IRIN interview with Amnesty International head

Plagued by poverty and hunger as well as more than two decades of conflict, some Afghans are optimistic that peace and reconstruction could mean a change for the better. In an interview with IRIN on Tuesday, Secretary General of the international NGO Amnesty International (AI), Irene Zubaida Khan, said that human rights shouldn't just be on the political agenda of a new Afghanistan, it should become the agenda for the new nation. QUESTION: Amnesty International has expressed grave concern over the existing situation of hundreds of thousands of Afghans on the Pakistani border. How serious is the problem? ANSWER: The problem was very serious in Chaman and Quetta area where there was a large number of people, women, children and families, stranded on the border trying to enter Pakistan even recently. However, I just heard yesterday that the situation seems to have improved somewhat and we are very pleased about that. We did raise this issue [the border situation] with the government of Pakistan today because we believe the border should be opened to allow those who need safety to be able to seek asylum here. We were told that vulnerable cases were being allowed in. We hope the situation will ease now...Right now in Chaman the situation has improved and we hope it will stay that way. Q: During your visit you spoke to many Afghan refugees. What did they tell you? A: What they told me was first of all that they have hope for the situation inside Afghanistan. But that hope is tempered by caution as they are also concerned over the insecurity that is prevailing and the total destruction of livelihood there. They would like to go home, but when conditions are secure enough, both in terms of physical and material security. They also, almost all of them, raised concerns about the level of arms that were still flowing around and the need for disarmament. In addition, the need for accountability for past abuses. Without that accountability, they felt they could not be confident about a stable situation in the future. Q: Regarding the millions of Afghan refugees in both Pakistan and Iran, [both countries have well over two million each] what human rights abuses do they face now? A: Both Iran and Pakistan have received and hosted millions of refugees over the past 20 years. I myself worked for UNHCR in Pakistan during the early eighties so I know the kind of responsibility the Pakistani people have taken onto their shoulders in caring for these refugees. They have done a remarkably good job. However, in recent years international attention had been diverted and international assistance fell enormously. There was a growing frustration on the part of the population here which did lead to forced returns. From Iran, there was forced deportations, while in Pakistan, people were being relocated to camps who had been living outside. Additionally, there were protection problems. I visited the Jalozai camp yesterday and living conditions there were quite appalling. Recently arrived people were completely destitute. They had very little. The situation is quite serious in terms of material conditions in some of these camps. It is very important that the international community supports the host countries, both Iran and Pakistan, to keep these refugees until it is safe for them to go home. Q: As the crisis continues to unfold inside Afghanistan, in terms of abuses there, what are your main concerns? A: Inside Afghanistan, I think our main concern now is continued insecurity and violence. There seems to be very little access of international agencies in areas outside the main cities. There seems to have been considerable damage done by the war, but it is unclear how much of that has affected the local population. What I heard in Jalozai camp were stories from new arrivals about how their homes had been destroyed and their family members killed. This indicates far greater civilian damage than we have gathered up to now. There is of course the damage of the war so the conditions inside Afghanistan seem to be pretty desperate. Unless something is done quickly, it is likely to get worse with winter coming on. Of course, there is the food problem. WFP is bringing in a lot of food, but it is not only an issue of food. The basic concern is one of security and protection of human rights. Q: What is your take on the recent prison uprising near Mazar-e Sharif in which hundreds of Taliban fighters were killed? A: As you know, Amnesty within hours of those killings issued a statement asking for an inquiry from the parties. That is the US, the UK, and the United Front [Northern Alliance]. I think the lesson to be learned from these kind of situations is firstly, the need to scrupulously respect international humanitarian law when it comes to the treatment of prisoners. And secondly, the need for the parties themselves, to take the necessary precautions in this kind of internal ethnic conflict, with external interventions, where it is a very complicated situation on the ground. I can appreciate the difficulties and political complexities. In this kind of situation it is particularly important that the protection provisions that exist under international law are fully respected by everyone. Q: Do you feel the United States needs to take some responsibility for what happened there? A: We asked all parties, including the US, to investigate because their forces were on the ground. US personnel were inside the fort and the US provided air support to the Afghan ground troops who eventually went into the fort. The US was certainly involved in the action that was taken in Mazar. Therefore they have a responsibility to investigate and to find out what has happened. Q: Are you satisfied what has been done thus far? A: Nothing has been done. Unfortunately, both the US and the UK have refused, feeling such an investigation was not necessary. We have not heard anything from the United Front. For this reason, we have called for an international inquiry by the UN. This is very important. If we want to address the issue of accountability in Afghanistan, it is very important that such incidents do not go unaddressed. Q: There has been a great deal of discussion on a war crimes tribunal for Afghanistan. What actually needs to be done and how? A: What actually needs to be done is to put in place a mechanism that would allow for a proper investigation. In order to identify who are the suspected perpetrators and to try them according to international standards of a fair trial. This can be done through a national mechanism or through international tribunals. There is of course the precedent of international tribunals in Bosnia and Rwanda, as well as other places. So that precedent can be followed if there isn't a proper national mechanism for doing it. What we have recommended from Amnesty is the establishment of an expert commission, including international experts and Afghan experts to examine what would be the best mechanism for dealing with these issues in Afghanistan. Q: One Pakistani journalist and expert on Afghanistan, Ahmed Rashid told IRIN earlier in an interview that there is nobody in Afghanistan who does not have blood on their hands and any premature attempts by the international community to hold warlords accountable for war crimes risks stalling progress towards a future Afghan consensus. Do you share this view? A: Amnesty's position, and this position is based on our experience of other post conflict situations around the world, is that you cannot have peace without justice. We have seen in Angola, Sierra Leone, Cambodia, and even in Chile, if accountability is not upheld and impunity does not come to an end, the peace process suffers. We believe it is very important that the issue of impunity - of ending impunity - not be brushed under the carpet. It has to be addressed and investigations have to be made. Then a proper mechanism has to be found for holding people accountable, regardless of their rank, status or role in government, whatever it might be. Everyone has to be held accountable. Unless that is done, while it may seem you have achieved your goals in the short-term, we have seen time and time again that political pragmatism does not pay in the long term. In the long term, a principled approach is really the only answer to these problems. Q: So you're saying that accountability needs to be brought forward immediately? A: We believe that investigation mechanisms should be set up and efforts should be made now to find out what has happened, who is responsible, and then, through whatever mechanisms is considered appropriate, people should be brought to trial. Q: Women have suffered immeasurably under the Taliban regime. How do you think they will fare under the Northern Alliance [United Front]? Are you hopeful for them? A: Amnesty produced a report on women in Afghanistan in 1995, one of the first reports of its kind. Women in Afghanistan have been the first victims of the war regardless of whatever regime. The form in which they have suffered has depended greatly on the circumstances and it has been particularly hash under the Taliban. But we cannot say they did not suffer under the mujahideen. I myself was working in Pakistan in the early eighties when I tried to persuade the refugee leaders at that time, the mujahideen leaders, to send their girls to school. The answer was: "We fled Afghanistan because the communists wanted to send our girls to school." The issue of women's rights is not limited to a particular faction. It is a difficult issue and it has to be handled clearly. And I think the real answer would not be with a particular faction providing respect for rights, but proper institutions should to be put in place. There should be proper laws and proper mechanisms, judicial and legal mechanisms, to allow women's rights to be respected....This agreement has been brokered by the UN and I think the international community has a responsibility to make sure some of these concerns are addressed. Q: How can human rights abuses be better monitored inside the country? A: Right now there are some very immediate concerns of security and they can be best addressed through an international presence and international monitoring of human rights. In the long term, however, of course one would have to build the Afghan systems, the judicial and criminal justice system, the legal and policing system. All these structures need to be put in place. Q: How have foreign powers influenced human rights abuses inside Afghanistan? A: One major concern that Amnesty has had is with regard to the arms flow. The arms have fuelled grave abuses of human rights inside Afghanistan and many of the major powers were involved, including many of the neighbouring countries. I think one of the important things in this peace process has to be demilitarisation and disarmament. As long as the arms are there, the likelihood of violence is going to be high. Q: Amnesty has been quite critical of neighbouring Uzbekistan with regard to its own human rights record, particularly with regard to its alleged persecution of independent Muslims or Wahabis. As an important coalition partner with the United States and Britain, do you worry that human rights will be swept under the carpet there now? A: Amnesty has produced a report on Uzbekistan precisely because of our concern of this kind of thing happening. Of course it is not in just neighbouring Uzbekistan. This concern remains valid in many countries where the approach of the major powers seems to be that the global coalition on terrorism means that you no longer look at the human rights performance of your allies. We have seen that in Egypt, and with the case of Chechnya and Russia. You mentioned Uzbekistan, but there are many situations where this is happening and indeed this is very sad. It is a major set back for human rights. Q: Current talks inside Afghanistan are focusing on reconstruction and peace initiatives, do you think human rights is high enough on the agenda at this point? A: The Bonn agreement contains a number of provisions on human rights, some of them are actually provisions that we recommended in our agenda on human rights which we issued on 1 November and we are pleased to see them reflected there. But I think the real test will be how they are going to be implemented on the ground. That is why it is very important that these implementation mechanisms are put into place, and that a prominent position be given to the human rights component in the UN operation that is being planned for Afghanistan so that political expediency does not dominate over human rights concerns. Q: Everyone is talking about the future of Afghanistan, but after a failed peace process 10 years ago, the world turned its back. How hopeful are you now? A: Personally, I am more hopeful now than I have ever been before. I have been an Afghan watcher for 20 years. I believe for the first time, there is an appreciation in the international community that peace and stability in Afghanistan affects the region certainly and perhaps even far beyond. If people are going to be safe in New York, then the people in Afghanistan have to be as well. They have to have their human rights respected. That is the lesson we see out of this crisis. I think because of this realisation there is an enormous degree of international cooperation in Afghanistan now. The challenge will be to sustain this focus. Q: Is the international community doing enough to safeguard human rights in Afghanistan? A: At the moment, they aren't doing very much in safeguarding human rights in Afghanistan as there isn't much of an international presense focused on human rights. I certainly hope, however, as the international presence grows, particularly with the improvement of the security situation, that it will be a major issue. In fact, what Amnesty has been saying is that human rights should not just be on the political agenda, it should become the agenda for Afghanistan.