NEW
YORK - The United States and the United Kingdom are being accused
of undermining the work of international humanitarian
organizations in Afghanistan by misusing aid to advance
their military interests.
"There are times when
aid agencies need the support of the military - as in
Bosnia - but we are concerned about the increased
involvement of the US and UK military in the provision
of aid," said Caroline Green of Oxfam International.
"Our impartiality is vital for us to carry out
our work on the ground but this has become undermined by
the United States giving aid to people not on the basis
of need but in exchange for information," Green told
Inter Press Service (IPS).
Besides aid
agencies, humanitarian assistance - including food aid and
relief supplies - have also been provided by coalition
forces, including the US, the UK, France, Germany
and Italy, according to the US State Department.
"Communities that we work with have become confused as
the lines between aid agencies and the military have
become blurred in Afghanistan," Green said.
Those charges have been strongly endorsed by
several other international aid organizations, including
Medecins sans Frontieres (MSF or Doctors Without
Borders), Christian Aid and Concern Worldwide. Last
week, MSF pulled out of Afghanistan after having
provided humanitarian assistance there for nearly 24
years. The reasons for the organization's withdrawal
included a deterioration of the security environment in
Afghanistan and, more important, the misuse of
humanitarian aid by US military forces in the country.
MSF also said it was unhappy with the lack of
progress in a government investigation of the killing of
five of its aid workers in the northern province of
Baghdis in June, presumably by insurgents. MSF, which
employed about 1,400 local staff and 80 international
staff, ended all its operations last week.
"In
Afghanistan, the US-backed coalition has constantly
sought to use and co-opt humanitarian assistance to
build support for its military and political ambitions,"
said Michael Neuman, program officer at MSF. "By doing
so, providing aid is no longer perceived as being a
neutral and impartial act, and this is endangering
humanitarian aid workers and this is jeopardizing
assistance to the Afghan people - the assistance which
is needed," Neuman told IPS. In May last year, MSF
complained to the US and other coalition forces about
the distribution of a leaflet in southern Afghanistan
that included a picture of a young Afghan girl carrying
a bag of wheat. The leaflet said that if humanitarian
assistance was to continue, Afghans needed to pass
information to the soldiers about all insurgent forces
in the country, including remnants of the the former
Taliban regime and members of al-Qaeda.
Neuman
said MSF has been raising general concerns about the
blurring of humanitarian and military objectives for
years. "We have done this is at meetings with officials
for different countries, including the United States and
UK," he said. Wherever there are coalition forces - or
even UN agencies - mixing political and humanitarian
mandates, "you will continue to see a danger for
impartial, neutral and humanitarian action", he said.
"Humanitarian assistance is only possible when
armed actors respect the safety of humanitarian actors.
This is why we are calling on the coalition to cease all
activity which tries to put humanitarian aid in the
service of their political and military objectives,"
Neuman said.
The coalition in Afghanistan, also
called the combined joint task force, includes troops or
logistical support from the US, the UK, Australia,
Canada, Belgium, Jordan, Norway, New Zealand, Denmark,
Italy, Germany and France.
Green said Oxfam
International respects the decision of Medecins Sans
Frontieres to withdraw from Afghanistan. "We understand
why MSF feels that their position has become untenable.
Oxfam International is gravely concerned about the
deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan, which
is increasingly affecting the ability for humanitarian
and development organizations to work. We are also
concerned about the inability of the government and the
international community to do anything about the
situation."
In 2004, six staff members from
Oxfam partner organizations have been killed in attacks
in provinces previously considered to be relatively
safe. "However, we feel strongly that Oxfam is providing
important services to the poor people of Afghanistan and
the risks we face are currently manageable and we feel
that we are able to continue working in Afghanistan,"
added Green.
Most aid organizations and
UN agencies have pulled out their international staff
from another violence-ridden country - Iraq -
primarily because of the security situation there. Green
said Oxfam decided to cease direct operations in the
occupied country in April. "We had already withdrawn
all international staff from Iraq in August 2003 after
the bombing of the UN headquarters. The
deteriorating security situation has made it virtually impossible
for our staff to work effectively and this is why we
made the decision to end our operations there," she
said. Just after the bombing, which killed over 20
UN employees, including undersecretary general Sergio
Vieira de Mello, the UN withdrew all of its
international staff from Iraq. They are currently
operating out of Jordan and Cyprus.
"The issue of non-governmental organizations [NGOs],
military and humanitarian work is not a new one," Manoel de
Almeida e Silva, a UN spokesman in Kabul, told
reporters last week. "It is not new in Afghanistan and it is
not new elsewhere." He said it was an issue that
NGOs have raised "with great concern, and we at the
United Nations have played a role in facilitating and helping
in the dialogue between the military and the NGOs".
US President George W Bush told reporters on Monday
that he regretted MSF's decision to close shop in
Afghanistan. But at the same time he trumpeted the fact
that more than 8.6 million Afghans had registered as
voters for the October presidential elections, 90% of
those eligible, according to the United Nations.
