IRIN Interview with Under-Secretary-General Kenzo Oshima

UN Under-Secretary-General and Emergency Relief Coordinator Kenzo Oshima returned to Islamabad to participate in the mid-term review of the Afghan Support Group (ASG), the donor group engaged in providing assistance to Afghanistan. Since his visit in February, a string of high-level UN officials, including the UN Secretary-General himself, have helped raise international awareness of the Afghan crisis. Following the ASG meeting, Oshima told IRIN there had been a shift in the international community’s assistance strategy on Afghanistan.

QUESTION: You have just attended the Afghan Support Group meeting. Has there been any significant development or change in the attitude of donors to the crisis?

ANSWER: Yes, I see some new developments. Firstly, as far as the situation on the ground inside Afghanistan is concerned, we have agreed that it is deteriorating fast, due to fighting and the continuing drought. We may be looking at a figure of one million internally displaced throughout the country by the end of this year. In addition, there are millions of refugees across the border in Pakistan and Iran. The meeting took place against this background and served as a mid-term review of the appeal that was launched on Afghanistan. As far as funding is concerned, there has been a heightened awareness of the crisis in Afghanistan and an improved response by the donor community compared to last year. This time last year, the UN appeal was about US $78 million funded. This year US $102 million has been funded, which is a significant increase. If you include commitments made outside of the appeal, you have a total of US $138 million pledged for 2001. This level of commitment shows an increased donor concern to the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan.

Q. In the pre-ASG briefing given by donor countries, the issue of providing longer-term development aid instead of just emergency aid was raised. Was this discussed in the ASG meeting?

A. Yes. This is a new development which is very welcome, as it is clearly needed. The international community needs to do more to help the Afghan people address their problems at a community level. This is necessary to prevent further displacement and to encourage a return of refugees from camps to their places of origin. It’s also necessary in order for the country to move from conflict to peace and development. There needs to be an emphasis on small-scale quick impact projects at the community level. One particular aspect discussed was the ban on poppy cultivation. Many countries agreed on the need to do something in response to the poppy ban so that the policy put in place by the Taliban can be maintained. It is very much hoped that donors will back the policy with concrete pledges so that farmers will not have to go back to poppy cultivation.

Q. A recent UNDCP-led mission to Afghanistan to review the poppy fields concluded that they had been virtually eradicated. What’s your view on this?

A. They have been pretty much eradicated, and the ban has been implemented vigorously. One result is that a large number of poppy growing farmers - most of them poor - have lost their only means of livelihood. Many have been forced to become refugees or internally displaced. The international community and the UN have been advocating for the eradication of poppy cultivation, and the Taliban did it. For whatever reason, they did it. That is a good reason for the international community to do something to help.

Q. Do you expect there to be a large rehabilitation effort as a result?

A. That remains to be seen. The United States already has made an announcement to this effect. Some other governments have indicated strong interest in this, so we are hopeful that something meaningful will be done. On a related note, it was highlighted in the meeting that there was a serious under-funding of agricultural programmes, whereas food aid is reasonably well funded. We need to go beyond the provision of just food, and look at food security. For this to be sustainable, this means being involved in agricultural programmes, such as the provision of seeds and tools. Very little of this has been funded so far, and we need to look at it carefully. There was debate [in the meeting] on sustainability and the need to take a long-term look at the country’s problems, in addition to short-term life-saving assistance. We have now reached the stage where we must consider the whole crisis from a longer-term perspective.

Q. At the joint UNDP and World Bank [Assistance to Afghanistan] conference in Islamabad this week, reference was made to the self-sustaining war economy in Afghanistan, which was fuelling the conflict. One argument put forward was that sustainable development, such as in agriculture, could provide people with viable alternative [sources of income]. Was this discussed at all in the ASG meeting?

A. There is a lot to be said for more sustainable long-term programmes in the country, although we have to be careful that these do not help to fuel the war efforts. But what we are talking about is not helping the war effort of the Taliban, but focusing on helping the communities, the poor and vulnerable, to help them to become self-supporting instead of having to rely on aid. If there are more self-supporting communities, if we manage to reduce displacement and allow refugees to return to their villages, then we will be creating conditions where the process of rehabilitation and reconciliation can take place. Hopefully in turn, this will lead to peace. It is of course easier said than done, but I think that is the kind of strategy that we should be looking at.

Q. Over the last six months there have been indications that the Taliban has been hardening its position, initially with respect to the political offices of the UN and now also with its humanitarian offices. Some observers have said the Taliban is trying to force the UN out of Afghanistan. What is your view on this?

A. I don’t believe so. There have been some misguided policies and it is really regrettable that this harassment and arrest of relief workers has taken place. But given the fact that the country as a whole needs such massive humanitarian and life-sustaining support, it would be total folly if the Taliban did something which led to a cessation or suspension of these support activities. So we must do all we can to help the Taliban authorities to understand the consequences of their actions, if these regrettable acts continue. We hope that they will understand the reasons for this so that the environment will be restored where UN and other relief agencies will be able to carry on with their job.

Q. The head of UNHCR, Ruud Lubbers, and the Special Coordinator for Internal Displacement, Dennis McNamara, recently visited the region. Their proposed strategy is to significantly increase UNHCR’s presence in Afghanistan and to address the internally displaced issue, in collaboration with other agencies and your office [OCHA]. Does OCHA have any plans to significantly increase its personnel inside Afghanistan given the scale of the crisis?

A. Yes, if OCHA and other agencies are going to strengthen their humanitarian activities, clearly the field [operations] need to be strengthened. Mr Lubbers has indicated his willingness to be more active inside Afghanistan in order to strengthen UNHCR activities for the repatriation of refugees and to support IDPs [internally displaced people]. This will be in collaboration with other agencies involved, and to the extent that funds permit. This is a very welcome policy, and one that I encourage. I would urge other agencies to also make their work on IDPs a priority, if they have not already done so. Concerning IDPs, OCHA will be taking measures to strengthen our own ability and coordination. We plan to set up a mechanism which will allow us to do more effective work, and are consulting agencies to this end. Dennis McNamara, the special coordinator on IDPs, has been very involved. Within the next few months we hope that the UN system as a whole will be strengthened in its ability to deal with IDPs.

Q. How optimistic do you feel personally on the crisis? Do you think the UN now is engaging in a new phase to scale its activities in response to the crisis? Do you think this is going to be enough?

A. No, I am not that optimistic. There is going to be a massive humanitarian crisis, much more serious than we are witnessing inside Afghanistan now. There will be more refugees going into neighbouring countries, unless we are able to do something massive very soon. We need much more funding and a more concerted effort from all UN agencies and organisations. Whether we will be able to do it depends on the will of the UN and donors. It also depends on the cooperation of the Taliban. As mentioned earlier, what the Taliban have been doing recently has not been helpful. They need to allow us to do our work in a better environment. We are really facing a shrinking of humanitarian space inside Afghanistan, and much needs to be done on all sides to avoid the crisis from deteriorating further. While I am not very optimistic, I also realise that there is this urgent need for us all to be making much more of a concerted effort to address the problem.

Q. Recent reports suggest that UNHCR
may start a voluntary repatriation programme this month, which is striking given that there is currently a huge exodus from the country. In southern Afghanistan, reports are emerging that farmers are so impoverished [that] some have started moving to Herat. Does this policy not seem to be going against the tide?

A. On the face of it, it looks that way. One thing that comes to mind is the need for UNHCR to be concerned about repatriation, if only to help alleviate the burden placed on Pakistan and Iran. How far UNHCR can go into promoting repatriation depends on the circumstances that you have just referred to. There are places to which voluntary repatriation of people can take place, as the fighting is not going on throughout the entire country. There are areas to which people can be returned in safety, and it is really a matter of judgment. Negotiations between UNHCR and the Pakistani government on the modalities of voluntary repatriation are ongoing. If some repatriation takes place, it will not be on a large scale, as conditions may not be there for large-scale repatriation. It would be good if this takes place with calmer conditions [for refugees] inside Pakistan.

Q. You have just returned from the Pakistan Foreign Ministry. Was this an issue you discussed?

A. Yes, I had some discussions with high-ranking officials in the Pakistan Foreign Ministry. We discussed the situation of refugees inside Pakistan at Jalozai camp. Recently UN agencies have been allowed to bring some relief to people in Jalozai, and there has been some amelioration of conditions there, although the general conditions remain bad. We hope that more can be done to help improve the conditions of people living there. This is a rather difficult issue, and there are a lot of sensitivities attached. But there is a sense of urgency, because the conditions need to improve very quickly. To be fair, Pakistan has borne the brunt of the burden and has accepted more than one million refugees - the old caseload - and now a new caseload of 170,000. This is putting a heavy strain on the country.