Current Projects

Women’s Day – Meaningless for Afghan Women

The 8th of March was celebrated as International Women’s Day across the world, but does it matter for Afghan women? The rights of women have been a controversial issue and Afghan women left several regimes behind, including the Taliban’s regime. The political ups and downs throughout the history involved women’s rights and liberty and the patriarchal system left them at the mercy of injustice. They suffered indescribable pains and anguish. Their rights have been violated and their freedoms were curtailed in one way or another. Moreover, Afghan women have been the victim of traditional cultures. Their rights were restricted within the closed frame of traditions being practiced mainly in tribal belts. In other words, the parochial mindsets regarding women played highly negative role across the country through engendering hatred and misogyny. Women’s role was tailored to men’s desires. They were deemed inferior creature and had to be all ears to their spouses’ orders. After all, stereotypes abounded in our literature and our culture concerning women and continue up to now. The Taliban’s regime treated women as a pariah and trampled upon their rights and liberty. It is believed that Afghan women bore the brunt of violence during that regime. Women were not allowed to attend schools or go to bazaar without chaperone. They were flagellated in public places in case of eloping with their favorite men. Their social and political role was denied. With the establishment of democracy in the post-Taliban Afghanistan, Afghan women were entitled to engage in social, cultural and political activities, including being candidate for presidency and provincial council. Constitutionally, “the citizens of Afghanistan, man and woman, have equal rights and duties before the law.” In the meantime, “liberty and human dignity are inviolable. The state shall respect and protect liberty as well as human dignity.” The current Constitution of Afghanistan, which was approved in 2004, is the most...

CPEC Enclaves

A small line in a news story a few days ago caught my eye. The setting was a hearing in the Senate Standing Committee on Planning and Development at which high officials from the Planning Commission were answering questions about the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The line that caused me to do a double take was this one: “The committee was informed that only Chinese industrialists would be allowed to set up their industries in the proposed economic zones along the corridor.” Surely this was a mistake, I thought, so I called some people, including members of the committee, to ask whether this had indeed been said. They confirmed that, yes, the officials from the Planning Commission had indeed said this. So what’s going on? Under the CPEC umbrella, there are nine Special Economic Zones planned. One each in Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and Islamabad, two in Sindh and one each in Fata, Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. Going by the CPEC website, work does not appear to have begun on any of them yet. The relative size of each is also not disclosed, nor are there any details about the special infrastructure requirements for each. The website claims that these are Chinese-financed projects, though it doesn’t tell us what the terms are, whether the financing is concessional or on commercial terms. We also don’t know how the energy and water requirements of these zones will be met. Will there be new transmission and distribution lines, grid stations for electricity, gas pipelines and compressors, water pipelines, and if so, where will the water be sourced from? If gas will be supplied from the grid, what will be the merit order placement of these industries in the gas load curtailment plan? Or will they be required to import their own LNG, in which case what third-party access rules will apply for the transport of that gas from the regasification terminal to the economic zone? We know nothing about the security arrangements inside the zones, and if...

Victims of Narratives

The narratives in Kabul and Islamabad refuse to change; Afghan officials insist Tehreek-e- Taliban Afghanistan (TTA) militants remain ensconced in Pakistani havens in Islamabad, Peshawar, Quetta and elsewhere. They insist the Haqqania seminary in Akora Khattak, many in Kuchlak (Balochistan) that belong to JUI-F clerics continue to serve as support centres to the TTA militants including those from the Haqqani Network. They believe the TTA offers the bedrock of social support to all shades of terrorists including the TTP, Jamaatul Ahrar, ETIM, IMU, Chechens and Daesh. At the Munich security conference in February, President Ashraf Ghani spoke of some 20 terrorist groups currently operating out of Afghanistan. Masoom Stankzai, the head of the mighty National Directorate of Security, talks of some 30 terror groups based in the tribal areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan. They cannot flourish if they are not tolerated. If there is a will to counter them, how can they operate, he asks, implying that Afghanistan’s enemies operate out of Pakistan? The Afghanistan Times editorial on February 19, for instance, laid in to “Pakistan’s complicity snakes.” “In Afghanistan we are fighting insurgents, while in Pakistan they (militants) are using the country’s passports, airports, hospitals and the army toilets,” wrote the paper. The editorial a day earlier accused Pakistan of backing terrorists that are killing its own people. Such arguments amount to turning logic on its head because they imply that the Pakistani establishment is paying terror groups to blow up Pakistani people and security forces and it is exporting terrorism to Afghanistan. Notwithstanding Pakistan’s baggage of involvement — together with the US and Saudi Arabia — with Afghan mujahideen including Ustad Sayyaf, Prof Rabbani, Jalaluddin Haqqani, Hekmetyar, Haji Qadeer, Mr Karzai — and then support to the Taliban under Mullah Omar, the current Afghan discourse also overlooks the intricacies of geo-politics that...

Afghan Ambassador Dr. Omar Zakhiwal's remarks at the 13th Economic Cooperation Organization Summit

Dateline: March 01, 2017. Islamabad, Pakistan. Mr. Chair, the Honorable Prime Minister of Pakistan Honorable Secretary General Excellencies Heads of States Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen It is a distinct pleasure for me and my delegation to represent our leadership and our country at the 13thSummit of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) here in Islamabad. I would like to express my gratitude and sincere appreciation to the government and people of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for the excellent organization of this Summit and the warm hospitality extended to us. Let me also take this opportunity and congratulate H.E Ilham Aliyev, President of Azerbaijan, for a successful completion of his tenure as ECO's Chairman and H.E Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, for his election as the Chairperson of ECO. I trust H.E’s wise leadership will lead ECO to new heights. On behalf of Afghanistan, I assure our full support and cooperation. I also take this opportunity and thank the ECO Secretary General and his team for their hard work, preparing the required documents and proposals that have facilitated helpful discussion among the member states. I would also like to express my profound gratitude to all leaders who expressed here today their strong support to peace, stability and development in my war-devastated country. Honorable Chair, The Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) is one of the oldest and most important regional forums, covering unique geo-strategic location that could link Europe to China, and Russia and Central Asia to South Asia and the Middle East. ECO’s core objectives to achieve collective economic prosperity and sustainable economic growth for all through regional connectivity and economic cooperation fall within Afghanistan’s regional policies and endeavors. The Heart of Asia (the Istanbul Process) and RECCA are two Afghan-led initiatives, which are aimed to enhance regional...

Afghan Ambassador Dr. Omar Zakhiwal’s remarks at the 13th Economic Cooperation Organization Summit

Dateline: March 01, 2017. Islamabad, Pakistan. Mr. Chair, the Honorable Prime Minister of Pakistan Honorable Secretary General Excellencies Heads of States Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen It is a distinct pleasure for me and my delegation to represent our leadership and our country at the 13thSummit of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) here in Islamabad. I would like to express my gratitude and sincere appreciation to the government and people of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for the excellent organization of this Summit and the warm hospitality extended to us. Let me also take this opportunity and congratulate H.E Ilham Aliyev, President of Azerbaijan, for a successful completion of his tenure as ECO's Chairman and H.E Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, for his election as the Chairperson of ECO. I trust H.E’s wise leadership will lead ECO to new heights. On behalf of Afghanistan, I assure our full support and cooperation. I also take this opportunity and thank the ECO Secretary General and his team for their hard work, preparing the required documents and proposals that have facilitated helpful discussion among the member states. I would also like to express my profound gratitude to all leaders who expressed here today their strong support to peace, stability and development in my war-devastated country. Honorable Chair, The Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) is one of the oldest and most important regional forums, covering unique geo-strategic location that could link Europe to China, and Russia and Central Asia to South Asia and the Middle East. ECO’s core objectives to achieve collective economic prosperity and sustainable economic growth for all through regional connectivity and economic cooperation fall within Afghanistan’s regional policies and endeavors. The Heart of Asia (the Istanbul Process) and RECCA are two Afghan-led initiatives, which are aimed to enhance regional...

Afghanistan's Conflict Displacement Tracker (Feb 25 – Mar 04, 2017)

The total number of individuals displaced by conflict in 2016 has risen slightly from last week to 652,594 as joint teams finalise assessments of those displaced last year. Northern/North Eastern: On 1 March, NSAG temporarily captured the Tala-wa-Barfak district administrative center in Baghlan, which was later recaptured by government forces on 3 March. No displacements were reported yet. Fighting also continued in Kunduz and Faryab, with reports of 2,800 unverified individuals displaced from Shirintagab district in Faryab to the district centre. Assessments will be challenging given the ongoing insecurity in the area. Eastern: While no further cross-border shelling or artillery fire was recorded in Nangarhar last week, resumed shelling in Kunar reportedly impacted some residential areas. Early reports indicate up to 1,100 individuals have been displaced in Kunar from the shelling, with assessments to commence shortly. Intensified government clearance operations in Nangarhar, Laghman, Kunar and Pakistan also continued, with further displacements expected. Central: In Kapisa, conflict in Tagab district continued to cause displacement. Armed clashes were reported in Shikari Valley, an area covering three districts of Bamyan. No humanitarian impact has yet been reported, however the fighting could result in increased conflict in neighboring areas of Baghlan and Parwan provinces. Western: Armed clashes occurred in Farah, Hirat and Badghis, with Farah recording increasingly intense confrontations between NSAG and government forces. During the reporting period, 491 IDPs were verified in Hirat from surrounding provinces; 171 IDPs were verified in Ghor from districts north of the provincial capital Chaghcharan; and 408 IDPs were verified in Farah city from surrounding districts. Southern: As the weather improves, the intensity of the fighting across the southern region has increased week on week. Frequent frontline clashes and airstrikes were reported, particularly...

Afghanistan’s Conflict Displacement Tracker (Feb 25 – Mar 04, 2017)

The total number of individuals displaced by conflict in 2016 has risen slightly from last week to 652,594 as joint teams finalise assessments of those displaced last year. Northern/North Eastern: On 1 March, NSAG temporarily captured the Tala-wa-Barfak district administrative center in Baghlan, which was later recaptured by government forces on 3 March. No displacements were reported yet. Fighting also continued in Kunduz and Faryab, with reports of 2,800 unverified individuals displaced from Shirintagab district in Faryab to the district centre. Assessments will be challenging given the ongoing insecurity in the area. Eastern: While no further cross-border shelling or artillery fire was recorded in Nangarhar last week, resumed shelling in Kunar reportedly impacted some residential areas. Early reports indicate up to 1,100 individuals have been displaced in Kunar from the shelling, with assessments to commence shortly. Intensified government clearance operations in Nangarhar, Laghman, Kunar and Pakistan also continued, with further displacements expected. Central: In Kapisa, conflict in Tagab district continued to cause displacement. Armed clashes were reported in Shikari Valley, an area covering three districts of Bamyan. No humanitarian impact has yet been reported, however the fighting could result in increased conflict in neighboring areas of Baghlan and Parwan provinces. Western: Armed clashes occurred in Farah, Hirat and Badghis, with Farah recording increasingly intense confrontations between NSAG and government forces. During the reporting period, 491 IDPs were verified in Hirat from surrounding provinces; 171 IDPs were verified in Ghor from districts north of the provincial capital Chaghcharan; and 408 IDPs were verified in Farah city from surrounding districts. Southern: As the weather improves, the intensity of the fighting across the southern region has increased week on week. Frequent frontline clashes and airstrikes were reported, particularly...

More than 240 targeted attacks on Health Centers in the last two years

Ongoing conflict in Afghanistan and increased targeting of medical facilities and personnel by parties to the conflict has further eroded the country’s already fragile health care system. As of November 2016, more than 30 percent of Afghanistan’s population of more than 33 million lacks health care access, according to the ministry of public health (MoPH). While there are more than 2,200 medical facilities throughout Afghanistan’s 34 provinces, frequent or ongoing conflict has significantly limited access to health care due to road closures, irregular delivery of medical supplies, and shortages of medical personnel. Access to health care has also been restricted and in some cases blocked due to targeted attacks on medical facilities and personnel. Many of the attacks documented in this report fall within the definition of attacks on hospitals and related protected persons provided by the United Nations guidance note on security council resolution 1998 (guidance note). Prompted by many reports of these attacks, Watchlist conducted a research mission to Afghanistan in November and December 2016. Watchlist interviewed humanitarian actors, health workers, community shura (council) members, and current and former patients to investigate attacks on medical facilities and personnel and their impact on children’s livelihoods. Watchlist also conducted a systematic desk review of UN and non-UN organizations’ reportage of attacks on health care as well as the delivery of humanitarian aid and public health. While attacks on medical facilities and personnel have occurred in at least 20 provinces during the reporting period of January 2015 to December 2016, Watchlist focused its inquiry on Helmand, Kunduz, Nangarhar, and Maidan Wardak. Parties responsible for the attacks on medical facilities and personnel include armed opposition groups (AOG), including the Taliban and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant-Khorasan Province (ISIL-KP); Afghan national defense security forces...

The Leahy Law and Human Rights Accountability in Afghanistan: Too little, too late or a model for the future?

The Leahy Amendment, or Leahy law, is a little known piece of United States legislation that bans US assistance to units of foreign security forces where there is credible information that a member has committed gross violations of human rights. The Leahy law has accomplished far less than its champions hoped for, but far more than its critics presume, and nowhere are these contradictions on better display than in Afghanistan. Guest author Erica Gaston* has taken a closer look at some post-2014 improvements to its enforcement in Afghanistan, and discovered that the foremost security official in the south, Kandahar Provincial Police Chief Abdul Razeq has failed Leahy law vetting. However, how far he and his forces have been excluded from receiving assistance is an open question, and provides a litmus test of the law’s effectiveness. This dispatch is one of a number of publications under a joint three-year project of AAN, the Global Public Policy institute (GPPi), and the American University of Iraq, Sulaimani (AUIS). The project explores the role and impact of militias, local or regional defence forces or other quasi-state forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, including mechanisms for foreign assistance to such actors. Funding is provided by the Netherlands Research Organisation. The Leahy Law The US Leahy law was first proposed by Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy in 1997 and has been a permanent fixture of the US foreign assistance landscape since 2008. There are parallel versions of the Leahy amendment in the Foreign Appropriations Act of 1961 and the annual Department of Defence Appropriations Bill, which respectively authorise US Department of State (DoS) and US Department of Defence (DoD) funding. (1) Although there are slight distinctions between the two, in essence, both versions prohibit US assistance to any unit of foreign security forces where there is “credible information” that one of its members has committed “gross violations of human rights.”(2) Where...

Chinese Troops Appear To Be Operating In Afghanistan, and The Pentagon Is OK With It

There is mounting evidence that Chinese ground troops are operating inside Afghanistan, conducting joint counter-terror patrols with Afghan forces along a 50-mile stretch of their shared border and fueling speculation that Beijing is preparing to play a significantly greater role in the country's security once the U.S. and NATO leave. The full scope of China's involvement remains unclear, and the Pentagon is unwilling to discuss it. “We know that they are there, that they are present,” a Pentagon spokesman said. Yet beyond a subtle acknowledgement, U.S. military officials in Washington and in Kabul would not respond to several detailed questions submitted by Military Times. This dynamic stands in stark contrast to the two sides' feisty rhetoric over their ongoing dispute in the South China Sea, and to Washington's vocal condemnation of Russian and Iranian activity in Afghanistan. One explanation may be that this quiet arrangement is mutually beneficial. Both the Chinese and Afghan governments have disputed reports of joint patrols inside Afghanistan. Those first surfaced late last year when India's Wion News published photos claiming to show Chinese military vehicles in a region called Little Pamir, a barren plateau near the border. Reuters, an international news agency, also recently documented the development. The vehicles were identified as a Dongfeng EQ 2050, which is the Chinese equivalent of a U.S. Humvee, and a Norinco VP 11a, which are like the mine-resistant MRAPs developed by the U.S. military last decade. China maintains that while its police forces do conduct joint counter-terrorism operations along the border, based on existing bilateral agreements between the two nations, the People's Liberation Army does not. But then there's this peculiarity: In January, Chinese media circulated a report about Chinese troops allegedly rescuing a U.S. special forces team that had been attacked in Afghanistan. The story is likely bogus propaganda, and U.S....