26 European Security and Defence
Policy: Policing in Afghanistan
| (34908)
—
—
| Council Decision amending Council Decision 2010/279/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN)
|
| Legal base | Articles 28, 42(4) and 43(2) TEU; unanimity
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 8 May 2013
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see (34057) —: HC 86-xx (2012-13), chapter 19 (21 November 2012) and HC 86-viii (2012-13), chapter 16 (11 July 2012); also see (31557) — and (33003) —: HC 428-xxxiv (2010-12), chapter 16 (19 July 2011); (31557) —: HC 428-i (2010-12), chapter 55 (8 September 2010); (31071) —: HC 19-xxxi (2008-09), chapter 3 (11 November 2009); (30100)—: HC 16-xxxv (2007-08), chapter 14 (12 November 2008); (29517) —: HC 16-xv (2007-08), chapter 7 (12 March 2008); and (28556) —: HC 41-xviii (2006-07), chapter 16 (25 April 2007)
|
| Discussion in Council | Before 31 May 2013
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
26.1 EUPOL Afghanistan was established on 30 May 2007 with
a three-year mandate; this was extended in 2010 for another three
years, until 31 May 2013. It was set up to:
— assist
the Government of Afghanistan in implementing coherently its strategy
towards sustainable and effective civilian policing arrangements,
especially with regard to the Afghan Uniform (Civilian) Police
and the Afghan Anti-Crime Police, as stipulated in the National
Police Strategy;
— improve cohesion and coordination among
international actors;
— work on strategy development, while placing
an emphasis on work towards a joint overall strategy of the international
community in police reform and enhance cooperation with key partners
in police reform and training, including with the NATO-led mission
ISAF and the NATO Training Mission and other contributors; and
— support linkages between the police and
the wider rule of law.
26.2 The full history of the Committee's consideration
of developments since then are set out in our previous Reports.[95]
26.3 The draft Council Decision that the Committee
cleared in July 2011 set the budget to 31 July 2012 at €61
million: a €6.4 million increase on the previous 14 month
budget of €54.6 million, but €3 million less than originally
proposed. The "geographical" Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Minister (Mr Alistair Burt) expressed full support for
EUPOL Afghanistan: without it there would, he said, be no international
operation focused exclusively on providing civilian policing expertise;
it also brought in other Member States in support of a UK foreign
policy priority. The successful delivery of EUPOL Afghanistan's
mandate was a Government foreign policy priority, and had an important
role to play in the international community's effort in supporting
the Afghan Government to develop its police force. However, while
its performance had improved, it was still not fulfilling its
full potential. The Minister was therefore committed to supporting
recent momentum so that the mission could achieve its objectives
before the end of its current mandate in May 2013. Effective evaluation
of EUPOL's activity would, the Minister said, be a top priority
to ensure that the new budget represented good value for money.
The Committee commended the Minister and looked forward to hearing,
when the next budget was presented, about this evaluation of EUPOL's
impact and value for money.
26.4 The Council Decision that we considered
on 11 July 2012 set EUPOL Afghanistan's budget for 1 August 2012-31
May 2013 at €56.91 million. The Minister for Europe (Mr
David Lidington), said that though this was a €1,090,000
reduction on the €58,000,000 initially proposed by the External
Action Service, as it covered only 10 months, it was effectively
11% higher than the 12 months budget up to 31 July 2012. The
principal reason was, he said, that the mission needed a greater
level of security and more close protection teams, in response
to recent attacks on international advisers, as well as a heightened
threat environment, and was consistent with the increased security
arrangements of others in the international community. A further
reason was that the number of EUPOL international staff was now
at its highest: 353, up from 182 at the start of 2009. He continued
to stress that, without it, there would be no international mission
focused on providing civilian policing expertise or the professionalization
of the senior police leadership, and that it involved other Member
States in support of a UK foreign policy priority. He also noted
that the UK was a major contributor, providing a total of 16 police
officers: 12 in Kabul and four in Helmand, in key positions such
as Deputy Head of Mission: as such, the Minister said, "we
lead EUPOL's work in Helmand."
Our assessment
26.5 That other Member States were now putting
more of their shoulder to wheel was, we felt, welcome. However,
the principal reason for the budget increase — a greater
level of security and more close protection teams, in response
to recent attacks on international advisers, as well as a heightened
threat environment — was sobering, to say the least.
26.6 What the Minister had to say at present
was essentially a brief statement of mission activity, and in
no way an evaluation of EUPOL's impact and value for money over
the past 12 months. Given the cause of the budget increase, effective
evaluation of EUPOL's activity was all the more important —
as, therefore, was the strategic review to which the Minister
drew attention.
26.7 We therefore asked the Minister to deposit
it once he had received and studied it, with his views on its
findings and on its implications for the right way forward, and
explaining where matters stood on evaluating its impact and value
for money.[96]
The Minister's letter of 8 November 2012
26.8 The Minister's detailed response is set
out in detail in our most recent Report. In brief, the Minister
said that he had achieved the key UK objectives of a continued
focus on Afghan National Police senior leadership, a tighter and
more focused EUPOL presence in the provinces and a further review
in 2014 to determine the shape of CSDP engagement after transition.
EUPOL's role was vital in developing a more capable, legitimate,
accountable and sustainable Afghan National Police (ANP), and
complementary to the work of the US and other international police
reform programmes, which focussed on recruitment, equipping and
providing basic training for new police recruits. By 2014, EUPOL
would be in Kabul and three to four other locations, down from
10 at present.
26.9 Looking ahead, the Minister said that a
planning document would now be drawn up, looking at the role of
the Mission until the end of 2014. Prompted by the UK, the new
EUPOL Head of Mission was preparing to establish a "pure
benchmarking system" for the mission: the Minister looked
forward to updating the Committee on this in due course. Other
Member States, like France, were also keen for evidence of EUPOL's
impact. Effective benchmarking, monitoring and evaluation would
become ever more important, since only then would Member States
be able properly to determine whether EUPOL had achieved its objectives,
assess the impact of what was now five years of costly training
and answer his key question — could the Afghans continue
this training beyond 2014 with a much reduced international presence?
EUPOL needed to get better at measuring this. With 14 CSDP missions
globally, and the potential need for more, Missions needed to
provide Member States with more comprehensive evidence of their
effectiveness and to show that stretched EU resources were being
used to deliver maximum impact.
Our assessment
26.10 We presumed that that the planning document
would pave the way to the next major review, determining the best
post-2014 option, and looked forward to hearing more from the
Minister when he submitted the next Council Decision for scrutiny.
26.11 In the meantime, we reported these developments
to the House because of the widespread interest in the situation
in Afghanistan; and for the same reason, also drew this chapter
of our Report to the attention of the Foreign Affairs Committee.[97]
The draft Council Decision
26.12 The draft Council Decision extends the
EUPOL mandate and sets out a new €108 million budget from
1 June 2013 until 31 December 2014.
The Government's view
26.13 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 8 May
2013, the Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington) says that EUPOL
is the only organisation "doing for the police what the Officer
Academy will do for the army: help the generational shift in Afghanistan
by training a cadre of professional and able senior leaders."
By 2014, the Minister says, the majority of basic police training
will have been completed. Then, he says, "the principal
gap will be on senior leadership, which is both EUPOL's area of
focus and the area the UK considers key to a sustainable Afghanistan
National Security Force." In the meantime,
"EUPOL is performing well in the delivery of
key areas of police training in which it adds the most value —
intelligence-led policing, CID, and community policing —
through projects such as the Police Staff College, the City Police
and Justice Programme and the Crime Stoppers hotline".
26.14 The Minister reiterates the points he made
last November concerning EUPOL's unique role in developing a more
capable, legitimate, accountable and sustainable ANP and in complementing
the US and other international police reform programmes (such
as NATO's Training Mission Afghanistan, NTM-A). The operating
environment over this new mandate "will see a flux in security
forces, and therefore it is important that UK officials continue
to scrutinise the mission, and allow for Mission flexibility to
adapt to any change".
26.15 A further review in the autumn of 2013
will determine the shape of CSDP engagement after transition.
26.16 With regard to costs, the Minister says
that he is "mindful" of the Committee's interest (and
that of its House of Lords counterpart) in this, as with other
CSDP missions, and therefore provides the following detailed analysis:
"The pro rata difference between this €108,050,000
budget and the previous budget is negligible; however, budget
lines within the statement have changed. A comparison of the new
budget to the previous budget is set out below. The UK has worked
hard to ensure budgets on all CSDP missions are fit for purpose.
I am content that this budget is consistent with the activity
of the Mission. As set out above, it is expected that the operating
environment will change over the new mandate and need the Mission
to be flexible in adapting to this. Therefore, a 19 month budget
was accepted on the condition that a detailed report is issued
at the 12 month mark, to update EU Member States on budget consumption
and possible modifications to the budget in line with the mission's
requirements.
o
"Change: €4m increase on the previous figure (pro
rata per annum).
- "In accordance with new guidelines on
daily allowances, approved by Council, the Afghanistan rate of
per diems has increased. The changes to per diems across all CSDP
missions remains cost neutral, so does not have an impact on the
UK contribution;
- "There is an increase in local staff
salaries as a result of upgrades to local staff contracts to ensure
compliance with international best practice;
- "The insurance has increased. This is
not a standard amount as it is not a framework contract; each
Head of Mission requests it.
o
"Change: €58,963 decrease on the previous figure (pro
rata per annum).
- "This reflects a decrease in the predicted
number of visits from Mission personnel to Europe.
o
"Change: €1,782,214 decrease on the previous figure
(pro rata per annum).
- "IT and maintenance costs have increased
due to an ongoing need for consultancy services to produce further
efficiencies on the internet and IT systems by Autumn;
- "Communications costs have also increased
due to the need for multiple providers of satellite phones for
wide coverage, and to increase operability around jamming devices;
- "Increase to accommodation costs covering
increased staff in Kabul (having moved to the capital from other
regions where there are no accommodation costs);
- "These increases are offset by a number
of decreases in budget lines reflecting actual costs of contracts.
A large decrease in programme costs is due to the shift in focus
from small tenders (provided by external bodies) to set piece
projects e.g. conferences and official visits to Europe.
o
"Change: €2,127,351 decrease on the previous figure
(pro rata per annum).
- "A decrease in capital costs was expected
as many of the required assets for the Mission were bought in
the previous budget, e.g. armoured vehicles. However there are
still some investments to be finalised. This includes new provisions
for computers and communications equipment which have reached
the end of their life.
- "Representation / Contingencies:
€841,216
o
"Change: €36,296 decrease on the previous figure
(pro rata per annum).
- "This slight decrease is consistent
with the requirements of the Mission on representation and contingency
on any unforeseen problems the Mission may encounter, including
changes in security requirements.
"UK officials will continue to evaluate the
impact of EUPOL over the new mandate, to ensure that the mandate
remains flexible and appropriate for the operating environment,
whilst maintaining value for money, and assess the spend of the
budget allocated to the mission when each six-monthly report on
mission performance is issued, as well as a more detailed examination
specifically on the budget after 12 months."
Conclusion
26.17 We are happy to clear this Council
Decision on the basis of the information provided at this juncture,
and thank the Minister for his detailed analysis of the budget.
However, we are also even more interested in effectiveness and
value for money.
26.18 There are two important milestones between
now and the end of 2014 — the first being the autumn 2013
review. We presume that it will focus on the Minister's key question
of last November — will the Afghans be able to continue
this training beyond 2014 with a much reduced international presence?
We hope that he will be able to deposit this for scrutiny in the
normal way. If, however, its sensitivity prevents him from so
doing, then we ask him to supply the sort of full summary that
he provided last November.
26.19 The second is the detailed report that
is to be issued at the 12 month mark. We hope that, finally,
it will provide some evidence of effectiveness, rather than activity
analysis (c.f. paragraph 26.9 above). By the end of 2014, the
mission will have cost over €220 million.
26.20 We recall the discussion that we have
had with the Minister about the audit by the Court of Auditors
of another similar, lengthy and costly mission, EULEX Kosovo,
which found that it had been effective only in a limited part
of its mandate. Our discussion revolved essentially around the
wider implications of this unprecedented audit, which we suggested
should be applied to all CSDP missions. Though the Minister,
rightly, pointed out that it is for the Court of Auditors to set
its own priorities, we felt that the message was nonetheless clear
— notwithstanding the political considerations that tend
towards the quickest possible establishment of each new mission,
they need to be: given clear, measurable objectives and a time
limit; be benchmarked; be rigorously assessed along the way; and
be wound up if those objectives are, for whatever reason, not
being met effectively and not providing value for money. Thanks
in no small measure to the stamina and persistence of UK Ministers
and officials, EUPOL Afghanistan has finally been brought
to the point where, at least in theory, it is to be subjected
to at least some of these key elements. If not now, then certainly
by mid 2014 we need to see detailed evidence of its effectiveness,
so that the lessons can be identified and then applied to other
such CSDP missions in similarly challenging circumstances.
95 See headnote. Back
96
See (34057) -: HC 86-viii (2012-13), chapter 16 (11 July 2012). Back
97
See headnote: (34057) -: HC 86-xx (2012-13), chapter 19 (21 November
2012). Back
| 
