Afghanistan: USAID rejects NGO concerns over aid militarization
Source: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs - Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN)
Date: 02 Dec 2009
KABUL, 2 December 2009 (IRIN) - Aid agencies have increasingly been
expressing concern about the "militarization" of aid to Afghanistan by
big donors such as the USA, but the US Agency for International
Development (USAID) says counterinsurgency helps aid workers to
operate in insecure areas.
Humanitarian organizations such as CARE International and Oxfam
International argue that too much aid has been diverted to
counterinsurgency activities and to areas where donors have troops.
"If we are forced to be involved in counterinsurgency activities and
work with [NATO-led] Provincial Reconstruction Teams and military
entities, our acceptance in the communities will be demolished," said
Lex Kassenberg, country director for CARE International.
"This is a risk we cannot take and as a result, we have turned down
funding opportunities which require working with the military and
involvement in counterinsurgency," he said.
NGOs have particularly accused the USA and Canada of diverting more
and more aid through military channels and primarily for military and
political purposes.
"The militarization of aid in Afghanistan is a reality but not across
all donors," Lynn Yoshikawa, a humanitarian policy and advocacy
specialist with Oxfam International, told IRIN.
Dozens of aid workers have been killed, kidnapped and wounded over the
past few years and independent access to large swathes of the country
has been lost.
While condemning those that attack aid workers and impede humanitarian
activities, some NGOs say the blurring of civil-military lines and the
politicization and militarization of aid have seriously damaged their
distinct identity.
"The military are part of the conflict so they are unable to provide
aid without jeopardizing the safety and security of civilians," said
Hashim Mayar, deputy director of ACBAR, a consortium of over 100
Afghan and international NGOs.
"Gross mischaracterization"
With over US$38.6 billion of civilian and military aid having been
dispensed since 2001, according to a report by the US Government
Accountability Office, the USA has been the biggest donor to
Afghanistan.
A big portion of US funding has gone to the build-up of Afghan
security forces, but over $7 billion has been spent by USAID on
civilian development and humanitarian activities.
"'Militarization of aid' is a gross mischaracterization of what
actually happens on the ground," William Frej, head of the USAID
mission in Afghanistan, told IRIN.
According to Frej, the main objective of counterinsurgency is to rid
an area of the insurgents and pave the way for the distribution of aid
by civilian and military actors.
"Without COIN [counterinsurgency] and without the military's support,
many of the humanitarian agencies - such as Oxfam - that raise such
complaints [about militarization of aid] would not be able to enter
the areas once controlled by insurgents," he said.
However, NGOs do not think the military and counterinsurgency are helping them.
"We have worked here for a long time and the military presence has not
positively impacted our work," said Oxfam's Yoshikawa.
The 2009 USAID budget is estimated at $2.1 billion and a "significant
portion" of that aid goes through civilian agencies, according to
Frej.
Needs based
Wael Haj-Ibrahim, head of the UN Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Afghanistan, thinks aid can be divided
into various categories such as aid to the security sector,
governance, economic recovery, development and humanitarian
assistance.
He said while political considerations play a role in determining
priorities, such aid must be apolitical and entirely based on needs.
"By definition, for aid to be humanitarian it must be needs based -
addressing community and population needs - and must be provided
without expecting anything in return whether it is information,
political support, etc," Haj-Ibrahim told IRIN.
"Should the humanitarian assistance be in effect, or perceived to be,
serving purposes other than the wellbeing of the population, then the
natural reaction of the opposition is to counter that strategy by
targeting the assistance, the aid providers and the beneficiaries,"
|