AFGHANISTAN HUMANITARIAN CRISES ANALYSIS 2017 February 2017 Each year, Sida conducts a humanitarian allocation exercise in which a large part of its humanitarian budget is allocated to emergencies worldwide. This allocation takes place in the beginning of the year as to ensure predictability for humanitarian organizations and to allow for best possible operational planning. In an effort to truly adhere to the humanitarian principles, Sida bases its allocation decisions on a number of objective indicators and parameters of which the most important are related to the number of affected people, vulnerability of affected people and level of funding in previous years. One of the indicators is also related to forgotten crises in order to ensure sufficient funding to low profile crises. Besides this initial allocation, another part of the humanitarian budget is set aside as an emergency reserve for sudden onset emergencies and deteriorating humanitarian situations. This reserve allows Sida to quickly allocate funding to any humanitarian situation throughout the year, including additional funding to Afghanistan. For 2017, Afghanistan has been allocated an initial 110 million SEK in January 2017. Close monitoring of the situation in Afghanistan will continue throughout the year to determine whether additional funds should be allocated. 1. CRISIS OVERVIEW Conflict Afghanistan has experienced continuous conflict since the late 70s. The Soviet invasion in late 1979 triggered a wide-spread insurgency across the country. Following the collapse of the Soviets-backed regime, the different anti-soviet Jihadi fighting groups engaged in a bloody civil war among themselves from 1992 to 1996. Taliban s repressive and medieval rule replaced the civil war (in most part of the country) until late 2001. By 2002 Taliban s were withdrawn and Afghanistan found a new internationally-backed government. Currently there is an active insurgency across the country aimed at overthrowing the government and withdrawal of foreign forces. The Islamic State and various other terrorist networks are also, reportedly, active in the country. The UN in Afghanistan started recording civilian casualties due to conflict in 2009. Since then the number of casualties have been continuously increasing every year. Conflict-induced displacement increased substantially in 2016. Half a million people are so far displaced this year; never in the past were this many people displaced in one single year. 31 of 34 provinces have recorded forced displacement and all 34 provinces host IDPs. This is in addition to more than 1 million additional (more protracted) IDPs from previous years. While there is disagreement and confusion around what parts/percentage of Afghanistan is lost to or disputed by the insurgents, it is clear that Taliban now control more Afghan territory than at any time since 2001 and that fighting has reached vicinities of multiple large population centers. As a result of increased pressure from the insurgency, International forces (reportedly) have engaged more frequently in ground combats supporting Afghan forces. While conflict normally slows down to some extent in the winter months ahead, there is no prospect of reduced war in 2017 despite a peace deal that was signed recently between government and the HIG insurgent group. Natural Disasters Afghanistan is prone to natural disasters, including earthquakes, droughts, floods, storms, landslides, avalanches and extreme cold. The most frequently happening disaster is seasonal flooding. Due to mountainous terrain flooding are usually localized but with significant impact on lives, livelihoods, agriculture and other rural infrastructures. Over three decades of conflict, coupled with environmental degradation, and insufficient investment in disaster risk reduction strategies, have contributed to decaying infrastructure and increasing vulnerability of the Afghan people. Natural disasters, mainly floods, do not only cause casualties and emergency needs but devastate local existing basic infrastructure, local economy and basic services such as education and health. Chronic poverty and decades of war has increased communities vulnerability such that small shocks to their harvests or livelihoods can be devastating forcing families to rely on negative coping mechanisms.
Returnees and Refugees Since January (until end October 2016) more than half a million Afghans both registered refugees and undocumented Afghans have been forcefully returned (due to harassment, intimidation and being deprived of services, resources) from Pakistan triggered in July this year after deterioration of political relations between the two countries. Vast majority of them are in need of humanitarian assistance. The upcoming winter cold will add to their chronic situation. In addition, more than 200 000 Pakistani refugees from North Waziristan remain in the south east of Afghanistan since 2014. They also continuously rely on humanitarian supplies. Returnees and deportees from European countries could add to the humanitarian caseload in Afghanistan. Certain deportees from Europe may have specific protection needs. Structural Issues Despite exceptional amounts/scale of international aid to Afghanistan since 2002, Afghanistan remains plagued with wide-spread chronic poverty (39.1%), prevailing conflict, and recurrent natural disasters. Basic services (funded by development donors) don t reach conflicted-affected areas or their quality is poor. Isolation (lack of roads/connectivity) to economic hub-centers is another challenge for remote areas. Seasonal floods affecting lives, livelihoods (stocks and agriculture) of communities and pushing them to migrate or to adopt negative coping mechanisms (despite humanitarian actors repetitive post-disaster response over the years) is a clear example of one such structural failure. Corruption and lack of political will to distribute meaningful (close to cities, water, other resources and services) land plots to returnees and IDPs have been other contributing factors in forcing them to remain in poverty and a dire situation. IDP/returnee slum-like settlements are found in every major city in the country. Chronic poverty, lack of basic services, lack of investments in flood risk mitigation and the inability of (returnee and displaced) communities to acquire housing close to cities and income sources are contributing factors to increasing humanitarian needs. These are developmental short-comings. They are beyond the mandate and capacity of humanitarian actors to respond to. Though, humanitarian actors do have an obligation to advocate to government and developmental actors for outreach to these issues in addition to their normal emergency response. Corruption remains a substantial challenge in Afghanistan. Recent donor studies have pointed out wastage in international investments in Afghanistan since 2002 and that a tiny minority (of former warlords) have benefited more at the cost of the wider population (and perhaps the poorest). It remains crucial that developmental interventions learn from the past 15 years and adjust accordingly; that is to be more poverty, vulnerability and needs-focused. Sida s Afghanistan strategy which has a poverty and rural focus is well positioned to make a tangible difference. 1.1 Geographical areas and affected population Compared to past years, conflict has spread wider and is reaching closer to population centers. There are numerous frontlines in different parts of the country. All 34 provinces of the country host IDPs. General fragility and uncertainty of security situation has increased all over the country. Small localized flooding happens across the country on annual/seasonal basis but normally north and northeastern parts of the country are more severely affected. Remote mountainous areas are vulnerable to harsh winters. The most vulnerable groups in this complex humanitarian situation are children and women. Children and women combined make vast majority of those in need. They are also the most at-risk and vulnerable. Five provinces with highest concentration of displaced communities are Takhar, Helmand, Konduz, Kandahar and Baghlan. Five provinces receiving highest concentration of returnees from Pakistan are Nangarhar, Kabul, Konar, Laghman and Konduz. Mobility and short term displacement, seeking refuge with relatives in neighboring provinces or big cities is how communities deal with when conflict reaches them. Networks of extended families that might support each other with shelter or lending money are another mechanism that substitutes the absence of any functioning social welfare system. Dependence on remittances from abroad is also a lifeline for those with family members in other countries. Migration to cities is seen as a way to escape unemployment/underemployment in rural areas but many ends up in precarious situations in the cities which might further increase their vulnerability to different risks. The worse-off are those who have none of these possibilities and remain in poverty in villages facing natural and conflict calamities. Division of needs by sector as per the draft HNO are: Health 6.3 million, nutrition 4.3 million, protection 3.6 million, food security, 3.2 million, Emergency Shelter 2 million people. Overall, 9.3 million people are predicted to need immediate humanitarian assistance which shows an increase of 1 million people in need of humanitarian assistance compared to 2016.
Trend of needs: 2016 was very difficult year for Afghan citizen. Record number of people were displaced in 2016 due to wide spread fighting across the country which is also reaching closer to multiple provincial centers. There are no indications of the needs reducing in 2017. Similarly return numbers sky rocketed mid 2016 after deteriorated relations and border skirmishes with Pakistan. Half a million Afghans have returned from Pakistan. 15 November was the deadline for undocumented Afghans to leave Pakistan. Undocumented Afghans are continuously harassed and pressured to return. There are negotiations going on to extend the departure deadline of the registered refugees to end of 2017. 1.2 Risks and threats Risks to communities are similar to factors causing humanitarian needs. They include being affected or displaced by conflict; not having access to emergency and basic health; not having access to assistance as a result of conflict or remoteness or a combination of both; outbreaks of diseases and food insecurity. Isolation/remoteness, lack of economic opportunities, harsh winters, harvests affected by natural disasters, extreme poverty are other not-so-visible contributors to human suffering and exacerbated humanitarian needs. Humanitarian operations face substantive challenges which are mainly about lack of security and uncertainty (rapidly changing situations) in the field. Multiple quickly changing frontlines that are ever more close to multiple provincial centers is the new reality. New armed groups are understood to be more lethal and less complying with international norms. So far this year, there have been 169 incidents (13 killed, 22 wounded, 110 abductions, 36 health facilities or workers) involving aid personnel or facilities. Afghanistan is a high-risk corruption country. While Sida s humanitarian partners have strong control mechanisms, partners will be encouraged to improve measures and adapt to the challenging circumstances. Similarly GBV and child abuse and forced labor are constant threats to women and children. Returnee and displaced children are at higher risk of recruitment by armed forces, early marriage and other forms of negative coping mechanisms depriving them of their basic rights. Partners will be encouraged to mainstream protection in all activities and to report accordingly. Slow erosion of donors attention and resources from Afghanistan feeds the overall uncertainty. Potential opportunities for reduction of humanitarian needs also exist. Government signed a peace deal with the HIG insurgent group recently which is seen as positive development towards reducing conflict even though the deal s impact on the conflict is expected to be marginal. The Afghan government has renewed its whole development agenda recently. New National Priority Programs are at various stages of development. Among them the Citizen s Charter is expected to contribute positively in reducing vulnerability (and subsequently) in reduction of humanitarian needs. 1.3 Strategic objectives identified in the Strategic Response Plan HRP strategic objectives are: 1. Immediate humanitarian needs of shock affected populations are met -including conflict and natural disaster affected and internally displaced persons (IDPs), refugees and returning Afghans 2. Lives are saved by ensuring access to essential services and respect for International Humanitarian Law 3. The impact of shock induced acute vulnerability is mitigated in the medium term 4. Humanitarian conditions in hard-to-access areas of Afghanistan are improved 2. IN COUNTRY HUMANITARIAN CAPACITIES 2.1 National and local capacities and constraints The security situation has always overshadowed other priorities for the Afghan government. Little attention has been given to humanitarian needs. In the health sector, inefficiency of delivery of basic services has often resulted in breach of emergency thresholds; such is the case of nutrition. ANDMA, the responsible government authority for emergencies, over the years, has not received enough attention from government or international donors. 1 Though local capacities at provincial levels differ, overall capacity remains extremely low. Although government did manage to contribute cash to those recently displaced a sign which indicates improved attention and will for emergency needs. National CSO capacity 1 UNOPS (through Sida support) has contributed to ANDMA s organizational development through a consultant study.
is very week. But there are signs of improvements as the number of NGOs accessing CHF have increased. The Red Crescent Society is the largest humanitarian organization in the country. 2.2 International operational capacities and constraints Humanitarian coordination is led by the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) with the support of UN OCHA and the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT). Humanitarian donors are represented by ECHO at HCT. Donors have regular meetings among themselves and with the HC. CHF is seen as an effective mechanism for timely response to emerging needs. There is scope for improvement for some of the clusters performance. Response capacity, at least to medium (and to some extent for even larger scale events), is high. There are sufficient supplies present. Though remoteness, road closures (due to snow or conflict), and logistics could delay responses. Overall coordination of response, and to design interventions more strategically still requires significant improvements. Cuts to OCHA Afghanistan budget in a year when humanitarian needs are the highest ever, and the appeal amount being also the highest ever, is very unfortunate. Donors can help the process by requiring their partners to collaborate with and support clusters as regular as possible. Similarly partners should contribute towards common standard packages and to adhere to them. There is also scope for improving donor projects to be better aligned with HRP. Reporting to FTS can also be improved. Normally it is understood that NGOs have better access than UN agencies who work more through IPs or closer with government. Sweden, this year, has been the sixth largest contributor after US, EC, UK, Japan, and Germany. HRP has been 51% funded. Afghanistan s neighbors and countries in the region often provide in-kind support in reaction to larger scale incidents 3. SIDAs HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE PLAN 3.1. Sidas role In 2016, Sida s humanitarian funding was directed to protection, WASH, shelter, nutrition and coordination. In 2016 the total amount of Swedish support reached 184 million SEK. Sweden has a long tradition of funding humanitarian projects in Afghanistan and it continues to be a key donor in the country. Although limited humanitarian staff deployed at the Embassy Sweden is an appreciated humanitarian actor in the country; Sida s recent quick response to the flash appeal was particularly appreciated by actors as is its flexible and quick RRM mechanism. Sweden is also a major contributor to the Common Humanitarian Fund (CHF) to which it allocated 90 MSEK in 2016, making Sweden one of the largest donors to the fund. In 2017 Sweden aims to be represented at the CHF advisory board, filling the seat which is currently held by Norway. CHF remains a strategic and effective modality of responding to emerging needs. Allocation processes have improved over the past three years. In 2016 the fund allocated 39,8 MUSD through two standard and one reserve allocations, successfully responding to emerging needs. CHF has strong Accountability Framework which is based on a comprehensive risk management model and having four pillars; Eligibility Process, Monitoring and Reporting, Audit, and Evaluation. The comprehensive eligibility process of the fund had resulted in fewer NNGOs having access to the fund. OCHA since then has put efforts into familiarizing NGOs with the fund. Another DFID-funded initiative through ACBAR has also helped national NGOs build their capacity particularly to enable them be eligible for accessing the fund. National NGOs share in the fund has steadily increased. Overall, there is a reasonable balance between NGOs and UN agencies receiving funds from the fund. Responding to humanitarian needs in the Afghan context where security situation is fluid and constantly changing requires tremendous ability of mobility while gaining access and cooperation with local communities require time. With multiple annual allocations targeting specific geographic areas having the most acute needs and specific sectors, CHF has proven to be instrumental in partly overcoming this mobility challenge by successfully reaching out to newly arising needs over the past two years. With overall reduction of aid to Afghanistan, CHF gains more relevance as a funding tool. However, there is need for the fund to broaden its funding base. Sida s contribution to protection, health, nutrition, shelter and CHF areas remains very relevant and important. Gender inequality is high in Afghanistan. Acknowledging that the most vulnerable groups within the affected communities are women, children (both girls and boys) and the elderly; and that due to socio-cultural and political reasons GBV generally goes underreported even in times of peace; the absence of evidence or numbers of reported cases should therefore not prevent humanitarians (Sida partners) from ensuring that resources and strategies are in place to prevent and respond appropriately including age and gender disaggregated data and use of gender marker.
3.2. Response Priorities 2017 Sida s current supported sectors and partners remain valid and relevant considering existing needs. Protection, Health, Nutrition in addition to CHF interventions would allow Sida to have significant contribution to meet some of the needs. Some of Sida s humanitarian contributions have resilience components which shall continue in 2016. Sweden s development contributions can also include/strengthen resilience/preventive components where relevant. Additionally, the Embassy does have a role to advocate in different fora for improvement of health service delivery and longer term approach to disaster response which shall decrease humanitarian needs substantially. Focusing on women and children and advocacy for better outreach of development services and poverty/vulnerability focused development programing will be an additional priority for Sida s humanitarian partners in 2017. 3.3. Partners NRC: Sida will from 2017 provide programme based support to NRC s programme in Afghanistan. Sida s decision is in line with the principles of Good Humanitarian Donorship and motivated by NRC s past high performance in regards to delivery of humanitarian assistance, including reporting on results as well as a sound management and internal control system. Sida proposes to support NRC activities with 15 MSEK. ACF: ACF has integrated approach combining Nutrition, WASH, and Food Security interventions at health facility and community levels to address nutrition crisis in Ghor province which has the highest food-insecurity rate in the country. Sida proposes to support ACF activities with 8 MSEK. SRK: SRK works in cooperation with IFRC to support ARCS health activities and capacity. ARCS is the largest humanitarian organization in the country with presence in all 34 provinces and large network of volunteers. Sida proposes to support SRC planned activities with 5 MSEK. ICRC: With record high numbers of casualties from conflict and mass displacements, ICRC role and protection activities are very relevant and crucial. The proposed activities include protection, assistance, prevention and support to national society. Sida proposes to support ICRC activities with 20 MSEK. CHF: The humanitarian fund remains important, quick, and strategic tool to respond to emerging humanitarian needs. CHF has successfully responded to emergencies during the past three years of its lifetime in Afghanistan. Sida proposes to top up its existing agreement in 2017 with additional 60 MSEK. OCHA: In addition to its normal coordination role in the extremely difficult Afghan context, OCHA Afghanistan is also Managing Agent for the CHF. As humanitarian needs are exceptionally high, there role is more crucial. It is recommended to contribute to OCHA with 2 MSEK. Sida s humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan in 2017 Recommended partner for Sector/focus of work (incl. integrated or Proposed amount Sida support multi sectorial programming ) (MSEK) NRC Multi-sector 15 SRK Health 5 ACF Nutrition 8 ICRC Protection 20 CHF Multi-sector 60 OCHA Coordination 2 TOTAL: 110 MSEK Sources HNO and HRP 2017; Transparency International; NRC; ACF; ICRC; CHF.