that will be necessary to fight Afghan corruption will not be possible. On the other hand, corruption is not an invincible adversary. A strong and positive example from the government, a solid anti-corruption infrastructure, and an unassailable judiciary can make a noticeable difference, even in a country as complex as Afghanistan. The Karzai government can choose what it wishes its legacy to be.