Last month, the Feinstein International Centre published an excellent report examining the relationship between aid and security in Afghanistan (Winning Hearts and Minds? http://tinyurl.com/46qpnkw)
It presents a rather bleak conclusion; that little evidence exists to support the assumption that aid results in improved stabilisation or security. The report goes on to highlight the root causes of this breakdown, citing inequitable distribution, corruption and misappropriation, lack of community ownership, poor quality of delivery compounded by weak coordination. The list goes on…
Having just returned from a 9-month stint in the northern districts of Helmand working as a PRT Stabilisation Adviser embedded with the US Marines, I’ve witnessed more than my share of projects which have failed for such reasons (and which lend weight to Josh Harris’s points). Sadly, I’ve also seen the culpability lie with internationally respected NGOs as well as oft-cited governmental or military actors.
Given the complexity of the conflict (and in light of the pitfalls of increased securitisation of aid), how can concerted action be generated to create the conditions for sustainable peace and an enduring political settlement? And what role can or should aid take?
In Helmand, at the highest levels of civilian, military and government command, the nature of the debate – and the assistance being delivered on the ground – is changing for the better. Increasingly frank recognition of the consequences of failed aid projects, as well as lessons borne out by the growing number of successful programmes are underpinning the new imperatives for ‘transition’ to Afghan government control in 2014.
Within this context, the establishment of legitimate and accountable governance and the rule of law is rightly taking primacy. The emphasis of efforts to support livelihoods, establish healthcare systems, stimulate economic development and build critical infrastructure is moving beyond ‘quick-wins’ to creating a sustainable foundation for transition – by both improving basic quality of life and the Afghan government’s capacity. For an insight into the daily stabilisation challenges, follow my blogs from Helmand.
The aspiration is that transition will see the Afghan government assuming full oversight of on-going security and development supported by a growing presence of independent domestic and international development actors. In essence, the road to transition marks the process of creating the space so critical to development beyond this current militarised campaign.
In the meantime disengagement by the humanitarian community is not an option. It must continue to ensure that its voice is heard by the donors, the diplomats and those in the military, and find new ways of engaging to ensure the failings of the past are not repeated.
