Despite having written our paper, a recent USAID report states that the Afghan government is still corrupt, despite years of effort in fighting corruption. Laura Freschi wrote in an Aid Watch blog post that asks some interesting questions about the USAID recommendations:
"Could USAID explain how concerted efforts are failing to defeat corruption as a whole when each individual project is successfully meeting its targets?"
"One of the six recommendations for future action in the report is to provide more resources and support for the High Office of Oversight (HOO), the anti-corruption agency which has until now has shown an “apparent unwillingness” to go after high-level corruption. The report notes that “often the officials and agencies that are supposed to be part of the solution to corruption are instead a critical part of the corruption syndrome.” How is the solution to aid money being stolen to give additional aid money to those who are stealing it?" [bold, my emphasis]
With respect to our project, both USAID and our team recommend: the coordination of donors and focusing anti-corruption efforts on issues Afghan citizens care about. We depart from the USAID report's focus on governance issues and instead recommend increased funding for livelihood programs that reduce Afghan citizen's dependence on the illicit opium economy. Freschi's (bold) question still applies to our recommendation, how do we minimize the stealing from our program as we increase funding for it?
I would be interested to see discussion of corruption in the programs we recommend increasing funding for - Community Development Council program in the Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development and the Alternative Development.
On May 11, 2009, Beth emailed the final draft of our Afghanistan group recommendations. It's posted under Documents, and can also be found here: Alternative Livelihoods for Helmand Province.
Here is the paper's Introduction to give you an idea of what we concluded and recommended:
NATO and Coalition forces, in conjunction with the international development community have long struggled to achieve a lasting peace in Afghanistan. Opium production and its negative impacts have been, and continue to be, one problem that has risen above all others. With over thirty percent of the nations GDP existing outside the government’s control, and commonly being used to fund insurgent activities, the impact of opium on the modern Afghan experience cannot be ignored.1 This paper provides advice and program recommendations to USAID, with the aim of reducing opium production and stregnthing the legitimate economy through alternative development programs and donor coordination, believe that a road to success should begin in Helmand Province. It addresses the challenges faced in creating such programs, provides recommendations for program improvement and sets benchmarks by which to evaluate success.
Last Updated on Wednesday, 13 May 2009 09:20
Stalemate in Korangal Valley - NYTimes.com Video
Written by Chris de Veer
Friday, 15 May 2009 07:34
After having written the paper talking about security operations in Helmand Province, this video shows how difficult that fight is going to be. Although Kunar is in the east on the border with Pakistan, I suspect the issue of a local stalemate is the same. Without additional troops, you can't secure the place. But unfortunately, additional troops bring additional civilian casualties. This article describes fighting and subsequent US bombing in the town of Granai in Farah Province (west, on Iranian border). Although there is disagreement between the US military and the civilians on how many were killed, the example highlights the tension and perspectives of the small groups of US troops on the receiving end of gunfire and the civilians on the receiving end of US firepower to protect the troops.
The number of civilians killed by U.S. airstrikes in Farah Province last week may never be fully known, but villagers tell stories of devastation.
Afghanistan Presentation
Written by Chris de Veer
Tuesday, 21 April 2009 09:11
Presented to class on 20 April 2009.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 21 April 2009 09:13
Korb vs. vanden Heuvel: More or Less Troops in Afghanistan?
Written by Chris de Veer
Sunday, 10 May 2009 10:23
From the web site Rethink Afghanistan, a debate between Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation, and Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. The question is: "Do we need more or less troops in Afghanistan?"
