Afghanistan
Mixed structural capacity, prosperity roughly in line with institutions, lopsided (institutions the weak point).
What stands out
Select any label for its definition and scoring rule.
Structural shape
Each spoke shows one pillar, with 0 at the center and 1 at the edge. The shape reveals whether the pillars are similar or whether one is much lower than the others. That difference is called the .
Read as Lopsided · spread 0.41
Additional checks
1 flagged · 2/9 assessedThese checks add context that the overall score can miss. Select a check to see its result, the evidence behind it, and whether enough information was available to assess it.
These two checks run automatically from the five pillars and public source data.
These checks need reviewed historical or political context. A result of “not assessed” means that review has not been completed.
These checks describe structural risk. They do not predict who will act first in a conflict. Differences smaller than 0.03 are treated as too close to rank when countries are compared head-to-head.
Additional diagnostics
governance context has not been reviewedmanages political pressure through central control rather than shared authority.
Main risk in this approach: Violent fragmentation when control mechanisms weaken
- · High concern: Institutions score is in the bottom third
- · Watch: 0.413 gap between the highest and lowest pillars
- · Flagged checks: income and institutions gap
Accountability trails income and state capacity. The available evidence is partial, so this remains a watch item.
This is an exploratory comparison. It is separate from the income and institutions gap and has not yet been tested against crisis outcomes.
Largest difference across the weighting methods: 0.042. The country stays in the same score band in each check.
Try a different profile
Move a pillar to see how the overall score would change. You can also test different pillar weights. The published score uses equal weights of 20 percent each.
This tool changes the five published pillar values or their weights. It does not recalculate the pillars from the raw indicators, and it does not update the additional checks shown above.
External security context
reviewed for 2019MODERATE structural exposure + weak response: not relationally over-determined, but with little to absorb a shock, fragile if one lands, and fatal if an external prop is removed (e.g. Afghanistan 2021, which fell within weeks of the withdrawal).
What happened: Survived 2001-2021 on external backing; collapsed within weeks of the US withdrawal (Kabul fell 15 Aug 2021). Shield removed: fell.
The indicators behind the score
5/5 pillars · 2024Select an indicator to see what it measures and where it comes from.
Countries with similar pillar profiles
These countries have the closest five-pillar pattern to Afghanistan. Similarity does not mean that their politics or histories are the same.
Compare Afghanistan head-to-head with any country →