Challenges to Afghan Reconstruction Outlined at Congressional Hearing

 

Monday  June 23, 2003
(Participants say increased security, financial resources keys to
success) (1060)
By Lauren Brodsky
Washington File Staff Writer

Washington -- At a June 19 hearing before the House Committee on
International Relations, economic and political challenges affecting
the reconstruction of Afghanistan were outlined by a panel of
academics, directors of various non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
and representatives from the State Department and the United Nations
Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention.

Most concurred that outside of Kabul, the security environment has
deteriorated and warlords continue to gain power, creating risks for
families, especially women and girls, and foreigners.

Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (Republican from Illinois) noted in
his opening statements that reconstruction efforts "have quite a way
to go" before the goal of a peaceful Afghanistan is realized.
"Concerns about persistent insecurity and a slow political and
economic reconstruction process are prevalent throughout Afghanistan,"
he said.

Despite the military success in Afghanistan, "peace remains elusive,"
said Representative Tom Lantos (Democrat from California), the ranking
Democratic member of the committee, who voiced concern that the U.S.
is not adequately focusing on nation building.

"Al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants appear to be reconstituting themselves,
mounting a concerted effort to destabilize the government, impede
reconstruction, and terrorize the population in the hopes of making
Afghanistan ungovernable until the Unites States gets tired and
departs," he said.

Lantos argued that democracy will be possible only when "warlords
realize that their continued relevance lies not with their armies but
with the new emerging democratic system in Afghanistan."

Ambassador Peter Tomson, former special envoy to Afghanistan, said
that the U.S. government and Afghanistan's new administration under
Hamid Karzai have "lost the initiative. The policy drift in U.S.
Afghan policy must first be resolved in Washington."

Ambassador Tomson suggested a new reconstruction push to increase
security. "The U.S. should seek NATO approval to augment the
international peacekeeping force in Afghanistan when NATO takes over
the U.N. mandate for the International Security Assistance Force
(ISAF) in early August," he suggested.

Ambassador Tomson praised the Department of Defense's successful
Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) for "blending security and
development." He said "the PRTs are winners, an innovative, productive
framework for reconstruction in Afghanistan's rural areas. There
should be more of them and more project funding support for each."

Along with increased U.S. reconstruction efforts, Representative
Lantos advocated more participation by the Afghan people in creating
their own constitution. "The current constitutional drafting process
is secretive and apparently strongly influenced by Islamist
hardliners; there is little or no public input, and there are reports
about intimidation of democracy advocates and political reformers," he
said.

The implementation of an Afghan constitution and the national
elections scheduled for June 2004 are key benchmarks of the Bonn
Agreement, which will create the foundation of the post-Taliban
government in Afghanistan.

To ensure the success of the Bonn Agreement, Ambassador Tomson
supported a centralized government to prevent warlords "from
attempting to fix election outcomes in their areas." Tomson proposed
that the United States "become much more decisive in building up the
moderate Karzai regime."

However, Charles Santos, the Director of the Foundation for Central
Asian Development, noted that Afghanistan is made up of many regions,
and therefore he took issue with the notion that "he who rules Kabul
rules Afghanistan." Professor Larry Goodson of the U.S. Army War
College agreed, calling for "modifications to the central government
model, including a federal or confederal approach."

However, others on the panel supported a strong central government
system, including M. Hasan Nouri, Chairman of International Orphan
Care. Nouri argued that local autonomy is "another word for
warlordism."

Warlordism not only challenges the democratic process but also has
caused a deteriorating human rights situation, according to John
Sifton, Afghanistan researcher for Human Rights Watch. He said fear of
robbery, kidnapping and rape keeps many Afghans at home, afraid to
seek health care or attend school. And although the situation has
improved for some Afghan women, "a majority of girls are not at
school."

Many panelists and members of Congress expressed concern for the
status and safety of women, including Representative Diane E. Watson
(Democrat from California). She argued that if "women are not involved
all the way, [the new government] won't be legitimate." Watson
proposed that women be granted a more vocal role in the act of
constitution drafting.

Norman Leatherwood, Executive Director of Shelter for Life, argued
that participation in the act of nation building should extend to all
Afghans. He explained that by building a road or a home, Afghans of
all ethnic and tribal backgrounds will have a stake in the future of
their nation.

But funding for such projects has been inadequate, according to
Professor Goodson who said that funds for Afghanistan are "lagging
behind Iraq."

Congress made a strong financial commitment to rebuilding Afghanistan
through the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act, which allocated $3.3
billion in economic and military assistance. However, many panelists
said that the funds are not reaching the appropriate groups within
Afghanistan.

Professor Barnett Rubin of New York University said the Afghan
Minister of the Interior has "only $7 million in the Law and Order
Trust Fund for Afghanistan, though he estimates that he needs over
$100 million."

Also complicating the financial and security situation is the growth
of the opium trade. The drug trade in Afghanistan has continued to
grow in recent years and prices have shot up from $50 per kilo of
opium to $550 per kilo.

Bernard Frahi, the Chief of the Operations Branch of the U.N. Office
on Drugs and Crime, said that while "there is no quick fix," better
law enforcement will lead to better security. Frahi said that "in
macro-economic terms, while the value of the opium harvest in 1990 was
about $150 million a year, in 2002 such revenue reached $1.2 billion,
an amount that matches that total assistance provided last year by the
international community."

According to Chairman Hyde, increasing security is the biggest
challenge to securing financial support. "If the United States wants
to see donors stay continuously engaged, then we have to do a better
job working with the Afghans to achieve security," he said.

(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International
Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:
http://usinfo.state.gov)

 

HOME

Copyright 2014  Q Madp  www.OurWarHeroes.org