Desert Revival: Could CRISPR Crops Transform Afghanistan into a Green Powerhouse?
It may seem like a stretch, almost fanciful, to imagine Afghanistan as a major agricultural exporter. A country so often associated with conflict, fragility and political uncertainty is rarely discussed in terms of innovation or economic opportunity. Yet the land itself tells a different story. Afghanistan has fertile valleys, ancient irrigation systems, a centuries-old tradition of farming, and a young population still largely reliant on agriculture. What it does not have is water security, modern infrastructure, or the resilience to withstand the intensifying climate shocks it faces every year.
Now imagine, for a moment, what would happen if the most cutting-edge agricultural technologies were deployed not in Silicon Valley or Abu Dhabi, but in the Afghan countryside. What if CRISPR gene editing, already being used to develop drought-proof crops in labs from China to the UK, could be made viable for Afghan farmers? What if Afghanistan, instead of surviving on international aid and subsistence farming, became a net exporter of climate-resilient food? What would it take to make that possible, and who would need to be involved?
At the heart of this thought experiment lies a simple truth. The global south, particularly regions with arid and semi-arid climates, is where agricultural resilience is most urgently needed. Afghanistan is already one of the most climate-vulnerable countries in Asia. According to the UN, droughts over the past five years have displaced over one million people and decimated crop yields. Nearly 80 percent of Afghans rely on farming or pastoralism for their livelihoods, and yet most remain dependent on outdated methods and rain-fed irrigation. The land, in many areas, is productive. The tools are not.
CRISPR technology offers a tantalising solution. It allows for precise, low-cost editing of crop DNA to improve traits like heat tolerance, drought resistance, and reduced water dependency. Unlike older forms of genetic modification, CRISPR does not involve inserting foreign genes, which makes it more acceptable in many regulatory environments. Researchers in India have already produced gene-edited chickpeas that require less water. Chinese scientists have engineered drought-tolerant rice. In the UK, trials are underway for barley that can grow in dry, degraded soil. There is no biological reason such crops could not be grown in Afghanistan. The question is structural, not scientific.
For CRISPR agriculture to take root in Afghanistan, three things would need to happen. First, there would need to be robust local agricultural research partnerships. Afghanistan has lost much of its scientific infrastructure in recent years, but institutions like Kabul University and the Afghan Ministry of Agriculture have capable professionals eager to rebuild. Partnering them with global agricultural research centres — such as the International Rice Research Institute or Rothamsted Research — could create the capacity to localise CRISPR crops for Afghan conditions. Developing gene-edited varieties is only the beginning. They must be adapted to the altitude, soil type and regional growing cycles of specific provinces.
Second, a secure and scalable seed distribution system would be essential. Even if CRISPR crops were developed, getting them into the hands of farmers is a massive logistical challenge. Roads are poor or non-existent in many rural areas. Cold chains are unreliable. Private-sector actors like the Aga Khan Foundation and Mercy Corps have long experience in navigating these constraints. Working with them to distribute seed, provide training and monitor outcomes could build a bottom-up model that starts with the farmers rather than state institutions.
Third, and most critically, international investment would be needed. Not just aid, but coordinated investment with long-term objectives. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have already shown interest in securing food supply chains through overseas partnerships, investing in hydroponics in Egypt and Ethiopia. Israel has a deep bench of agricultural tech and desert farming expertise. The US and UK, which have both poured billions into Afghanistan over the last two decades, could reframe their engagement through the lens of climate adaptation and economic stability rather than counterinsurgency. Joint investment funds, perhaps under the framework of climate finance, could help de-risk early-stage deployment and support Afghan ownership of the process.
The potential benefits are not purely economic. A CRISPR-enabled agricultural sector could increase rural employment, reduce food insecurity, and diversify the country’s export base beyond opium. Saffron, almonds, pomegranates and apricots are already grown in parts of Afghanistan with international market potential. With improved yields and drought resilience, these could be scaled up. The country’s location, bordering Central and South Asia, offers geographic advantages for regional trade. Imagine a future where Afghan produce moves by rail to markets in Uzbekistan, India, and the Gulf.
Of course, none of this is simple. The current political reality, with the Taliban in control and widespread restrictions on international engagement, poses real barriers. Regulatory oversight of gene-edited crops would be minimal or non-existent. There are valid concerns about human rights, corruption, and the misuse of funding. But to ignore Afghanistan entirely is to consign its people to perpetual poverty. If we accept that climate adaptation is a global necessity, then leaving behind the most climate-vulnerable regions because they are difficult to work in is not a viable strategy.
There are also creative ways to navigate the political challenge. Pilot projects could be run in relatively stable regions with strong community leadership. Engagement could be channelled through local cooperatives, independent NGOs, and regional technical colleges. The private sector, especially Islamic development banks and Gulf-based investors, may be more nimble than governments in taking calculated risks. The point is not to wait for perfect conditions, but to build around what exists.
Perhaps most intriguingly, CRISPR agriculture in Afghanistan could serve as a model for other fragile states. Countries like Yemen, Somalia, and South Sudan face similar challenges: conflict, drought, weak institutions, and agricultural dependence. If a system could be designed to work in Afghanistan, it might offer a blueprint for other crisis-prone environments. It could demonstrate that climate resilience is not a luxury, but a necessity — and that innovation can thrive in the most unexpected places.
It also reframes Afghanistan not as a problem to be solved, but as a potential contributor to global food systems. That shift in narrative is powerful. For too long, Afghan agriculture has been trapped between tradition and turmoil. Bringing in science, capital and collaboration does not erase history, but it does open a path forward. CRISPR is not magic. It is a tool. But when combined with imagination, it might just be the beginning of something transformative.
In the end, the real thought experiment is not whether CRISPR crops could grow in Afghanistan. They could. It is whether we are willing to reimagine Afghanistan not as a land beyond help, but as a land worth investing in. And if we are, then perhaps drought will no longer mean devastation, but something that crops — and people — can survive.
Further Reading and Resources:
United Nations Environment Programme. Afghanistan: Climate Change and Environmental Stress
UK Government. Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023: Guidance
Rothamsted Research. Gene-Edited Barley to Beat British Droughts
International Rice Research Institute. Drought-Resilient Rice Using CRISPR
African Union. Policy Guidelines for Genome Editing in Africa