|
The future of Afghanistan is uncertain. There will be changes in its leadership, the withdrawal of international forces and a reduction in total overseas aid. It is not known what attitude neighbouring countries, particularly Pakistan, will take. The Taliban is stronger in many parts of Afghanistan than it was when our predecessor Committee visited the country in 2007. Despite these uncertainties we believe the UK should have a major aid budget in the country. We have an obligation to the millions of Afghans who have resisted the Taliban and the British soldiers who have died in the country.
Nevertheless, because of the uncertainties in the country, DFID will need to be flexible. For example, there might come a point at which DFID would need to stop funding the Afghan Government through the ARTF; in which case, it should ensure it has other channels open to it such as NGOs to which funding can then flow to prevent Afghan communities from suddenly being cut off from aid.
The UK Government's overarching strategy for its engagement in Afghanistan has given DFID the lead in creating a viable state. DFID has had some successes, for example in increasing tax revenue, but these gains will be difficult to sustain and further progress will not be made unless the Afghan Government is determined to achieve a similar outcome. We recommend the UK Government reconsider DFID's focus on creating a 'viable state', giving greater emphasis to the provision of services and alleviating poverty.
While the situation for women in Afghanistan improved after the fall of the Taliban, it remains difficult and even appeared to us to have deteriorated in some respects since our last visit. Although DFID and the UK Government have spoken at length about women's rights and women in Afghanistan, we are concerned that this has not been followed by adequate and specific action and funding. We recommend that girls' education be made a greater priority and that DFID fund women's shelters and legal advice for women.
It is estimated that over a third of Afghan children in the south are acutely malnourished and there are about half a million internally displaced people. If transition does not go smoothly the crisis will get worse. We recommend that DFID give a higher priority to its humanitarian work in Afghanistan. In the absence of any donor taking a lead then DFID may have to fulfil this role.
A serious problem for DFID in Afghanistan is the difficulty in monitoring its programme since security conditions prevent DFID staff visiting projects. We appreciate that working in Afghanistan is extremely difficult and commend DFID staff for the job they have done. Nevertheless, we are concerned about the high turnover, resultant loss of capacity and knowledge, weak institutional memory and, at times, a lack of staff with adequate training and skills. We recommend that DFID create a cadre of experts with knowledge of Afghan language and culture, who will work in London and in country; longer tours and routine rotations to Afghanistan would also aid this.
DFID also needs to reconsider how it can support work in insecure areas of the country, developing stronger partnerships with trusted NGOs and other organisations, which can absorb significant funding and work effectively, especially where NGOs have strong links with and support from local communities. It may also be necessary to switch funding to poorer, safer areas such as Bamiyan which have been relatively ignored by donors, who have concentrated their spending in insecure regions where they have had a military presence.
| 
