“Afghanistan: Humanitarianism Under Threat” by A. Donini, Feinstein International Center, Tufts University
Tis brieng paper provides an update on the humanitarianchallenges and opportunities in Aghanistan. It is based on some60 interviews with Aghan and international aid workers, as wellas with senior Aghan government ocials, bilateral donors,and observers and analysts unrelated to the aid enterprise. Teseinterviews were conducted in Kabul in August 2008 and January 2009. In order to gain a wider perspective on perceptions o the evolving situation, ve ocus groups were also held in theShomali plain (north o Kabul) and in Jalalabad with a selectiono local beneciaries o assistance projects, returnees, andconict-aected displaced persons. Te purpose o this paperis to highlight, working rom the data collected on the ground,critical issues aecting the provision o humanitarian action andto suggest how they could, partially at least, be redressed.Humanitarianism is under deep threat in Aghanistan.Humanitarian actors and the principles they proess are underattack. Te ability o humanitarian agencies to address urgentneed is compromised by internal and external actors, i.e., bothby the organization and modus operandi o aid agencies on theground, and by an extremely volatile and dangerous operatingenvironment.Te UN is, and is seen as, aligned with the US-led coalition in-tervention. Its humanitarian capacity is weak and urther dimin-ished by its incorporation, until very recently, into an essentially political, integrated mission. Te separate OCHA (Oce or theCoordination o Humanitarian Aairs) oce that had existedsince 1988 was disbanded when the integrated mission waslaunched in 2002. A humanitarian unit was only re-establishedwithin the United Nations Mission in Aghanistan (UNAMA) in2007.
Tis arrangement was seen as unsatisactory, especially by international NGOs who, as the crisis deepened, advocated re-peatedly or the creation o a separate OCHA oce,
a move thatthe Special Representative o the UN Secretary-General (SRSG)and the UN headquarters political departments opposed, butthat OCHA headquarters and the Emergency Relie Coordinator(ERC) supported. While it has recently been decided (December2008) to separate the humanitarian coordination unction outo the mission through the establishment o a separate OCHAoce, the problem o perception o alignment and inadequateUN humanitarian capacity remains. Te lack o humanitariancapacity and resources is broader than just OCHA’s coordina-tion unctions: there is no common inormation collection andanalysis system, nor an adequate humanitarian logistics capacity,common services or customs and tax agreements, joint convoys,coordinated air services, and the like.Te majority o NGOs do not are much better. Many work asimplementing partners or government programs or, even i they do not, are seen as part o the international enterprise that supports
Thanks to a contribution from Norway, one of the few donors torecognize the need for a humanitarian capacity within UNAMA.
Through a formal letter to the DRSG/RC/HC in March 008 and
subsequently in various demarches, both at UN HQ and in the eld.
the government. Unlike other conict situations, there are ewNGOs in Aghanistan with humanitarian track records or speci-cally humanitarian mandates. Most, i not all, NGOs are multi-mandate organizations ocused principally on reconstruction,development, and advocacy or solidarity issues. Some engage inhumanitarian activities as part o their varied portolios. A ew o these have dedicated humanitarian sta that ably engage on issueso principle or humanitarian advocacy. Nevertheless, the absenceo a critical mass o principled “Dunantist” humanitarian playersaects the quality o the debate around humanitarian issues andthe ability to address these issues on the ground. Te deense andpromotion o humanitarian principles is lef to the InternationalCommittee o the Red Cross (ICRC), the only international or-ganization able to work neutrally, impartially, and independently on both sides o the conict, although its ability to interact andnegotiate access with the aliban and other insurgent groups isimpaired by the volatility o the situation and uncertainties aboutthe representativeness o local interlocutors on the ground.Donors, all o whom are also belligerents, with the exceptiono Switzerland, are either unwilling or unable to recognize theneed or a humanitarian response and to mobilize the necessary resources. ECHO (the European Commission HumanitarianAid Department) and Norway stand out as donors supportiveo principled humanitarian approaches. Te programs o mostother donors are driven by political and security agendas andbased, in the main, on the increasingly erroneous assumptionthat Aghanistan is a post-conict country. Te pressure romdonors on “their” NGOs to work with and around their country’sProvincial Reconstruction eams (PRs) is particularly troubling.Te pursuit o “joined-up” or “comprehensive” approaches, inwhich assistance, including humanitarian assistance, is unc-tionally linked to political and military agendas, is seen by many observers as a dangerous blurring o lines, in addition to clashingwith the Good Humanitarian Donorship principles to whichdonors have subscribed.Tere is no humanitarian consensus in Aghanistan and very little humanitarian space. Both have been trampled by politicalexpediency and by the disregard by all parties to the conict orthe plight o civilians. Civilians are dying because o conict andinsecurity. According to UNAMA, there has been a 0% increaseo civilian casualties in 2008. Te human security o ordinary Aghans is rapidly deteriorating because o the combination o conict, appalling levels o poverty, ood shortages, dicultieso access, and the accumulated consequences o three decades o war. Conict-related displacement is a seriously under-addressedissue. Estimates o the numbers o displaced vary, but there isagreement among aid workers that they are on the rise and thatthe international community is not doing enough, even in placeslike Kabul, where access is possible.Aid agency sta are being increasingly targeted by the alibanand other insurgents or their perceived instrumentalization by,and support o, alien political agendas. Access and operationalspace are almost nonexistent in the south, south-east, and partso the west o the country. Large swathes o the country are no-
Leave a Comment