Afghanistan Report published (14 February 2008)
‘We are right to be in Afghanistan’ Richard Burden MP has said today.
Welcoming today’s publication of the International Development Select Committee Report on Afghanistan Richard, a member of the Committee, highlighted that the international community has a responsibility – and also a vested interest – to assist Afghanistan to achieve lasting peace, stability, reconstruction and development.
Explaining why it is essential that the UK remains committed in Afghanistan, Richard said:
‘Sadly, Afghanistan remains blighted by conflict in Helmand, where most of the UK’s 7,500 troops are deployed. Many families here in the UK have lost loved ones over there. With no end yet in sight it is understandable that some commentators are now suggesting that we should get out.
‘Understandable maybe, but – in my view – wrong. I was in Afghanistan with the International Development Committee towards the end of 2007. Even the week-long snapshot I experienced convinced me that we should not abandon the Afghan people. Large parts of the country are much more stable than Helmand. International support has helped build the foundations of democracy and enable thousands of children to go to school. Withdrawal would put all of this at risk.
‘Afghanistan also remains dreadfully poor; women still face appalling discrimination and most of the heroin that ends up on UK streets comes from Helmand poppy fields. So we have a national interest in helping the Afghan government to tackle these issues as well as a humanitarian responsibility to help the country build a sustainable future. Parts of the international operation must change but we need to stay.’
The report ‘Reconstructing Afghanistan’ points out that Afghanistan has made real progress in health, education, economic growth and governance since 2001. These tangible achievements deserve to be recognised. However, after 30 years of conflict Afghanistan remains one of the poorest countries in the world and that the risks of abandoning it and the consequences for global security are significant.
The report urges donors to work together to build the capacity of the Government of Afghanistan to deliver services to the Afghan people. More than 50% of donor expenditure in 2007 did not go through Government of Afghanistan channels. The Committee argues that projects and programmes which do not use Afghan goods and services or are not aligned with the Government of Afghanistan’s priorities are counter-productive because they do not build local capacity.
There will not be a sustained reduction in poppy cultivation unless greater resources are put into rural livelihoods including agriculture, technical services, irrigation, livestock and the provision of credit. Any enforced wide-scale eradication would have significant negative political and economic consequences, especially in already insecure provinces.
An effective counter-narcotics strategy will also require criminal prosecution of big traders and the extension of the rule of law to rural areas since the opium trade is controlled by powerful criminal gangs who operate with impunity in a lawless environment.
The position of women in Afghan society has improved since the fall of the Taliban but these gains could easily be lost. Insufficient attention has been paid to reform of the justice sector by the donor community and this needs to be addressed urgently.
The Committee commends the efforts of the joint civilian and military Provincial Reconstruction Team in Helmand which is trialling new methods of working in a challenging environment. However it notes that civilian movement is restricted by the security situation and local capacity is limited. The Committee cautions that political objectives for Helmand need to be aligned with Afghan capacity in order to ensure that the reconstruction process is Afghan-led.
A copy of the report is available online here
> Richard visiting a school in Afghanistan, October 2007
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon