06.01.2014 Views

HAP Afghanistan Field Trial - Assessment Report - HAP International

HAP Afghanistan Field Trial - Assessment Report - HAP International

HAP Afghanistan Field Trial - Assessment Report - HAP International

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

<strong>HAP</strong> ASSESSMENT MISSION REPORT<br />

ISLAMABAD – PESHAWAR – HERAT<br />

Agnès Callamard and Andy Featherstone<br />

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY<br />

Andy Featherstone and Agnès Callamard from the <strong>HAP</strong> went on a mission to Pakistan<br />

and <strong>Afghanistan</strong> to assess the possibilities of running a field trial in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>.<br />

The <strong>HAP</strong> met with representatives of humanitarian agencies (NGOs, UN agencies), in<br />

Islamabad, Peshawar, and Herat for the following purposes: to seek advice and reactions<br />

on a <strong>HAP</strong> field trial, to discuss with the host organization the terms of our relationships,<br />

to identify the possibilities, costs, and constraints of running a field trial, and to gather<br />

substantive information on the situation in the region.<br />

Our itinerary included:<br />

19/01 - 23/01 Islamabad<br />

24/01 - 26/01 Peshawar<br />

27/01 - 01/02 Herat<br />

02/02 - 04/02 Islamabad<br />

Agencies visited:<br />

Islamabad: <strong>Afghanistan</strong> Information Centre, UNHCR, UNOCHA - Protection, ACBAR,<br />

Oxfam, Ockenden <strong>International</strong>, MSF-H, Strategic Monitoring Unit (SMU)<br />

Peshawar: DACAAR, European Commission, AWWD, SEAL, ICRC, MADERA<br />

Herat: AREA, Christian Aid, CHA, DACAAR, IOM, MDM, MSF, UN Security,<br />

UNHCR, Ockenden <strong>International</strong>, WFP, IAM, IRC, CHA, IFRC, MDM, UNOCHA, UN<br />

Co-ordination Meeting, Afghan women workers, one day trip to Pashtoun (3 hours drive<br />

from Herat) and participation to a Shura’s.<br />

The assessment team for the second <strong>HAP</strong> <strong>Field</strong> <strong>Trial</strong> concluded that there were extremely<br />

positive reasons why a <strong>HAP</strong> <strong>Trial</strong> should be undertaken in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>.<br />

o There is a large degree of success with Herat constituting a potentially good <strong>Trial</strong><br />

site with extremely positive feedback from agencies about the proposed <strong>Trial</strong>, and<br />

a number of issues raised that could act as a good starting point.<br />

o There is also a demonstrable need - there is a large and accessible group of IDPs<br />

in camps, receiving assistance and a large hinterland affected by a 3-year drought.<br />

o There is also a large and varied actor constellation (INGO/UN/ICRC/Afghan<br />

NGO) running both new and old assistance programmes. The more established<br />

agencies are particularly interesting as many of them have quite well developed<br />

community participation methodologies which <strong>HAP</strong> may be able to borrow from.<br />

1


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

o The “humanitarian” operation in <strong>Afghanistan</strong> raises many coordination and<br />

accountability issues, some of which are presented in the second part of this<br />

document.<br />

At the same time, the team also recognized that a trial would pose large operational<br />

difficulties, that it would require support from the Host Agency.<br />

o The main constraining factors are operational and include security, logistics and<br />

staffing and the level of support the host agency may be able to offer, given its<br />

own operational needs and priorities.<br />

o The issue of support is fundamental to the success of the project. The <strong>HAP</strong> team<br />

will need to rely quite heavily on the Host Agency for admin/logistics support<br />

especially within the first weeks (visa renewal, house rental, car rental). It will<br />

clearly take some time for newly recruited <strong>HAP</strong> staff (both national and<br />

international) to have the necessary networks to be able to operate. Without such<br />

support, it will not be possible to run the field trial.<br />

o Security is particularly important due to the significant problems of access and<br />

evacuation. If there is a strong likelihood of further deterioration in security, then<br />

it would be ill-advised to go further in establishing an office - evacuation plans<br />

are at best, sketchy and given the military posturing of the Khan regime, it would<br />

seem well possible that in the next 6 months, there may be a return to conflict.<br />

o Finding suitably qualified staff will likely be problematic (languages, education,<br />

experience, understanding context) – without which it will be impossible to run<br />

the <strong>Trial</strong> along the lines of the methodology currently tested in Sierra Leone.<br />

Gender considerations will also be an important issue and also one that, as a new<br />

agency, <strong>HAP</strong> will need to be mindful of.<br />

o Finally, logistics is currently, and is likely to remain extremely difficult. Internal<br />

flights within <strong>Afghanistan</strong> is difficult because of their limited number, the<br />

prioritization system, the limits imposed on the number of staff able to travel (no<br />

more than two per agency at once) and the necessity to ensure that the <strong>HAP</strong> team<br />

does not impede the host agency flight plans. Moving around the country will<br />

require patience and will be time-consuming.<br />

Table of content<br />

This report is divided in two sections: the first focuses on the conditions for setting up a<br />

small field trial in Herat and identifies both constraints and opportunities. The second<br />

part presents a summary of the substantive issues raised by our interlocutors during the<br />

mission.<br />

First part<br />

I – Seeking advices and reactions<br />

II – Setting up a <strong>HAP</strong> field trial<br />

2


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

Second Part<br />

I - The structure and politics of the operation<br />

II - Programmatic Issues<br />

III – Humanitarian staff<br />

IV – Methodological issues<br />

Warning:<br />

The two weeks mission conducted by the <strong>HAP</strong> allowed us to get a (time-based) snapshot<br />

on the humanitarian operation in Herat and its accountability issues.<br />

The information contained in the second part of this report should not be seen as an<br />

evaluation. It is a summary of the reactions and comments made by our contacts<br />

during the mission, coupled with some observations and analysis on the part of the<br />

<strong>HAP</strong> team.<br />

Unlike a <strong>HAP</strong> field trial, this snapshot is based on agencies viewpoints and our own<br />

analysis and observations. The time-frame of the mission did not allow us to get a feel<br />

for the beneficiaries perspectives and for the nature of accountability issues from their<br />

standpoint. It is therefore not possible to comment on the accountability concerns of<br />

people affected by the assistance activities (such as the quality of the assistance provided<br />

and the dialogue between aid givers and receivers). Furthermore, we were not able to<br />

follow up and investigate the problems or allegations made by our contacts. Finally, it is<br />

likely that some of the problems raised (e.g. coordination) may have been addressed or<br />

alleviated since the mission.<br />

3


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

FIRST PART<br />

I – SEEKING ADVICE AND REACTIONS<br />

The two questions guiding this objective were:<br />

- Should the <strong>HAP</strong> consider a field operation in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>?<br />

- Where should this operation take place, taking into account security, logistical<br />

and strategic considerations<br />

I.1. Reactions to the <strong>HAP</strong><br />

In the course of almost all meetings held, the <strong>HAP</strong> team got very positive responses to<br />

the proposal of holding a <strong>HAP</strong> field trial in <strong>Afghanistan</strong> or Herat. Representatives met<br />

pointed out that the situation was ripe for this kind of work, highlighted accountability<br />

issues. Quite a few presented their own work on or with accountability, either at a<br />

programmatic level (OI, Afghan NGOs, EC) or at a theoretical one (MSF, ICRC). Below<br />

is a sample of some of the reactions:<br />

<strong>International</strong> NGOs:<br />

“Very appropriate time to kick something like the <strong>HAP</strong>… So many new agencies. No<br />

name NGOs. What is needed are: practical recommendations, practical benchmarks, best<br />

practices.” (OI)<br />

“It is prime time to set up a project like that in Herat.” (DACAAR-Heart)<br />

“You should run the trial…” (MSF-Holl)<br />

“ Very good idea… I actually thought that the <strong>HAP</strong> could come and talk to the<br />

beneficiaries of our projects to assess them…” (IAM)<br />

United Nations:<br />

“I am a big supporter of accountability. I suggest a focus on best practices and not only<br />

on what does not work in order to extract lessons.” (UNOCHA-Protection)<br />

“ Welcome the project and its possible use by WFP: We need monitoring done by some<br />

people.” (WFP)<br />

Afghan NGOs<br />

“I welcome the <strong>HAP</strong> and its project: a very good suggestion. You will need a lot of work<br />

and contacts. I suggest that you contact big donors…” (SEAL)<br />

“I welcome the <strong>HAP</strong>: you need to work out a system. Community should be involved<br />

and informed. We would highly appreciate this kind of mechanisms.” (AREA)<br />

Donors:<br />

“I welcomes the project: good idea: accountability to the beneficiaries and not only to<br />

donors…” (EC)<br />

I.2. <strong>HAP</strong> by invitation<br />

4


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

Especially interesting was the fact that four of the organizations we met suggested that<br />

our field trial include “their” beneficiaries. These four organizations were keen in finding<br />

out how their beneficiaries felt and perceived the work done on their behalf, the social<br />

and longer term impact of their activities and the extent and effectiveness of their<br />

accountability mechanisms.<br />

From a <strong>HAP</strong> stand point, and in view of the difficulties in running a field trial in<br />

<strong>Afghanistan</strong>, especially with regard to accessing communities, these suggestions may be<br />

very helpful and could allow us to initiate the trial.<br />

These four organizations have established relationships with specific communities and<br />

working with and through them will allow for a smoother and relatively easier insight<br />

from both a methodological and information-gathering perspectives.<br />

I.3. Choosing a location for the trial<br />

By the time the team departed for its assessment mission, a number of our contacts,<br />

including DACAAR our host organization, had suggested Herat as the place to conduct a<br />

field trial. In the course of the trial itself, the large majority of representatives agreed<br />

with this choice. Those that appeared to question it may have done so more on the basis<br />

of the fact that their own organization was little involved in Herat itself. It should be<br />

highlighted that there was no objection to the choice of Heart, but more simply a<br />

preference for other areas.<br />

The rational for the choice of Herat is listed below. It is based on Thomas Tompsen<br />

(DACAAR director) assessment and our own findings:<br />

(i) Herat has been one of the main areas for direct humanitarian assistance as the western<br />

region has been one of the worst affected in terms of fighting and in particular drought.<br />

Assistance is focusing on two caseloads: a) IDPs in camps in and around Herat city.<br />

The population in these camps is reported to have grown from 100,000 to 300,000 over<br />

the past month, although the figures are highly contested. This involves both food and<br />

non-food assistance; b) Drought-stricken communities in their areas of origin - with the<br />

objective of preventing further displacement. The principal element has been food<br />

(initially in the form of food-for-work/asset creation and lately more and more as free<br />

food distribution) along with efforts to re-establish drinking water supply through<br />

deepening of wells.<br />

(ii) New NGO have settled in the western region in recent months (although maybe not to<br />

the large extent as predicted or thought). This along with the absence of expatriate staff<br />

during the period September-December 2001 has led to a breakdown of coordination in<br />

the region, and the effects of this are already now starting to be apparent.<br />

(iii) At the time of the assessment mission, it was possible to access rural areas in Herat<br />

province, except towards the south (Farah province). One could also travel into parts of<br />

Badghis province.<br />

5


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

(iv) The security situation in Herat is improving although it remains highly unpredictable,<br />

as in the rest of the country. There are many question marks as to the political (and<br />

geographical!) direction the regional governor (Ismael Khan) will take over the next few<br />

months, i.e. move closer to the central interim government or to Iran.<br />

(v) It is relatively cheaper to operate in Herat (as compared to Kabul for instance). An<br />

office building in Kabul currently costs no less than $4,000 per month, whereas one can<br />

be found in Herat for a fraction of that amount ($1,500). The going rate for interpreters in<br />

Kabul is at the moment $100 per day. They along with other necessary staff may be more<br />

difficult to find in Herat - but, again, it will be far cheaper.<br />

(vi) Kabul is currently very much the centre of gravity for all macro-level planning and<br />

co-ordination. Most UN organisations are in the process of moving their headquarters<br />

from Islamabad, and there is already a very substantial senior presence in Kabul (e.g.<br />

Brahimi as well as most of the heads of operational UN agencies). There is also a major<br />

influx of donor and diplomatic missions. This is i.e. the place to be if you want overall<br />

information and analysis on the general direction of political developments, assistance<br />

planning etc. However, there are only very limited direct linkages between the activities<br />

in Kabul and concrete action on the ground. One reason for this is that access to rural<br />

areas outside Kabul is highly restricted for security reasons, and in a way that tends to<br />

make the activities in Kabul somewhat introvert and in some cases even surreal.<br />

II – SETTING UP A FIELD TRIAL<br />

The second objective of the assessment mission consisted in assessing the conditions<br />

necessary for establishing a field trial, including:<br />

- Costs of an office, accommodation for staff, etc.<br />

- Security considerations and rules<br />

- Coast of renting or buying cars<br />

- Communications equipment<br />

- Hiring local researchers<br />

- Access to communities<br />

The main conclusions are twofold: (i) <strong>Afghanistan</strong> implies difficult to very difficult work<br />

conditions, and (ii) the support of the host agency will be important, especially at the<br />

beginning of the trial, to address these.<br />

II. 1. Security<br />

Security is far from being assured and a number of precautions have to be followed.<br />

Security threats are both political and criminal.<br />

At the Provincial level, security is reasonably good - despite an increase in banditry<br />

6


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

following the withdrawal of the Taleban, law and order has largely been restored in Herat<br />

although there are still large numbers of weapons in evidence and large numbers of<br />

armed troops in the city. Outside of the city, the situation is a little less stable, with small<br />

pockets of insecurity and occasional reports of banditry on the main roads.<br />

At the national level, there is much greater cause for concern with increasing signs of<br />

fractures between the Interim government and Provincial Warlords. Whilst there appears<br />

to be broad support for the new Interim Government from large parts of the population,<br />

there are already signs of fractures with an anti-government uprising in Paktia Province<br />

(killing 50 and resulting in the pushing out of the government representative), inter-ethnic<br />

rivalry in the city of Mazar-e-Sharif (between General Dostam - an Uzbek warlord, and<br />

Atta Mohammed, a Tajik), and signs of unrest in the West there are currently negotiations<br />

ongoing between Ishmael Khan and a representative from Kandahar.<br />

On this latter issue, it would appear that the long-term situation and security of Herat are<br />

unclear and uncertain.<br />

Opinions tended to vary as to the political and geographical directions which Ismail Khan<br />

may take and when. According to our main security contact, the gunpowder keg is in<br />

place, the fuse has been set and all that is needed is someone to light it. The city is awash<br />

with guns, there are troop movements to the south and there is every indication that<br />

conflict may occur in the foreseeable future. All that is unclear is the course that this<br />

conflict will take and the timeframe in which it will happen. This would appear to be very<br />

much in the hands of Ishmael Khan, self-appointed Emir of the West.<br />

In our contact’s opinion, there are three main scenario's for the future of the Western<br />

region;<br />

• either Khan will retain his position in Herat, continue to defy the Interim government<br />

whilst reinforcing links with Iran (who would support the creation of a buffer state for<br />

religious and economic reasons) and wait for Kabul to attack (there are already<br />

20,000 troops from Kandahar stationed to the south of Herat for this purpose);<br />

• or he will make a pre-emptive strike against Kabul, and in doing so will sever links<br />

with Iran and the Hazara's (who will only support him if he is in Herat, not Kabul) in<br />

which case he will likely be fighting on two fronts - against Iran and Kabul;<br />

• or he will join the government, sever links with Iran (and by association, the Hazara's<br />

also - both are Shi’ite Muslim) and seek to drive them out.<br />

Depending on the course of action pursued, conflict might be sudden (scenario 2 and 3)<br />

or there will be a gradual build-up (scenario 1). Any decisive move by Khan will likely<br />

trigger unrest in Herat - which will be divided ethnically (Hazara's, Pashtun's, Tajiks),<br />

religiously (Sunni and Shi’ite) and militarily (Herat Defence force, troops loyal to Khan,<br />

Hazara's and Iranians). Any unrest in Herat will likely inflame anti-West sentiment which<br />

will be targeted at the UN agencies and NGOs (being the most visible symbols of<br />

Western influence).<br />

7


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

The assessment team opinion differed as to the weight to attribute to these scenarios. On<br />

one hand, our contact was very knowledgeable about <strong>Afghanistan</strong> and security questions<br />

and has already gone through many upheavals.<br />

On the other, it was difficult to obtain detailed information, if at all, as to the nature of his<br />

evidence and the patterns. In previous and further discussions, corroborations of his<br />

analysis was difficult to establish, except by individuals who had been briefed by him!<br />

Since our return from the mission, information from Iran seems to indicate that Iran is<br />

keen on distancing itself from the opposition to the Afghan interim government 1 . On the<br />

other hand (!), given the internal struggles within the Iranian government, and especially<br />

the struggle between the “fundamentalists” (as represented by the secret services,<br />

apparently those working in Herat) and the more “progressive” ones, decisions from the<br />

Iranian President or members of his government may not necessarily say much about<br />

how others are acting.<br />

But whatever the medium, long or short-term scenario, it is clear that a large<br />

number of precautions have to be taken by expatriates in Herat. It will be necessary<br />

for the <strong>HAP</strong> team to:<br />

(i) Find secure accommodation with a private compound and food stocks to last<br />

for at least 24 hours (most agencies are continuing to keep a reasonably low<br />

profile - no stickers on houses/offices etc), strong doors, barbed wires, metal<br />

bars on houses (this was not the situation in the guest house where we stayed<br />

but it strongly advisable)<br />

(ii) Get regular security briefings<br />

(iii) Hire day and night guards (several)<br />

(iv) Drive rather than walk (some of the people we met did walk and go to the<br />

market but overall, expatriates remain cautious)<br />

(v)<br />

(vi)<br />

Get Radio Communication system in house and in cars<br />

Be included in an evacuation plan and devise alternative evacuation routes,<br />

via Turkmenistan or Iran.<br />

II.2. Renting Office and accommodation<br />

The rent may vary but should be around USD 1,200 and above. There is increased<br />

competition among agencies to locate houses and accommodation but the overall<br />

impression is that it will be possible to rent a house, which could serve as both an office<br />

and accommodation. This may require some work (as in SL). The DACAAR staff<br />

member responsible for purchasing showed us one house (much too big for the <strong>HAP</strong>). In<br />

his opinion, it will be possible to rent a house for six months, although the monthly rent<br />

may be bigger than for a longer period of time. (At the time of the visit, two large<br />

agencies were looking for new guest houses and offices, one of which had been shown 14<br />

houses).<br />

1 One additional piece of information to be confirmed is that the Iranian authorities would have closed<br />

down Ismail Khan’s houses in Iran.<br />

8


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

In addition to renting, additional costs will have to be covered to ensure the security of<br />

the occupants.<br />

Further, the office will need to include a women’s office from where Afghan women staff<br />

can work.<br />

II.3. Car hiring or rental<br />

Cars can be purchased in Herat itself and it did not seem to present much difficulties<br />

when it was discussed with DACAAR staff.<br />

II.4. Communication equipment<br />

These should include:<br />

- Thoraya satellite phones (very popular in <strong>Afghanistan</strong> and Pakistan) which we<br />

can purchase from Geneva and hand carry to <strong>Afghanistan</strong>. HF comms will be<br />

extremely difficult to import and for this reason, it is recommended that the team<br />

have two satellite phones - at least one of these should be a portable device and<br />

should travel with the field team in the absence of an HF radio.<br />

- VHF for travel around town and for access to the security network. These can be<br />

bought in through Pakistan or freighted directly to <strong>Afghanistan</strong>.<br />

II.5. Hiring local staff<br />

This is probably one of the hardest dimensions of a <strong>HAP</strong> field trial.<br />

With the recent increase in the scale of operations and with the arrival of a number of<br />

new agencies, the market for educated staff is extremely small. Specifically in the context<br />

of running an action research project, it is far from certain that staff with any training or<br />

experience will be available for such a short time period. In particular, finding Afghan<br />

staff able to speak English is becoming very difficult. The challenge appeared greater<br />

with regard to recruiting female staff.<br />

It is also important to note that there has been an “edict” made by the Minister of<br />

Planning that any new staff should be recruited with their assistance (which essentially<br />

involves them providing a list of names). At the time of the mission, relief agencies were<br />

determining the meaning and implication of the “edict” and how to apply it. Whether this<br />

will be done in a coordinated fashion was opened to question at the time of the mission.<br />

A weak national staff base would present a significant obstacle to the team - particularly<br />

given the need to access communities. It is not satisfactory to expect credible results<br />

without a reasonably strong team, and at least one team member with good language<br />

skills (English, Dari, Pashtun) will be an extremely important part of this.<br />

Provided the Provincial Authorities fully support the recruitment of female staff members<br />

to NGOs (which remains debatable – see Part Four), we will need to set up a separate<br />

9


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

women’s office space, and the team will need to be extremely careful in how it relates to<br />

female team members (not to be left alone with a male team member, not to sit next to<br />

male colleagues in <strong>HAP</strong> vehicles etc.).<br />

The challenge for the <strong>HAP</strong> will be to recruit male and female staff and to do so without<br />

engaging in unethical staff poaching (a major unaccountable way of working!). During<br />

the assessment mission, the team explored ways of doing so.<br />

‣ Second staff from other agencies: It may be possible to second staff from<br />

Afghan NGOs - and discussions with OI and AREA confirmed this possibility<br />

(AREA offered to second a staff member for at least a month in order to train<br />

<strong>HAP</strong> researchers). This would take the pressure off the immediate need to recruit<br />

our own staff and may facilitate initial access to communities.<br />

‣ Hire students: In the absence of trained research staff, it may be possible to<br />

recruit students with some English language skills. In terms of accessing<br />

communities, Afghan NGOs interviewed agreed that communication skills were<br />

key but were split on the subject of age, with some suggesting middle-age and<br />

others advocating for young people who would be less prejudiced and more<br />

flexible.<br />

‣ Organize an international recruitment for a Dari speaker: this will ease the<br />

pressure in terms of finding local researchers with both research and English<br />

skills. <strong>HAP</strong> Geneva could set this in motion rapidly.<br />

II.6. Accessing local communities<br />

This constitutes the other major challenge for a <strong>HAP</strong> field trial.<br />

Currently in Herat and surrounding Provinces (Badghis, Ghor, Farrah), there are two<br />

distinct communities receiving aid - IDPs in high profile camps which are served well by<br />

NGOs, and those in more remote villages who are in need but who are more numerous<br />

but less visible and hence who receive less assistance. Much of the relief effort (by<br />

INGOs and UN agencies at least) has focused on the IDP camps and it is only recently<br />

that agencies are proactively targeting rural villages. It will be important that the <strong>HAP</strong><br />

team strikes a balance between the two although this may be difficult due to the distance<br />

of some of the more remote (and hence more needy) areas.<br />

In terms of working within rural communities, there are a number of NGOs, which have<br />

developed participatory methodologies (AREA, OI, DACAAR) and it is these who could<br />

act as entry points for the <strong>HAP</strong> team. Communities are consulted about needs after which<br />

village leaders Committees (Shura's) are consulted throughout the life of the project. It is<br />

10


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

interesting to note that for all of these agencies, the same methodology is used for both<br />

long- and short-term programs.<br />

Without further research, it is difficult to gauge the quality of the dialogue between aid<br />

giver and receiver.<br />

Talking to both men and women will present a challenge. In the last years, a small<br />

number of agencies have managed to continue activities focusing or involving women,<br />

particularly medical projects and those in areas where negotiations could take place with<br />

local rulers. Many others, however scaled down any aspects of programming relating to<br />

women leaving a very large gap in assistance programmes. Of the agencies interviewed,<br />

few made specific reference to the need for gender balance (e.g. establishment of<br />

women's focus groups in communities where they work).<br />

II.7. Working with the Regional Authorities<br />

During the assessment there were no specific meetings held with the Regional<br />

Authorities. This was for a number of reasons - firstly to avoid confusion as to how <strong>HAP</strong><br />

would be operating (it is yet to be confirmed whether DACAAR are willing to support<br />

the <strong>Trial</strong>) and also as agencies themselves have not yet re-established relations with them<br />

(and many are fairly reticent given the tensions between the regimes in Herat and Kabul).<br />

What is clear, however, is that under the Taleban, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the<br />

Ministry of Plan posed significant obstacles to humanitarian operations.<br />

It is yet to be seen how the new regime will engage although early feedback has been<br />

mixed (already regulations have been passed on the recruitment of local labor, and<br />

women in particular). If the <strong>Field</strong> <strong>Trial</strong> goes ahead, <strong>HAP</strong> will need to have links with the<br />

government.<br />

11


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

SECOND PART<br />

The two weeks mission conducted by the <strong>HAP</strong> allowed us to get a (time-based) snapshot<br />

on the humanitarian operation in Herat and its accountability issues. Unlike a <strong>HAP</strong> field<br />

trial, this snapshot is based on agencies viewpoints and our own analysis and<br />

observations. The time-frame of the mission did not allow us to get a feel for the<br />

beneficiaries perspectives and for the nature of accountability issues from their<br />

standpoint. It is therefore not possible to comment on the accountability concerns of<br />

people affected by the assistance activities (such as the quality of the assistance provided<br />

and the dialogue between aid givers and receivers). Furthermore, we were not able to<br />

follow up on each of the problems or allegations made by our contacts. Finally, it is<br />

likely that some of the problems raised (e.g. coordination) may have been addressed or<br />

alleviated since the mission.<br />

The information below should not be seen as an evaluation. It is a summary of the<br />

reactions and comments made by our contacts during the mission, coupled with some<br />

analysis on the part of the <strong>HAP</strong> team.<br />

I - THE STRUCTURE AND POLITICS OF RELIEF ASSISTANCE<br />

I.1. Labelling the situation: are we dealing with a new emergency?<br />

The naming of the crisis faced by <strong>Afghanistan</strong> is a complex issue, which raises many<br />

operational issues. It rapidly emerged that the crisis is probably not an emergency<br />

humanitarian one in the usual sense of the word. While life-saving activities remain<br />

much needed, they are addressing structural and longer-term problems rather than those<br />

emerging from a sudden unset.<br />

“It is a chronic emergency. There is nothing particularly new in the current situation,<br />

with the exception of the necessity to providing food in Mazlak camp. There is an<br />

emergency but it is an old one: emergencies upon emergencies upon emergencies…”<br />

“Drought has brought people one step lower in the chronic emergency scale. It took<br />

about 6 to 8 months for us to realize that the drought brought people to the limits.<br />

People in the rural areas are on the edge of survival - There is a real risk of applying<br />

emergency response to long-term problems.”<br />

There are certainly pockets where immediate humanitarian needs predominate but the<br />

majority of our informants were very cautious in terms of referring to the situation as a<br />

humanitarian and emergency crisis (and many backed down from doing so). Indeed,<br />

quite a number had very quickly moved to activities with a longer-term and<br />

reconstruction dimension.<br />

The labeling has serious programmatic implications, as was demonstrated by the<br />

controversy over the distribution of free food or rations (see below). Probably more<br />

important with regard to the future of <strong>Afghanistan</strong>, it also has political implications: a<br />

12


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

humanitarian labeling is likely to delay or impede an Afghan control and ownership over<br />

the activities. This point was made very clear in the context of one meeting but it may be<br />

said to be at the forefront of Afghan (NGOs) concerns.<br />

“You’re talking about a complex emergency but is it? This is a post war recovery, not a<br />

complex emergency. So we need to change our mentality. We need to support the<br />

administration. They need ownership. Otherwise, the minute you leave, the system will<br />

collapse.”<br />

“We are approaching the emergency needs with an emergency approach grounded in a<br />

long-term perspective. Agencies who don’t do that may not be effective and may irritate<br />

local authorities. By so doing, they will put everyone at risk.”<br />

I.2. The politics and coordination of funding<br />

Along with the coordination structure and mechanisms (see below), the funding of the<br />

operations in <strong>Afghanistan</strong> remained throughout the assessment mission a rather opaque<br />

question. There may be simple answers and explanations but we were unable to get a<br />

very clear picture. So to follow up from Geneva…<br />

Some of the questions we began to research:<br />

1. Whether the Tokyo process and its outcome ($4.5 billion being pledged),<br />

focus exclusively on the longer-term reconstruction needs of <strong>Afghanistan</strong> or<br />

whether it includes as well humanitarian activities.<br />

It seems that the first option is the correct one. There appear to be two different<br />

processes or programs: the immediate and transitional Assistance program for<br />

<strong>Afghanistan</strong> and the reconstruction program (UNDP/WB/Asian Bank). Apparently,<br />

UNOCHA pushed without success for a common strategy in Tokyo, i.e. a strategy<br />

including humanitarian assistance.<br />

“New York and Washington pushed the <strong>Afghanistan</strong> and Tokyo process at the time it did<br />

“because <strong>Afghanistan</strong> is hot right now.” But it was premature. Not ready. Criteria for<br />

decisions are not necessarily in the best interests of Afghans.”<br />

Given the above point on the labeling of the crisis, it remains unclear how the two<br />

(reconstruction and humanitarian) will be linked and coordinated. We were also unable<br />

to establish how the 2002 Appeal process (based on project submission for a total of<br />

1,114,000,000 dollars – to be double checked) will link up with the other funding<br />

processes.<br />

2. Who is funding what (reconstruction vs. humanitarian activities)?<br />

According to all our informants, the funding climate at the time of the mission was very<br />

“positive”. This means that money was available, and available immediately. At the time<br />

13


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

of the mission, consultants from the EC and DFID were assessing needs with a view to<br />

scaling up their assistance missions. (For instance, the EU has 2 million to spend this<br />

year.)<br />

“Money will finish in 1 or 2 years. The money should be spread over a 10 year period.<br />

We should have a 10 year plan.”<br />

3. The implications of the funding climate:<br />

The positive implications of this favorable funding climate cannot be denied. NGOs have<br />

been able to recruit new staff and implement new activities or activities they had planned<br />

for in previous months or years but had been unable to fund until then 2 .<br />

But the risks and abuses were also very much in everyone’s minds. Many of our<br />

informants brought them to our attention.<br />

The speed of disbursement often meant that there were no or limited accountability<br />

systems, financial and others, and most probably limited or no monitoring:<br />

“Donors are allocating resources without accountability lines.“<br />

“NGOs have become shopkeepers.”<br />

“Financial accountability? Forget it! You can get any justification you need in<br />

<strong>Afghanistan</strong>. Only way to monitor is to go through the field. To do Real Time<br />

monitoring: but it is time consuming and raises staffing issue.”<br />

“I have a recommendation to donors: there should be three parties on a contract: The<br />

NGO, donors, and the community where the project is to take place. Community should<br />

know about the project, who implements it, for whom, outcome, budget, etc. For instance,<br />

they should know the number of teachers, their salary, they should be asked whether it is<br />

a good project.”<br />

Fears were raised that there may be insufficient partner capacity to 'absorb' such<br />

quantities of funds, the so-called absorption capacity problem. With no formal criteria for<br />

partner selection and with the need to spend funds quickly, it is well possible that<br />

mistakes may be made in the selection process.<br />

There were allegations (we cannot substantiate them) made against some donors who<br />

had funded agencies with no experience in the sectors/areas they are funded to work in.<br />

Also reported to us was the creation of Afghan NGOs by implementing partners as a<br />

vehicle to disburse funds, increasing bilateralisation by UN agencies in particular who<br />

establish partnerships outside of existing co-ordination mechanisms. Reference was also<br />

2 Interestingly enough, the only ones who seemed not to be able to take advantage of the positive funding<br />

climate were Afghan women’s NGOs absent at the time of the mission from Herat (and possibly elsewhere<br />

in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>.)<br />

14


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

made to a donor Quick Impact Projects as being a vehicle to spend money rather than to<br />

provide relief. In an <strong>Afghanistan</strong> context, the time frame within which to spend the funds<br />

was far too short.<br />

Given the focus of attention on 'absorption capacity' of agencies, and the ability to spend<br />

funds in limited time spans, and given the fact that a number of agencies had been absent<br />

from <strong>Afghanistan</strong> for a while or never there, funding were (often) disbursed without<br />

needs assessment. There were exceptions (NGOs with longer term presence in<br />

<strong>Afghanistan</strong>, both international and Afghan).<br />

The problem of funding without needs assessment has to be seen in light of the first point<br />

raised above: the labeling of the crisis.<br />

“You got to get the balance right between grabbing money and using it constructively.”<br />

These problems are compounded by the difficulties (this may be an understatement) in<br />

the coordination of funding.<br />

4. The coordination of funding activities and strategies<br />

“Checking what other donors are doing: it is a nightmare.”<br />

A coordination structure seems to have been put into place but it does not seem to be<br />

working! It may be because the structure itself is rather heavy…<br />

- The <strong>Afghanistan</strong> Reconstruction Steering group, made up of Japan, US, EU,<br />

Saudi Arabia<br />

- The Implementation Group, made up of UNDP, Asian Development Bank,<br />

Islamic Development Bank, World Bank, Chair of ASG, NGO and UN<br />

representatives<br />

- The ASG (Afghan Support Group), made up of bi-lateral donors (Western donors,<br />

Russia, Japan) whose mandate may be humanitarian (not reconstruction)<br />

activities. According to our contacts, the ASG is fighting to demonstrate they are<br />

the main coordination body.<br />

At the time of the assessment mission, there were several on-going discussions on how to<br />

distribute the funds, e.g. through a trust fund, through the government, etc. The team does<br />

not know the outcome of these discussions. Some of our informants recognized that the<br />

best way to coordinate is through the government, but that the search for freedom and<br />

flexibility and the absence of trust militated against it.<br />

“ A trust fund would have been an approach but who will manage? Funding should be<br />

centralized. But there is no real state right now.”<br />

“The most important next step is coordination with interim authorities in terms of<br />

reconstruction. But we are very cautious. We are willing to support them but we know<br />

that the interim authorities are polarized.”<br />

15


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

I.3. Coordination of humanitarian activities<br />

Below is a review of some of the reactions:<br />

“No one knows who is in charge at this point. There is no coherent body.”<br />

“Information flow is critical but it is not working at the moment.”<br />

“Can the UN coordinate itself? Infighting and turf wars are going on. Brahmini, Mike<br />

Sackett, UNHCR, etc. »<br />

“All coordination mechanisms are playing catch up at the moment.”<br />

There is strong evidence to suggest that the problems faced by the aid community in<br />

Herat represent a failure of co-ordination. Many of the 'accountability' issues identified<br />

by the NGOs and UN agencies can be put down to an inability of agencies to<br />

communicate with each other in any meaningful way and the difficulties of UNOCHA<br />

and other mandated co-ordination mechanisms to function effectively.<br />

Before September 11, co-ordination mechanisms in Herat were reportedly good, based on<br />

functional formal structures and an extremely good informal system. This all stopped as a<br />

greater number of agencies returned to the Province to find greater numbers of displaced.<br />

“Regional coordinating bodies are key but OCHA collapsed after 11 September.”<br />

In principle, there should be 7 coordination bodies for all 7 regions of <strong>Afghanistan</strong>, with<br />

one RCO per region. The Regional Co-ordination body in Herat was eventually reestablished<br />

along with its sectoral teams but this mechanism was playing catching up at<br />

the time of the assessment mission.<br />

“RCO Structure: Hit and miss, some are good others not. Whether they can manage to<br />

get NGOs on board is opened to question. Whether NGOs want to be coordinated is also<br />

a question.”<br />

The NGOs have been little better with a noteable vacuum: along with the UN<br />

mechanisms, the NGO one (ACBAAR) is also playing catching up, having to re-establish<br />

itself and its legitimacy in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>. New and old members have to be brought in.<br />

According to an international NGO representative:<br />

“Herat Coordination is poor but I will lay the blame on NGOs… For instance, Mazlak<br />

camp. It was set up about 18 months ago. The whole community fell apart around this<br />

concrete yet simple problems. There were nasty in-fighting between NGOs… It was<br />

unmanageable especially under the Taleban rule. NGOs negotiated with the Taleban on<br />

their own. There were no common strategy.”<br />

16


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

It also seemed that there were duplicitous NGOs co-ordination mechanisms currently<br />

being proposed for <strong>Afghanistan</strong> (NGO forum and ACBAAR), although we were not able<br />

to follow up on how the two initiatives will work together.<br />

Sectoral coordination mechanisms seemed to work better (at least we could understand<br />

who was doing what). The coordination of non food items outside the IDPs camps were<br />

UNHCR task, each IDP camp had a focal point (IOM and the Danish Afghan<br />

Committee), and food distribution was coordinated by WFP.<br />

The <strong>HAP</strong> team attended two coordination meetings during its mission (a UN and an NGO<br />

led meeting.) On a comparative basis, the NGO coordination meeting was better<br />

managed, in that it provided an agenda, the minutes of a previous meeting had been<br />

circulated, the minutes of the meeting were taken, and Afghan NGOs, essential partners,<br />

were present. None of these tasks were performed during the UN coordination meeting<br />

and there was no Afghan presence.<br />

But whether or not any of these two meetings amounted to actual coordination is opened<br />

to question.<br />

Very problematic is the absence of Afghan NGOs from the UN led coordination meetings<br />

(a criticism made by both international and Afghan NGOs.) This is all the more serious<br />

that Afghan partners are also absent from the informal information sharing mechanisms<br />

(e.g. ICRC or UN bars).<br />

Our informants pointed out that the role of these mechanisms should consist not only of<br />

ensuring a better exchange of information (no one was really talking about coordinating<br />

activities at this point) but also of linking very different partners with a difficult history:<br />

“It is important now to involve government in coordination meetings so that they have a<br />

good idea of what we are doing.”<br />

“UNOCHA should bridge the gap between relief community and the government.”<br />

As was reiterated throughout the mission, these mechanisms, old or new, are playing<br />

catching up and have to establish some ground rules and legitimate role. The situation<br />

may have improved since our return.<br />

But by the time of our departure, it is fair to say that the majority of our informants had<br />

little faith in the UNOCHA coordination role, and that the majority of our UN contacts<br />

were uncertain as to the division of labor among themselves, and whether lead role had<br />

changed. Some NGOs had taken the lead in terms of establishing an NGO coordination<br />

system in Herat and much hope was expressed that it will fill some of the vacuum. In the<br />

meantime, coordination very much depended on individual or institutional stewardship.<br />

17


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

“We got no clear answer from HQ as to who is leading on what. We used to be the lead<br />

agency on … in Herat but it may have changed.”<br />

“We have asked NGOs who are working in the same areas as ours to coordinate with us.<br />

It is working a bit. We get an idea of what is going on.”<br />

I.4.Too many “New” NGOs?<br />

There was an overall perception that a number of new NGOs had arrived and were<br />

creating problems. For many of our informers, there are too many new NGOs, without<br />

appropriate experience, which are spoiling the work done so far.<br />

“When spring comes, the follow up to Tokyo will get into full swing. It will be a<br />

CIRCUS. “<br />

“A lot of new NGOs: 280 registered NGOs in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>, including 90 international.<br />

So many new agencies. No name NGOs. Never did this type of work before or never<br />

worked in this region.”<br />

“Problem with NGOs with no experience, not talking to people, not planning, not<br />

coordinating.”<br />

“Non experienced people and NGOs are coming. They don’t know about Afghan needs,<br />

they just spend money on projects.”<br />

However, when pushed a bit, people do admit too that there may not be as many as<br />

expected because so far a number of filters have been effectively preventing newcomers.<br />

“Overflowing of bogus and wastecoat NGOs: may not happen to the extent it did in<br />

Kosovo. Because of filtering mechanisms such as Visas, flights, etc. But as soon as<br />

direct planes are on, filtering won’t take place.”<br />

“New NGOs cannot get in because of planes filters. They require 2 year presence in the<br />

country.”<br />

“New NGOs may not pop up because of violence and culture. It was different in<br />

Kosovo.”<br />

“Whether they will be drawn to Kabul remain questionable. Many won’t set themselves<br />

up because of the rent: our office rent increased from 450 to 7000 USD.”<br />

These filters include:<br />

- Security conditions<br />

- Inability to travel by road to the main cities<br />

- Limited number of flight services to and within <strong>Afghanistan</strong><br />

- High rates on UN flight (up to USD 1,200 one way to Kabul until recently)<br />

18


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

- Strict conditions as to whom can get access to UN or ICRC flights (e.g. UN<br />

affiliated, no more than 2 staff person per agency, free flights only to the end of<br />

March)<br />

- New Visas and registration requirements, although these were quite unclear by the<br />

time of our departure. What could be asserted is that NGOs will have to be<br />

registered and that NGO staff must have visas in order to remain in Herat.<br />

- High rent and more generally high expenses to operate in <strong>Afghanistan</strong><br />

Whether or not these filters will function for much longer is opened to question. With<br />

Afghan airlines opening services, it is to be expected that new relief actors will arrive. In<br />

Herat, some of the new NGOs have arrived via Iran. A number of newcomers in the relief<br />

world are Afghans and Iranians.<br />

It is difficult to assess who is actually left out because of the filters. We could only assert<br />

that the small Afghan NGOs based in Pakistan, in the first place women’s NGOs, have<br />

not returned.<br />

The relatively widespread perception of “too many new NGOs” may reflect (i)<br />

difficulties with coordination, (ii) early warning and experience of other emergencies,<br />

(iii) increased number of staff within each existing agency, (iv) increased competition, (v)<br />

staff poaching, (vi) Afghan NGOs left out or feeling left out of the relief process and<br />

business, (vii) arrival each week of new actors, etc.<br />

As far as we could establish, new international NGOs in Herat included: World Vision,<br />

War child (Food distribution), Help Germany (Education), Maltesa (Swiss development<br />

NGO), ACF (UNHCR implementing partner in Gore province), MDM-P, Shelter<br />

<strong>International</strong> (?), Iranian NGOs (?).<br />

One “new” international NGO was the object of severe criticisms. Almost all of our<br />

contacts had a negative story or complaints to tell about them. We tried unsuccessfully to<br />

follow that up with the agency in question while in Herat. At issue was the seemingly<br />

absence of efforts to coordinate, share information, establish working relationships, etc.<br />

“There are major tensions with … Local NGOs are upset because they are not talking to<br />

them. They only refer to their local agreement with their UN agency.”<br />

“We have serious problems with them. They are working in areas where we are located<br />

but they have not yet visited us. They want to run a malnutrition program but they need<br />

planning and coordination.”<br />

I.5. Afghan Women’s NGOs<br />

As stated above, there were few, if any, Afghan women’s NGOs in <strong>Afghanistan</strong> and to<br />

the best of our knowledge and most importantly of our contacts there, they were absent<br />

from Herat.<br />

19


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

Some of the reasons included: security concerns and absence of resources for moving<br />

activities and offices back into <strong>Afghanistan</strong>.<br />

“I need a need assessment, a survey, practical support. How can I return to <strong>Afghanistan</strong><br />

without all these? They are not helping us in resettling in Kabul. How should I go there<br />

in my old car? Yet, 56% of the Afghan population is made up of women and girls…<br />

Only men’s organizations get assistance. I have nothing against men’s organizations but<br />

why only them? UN agencies funds local partner organizations through old<br />

connections.”<br />

<strong>HAP</strong> was not in a position to follow up on the factors, which may prevent some of the<br />

Afghan women’s NGOs from setting up activities in <strong>Afghanistan</strong>. Nor could we assess<br />

the history of their relationships with funding agencies in Pakistan.<br />

But we certainly were in a position to assert (along with many others) that accountability<br />

to women beneficiaries has been and remains a key problem and issue as far as<br />

humanitarian activities are concerned. The presence of Afghan women’s NGOs and their<br />

integration in humanitarian/reconstruction activities will fail very short of addressing<br />

meaningfully this problem, and of implementing the fairly weak and general statements<br />

on women contained in the Bonn agreement. But their absence augurs badly of the<br />

prospects for doing so.<br />

II – PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES<br />

There is a large and accessible group of IDPs in five camps located in or around Herat,<br />

receiving assistance and a large hinterland affected by a 3-year drought. There is also a<br />

large and varied actor constellation (INGO/UN/ICRC/Afghan NGO) running both new<br />

and old assistance programmes.<br />

Overall, the humanitarian situation in the camps is stable, although concerns were raised<br />

regarding the adequacy of food distribution. The provision of basic services has now been<br />

consolidated which has meant that food, water and sanitation along with health provision<br />

is available. This was not the case a month ago but in the last weeks, assistance has<br />

reportedly been much better targeted. There was already talk of return (It is planned to<br />

return 11,000 IDPs from Maslakh camp in the next 6 weeks).<br />

That said, there is still a large IDP population in the camps (numbering between 200-<br />

250,000 - numbers are disputed and a re-registration was pending at the time of the<br />

mission), displaced largely as a result of the drought (not conflict). This caseload is still<br />

increasing although this has slowed in recent weeks (Nov increase - 8,000/Dec increase -<br />

26,000/Jan 1-10 increase - 6,000/UNHCR).<br />

II.1. Targetting the “right” beneficiaries: IDPs Camps vs. the rest of the province<br />

20


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

One of the main issues being discussed at the time of the <strong>HAP</strong> mission concerned the<br />

targeting of the “right” beneficiaries, and especially the (growing?) gap between<br />

assistance provided to IDPs in camps and assistance in further away rural areas.<br />

“The main ethical dilemna is how to provide minimum humanitarian standards in the<br />

camps without emptying the provinces?”<br />

“We must keep the balance right between IDP camps and the communities in the<br />

provinces.”<br />

“Assistance is too heavy in IDP camps as compared to places of origin. We need to solve<br />

grass root problems in the places of origin so that people can come back. We should be<br />

doing everything in places of origin.”<br />

Assistance to rural communities has been far slower to scale up. There are large<br />

humanitarian needs in the rural areas. Despite a growing realization that assistance<br />

programs need to scale up and decentralize, many areas were said to not be receiving<br />

adequate assistance.<br />

Rural families continue to be displaced both as a result of the continuing drought and<br />

difficult conditions but also because of the amount of assistance targeted at the camps<br />

constituting a significant pull factor.<br />

“When I visited a village, I was told that 5 families were planning to leave to go to the<br />

IDP camp in Herat. One head of family showed me a letter he had received from a family<br />

member, a cousin, in the camp where it listed all the items they had received for free.<br />

“Our relatives are receiving much more than what we are. One bag of wheat is nothing<br />

compared to what they are receiving in the camp”.<br />

But these were probably a minority. There are reported to be a number of people who do<br />

not have the means to move to more accessible areas - a caseload which UNHCR have<br />

termed as Internally Stranded Persons (ISP).<br />

It is important to note that the situation in these areas is one of chronic food shortage and<br />

as such it is difficult to categorize it as a classic emergency situation, particularly as the<br />

prevailing assistance model is one that borrows heavily from long-term development.<br />

Most of the large agencies have well developed participatory mechanisms, which appear<br />

to be reasonably effective although the distances between Herat and rural program areas<br />

(up to 3 days drive) do considerably hinder the effective provision of relief.<br />

The future of these drought-affected communities is far from certain - despite more rain<br />

and snow than last year, there is still the need for significantly greater precipitation if<br />

groundwater is to be recharged. This coupled with the scarcity of seed in the country will<br />

mean that livelihoods support to the rural areas may continue for some time to come.<br />

Shifting to the provinces<br />

21


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

At the time of the <strong>HAP</strong> mission, almost everyone recognized that there was an urgent<br />

need to shift assistance from the camps to the provinces. A number of agencies had<br />

already established or reactivated activities further inland, had opened offices or were<br />

about to open them, to address the problems.<br />

Yet, even if the trend appeared to be towards addressing the rural needs, several factors,<br />

however, militated against a rapid shift:<br />

(i) The humanitarian obligation to provide adequate assistance to those in the<br />

camps,<br />

(ii) A tension between this obligation and a “larger” perspective<br />

(iii) Logistical problems in reaching our the provinces (although an air strip was to<br />

opened very soon in Badghis province and warehouses were opened there),<br />

(iv) Security concerns,<br />

(v) Some vested interests in the camps: corruption, military elements, etc.<br />

(vi) Possibly a lack of interest on the part of some humanitarian actors in working<br />

further inland: this point was raised by some of our contacts but we were<br />

unable to establish its accuracy.<br />

“More than 44 returnees came back when they heard there was water and irrigation in<br />

the village.”<br />

“I have suggested that agencies focus on places of origin. But practically, most agencies<br />

spend huge money to provide assistance in IDPs. In my mind, you should just provide<br />

wheat and concentrate on places of origin.”<br />

II.2. Impact of food distribution on longer-term approach<br />

Ironically, the change of focus of activities from camps to rural areas has also bought its<br />

problems with concerns voiced by the established agencies about new agencies coming in<br />

and undermining their programmes. The general assistance model is that of a large<br />

established agency providing long-term support and distributing free food from WFP and<br />

perhaps one or two smaller agencies providing 'hit and run' drops, usually of non-food<br />

items gifted by one of the UN agencies (UNHCR or Unicef).<br />

Although many of the agencies consulted engaged in food distribution on behalf of WFP<br />

or other agencies, our impression was that a number of them were rather of two minds<br />

about it. In fact, quite a few questioned openly the strategy and brought up examples of<br />

its negative impact on the communities and on reconstruction activities. Afghan NGOs<br />

and Afghan staff within international NGOs were especially critical of the approach.<br />

“We do not believe in distributing food for free. Only families with no manpower should<br />

be entitled to free food.”<br />

“We used to do food for work projects or Food Asset Creation (FoodAc) but now WFP is<br />

distributing food for free. Food Asset Creation (Foodac) involves identifying vulnerable<br />

communities and individuals. Food is distributed to the all community in exchange of<br />

22


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

labor of some members of the communities for the realization of specific project. Almost<br />

al road repairs have been done through Foodac. But since October, food has been<br />

distributed for free.”<br />

The reasons for engaging in activities which may contravene an organization overall<br />

principles, approaches or assessment are twofold: (i) the (business or corporate) necessity<br />

to grab an opportunity, to become a donor or UN agency implementing partners and<br />

therefore to be well placed for future work, (ii) the possibility of working around some of<br />

the expectations:<br />

“This donor put some cash for free distribution of rations to drought affected people. The<br />

community heads told us it will have very negative impact. We distributed the ration but<br />

asked the community to build a surrounding wall.”<br />

II.3. Shortage of Seeds:<br />

Another major issue discussed at the time of the mission concerned the shortage of seeds,<br />

which would greatly threaten a self-sufficient future. NGOs and UN agencies tended to<br />

hold each other responsible for this major problem, although one particular actor – the<br />

FAO – was seen by everyone in Herat as bearing the primary responsibility. We did not<br />

meet with the FAO representatives so cannot establish their side of the story.<br />

It may be fair to say, however, that independently of FAO role, almost everyone<br />

overlooked to plan for seeds distribution. This oversight may result from the absence of<br />

relief actors for several months, the slow down of activities, the actual and objective<br />

difficulties in locating adequate seeds, the large needs as compared to the possible<br />

provision, etc.<br />

“There are insufficient seeds for planting. Even if rains come, farmers will be unable to<br />

plant because there won’t be seeds available. FAO asked us to make a commitment now<br />

to contract seed growers. But we don’t know whether we will have our funding and we<br />

cannot commit. Some families want to return but they need seeds and tools and enough<br />

food to feed itself for a while.”<br />

“Some of the seeds are not working here. There are two types of seeds: irrigated fed<br />

seeds and natural rain seeds. We are getting irrigated fed seeds in the hope that<br />

something will grow but they are not appropriate for here.”<br />

“We tried to order rain fed seeds but the contractor ran out of them.”<br />

“Disastrous situation. Seeds need to be distributed before 15 Feb but it won’t happen.<br />

UN agencies have totally failed in this regard. Why is FAO not acting?”<br />

II.4. WFP Food distribution<br />

23


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

During the mission, WFP food distribution activities were very criticized by other<br />

agencies on the ground that they did not reach the beneficiaries, that they were a PR<br />

exercise, that the numbers and figures were not correct, etc.<br />

“Food got to central distribution centers in districts but was not distributed to<br />

beneficiaries.”<br />

“A scandal! Yet they are not taking to task. To feed people, you need rations, not just<br />

wheat. Food dumps all over the country.”<br />

“WFP relies too much on implementing partners for assessment and implementation.”<br />

Our WFP interlocutor agreed that some of the critiques were founded (not the PR one<br />

though!) but that they were working on improving their distribution and targeting of<br />

communities. (By the time of our departure, some of our contacts agreed that the situation<br />

was improving.) Some of the possible reasons for the problems included the absence of<br />

information flows from the implementing agencies to the WFP, the reliance on<br />

implementing partners for assessment and implementation, and logistical difficulties in<br />

reaching mountainous areas. But whatever the reasons, WFP image within the<br />

humanitarian community was fairly to very negative.<br />

III – HUMANITARIAN STAFF<br />

III.1. Staffing and staff poaching<br />

Recruitment of local staff and staff poaching ran very high on the agenda of all<br />

informants. Both were described as problematic for many relief agencies, although not<br />

surprisingly it is particularly problematic for Afghan NGOs and international NGOs. The<br />

relatively scarce resource base coupled with bad and unethical practices on the part of a<br />

number of agencies were listed as the main reasons.<br />

The workings of a free labor market necessarily implies different salary scale and<br />

opportunities for experienced staff to move to a better employer as far as the salary is<br />

concerned. NGOs cannot match the salary offered by UN agencies, and Afghan NGOs<br />

find it especially difficult.<br />

As a way to handle the issue, the relief agencies are moving towards a “regulatory”<br />

approach: regulating the process, procedures of recruitment and possibly the conditions<br />

of employment. Whether or not ACBAAR will be successful in setting up a code of<br />

conduct and monitoring its implementation is however opened to questions. (It was<br />

interesting to see how a sector, which is not too keen on regulations and function very<br />

much on the basis of an extreme form of free market, reacts very negatively whenever the<br />

free market works against institutional interests).<br />

The problematic implications of staff poaching are twofold: (i) on going programs of<br />

activities may be negatively affected, and possibly unable to be pursued because of the<br />

24


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

loss of key staff, thus creating disruptions, (ii) local staff are not necessarily moving to<br />

better jobs but they appear to be moving to better paid jobs, thus resulting in a loss of<br />

much needed expertise.<br />

The main loser will be the Afghan government.<br />

Donors could fix the salary but they won’t.<br />

Code of conduct re poaching of staff, require advertising for the post, inform everyone.<br />

New staff is very difficult to recruit.<br />

Staff poaching is a big issue. Local NGOs pay 6000 to 8000 ruppees for locals,<br />

international NGOs offer 15000, and UN agencies offer 50,000<br />

We lost a person 4 days ago who had been with us for 4 months only. All we did during<br />

this period was train him. And then we lose him.<br />

4 or 5 key staff were lost over the last month.<br />

III.2. Recruiting Afghan Women<br />

In principle, Afghan women are “allowed” to return to work. Within a few days of<br />

arrival in Heart, we were told that the MOP had suggested in the course of a meeting with<br />

an Afghan representative that relief agencies should be careful in recruiting women and<br />

that women should not be recruited.<br />

As far as we could assert, the recruitment of Afghan women is allowed although<br />

prudence and caution may be required: there are or will be far more controls and<br />

procedures regarding the recruitment of women, and women staff should be given a<br />

separate office.<br />

We could not assert how many Afghan women had been recruited by UN and NGOs. Our<br />

observations indicate:<br />

- Very few Afghan women are working in the main offices,<br />

- Women’s offices have been set up by a number of agencies visited<br />

- One Afghan woman was working in a UN office wearing a simple veil<br />

Afghan women interviewed in one office remarked that there were extremists and<br />

fundamentalists in NGOs and UN offices, as well as in the government, and that they<br />

were preventing women from returning to work.<br />

It seems that so far the majority of NGOs and UN have been fairly cautious in pursuing<br />

an ambitious recruitment of women (with the exception of medical agencies who are<br />

advertising for many women positions), although most of them had begun recruiting a<br />

25


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

few. At the time of the <strong>HAP</strong> mission, the Taleban legacy was still very much in the minds<br />

of those expatriates who worked under or with them 3 .<br />

III.3. Expatriate women:<br />

At the time of the <strong>HAP</strong> mission, the gender-balance among the expatriate (and local staff)<br />

staff was far from established but there were signs of increasing balance. Under the<br />

Taleban, some agencies had a policy of not sending expatriate women to work in<br />

<strong>Afghanistan</strong>. This policy had been revoked and women had been recruited, including to<br />

head Herat sub-offices.<br />

“Personally, the last 6 years of my life has been with men”<br />

“You tend to live a very isolated life with limited contact with the communities. Gender is<br />

the issue, which will determine whether I will be working here longer than the three<br />

month contract. We are planning to employ two local women: a radio operator and a<br />

secretary but we will have to see how the government will react.”<br />

III.4. The legacy of the Taleban (and pre-Taleban) years<br />

This legacy could be seen in almost all aspects of the humanitarian work, approach to<br />

working, and individual reactions, including: recruitment, overall caution, cynicism,<br />

fears, etc. This legacy especially determined the nature and extent of the relationships<br />

between NGOs/UN agencies and the regional authorities, and explained the lack of trust<br />

on both sides: from the NGO/UN side because of “fear”: in Herat, the Taleban MOP<br />

(minister of planning) rule had been particularly brutal, from the authorities standpoint<br />

because of lack of knowledge and understanding on how these actors worked (coupled<br />

probably with a lack of general know-how: one does not become a minister over night.)<br />

Some of our contacts were particularly aware of the impact of recent history on actions,<br />

reactions and behaviors, and on the difficulties this history posed in terms of building and<br />

sustaining new relationships and activities, especially with the regional and central<br />

authorities. The problem in Herat was particularly compounded by the Ismail Khan<br />

regime and the questions regarding its political future.<br />

“The ministers have changed but not the aid NGOs.”<br />

But the main question, of course, is whether the Taleban years (and the pre-Taleban<br />

period) constitutes (just) a legacy or also a possible future, in one form or another.<br />

3 The reactions or resistance to the Taleban edicts regarding working women and projects for women or<br />

girls varied very much from one agency to the next. The medical ones kept some of their (technical?)<br />

female staff and negotiated a space of activities for women and with women. Some agencies recruited<br />

couples as a way to “resist” the Taleban edict. Others worked in secrete ways, even if their resistance<br />

strategies were in effect more “frontal”: e.g. pursuing education activities for girls with women teachers.<br />

Some agencies laid off their female workers fairly quickly, others kept them for longer, yet others laid them<br />

off but kept them on their payroll for several months.<br />

26


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

IV. METHODOLOGICAL ISUES: ACCESSING LOCAL<br />

COMMUNITIES<br />

One of the <strong>HAP</strong> team objectives was to dress a list of the existing mechanisms of<br />

engagement with local communities. We did not evaluate them.<br />

Local and international NGOs with longer-term programs worked very much along<br />

similar lines, i.e. through the Shura (village leaders’ committees). One agency also refers<br />

to the need of establishing women’s focus groups.<br />

Communities were involved in each part of the programme: their signatories were a<br />

must, donors should monitor that communities are involved. We work through the Shora,<br />

community elders elected by their own people. We are doing our best to involve<br />

communities. We need to involve them, and they need to solve their own problems.<br />

Communities are involved in every stages of the program. We have a participatory<br />

approach through:<br />

- Rural rapid appraisal<br />

- Encourage men to make a Shura and women to set up a women focus group<br />

(women shura do not exist)<br />

- Community workers are in close contact with the community. We encourage the<br />

community to use it own capacities<br />

- We explain the budget of the project at the beginning<br />

- Communities are involved and actively participate in: need assessment, base line<br />

survey, design, technical design, implementation, mid-term review, evaluation<br />

“We recruit information on qualified people in the village. We try to recruit people from<br />

the community: these are assets for the rural area and it improves the capacity of the<br />

community to manage its own resources.”<br />

Without further research, it is difficult to gauge the quality of the dialogue between aid<br />

giver and receiver, and whether accountability mechanisms are in place. What is clear is<br />

that there is a tradition of participatory methods and engagement with the communities<br />

on the part of relief agencies (both local and international). This approach has been<br />

applied to humanitarian activities and not only to development or reconstruction<br />

activities. From the <strong>HAP</strong> mandate perspective, there is probably a lot to be learned and<br />

extracted in terms of “good” humanitarian practices as far as consulting, listening and<br />

informing communities are concerned.<br />

“Non food items distribution: we have two teams in the area: two men and two women.<br />

In the first stage, we contact the community. In the second, we propose the setting up of a<br />

Shora and women’s focus group. We don’t go and distribute like this. We first identify<br />

priorities.”<br />

27


Humanitarian Accountability Project – Herat <strong>Assessment</strong> Mission February 2002<br />

Many of our contacts were also aware of the limits of the approach they have sought to<br />

implement, many of which are not specific to the Afghan context.<br />

In the reflective words of our contacts:<br />

Accuracy of the data:<br />

“We recently conducted a survey: in the first walli, it worked, but in the second, people<br />

adjusted! The communities have learned how to cheat.”<br />

“How to collect relevant information: the drought is a big issue for people but it is<br />

difficult to get the right information. People exaggerate to get more assistance.”<br />

Identifying and targeting the “right” beneficiaries:<br />

“We do many surveys but still I am not convinced. How to identify and approach the<br />

needy people? Different people with influence. Under the Taleban, one central governor<br />

decides. Now, every gunman in the village decides.”<br />

“Identify the right beneficiaries: NGOs have tried to do that but they worked mostly with<br />

community leaders.”<br />

Informing beneficiaries:<br />

“I did an evaluation two years ago. 6 agencies were evaluated. My findings were that<br />

NGOs were working with community leaders only, and beneficiaries were not aware of<br />

what they were entitled to. There was no transparency. Another agency tried to open the<br />

system by displaying the list of beneficiaries and asking people to comment. The list was<br />

read aloud. It gave excellent results.”<br />

Corruption and food diversion<br />

Our winterization program was done through block leaders. They are very corrupted.<br />

How to reach the population? We know that 45% of our stuff got diverted.<br />

Targeting women beneficiaries:<br />

Targeting and working with women beneficiaries constituted a challenge for many<br />

agencies. One had established women’s focus groups in order to address the challenge.<br />

Others had a less formal system (working through their female staff).<br />

28

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!