Louise: You are suggesting a number of elements of an approach that is unconventional insofar as Western powers and donors are concerned, and which substantiates emerging WDR thinking of a more general nature. The approach you lay out, as I understand it, a) embodies a form of governance specific to Afghani realities and experience; b) accepts certain interim compromises which may be distasteful to donor policy-makers (clientilism and corruption, for example); and c) embodies a long-term commitment to the country. What we observe in many conflict interventions, though, is the misperception that dealing with conflict is a short-term proposition (analogous to tackling the physical aftermath of a hurricane). While opportunities for change often need to be grasped quickly, helping societies build the kind of institutions needed to seriously confront conflict dynamics takes many years of sustained effort. Rory writes about the unrealistic expectations that have afflicted post-2001 thinking in Afghanistan; one of our concerns is that patience and attention spans may be decaying in a world of continuous media coverage and short political horizons.