Empty Promises At Afghan Conference?
The international community has pledged to stay the course in Afghanistan, but expectations are low in Kabul.
Thursday, 18 May, 2006
Empty Promises At Afghan Conference?
The international community has pledged to stay the course in Afghanistan, but expectations are low in Kabul.
Thursday, 18 May, 2006
The conference came four years after a similar event in Germany produced the Bonn Agreement, which served as the blueprint for Afghanistan’s transition to democracy. With the parliamentary elections in September and the Bonn process completed, many in Afghanistan feared that international donors would lose interest in their nation’s development. The purpose of the London Conference was, in part, to set those fears to rest.
Afghanistan is no stranger to conferences and promises. Donor meetings in Tokyo in 2002 and Berlin in 2004 promised close to 13 billion dollars in aid and raised hopes and expectations at home.
But many question why the promised aid has failed produce tangible results. More than four years after the ouster of the Taleban, Afghanistan remains largely without paved roads, clean water or stable electricity. Construction projects lag behind schedule.
Afghans grumble that the money has been misused or stolen, and many are afraid that this time will be no different. Corruption and mismanagement will drain any benefit from donor assistance, they say.
“If the international community wants to give its money to the Afghan government, first of all they should appoint honest and patriotic people to the government,” said Habibullah Ghamkhoor, a political analyst based in Sweden. “The present administration is totally corrupt. If the money is handed over to them, they are the only ones who will ever see it.”
Non-governmental organisations, NGOs, are also at fault for misusing funds or failing to achieve their goals, said Ghamkhoor. But this is because the Afghan government is incapable of monitoring their activities, he said.
“During the past four years the NGOs have spent grant money without consulting anyone,” said Ghamkhoor. “There was no legal government in existence.”
Even now, with an elected president and parliament, the government cannot handle the money, he said.
“If the money is given to the Afghan government, the conference will have no more positive effect than any of the previous ones,” said Ghankhoor. “It will only serve to show that the international community did not forget Afghanistan.”
The Afghanistan Compact, drafted by the government of Afghanistan, outlines the country’s development strategy through 2010. It lists three critical areas: security, governance and economic and social development. Each objective is also intended to counter the growing drug trade.
The government in Kabul has promised that, with the cooperation of the international community, it will establish a 70,000-strong national army and a 62,000-strong national police force by the end of 2010. The government has also pledged to ensure that all illegal armed groups are disbanded by the end of 2007.
The Afghan government has been hoping to attract additional financial support and a renewed commitment to Afghanistan’s development. It has also been active in trying to persuade potential donors to funnel the money directly to the government rather than working through NGOs as has been the practice until now.
"Over the past four years, the awarding of grant money to NGOs has not been successful,” said political analyst Fazel Rahman Oria. “The people of Afghanistan have not profited from these grants, because the government was not able to control the NGOs.”
But giving the money to the government directly is the answer either, according to Oria.
“At present, if the money comes through the government, the people of Afghanistan will not benefit, because the government is more corrupt than the NGOs,” he said.
Corruption is one of the issues addressed in the Afghanistan Compact. The government has promised to tackle the problem, by ratifying the UN Convention against Corruption by the end of 2006, and creating monitoring mechanisms to stop graft and embezzlement in government.
Ramazan Bashar Dost, a member of parliament and long-time critic of NGO activities, managed to find fault with the government of President Hamed Karzai, the NGOs and donor organisations for the lack of progress in developing Afghanistan.
“The only way to prevent embezzlement is to get rid of the present government, starting with Karzai’s office and including all the ministers,” he told reporters on the eve of the conference. “But there should also be changes in the leadership of international organisations, such as GTZ, USAID, the Asian Development Bank, and the International Monetary Fund.”
Bashar Dost added that he was sceptical that the London Conference would bring any more benefits than the previous ones.
“There may be talk about billions of dollars in grants, but that is just talk. As long as the mafia system in Afghanistan remains in place, these grants will not benefit the people.”
The only people who seem hopeful about international assistance are ordinary Afghans.
“In comparison to the Taleban regime, my life has improved a lot,” said Kabul resident Nasratullah.
Noor Mohammad, a shopkeeper in Kabul, said that he has followed the London Conference from the beginning on radio.
“It is very useful and vital for Afghan people,” he said.
“If the United Nations had not helped Afghanistan, we would never have been freed from the Taleban’s oppression,” said another Kabul resident, Naqibullah. “Our lives have improved, but we need more assistance.”
But Mohammad Nabi, who earns his living by hawking top-up cards for mobile phones by the side of the road, was less positive.
“I know nothing about this conference,” he said. “I am too busy earning my daily bread. I have not seen any benefits of assistance over the past four years. The poor are still poor. The money donated to Afghanistan reaches only those who own cars and houses.”
Wahidullah Amani and Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi are IWPR staff reporters in Kabul.
