Timeless Councils: Indigenous Assemblies from the Hindu Kush to the Globe

1. Beyond Conflict: Rethinking Afghanistan's Political Identity

The important conundrum that needs to be addressed— and warrants deep exploration—is the fact that for centuries, Afghanistan has been approached, remembered, and speculated upon through the lens of state-centric geopolitics and conflict (Gregory; 2004; Chaturvedi, 2017).However, beneath this narrative lies a rich tradition of governance that has significantly shaped Afghan society for generations (Ghobar, 2001l; Dupree, 1980). One of the most profound and overlooked contributions Afghanistan offers to global political thought and theories of international relations is the Loya Jirga—a traditional grand assembly used for decision-making and dispute resolution (Robin, 2012; Hazara, 2012). While such a geopolitical narrative may hold relevance in the field of international relations, it has often overshadowed and overlooked the visibility of this indigenous system that could provide valuable insights into global diplomacy and governance (Chaturvedi, 2017).

There is a growing academic need to (re)locate Afghan knowledge(s), narratives, political experiences, and indigenous governance within the field of international relations (Manchanda, 2020). Afghanistan should not be seen solely through the prism of geopolitical strategy.

However, it is important to engage with its rich histories of thought and resilience– site of knowledge. Engaging with Afghan epistemologies opens spaces for a more inclusive and pluralistic understanding of global governance (Chaturvedi & Painter, 2007; Chaturvedi, 2017) (See Tuathail, 1989; 1996; 1999. Agnew and Corbridge, 1996; Agnew, 1998; Agnew, 2010; Agnew, 2013; Dalby, 2010).

International Relations (IR) as a discipline has been mainly shaped by Western theoretical frameworks (Acharya & Buzan 2019; Acharya, 2016; 2017). From realism to liberal institutionalism, these paradigms emerged from European historical geopolitical experiences and spatial imaginaries (Kang, 2003; Safi, Momand & Safi, 2025). When these theories, while analytically influential, are applied to contexts like Afghanistan, they fall short of explaining the country's political resilience and adaptability. As a result, Afghanistan has been frequently approached as a strategic location in global politics, often bypassing the depth of its political traditions (Rashid, 2008; Jalali, 2017). This oversight has had real-world consequences. Time and again, efforts to establish an external governance model in Afghanistan have struggled to achieve credibility because they did not fully account for localized governance traditions that are deeply embedded in Afghan society (Saikal, 2004).

2. What is the Loya Jirga?

The Loya Jirga (translated as 'Grand Assembly') is a centuries-old Afghan tradition used for making important political and national decisions. It brings together tribal elders, scholars, politicians, and local representatives to debate and decide on critical matters. Unlike rigid procedural frameworks, the Loya Jirga is built on consensus, deliberation, and negotiation, making it uniquely suited for a country as ethnically and politically diverse as Afghanistan (Barfield, 2010).

Historically, the Loya Jirga has been instrumental in shaping Afghan politics.

●      1747: It selected Ahman Shah Durrani as Afghanistan's first king, making the foundation of modern Afghanistan (Gregorian, 1969).

●      1923: It ratified constitutional reforms.

●      1941: It decided Afghanistan's stance to stay neutral in World War II.

●      1964: It established a constitutional monarchy.

●      1977: It approved a new constitution.

●      2001-2002: It helped guide the formation of an interim government (Rubin, 2002).

●      2019: It played a role in discussions about peace talks.

3. Where the Loya Jirga is Relevant Today

As a traditional mechanism for decision-making, the Loya Jirga continues to be a vital institution. It is relevant even today, reflecting Afghanistan's unique approach to governance. Given its historical significance, the Loya Jirga provides a culturally resonant framework that has the potential to foster dialogue, strengthen unity, and support efforts toward stability. It is worth acknowledging that while no governance model is without limitations, mechanisms like the Loya Jirga are deeply embedded in Afghan society and offer a means of addressing political questions through inclusive consultation.

Beyond Afghanistan, similar traditional governance models have been effective in other regions facing political crises. In Somalia, traditional clan-based governance structures have been instrumental in resolving disputes where modern state institutions have failed (Menkhaus, 2006). Similarly, in South Sudan and Iraq, tribal councils and the Majlis system have been instrumental in facilitating peace agreements and contributing to the post-war reconciliation process. Moreover, the Ujamaa system of collective decision-making in Tanzania merits attention, as it represents a governance model that promotes self-reliance, local autonomy, and social equality alongside community-driven governance and collective decision-making (Odoom & Andrews, 2017; Hyden, 1980). The Loya Jirga offers a comparable model that could be adapted in post-conflict scenarios worldwide.

Hence, in this context, the world should pay attention to Afghanistan's experience with the Loya Jirga. It offers three significant lessons for global governance:

1. Consensus-Based Decision-Making Works – Unlike adversarial electoral politics, which often leads to polarization, the Loya Jirga fosters dialogue, cooperation, and compromise.

2. Cultural Context Matters – Recognizing and incorporating indigenous governance models can lead to more sustainable political systems. In addition, governance models that align with local traditions and societal structures tend to gain greater credibility and durability as well.

3. Lessons for Conflict Resolution – The Loya Jirga has been used to mediate disputes within Afghanistan for centuries. Its principles could be adapted to mediate conflicts in other regions.

4. A Call to Recognize Afghanistan's Intellectual Contribution

For centuries, Afghanistan has been subjected to a reductionist and excessive geopolitical narrative. This narrative has surpassed its rich history, local narratives, and discourses, resulting in repeated difficulties in implementing externally designed political systems due to eclipsing local and indigenous political systems (Odoom, & Andrews 2017; Saikal, 2004). The Loya Jirga is not merely a customary Afghan institution; it represents a deeply embedded governance model rooted in centuries of deliberation, consensus-building, and negotiated political adaptation.

In a time when global governance is searching for more inclusive and pluralistic understandings of governance. The Loya Jirga presents a compelling case, illustrating that governing frameworks should originate from inside communities, rooted in their unique traditions, political cultures, and lived experiences. It encourages everyone to rethink that foreign policy think tanks cannot develop sustainable governance models without considering historical and cultural contexts and configurations. They must originate from within society, adjusting to and incorporating their social-political environments. Attempts to impose foreign frameworks—whether in Afghanistan or elsewhere—have repeatedly faltered because they fail to recognize the deep-rooted political traditions that sustain communities.  The Loya Jirga proves to be more effective in settling disputes and influencing national decisions. Therefore, Afghanistan could benefit from institutionalizing the Loya Jirga or creating a model that blends local traditions with modern governance.

As some scholars have pointed out in the context of other regions, many places have been treated as mere "strategic buffers" rather than acknowledged for their governance traditions (Hopkirk, 1992). Rather than seeing Afghanistan solely as a strategic space, scholars and policymakers should recognize it as a society with its enduring political mechanism. Instead of offering prescriptive solutions, this discussion aims to contribute to academic reflections on the importance of recognizing diverse political traditions when studying governance. Afghanistan’s governance traditions provide valuable insights for rethinking how governance is conceptualized and practiced in diverse cultural contexts (Manchana, 2020). In doing so, the global community may find alternative pathways for promoting peace and sustainable political systems.

Consequently, the Loya Jirga as an institution extends beyond the confines of Afghanistan. It represents a significant contribution to the realms of intellectual discourse and political frameworks within the context of global governance. Afghanistan’s traditions provide profound insights: prioritizing dialogue over division, establishing the pursuit of legitimacy through active participation, and a vision of governance that emerges organically rather than being externally imposed. The global community would benefit from heeding this perspective.

5. Conclusion

This analysis has examined the historical and comparative importance of the Loya Jirga as a native political institution in Afghanistan. The Loya Jirga has been positioned within a wider global framework of traditional governance models that prioritize consensus, local autonomy, and active community involvement.

This discourse seeks to enrich scholarly contemplation regarding the significance of acknowledging varied political traditions in the study of governance, especially within societies characterized by intricate social structures and histories marked by conflict. As interest expands in more inclusive and pluralistic interpretations of governance, institutions such as the Loya Jirga offer significant insights into the ways local communities structure political life, resolve conflicts, and uphold social cohesion through culturally resonant practices.

Author Contributions: All authors contributed to this research.

Funding: Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent Statement/Ethics Approval: Not applicable.

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies: This study has not used any generative AI tools or technologies in the preparation of this manuscript.