ABSTRACT
The case of Tajikistan confirms that the hints deriving from the study of the Mozambican case have wider application. DDR in Tajikistan was not UN-led, but at its outset few observers had faith that the Tajik state had the capacity and ability to implement it successfully. However many doubts one may entertain over the regime of President Rahmonov, most Tajiks would likely agree that it has been a better alternative than civil war. In the short term, this type of solution can seem attractive: it reconciles the need to satisfy inflexible bureaucracies back home and the need for political realism in the field. An aspect of state-building which is often neglected has to do precisely with legitimisation, which most political realists tend to discount as a secondary, perhaps even irrelevant, aspect. An inclusive political settlement is arguably a good point of departure for the development of a legitimate state.
