The immediate solution is essentially a long retaining wall spanning from the upstream shop to the downstream shop (it was originally a continuous row of shops, most of which fell into the river when the bank collapsed. Thankfully, nobody was killed). For anyone without a geotechnical background - pretty much everyone, myself included - retaining walls can be deceptively difficult, involved, and expensive, particularly when the ground might be saturated with large amounts of water. We spent several days developing and refining a suitable design for the site, while trying to keep the continually escalating cost within our budget. What we presented to the locals - who knew we were developing a project but lacked the specific details until we met with them a few days ago - was a technically sound and financially acceptable solution that will create two lanes on the road again and provide some protection against future floods. Obviously we can't build something that will save everything in the village from every conceivable flood event, especially considering the amount of damage upstream that could quickly get worse and cause problems at this site. Despite our limitations, what we designed is a good short-term solution that will help the village and the entire Panjshir Valley further up the road.
My conversation with the villagers took place in two acts. The first act was half an hour long and involved me telling them about our plans, our limitations, and what they could reasonably expect as a result of this project, followed by their explanation for why our plan obviously wasn't good enough, and how we should be doing things differently. This went back and forth several times, until my boss stepped in to try to disperse the crowd and only keep the key leaders involved. Then for Act 2 he took over and went through essentially the same speech - probably a little more diplomatically - countering the same objections over and over. To the villagers' credit, they did suggest alternatives and what they viewed as compromises, but none of them were technically acceptable (from an engineer's standpoint) and most of them involved some variation of us building a longer, shorter wall, then they would come back and finish the top of it, thereby saving money in a way that allowed a longer wall to be built. The problems with this approach are probably evident, but the most significant one I saw was the likelihood that they would never actually do their part. I had the brief urge to suggest they go first and build the bottom half of the wall instead, but that probably wouldn't have gone over so well.
Finally, after nearly an hour, the oldest guy in the group stepped forward and basically said, If you don't build it our way, you might as well not build it at all. This gave my boss the opportunity he was looking for, because he was able to take them up on their threat by telling them that was a great idea, we would save our money and be quite happy to see what they could build themselves. Of course he didn't mean it literally, but they got the point. They actually tried to keep the old guy quiet before he even finished telling us his thoughts, so I don't think he was representative of the group, but he gave us the chance to make the point, without coming across as petty or threatening, by using "we'll take our ball home with us and nobody will get to play" defensively rather than offensively. The point of the whole discussion, after all, was to negotiate an agreement, and at that point I think they grudgingly gave in to the fact that they would be better off with something rather than nothing. It wasn't all smiles and handshakes, but they were willing to go along with the project, which, considering the importance of the road, is really all we needed.
What really gets me about this situation is the underlying attitude involved. This is one of those situations where I have to remind myself that I volunteered for this job, and that I can't let myself get too cynical or judgmental, because I chose to be here and I owe these people more than to get upset about these things and to take them personally. I completely understand that I'm the outsider in this situation, and that the locals have personally experienced and should know firsthand how the river changes each year and how unpredictable the weather can be. The suggestion that the locals know better than we do how to build retaining walls and survive near a volatile river seems logical enough at first glance, but I've come to realize it's not entirely true. I've heard that suggestion in the few days since I talked to the locals about this project, and I've heard different variations of it from different groups of people around the valley.
I understand that we're newcomers here, and that the locals have a better idea of the geography and the climate than we do. I don't think that means that most people have a better understanding of what structures will and will not work in situations like this. If they did, the previous flood wouldn't have destroyed most of the existing retaining wall. The most common "structure" around here is a stone masonry wall. With the possible exception of the one contractor we hired to rebuild this particular wall, I don't think I've run into a single person who has given any more structural thought to these walls (and much of their other construction) other than to expand the recipe by making the wall as large as the bank it has to hold back, generally with a shallow foundation (or none at all), poorly mixed concrete, and no reinforcement.
If you want a nice looking stone masonry wall or canal, Afghans - I should probably be more specific and say Panjshiris, since they're the only Afghans I've worked with - probably know better than anyone else on earth how to build it. It's just what they do. But if you want something that stands a chance of surviving a major flood, or that won't succumb to years of gradual undercutting and erosion and then eventually collapse and take a bunch of houses with it, more is required than just piling up a bunch of rocks, but nobody seems willing to acknowledge that because they've always done it their way. There are quantifiable, demonstrable physical realities to deal with, and there are ways to mitigate problems even if it means part of the wall is underground and you can't see exactly why it works better just by looking at it.
Like I said, I understand that if an outsider walked into my town and told me they were coming to help, but just to trust them, they know how it's done and I need to adapt and learn from them, I probably wouldn't be very receptive either. If the outsider was a 25 year-old "engineer" would looks like he's fifteen and couldn't grow a beard if he spent the next five years trying...you get the idea. I know why it's hard to accept, and we certainly didn't go down there telling them they were wrong and we were right. This whole thing gets to several much bigger issues: How much do people really want help? Is there any hope when people won't recognize a level of knowledge required beyond "we've always done it this way"? On a more abstract level, this actually reminds me of the fact that there are fundamental, unchanging physical laws that govern the way things work, and that rather than trying to mold them to the way we want to perceive the world (a problem certainly not confined to Afghanistan), it would be immeasurably better and more productive to try perceive the world in a way that fits the facts. It strikes me as resistance to reality, but I know that my approach probably appears the same way to them.
I know, I know, that's a really philosophical take on the fact that a bunch of people want to build a rock wall differently than we do. The fact of the matter - arrogant though this may sound - is that there are reasons why our way will work, even if they can't see it. And regarding the geography and climate, you would be surprised at how actively people can go out of their way to avoid acknowledging facts they've probably dealt with their entire lives. General Rajab worked for months and finally put the river back where it was, and it accomplished nothing. Next spring when the river rises, it's going to go right back to where it was originally, and all his time and effort are going to be an even bigger waste than they've already turned out to be. Similarly, the people the other day in Gulbahar asked us to have the contractor move the river to the other bank once the wall is done, even though as soon as the river rises in the spring it will go right back to the permanently low spot on the outside of the bend and will be exactly the way it was before.
What's the resolution here? I don't know. At this point, for me, the resolution is to work harder being more patient and more understanding. Not everybody is an engineer, and not everybody can (or even should) approach things from a strictly rational and scientific perspective. The best we can hope for is compromise, and for them to realize when the project is done that they and a lot of other people have benefitted as a result of trusting us and working together on this. It may not be perfect, but not much around here is.
No comments:
Post a Comment