One of the challenges that reformers within the government and the international community have faced in analyzing the informal sector is the desire to separate dispute resolution from local governance, both conceptually and programmatically. he reality of local-level politics in Afghanistan, however, displays no such separation: hose in charge of local governance tend to be the same as those who resolve disputes.49 his partly stems from the fact that the ability to bring two disputing sides together and get them to accept a final decision demands a certain amount of local political capital. In turn, issuing a decision that is respected by the community will create even more political capital for those leaders involved, making it more likely that individuals will bring disputes to them in the future. his positive cycle is one reason why informal dispute resolution is effective and why elders are interested in remaining involved in cases without financial inducements and in ensuring that resolutions remain respected by all members of the community. But this also makes dispute resolution an inherently political issue, as the acknowledged authority to resolve disputes is transmuted into local political authority more generally. he ability to resolve disputes is often connected to the ability to make other decisions about governance within the community, related to a broad range of issues such as the control of irrigation systems, the control of religious shrines, and even the arrangement of marriage alliances.
As a result, at a local level, both community leaders and government officials often compete to determine who will resolve disputes. his also means that changes in local politics can reshape how informal dispute resolution happens. For example, the influx of development funds and other financial resources, as well as changes in local political capital due to support for certain local leaders by international troops or the government of Afghanistan, has altered the dynamics of dispute resolution in various settings (see box 9). Similarly, the relationship between community leaders and government officials often shapes the dispute resolution process. USIP's research suggests that it is generally where the district governor is strongest that he is willing to involve community elders in dispute resolution, often stamping their decisions once they are finalized. In areas where the governor is not as strong he may hesitate to cede any power lest he appear even weaker.
Local politics can also become intertwined with national politics and affect informal dispute resolution. In Deh Rawud, for example, the Popalzai, who are currently politically dominant due to the support of President Karzai and, until 2011, his late brother and head of the Provincial Council, Ahmed Wali Karzai, have been able to exploit their national connections to seize an increasing amount