A worrying humanitarian situation – the consequences of war.

“There are several factors in Afghanistan that are destabilising the population, but the resurgence of the conflict since 2008 is a major element: the decisions of the Bush and Obama administrations, but also of other countries, to increase the number of troops present in Afghanistan has had a “mirror effect” on the number of insurrectionary forces which have increased at the same time. This has led to an increase in security incidents. Today, the East, South and West of the country are largely unsecure. The North is also becoming more destabilised. We can see that there has been a reversal of the situation: until 2008, the country was mainly stable apart from certain unsafe areas. Now, only a few “pockets of security” remain in an otherwise mainly unstable country. This means that access to populations is becoming increasingly difficult throughout the entire country, while people are suffering more and more from the effects of the war.”

- Human consequences

“Civilians are finding themselves trapped in the cross-fire and are suffering as a result of these operations. The rebel movements use terror as a means of establishing their power, and direct this not only towards international institutions and representatives of official power (such as regional governments), but also towards civilians.”

- Effects on food security

“The conflict is also significantly affecting the food security of the population: access to largely agricultural provinces such as Ghor or Day Kundi is becoming increasingly difficult, while people need fertilisers, tools and seeds to be transported there in order to be able to cultivate the land. Even if agricultural yields appear to be better this year, they are not sufficient to ensure the food autonomy of the population, due to weak productive capacity. The aim of the Paris Conference last year – to put agriculture back at the heart of international aid – is going to require huge efforts if it is to be implemented. For a country which largely depends on its farming industry, agriculture is an aspect that has been majorly overlooked when considering aid to Afghanistan. Increasingly harsh climatic conditions in Afghanistan do not make this process any easier: as well as drought, there is real desertification in process, particularly in Ghor and Day Kundi provinces, and this further reduces the productive capacity of farmers. Last year, when weak local production combined with world prices, the price of food rocketed in many areas of the country (by up to 150%), plunging even more Afghans into poverty and hunger. Due to insecurity, it is impossible for us to launch real development projects aiming to reduce the impacts of this desertification.”


- Increased number of people displaced by the conflict

 
“Migratory practices have changed since last year: for example, in Day Kundi province, very often it was the oldest son or the head of the family who would secretly leave for Iran. Now, entire families are leaving the province. In September 2008, local authorities recorded 2,000 more passport requests compared to the previous year. These requests concerned whole families. Even though it is hard to tell the impact of the conflict on migratory patterns, there is no doubt that the villages and crops destroyed by the opium war have had serious consequences for the population. People arriving in camps in the area surrounding Kabul gather as whole families in the cramped makeshift shelters in the dried mud. Action Against Hunger wants these people to be recognised by the High Commissioner for Refugees as war refugees, but talking about war in Afghanistan seems to be a taboo subject for this institution, which limits their status to economic refugees. There also seems to be reluctance on the part of the Afghan government with regard to these displaced people: talks aimed at finding more long-term aid solutions – such as installing wells and latrines in their settlement areas – have failed because the government feels that the Kabul refugees are not in their right place. Therefore, all we can do is take drinking water there by lorry and distribute it. Finally, it is still hard to know if there are refugee camps in the eastern and southern regions, as it is very hard to access them: there is no information in circulation regarding these areas.”

The Afghan populations are also suffering the effects of international aid becoming increasingly instrumentalised. In fact, aid is most often shared among the coalition forces according to their combat zones and therefore military criteria, and not according to the needs of the most vulnerable people. For example, while 4 districts in a conflict situation received 16 million euros’ worth of aid from France (AFD) for the period up until the end of the year, because French troops are intervening there, other areas go without aid although the situation requires it. These funds released by the AFD went to NGO programmes suggested by the CIMIC group (Civil-Military Co-operation) within the framework of practices consisting of sending humanitarian aid staff in after the military has passed through a given zone. Action Against Hunger refuses to be involved in these practices, because we consider that the role of the military should be to ensure security and not to encroach upon aid.

Moreover, this kind of aid cannot be called “humanitarian aid”: the humanitarian movement is based exclusively on the criteria of needs and solidarity and under no circumstances does it respond to military or political interests. To consider a humanitarian corridor in collaboration with the army is therefore unthinkable, which is why Action Against Hunger prefers to ensure its own humanitarian access by improving its “acceptance” among the population. This acceptance is based on respect for the humanitarian principles of independence, neutrality and impartiality. Associating politico-military interventions with “humanitarian aid” is detrimental to the implementation of these principles and can lead to situations that endanger the physical safety of humanitarian workers and the people they are helping. When the Provincial Reconstruction Teams, or PRT, (the British CIMIC) build clinics in areas where international forces are intervening, these clinics are destroyed by the insurgents, because they bear the mark of the coalition and are therefore targets for violent actions on the part of the rebels. In addition, certain areas of the country – still peaceful but vulnerable in humanitarian terms, such as the Northern provinces – threaten to create artificial violence in order to attract the attention of the international community: apparently the only way to obtain aid, which up until now has been desperately lacking.

Far from appeasing the situation, this instrumentalisation can, to the contrary, create even more insecurity. Similarly, while communities benefit from programmes that are justified by political and military concerns, communities can be attacked by the insurgents for having collaborated with the coalition, and see everything they have been given destroyed by the rebels. Therein lies the danger of associating the civil population with projects motivated by politico-military objectives. Furthermore, this confusion – which is knowingly maintained – between humanitarian action and stabilisation, poses a risk to NGOs who can become legitimate targets in the eyes of the rebel groups. If these organisations can no longer access the population because they are being targeted by the insurgents, then people can no longer access aid.”

Elections under pressure

There is a fear of attacks surrounding the upcoming presidential and provincial elections on 20th August: actions against electorates and representatives of public authority in the context of a civil war are feared. A certain number of districts are now controlled by the rebels. In some of these areas, opponents of the Karzai regime want to show the population, exasperated by 30 years of war, that they represent a credible political alternative. And there is a high possibility that their voice may be heard, because the aid provided by the authorities is insufficient: deliveries of wheat, for example, often come late and mainly benefit the supporters of whoever is in power, which leads to a certain weariness among the population. The people do not want the Taliban to return, but there is certainly a feeling of disenchantment with regard to the intervention begun in 2001, which is rapidly losing the support of a section of the population, the majority of which supported the arrival of foreign troops.”
 
Action Against Hunger launched its first programme in Afghanistan, in 1979. Action Against Hunger works in several provinces such as Kabul (city and countryside), Day Kundi, Ghor, Samangan and Parwan. Programmes include the distribution of cattle, seeds and food,  implementing programmes aimed at preventing malnutrition, and water and sanitation programmes.
6 international and 150 national employees provide aid to 180,000 people.