Interview with EU Ambassador Kurt Juul

European Union (EU) Ambassador and Head of Delegation of the European Commission, Kurt Juul, has said that, despite the crisis in Afghanistan, any significant increase in EU spending could only be unlocked once there was stability and peace in the country. Meanwhile, efforts would be focused on trying to improve conditions inside the country in order to encourage people to stay or return back from neighbouring asylum countries. Juul said that the ongoing civil war in Afghanistan meant ordinary Afghans were forced to live in limbo and unable to plan for the future. QUESTION: Is the EU strategy to focus only on relief assistance? ANSWER: There is a three-tier approach to Afghanistan. 25 percent of the EU’s support is humanitarian aid and is channelled through the European Commission Humanitarian Office (ECHO). A further 25 percent has been given as food aid. Much of the remaining 50 percent has been allocated to help improve conditions inside Afghanistan, which is intended to also help refugees to return. We have been working to improve conditions for return and to encourage people to stay [inside Afghanistan] for the last 10 years. With small-scale irrigation and agricultural development, and through demining of the countryside, you can encourage people to stay and even perhaps attract people to return. Our total assistance adds up to over 400 million euros (some US $360 million) in the last 10 years. On an annual basis, we have spent between 20-40 million euros (US $18-36 million) on these refugee and relief activities. Q: Has it been a disappointment that the authorities of the Taliban Islamic Movement of Afghanistan have not been able to establish an effective civil administration? A: This is a fact. Apart from their ways of seeing justice, there is really not much administration going on. This is the sad fact and a huge amount of resources are channelled into the war effort. Q: Do you think there has been a shift in the international community’s approach following the Taliban’s destruction of Buddhist statues and Afghan heritage? A: My personal view is that when you get into a situation of open destruction of cultural and religious heritage, you confirm a view - held widely in Europe, Japan and the US - of intolerance. We are seeing [Taliban] intolerance in other policies as well. My conclusion for Afghanistan is not optimistic, and it is a country that is in a very difficult situation. We’re looking at a situation of intolerance, increasing isolation and misery. Q: Is the EU looking to increase aid as a result? A: No, we are not looking to significantly increase our support. It is not easy to work in a country only through international and local NGOs. There is a question of absorption capacity and we cannot throw millions of euros into a country without any guarantee of the money being spent well. So the conditions are not there for a bigger effort, which we could call an effort of reconstruction, until there is peace. The benefits for peace are so great that I fail to understand why it is so elusive. The war has gone on for so long and so many people are suffering, inside and outside of Afghanistan. If there were peace, the EU would consider a more concerted effort to build up the country. Of course, with every year that passes, with disinvestments in the fiscal and social infrastructure, you are faced with a more difficult problem. But this does not appear to bother those engaged in the civil war. The longer the war goes on, the more investment will be required to raise Afghanistan back to a reasonable level. The problem worsens daily. The priority must be to try and support peace in the country. If peace does come about, then the EU will provide support for reconstruction. But we can’t reconstruct as long as the civil war goes on. Q: The Pakistan government is very keen to see refugees return to Afghanistan. In light of the recent influxes, have the Pakistan authorities approached the EU to see if assistance could be increased? A: We are already doing a lot. The problem of Afghan refugees in Pakistan is not straightforward: many have been here for years and are well settled; others are newcomers due to drought and fighting. It is a porous border with traditional movement across as well and it’s not an easy situation to manage. First and foremost, I think we need to be help create peace in Afghanistan and then you will see people flow back. Afghans are naturally attached to their soil and they will return. Q: Do you think there is any hope in facilitating refugees’ return before there is peace? A: We have seen some return but I think the civil war is still the big hurdle for refugees. I visited Kabul recently, half of which is totally destroyed. I asked people there why they didn’t start to clean up the rubble and help to create a future in the city? They responded by saying that it was hopeless as the frontline was not far away and that, with a civil war, it was impossible to know what may happen. The attitude was, “Why should we bother now?” There is a hesitancy to go on because there is no hope. The future is too risky. Q: You recently visited refugee camps near Peshawar [northwest Pakistan]. The refugees in the Jalozai settlement are currently in the media as the Pakistani authorities are reportedly limiting assistance to them. Have you made any overtures asking that they address this? A: We are backing the UN effort stated by the Secretary-General [Kofi Annan] when he was here. [In a visit three weeks ago, Annan said that a humanitarian solution should be found to provide immediate relief to Afghan refugees at Jalozai]. I did not go to Jalozai myself, I went to Shamshatoo, which is a more established camp. Despite the distress, I think NGOs are doing a good job and ECHO has decided to contribute in the water management area. The EU is present on this side as well as on the Afghan side, which is in line with what Pakistan thinks should be the case. We took the decision many years ago that our basic course of action should be to keep people in Afghanistan as much as we can, and to invite them to return [there when they can]. We understand that having a caseload of 1.5 million is a lot [for Pakistan].