United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan: Background and Policy Issues
Released: 2010-12-27T00:00:00

Introduction

The United States and the international community continue to rely on the central role of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) as coordinator of international donor activity and assistance. Within a broader, ongoing debate focused on U.S. and other assessments of efforts to stabilize Afghanistan, UNAMA's role has been emphasized in different contexts, particularly in the past several years. For example, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1806 (2008) significantly expanded UNAMA's authority. The Declaration of the International Conference in Support of Afghanistan, which took place in Paris in June 2008, also underlined UNAMA's role in leading all aspects of civilian coordination.

In unveiling a new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan in March 2009, the Obama Administration highlighted the need for coordination and burdensharing among donors in building Afghan capacity and providing the necessary civilian expertise. It also emphasized the importance of a leadership role for UNAMA on these issues and as part of its coordination role. The Chairman's statement of the International Conference on Afghanistan (The Hague, March 31, 2009) emphasized UNAMA's coordination role and urged its expansion into as many provinces as possible. On December 1, 2009, the Obama Administration laid out a strategy for Afghanistan in response to a battlefield assessment from General McChrystal and reestablished previous commitments to civilian efforts in cooperation with the United Nations. In 2010, UNAMA was a central actor at a number of events and meetings that demonstrated ways in which the international community and Afghan government are engaged in Afghanistan. For example, the continued support of UNAMA was emphasized at a major international conference on Afghanistan in London in January 2010. The government of Afghanistan hosted the Kabul Conference in July 2010 and co-chaired the proceedings with the United Nations. UNAMA also provided advice to Afghan electoral institutions in support of the Afghan-led parliamentary elections held in September 2010.

Some observers contend that progress has been achieved so far in Afghanistan. U.S. embassy officials in Kabul have noted progress on reconstruction, governance, and security in many areas of Afghanistan, although violence is higher than previous levels and accelerating in certain areas. Experts argue that recent progress on civilian reconstruction and development in Afghanistan needs to be understood in the context out of which Afghanistan has emerged since 2001 following more than two decades of conflict that resulted in significant political, economic, and social decline. Reconstruction efforts must cope with the destructive impact of war and with the distortions in the Afghan economy, in which the war and drugs compete with agriculture and other economic activities. Despite the deteriorating security situation, some progress in Afghanistan's reconstruction continues to be made, and when considered over time, is not insignificant.

Other assessments are more pessimistic. Critics say that slow reconstruction, corruption, and the failure to extend in a sustainable way Afghan government authority into rural areas and provinces, particularly in the south and east, have contributed to continuing instability and a Taliban resurgence. Some experts raise concerns about increased insecurity in previously stable areas such as the northern part of the country and the challenges this creates in providing humanitarian and development assistance. Narcotics trafficking persists, despite countermeasures, and independent militias remain a problem throughout the country, although many have been disarmed.

UNAMA has been given a lead role in the civilian reconstruction effort. Some contend that UNAMA's role in the flawed August 2009 elections and aftermath may have undermined its credibility and created disappointment among international donors. Others argue that with the passage of time and the fraud investigation process improved for the September 2010 parliamentary elections, some confidence in UNAMA has been restored. Still, many experts agree that the international effort in Afghanistan is at a critical period. The international community's expectations of UNAMA may in part reflect the impact UNAMA might have on the success or failure of international efforts in Afghanistan. This report provides an analysis of UNAMA's role in Afghanistan and the key policy issues it faces on civilian reconstruction.

Setting the Context

The United States, other countries, and international relief organizations have long been active in providing assistance to the Afghan people. Afghanistan was admitted as a member of the United Nations on November 19, 1946, and has had a relationship with the United Nations that goes back more than 60 years. During the 1980s, the United States, along with other countries, funded the mujahedin forces fighting against the Soviet Union, as well as provided humanitarian aid to Afghans who fled to refugee camps in Pakistan. In 1988, the Geneva Peace Accords, brokered in part by Diego Cordovez, a Special Representative of then U.N. Secretary General Javier Perez de-Cuellar, were signed, which led to the Soviet withdrawal nearly a decade after its invasion.

With the peace accord in place, the United Nations established an active presence in Afghanistan. It generally maintains separate offices for (1) political and peace processes (Pillar I) and (2) humanitarian and reconstruction operations (Pillar II). During the violent civil war that lasted through the 1990s, the United Nations continued to seek a peace agreement that would allow for sustained reconstruction. However, with the failure of several peace agreements, the international donor community focused primarily on humanitarian aid because the conditions were not stable for long-term development. Donors also did not want to provide assistance to the Taliban, an Islamic fundamentalist movement that ruled Afghanistan between 1996 and 2001, when it was ousted by U.S.-backed Afghan factions.

Afghanistan was one of the least developed countries in the world even prior to the outbreak of war in 1978. The assistance situation changed dramatically once the Taliban was removed from power following the U.S.-led military intervention in 2001. The implementation of humanitarian assistance and the development of reconstruction plans quickly took shape when Afghans met under U.N. auspices to decide on a governance plan, which resulted in the Bonn Agreement, signed on December 5, 2001. On December 22, 2001, an interim government was formed with Hamid Karzai as its leader. This paved the way for a constitution, considered the most progressive in Afghan history, which was approved at a "constitutional loya jirga " (traditional Afghan assembly) in January 2004. Hamid Karzai was elected president in a nationwide election in October 2004, and parliamentary and provincial elections were subsequently held in September 2005. The next presidential and provincial elections were held on August 20, 2009 (details discussed later in the report), and the second post-Taliban parliamentary elections were held on September 18, 2010. The Afghan government has been working with the international donor community on reconstruction programs and plans since a major donor conference in January 2002 in Tokyo.

The Afghan government and the international community face a daunting task. Many problems remain in every sector. Strategic challenges are numerous and continue to put the institution-building effort in Afghanistan at risk. In conjunction with security, reconstruction is seen by many as the single most important factor for sustaining peace. According to many observers, successful development could stem public disillusionment with the international effort in Afghanistan, sustain Afghan participation in the reconstruction process, and help keep Afghanistan from again becoming a permanent haven for terrorists.

Mandate, Structure, and Funding

The role of UNAMA is to promote peace and stability in Afghanistan and to lead the international community in this effort. In support of the government of Afghanistan, UNAMA is tasked to coordinate efforts to rebuild the country and strengthen governance, development, and stability. However, in practice, in light of the number of donors and their own national priorities, the coordination role has been difficult for UNAMA to implement.

Mandate

On March 28, 2002, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1401 (2002) established the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) as a political and "integrated" mission, directed and supported by the U.N. Department of Peacekeeping Operations, to help implement the Bonn Agreement. UNAMA aims to bring together two key elements—one with a political focus and the other dealing with humanitarian and development efforts. Lakhdar Brahimi, then Special Representative for the U.N. Secretary-General to Afghanistan, organized the Bonn Agreement and directed UNAMA until December 2004. UNAMA's mandate is renewed annually in March. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1868 (2009) extended UNAMA's mandate until March 23, 2010, and U.N. Security Council Resolution 1917 (2010) extended the mandate for another year until March 23, 2011.

Significantly, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1806 (2008) expanded the mandate to include a "super envoy" concept that would represent the United Nations, the European Union, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Afghanistan. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1868 (2009) incorporates UNAMA's increased scope, which includes leading international civilian efforts to support the Afghan government, increasing cooperation with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), and developing greater political outreach with Afghan leaders. Highlights of Security Council Resolution 1917 (2010) focus on promoting international support for the government of Afghanistan's development and governance priorities, increasing cooperation with international security forces, providing political outreach and support to the Afghan-led reconciliation and reintegration programs, and helping implement electoral reform commitments agreed at the January 2010 London Conference. Security of U.N. staff and expansion of UNAMA's presence were also emphasized.

Organization

Beginning in March 2010, the head of UNAMA, and Special Representative of the U.N. Secretary-General (SRSG) for Afghanistan, is Staffan de Mistura. There are two Deputy Special Representatives of the Secretary-General (DSRSG) for Afghanistan: Martin Kobler (of Germany) covers Political Affairs. Robert Watkins (of Canada) covers Relief, Recovery, and Reconstruction (RRR). Mr. Watkins also serves as the UNDP Resident Representative, Resident Coordinator and Humanitarian Coordinator in Afghanistan. From March 2008 to March 2010, the head of UNAMA, and Special Representative of the U.N. Secretary-General (SRSG) for Afghanistan, with expanded powers over his predecessors, was Norwegian diplomat Kai Eide.

UNAMA has approximately 1,500 staff, of which about 80% are Afghan nationals (see organizational chart in Appendix B .) It coordinates all activities of the U.N. system in Afghanistan, which includes the participation of 18 U.N. agencies and several other organizations considered to be part of the U.N. country team (see Appendix C ). UNAMA has eight regional offices and 12 provincial offices. The participants at the International Conference on Afghanistan in March 2009 and at the London Conference in January 2010 emphasized that UNAMA should expand its presence into as many provinces as possible. Reports by the U.N. Secretary General have continued to underscore this point.

Budget

The total Calendar Year (CY) 2008 expenditures for UNAMA were $86.34 million, which was $10.2 million above the approved budget amount. The total CY2009 expenditures for UNAMA were $256.6 million, which was $12.6 million above the approved budget amount. The Mission's CY2010 budget is $241.9 million. These numbers reflect an increase in staff, the opening of additional provincial offices, and the strengthening of regional offices in Tehran and Islamabad. UNAMA is funded through assessed contributions to the U.N. regular budget. The U.S. assessment is 22% (the same level as for the U.N. regular budget) or approximately $53.22 million for CY2010.

Framework for Afghanistan's Reconstruction Strategy

UNAMA was established in part to facilitate the implementation of the 2001 Bonn Agreement. In addition to this landmark document, two subsequent agreements between the Afghan government and the international community outline the overall Afghanistan reconstruction strategy: The 2006 Afghanistan Compact and the 2008 Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS). The Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board (JCMB), of which UNAMA is co-chair, serves as a coordinating and monitoring mechanism for the implementation of these agreements. In addition, several international conferences have provided guidance and built international support for the way forward in Afghanistan.

Bonn Agreement—Bonn 2001

The Agreement on Provisional Arrangements in Afghanistan Pending the Re-establishment of Permanent Government Institutions , or Bonn Agreement, was signed in Bonn, Germany, on December 5, 2001. It was endorsed by U.N. Security Council Resolution 1385 (2001). Under U.N. auspices, Afghan participants met to outline a process for the political transition in Afghanistan. The Bonn Agreement established an Afghan Interim Authority (AIA) on December 22, 2001, which was made up of 30 members and headed by Chairman Hamid Karzai. An Emergency " l oya j irga " (traditional Afghan assembly) held in June 2002 replaced the AIA with a Transitional Authority (TA). The TA brought together a broad transitional administration to lead the country until a full government could be elected. A constitution, considered the most progressive in Afghan history, was approved at a "constitutional loya jirga " in January 2004. Hamid Karzai was elected president in October 2004, and parliamentary and provincial elections were subsequently held in September 2005. The Bonn Agreement also called for the establishment of a Supreme Court of Afghanistan and a Judicial Commission. It requested the U.N. Security Council to consider authorizing the deployment of a U.N.-mandated security force, outlined the role of the United Nations during the interim period, and referred to the need for cooperation with the international community on a number of issues, including reconstruction, elections, counternarcotics, crime, and terrorism. The Bonn Agreement was fully implemented in 2005.

Afghanistan Compact—London 2006

Donor countries and the Afghan government met at the London Conference in February 2006 to adopt the Afghanistan Compact (Compact), which provided a five-year time line (2006-2011) for addressing three main areas of activity, each with identified goals and outcomes: Security, Governance (Rule of Law and Human Rights), and Economic and Social Development. It also highlighted the cross-cutting issue of narcotics. The Compact acknowledged the need for Afghanistan to become more self-reliant while affirming the responsibilities required to achieve that goal. The international community agreed to monitor implementation of the Compact and the outlined benchmarks, and to improve aid effectiveness and accountability.

Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS)—Paris 2008

The Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS), which was signed by President Karzai in April 2008 and later presented as the "blueprint for the development of Afghanistan" at the donors conference in Paris, France, on June 12, 2008, is a policy paper created by the Afghan government. It builds on the Compact and follows a plan for establishing goals and measurable targets that is similar to the U.N. Millennium Development Goals. Focusing on the three issue areas identified in the Compact (security, governance, economic growth/poverty reduction), it looks ahead to a vision for Afghanistan in the year 2020 while identifying specific goals to be achieved over five years between 2008 and 2013. The ANDS envisions that most of the funding required would be provided by donors and that these funds would be distributed through the central government.

Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board (JCMB)

The Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board (JCMB) was established in 2008 and is the coordination body between the Afghan government and the international community. UNAMA is co-chair of the JCMB and has a central role in helping implement the development strategies outlined in the Compact and the monitoring activities put forward in ANDS. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1806 (2008), U.N. Security Council Resolution 1868 (2009), and U.N. Security Council Resolution 1917 (2010) direct UNAMA, in that capacity, to coordinate the work of international donors and organizations with an emphasis on aid effectiveness. The JCMB co-chairs reviewed the Compact and presented their findings at the June 2008 conference in Paris, stating that significant progress had been made in health and education, infrastructure and economic growth, and strengthening of Afghan national security forces.

International Donor Conferences and Trust Funds

The international donor communityhas established a series of institutional mechanisms for developing and coordinating reconstruction for countries emerging from conflict. Though adapted to specific situations, these mechanisms are generally similar. In November 2001, with the possibility of the fall of the Taliban and a potential opening for sustainable reconstruction work, the international donor community quickly established and implemented new initiatives. In addition to providing their own assistance to Afghanistan, international organizations and international financial institutions administered donor conferences, trust funds, and humanitarian and reconstruction programs. A brief summary of the main international donor conferences, each of which had extensive input from UNAMA and other U.N. institutions, demonstrates the ongoing challenges that remain in Afghanistan and the repeated articulation of some of the issues. At the same time, it also shows increased participation by international stakeholders, perhaps, many contend, as a barometer of the importance that has now been ascribed to Afghanistan's future.

International Donor Conferences17

Bonn Confere nce (December 22, 2001)—With the Bonn Agreement and interim government in place, UNDP organized a donor conference in which the interim government presented its reconstruction plans and country representatives and international NGOs made pledges in order to show international support for those plans. Tokyo Conference (January 21-22, 2002)—A ministerial conference, co-hosted by Japan, the United States, the European Union, and Saudi Arabia, was convened in Tokyo to discuss aid to Afghanistan. Donors pledged $4.5 billion. Berlin Conference (April 1, 2004)—The conference brought together 65 representatives from countries and international organizations to focus on reconstruction in Afghanistan. Pledges exceeded $8.2 billion. London Conference (February 1, 2006)—At the conference in London, the government of Afghanistan and the international community signed the Compact that outlined the principles of their cooperation over the next five years. Donors pledged $10.5 billion. Paris Conference (June 12, 2008)—The Afghan government and international community met in Paris in June of the same year to reiterate their partnership, with guidance from the Compact and the Afghan government's assigned leadership role in the implementation plan outlined in ANDS. The conferees affirmed the expanded role of UNAMA in all aspects of coordination. Key priorities identified at the conference included a wide range of activities: strengthening democracy and governance; investing in infrastructure and the private sector; improving aid effectiveness and reducing corruption; improving counter-narcotics measures; and ensuring the needs of all Afghans would be addressed through government services, greater civil society participation, and respect for human rights. Hague Conference (March 31, 2009)—More than 80 countries met in The Hague for the "International Conference on Afghanistan: A Comprehensive Strategy in a Regional Context," which was hosted by the government of the Netherlands and UNAMA. The conference reinforced the central role outlined for UNAMA as coordinator of international action and assistance. It also generated consensus on several points, including the need for a more directed agenda for Afghanistan, emphasizing the civilian capacity and institution-building, with sustained priority areas: security, governance, economic growth, and regional cooperation. London Conference (January 28, 2010)—At the Commonwealth Summit in Trinidad and Tobago, on Saturday, November 28, 2009, Prime Minister [author name scrubbed] and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon jointly announced plans to host an international conference at the ministerial level on Afghanistan to be held in London. Along with Prime Minister Brown, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkosy took the lead in proposing the conference, the purpose of which was to find ways to strengthen the Afghan government and security forces as assumed responsibilities currently carried out by the international community. President Obama linked the need for this transition to the possible withdrawal of international troops in his December 1, 2009, speech.

Kabul Conference (July 20, 2010)—At the Kabul Conference, the government of Afghanistan put forward an Afghan-led plan for improving development, governance, and security. Support for sustained capacity building at the national and sub-national levels was emphasized. The "Kabul Process" is viewed by experts as a potentially important link in the transition to full Afghan leadership and builds on earlier international commitments, such as are encapsulated in the ANDS.

NATO Summit (November 20, 2010)—At a November meeting of ISAF Heads of State and Government as part of the Lisbon summit, a framework under which full security responsibilities would be handed over to Afghan forces by 2014 was endorsed. The process defines the implementation of the transition province-by-province with a simultaneous drawdown of international combat forces. UNAMA will support the civilian side of this transition, particularly in areas of governance and development.

Trust Funds

At the start of the civilian reconstruction effort in Afghanistan in 2002, the international community placed great emphasis on paying the Afghan government's current expenditures, most importantly the salaries of government employees to enhance government capacity. Toward this end, several trust funds were established. Trust funds allow for rapid distribution of monies because they centralize funding and remove the administrative requirements of drawing from multiple funds. Donor countries decide to contribute to these trust funds and urge others to make contributions. The Afghan Interim Authority Fund (AIAF), for example, was created for donor contributions to the first six months during governmental operations and other related activities. On July 22, 2002, the Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund (ARTF) succeeded the AIAF. In addition, the Law and Order Trust Fund for Afghanistan (LOTFA) was established to cover the rehabilitation of police facilities, salaries, training and capacity-building, and the procurement of non-lethal equipment. Following on these trust funds, the Counter-Narcotics Trust Fund was also established. There is also a NATO-run Afghan National Security Forces trust fund.

Administered by the World Bank, the ARTF continues to provide funds for the government's budget, investment activities and programs including quick-impact recovery projects, government training programs for Afghans, and support for the National Solidarity Program. ARTF has also expanded into other sectors such as education, agriculture, justice, and urban infrastructure. ARTF currently provides approximately half of the government's non-security operating costs and over a quarter of its development expenditures. Recently, donors agreed to extend the ARTF until 2020. In part this reflects an ongoing commitment by donors to utilize the ARTF mechanism, and in part it is an acknowledgement of the development challenges that remain in Afghanistan. According to the World Bank, as of September 20, 2009, 30 international donors have contributed $3 billion to the ARTF since 2002.

U.S. Assistance

Before 2001, U.S. aid to Afghanistan flowed mainly through U.N. agencies and NGOs, but the U.S. role increased dramatically after the start of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). U.S. government funding for assistance has come from three main agencies—the Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the State Department. Military and security assistance since 2001 represents more than half of U.S. funding for Afghanistan and has been provided through DOD, mainly through the Afghan Security Forces Fund, the Commander's Emergency Response Program (CERP), and other funds appropriated for counternarcotics and other programs. Funds provided for development and humanitarian-related activities and implemented mainly through USAID and the State Department are distributed to international organizations and non-governmental organizations, which provide services in Afghanistan, or directly to the Afghan government. Afghanistan also receives U.S. aid through multilateral institutions. The most important avenue is through the United Nations and its affiliated agencies and through international financial institutions, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Some U.S. funding for Afghanistan comes from U.S. dues and additional voluntary donations to the United Nations through the State Department's International Organizations account or through the State Department's Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) account.

UNAMA's Expanded Mandate for the International Civilian Effort in Afghanistan

In deciding to extend the mandate of UNAMA until March 23, 2010, the U.N. Security Council emphasized specific priorities for UNAMA and expanded its authority as a coordinating body. It also asked the U.N. Secretary-General to report to the Security Council every three months on developments in Afghanistan. In addition, it requested the U.N. Secretary-General to establish benchmarks (drawing on the mandate and identified priorities) to determine progress in their implementation. The Secretary-General's June 2009 report was supposed to provide an update on the status of the benchmarks; instead, the U.N. Secretary-General requested a delay in finalizing the benchmarks, which were then outlined in the September 22, 2009, report.

U.N. Security Council Resolution 1868 (2009)—UNAMA Priorities

The priorities below are outlined in U.N. Security Council resolution 1868 (2009) as key areas of UNAMA's work in Afghanistan:

promote more coherent support by the international community to the Afghan government; strengthen cooperation with ISAF; provide political outreach through a strengthened and expanded presence throughout the country; provide good offices in support of Afghan-led reconciliation programs; support efforts to improve governance and the rule of law and to combat corruption; play a central coordinating role to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid; monitor the human rights situation of civilians and coordinate human rights protection; support the electoral process through the Afghan Independent Electoral Commission; support regional cooperation in working for a more stable and prosperous Afghanistan.

UNAMA's Benchmarks

The strategic benchmarks are outlined below.

Governance and Institution Building

Benchmark: Extension of Government authority throughout the country through the establishment of democratic, legitimate, accountable institutions, down to the local level, with the capacity to implement policies and to be increasingly capable of sustaining themselves.

Security

Benchmark: Development of a sustainable Afghan security structure that is capable of ensuring peace and stability and protecting the people of Afghanistan .

Economic and Social Development

Benchmark: Government policies backed by international support to promote sustainable economic growth that contributes to overall stability.

Human Rights

Benchmark: Improved respect for the human rights of Afghans, in line with the Afghan Constitution and international law, with particular emphasis on the protection of civilians, the situation of women and girls, freedom of expression and accountability based on the rule of law.

Counter-narcotics

Benchmark: Sustained trend in the reduction of poppy cultivation, narcotics production and drug addiction.

In his September 2009 report, the U.N. Secretary-General clarified that the benchmarks to measure progress on UNAMA's priorities would focus on broad areas in UNAMA's mandate and incorporate goals outlined in the agreed national strategies. The benchmarks would be results-based rather than tied to specific target dates, except where required under the constitution. While UNAMA has the capacity to monitor progress in some areas, the Secretary-General noted that this responsibility would also need to be shared with the Afghan government and other members of the international community. Furthermore, developing benchmarks in a comprehensive way would depend on creating an appropriate consultation process with the Afghan government and other international stakeholders.

Some experts believe that on the one hand, regular reports on benchmarks could help UNAMA execute its mandate in a more effective manner and would provide an opportunity to demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses of its strategy on a regular basis. On the other hand, others have questioned whether this is the most efficient way of measuring and tracking implementation of the mandate, whether it is possible to see progress in three-month intervals, and whether this may narrow the scope of how UNAMA's success or failure may be judged, which could have a significant impact on the perception of UNAMA's performance.

Current Report of the U.N. Secretary-General on the Situation in Afghanistan

Another key function of UNAMA and the United Nations more broadly is to provide assessments of the Afghanistan situation to U.N. institutions and member states. These reports also discuss the role of UNAMA in Afghanistan, including issue areas that UNAMA foresees an enhanced role or further activities. Some specific points from the December 10, 2010, report of the U.N. Secretary-General are highlighted below, while other key points are discussed elsewhere in this report:

Peace and Integration —as a result of the Consultative Peace Jirga in June 2010, President Karzai established a High Peace Council, at the request of the Jirga, to promote peace and national unity through confidence-building measures, including the Afghan peace and reintegration program. The Council was formally inaugurated in October and former President Burhanuddin Rabbani was approved as the Council's Chair. On October 20, the Council called on all sides to the conflict to renounce violence and participate in talks. The Council also asked that the United Nations participate in the process and help strengthen global support for the initiative. UNAMA has since been asked to develop an internal capacity to respond to requests from the Council and has established the Salaam Support Group to meet this need. The High Peace Council has also asked the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) to participate.

Regional Cooperation —the Kabul Silk Road initiative had its fourth meeting in November in Kabul. The SRSG launched the initiative to facilitate informal dialogue between the government of Afghanistan, Kabul-based Ambassadors of Afghanistan's neighbors, and UNAMA.

The Kabul Process —As a follow-up to the Kabul Process (road map defined at the London and Kabul conferences that took place in 2010) the government of Afghanistan presented its first 100-day progress report on commitments undertaken at the conferences and said that more than 70% of the target benchmarks had been met. Furthermore, at the JCMB meeting the government presented a monitoring and reporting framework to track progress made in each of its 22 national priority programs aimed at delivery of services to the Afghan people. The Kabul Process is part of an overall effort to better define specific goals and achievements in discussions between the government of Afghanistan and the international community.

Aid Coherence —UNAMA is more involved in developing a coherent approach to donor assistance as part of the Afghan government's anti-corruption agenda. In addition, an increasing priority is a focus on development activities at the subnational level, in particular (1) ensuring they are consistent with national priorities; (2) promoting coordination through development activities at the provincial level, including PRTs; and (3) supporting local authorities in assuming leadership for the coordination of development activities.

Policy Issues and Recent Developments

Afghanistan remains a key priority for Congress. It is at or near the top of the Obama Administration's national security agenda, as reinforced by the summary of the Obama Administration's policy review, issued on December 16, 2010. As congressional concerns about the strategy in Afghanistan unfold, UNAMA's role as a key player in coordinating international donor activity and assistance may be of particular interest, in part because the extent to which UNAMA is successful may reduce the need for relief and reconstruction activities currently conducted by the United States and other members of the international community. Congress may also raise questions related to the budget, oversight of benchmarks and activities, and its role in overseeing aid effectiveness and election reform.

The following sections address areas where UNAMA is playing a significant role.

Deteriorating Security Situation and Limited Progress on Development

There are several issues of concern for the international community, the Afghan government, and observers. First, the increasing lack of security has threatened the progress of development. According to the U.N. Secretary-General, violence has increased in parts of the country to levels not seen since 2001. In 2009, the monthly average of security incidents increased by 43%. Targeted attacks on unarmed civil servants and the aid community, including the United Nations, have also risen. Second, although progress has been made on development (see Appendix H for a list of key achievements since 2002), some observers argue that Afghans have become frustrated with what they perceive as little evidence of development. There are many possible explanations for the perceived lack of progress, including lack of security, lack of human and physical capacity to implement substantial development, inadequate funding levels, and a focus on other funding priorities.

It is well understood that both security and progress on development are necessary in order to maintain international donor interest in Afghan development, encourage private investment in Afghanistan, and maintain Afghans' hope in improvement in their country and their own lives. The deteriorating security situation continues to take center stage as the key issue in Afghanistan while international stakeholders try to find ways to enable civilian efforts to take hold and be sustained. As part of this effort, for example, UNAMA is coordinating with the Independent Directorate of Local Governance and ISAF on a pilot project to fashion local approaches to securing communities.

August 2009 Presidential and Provincial Elections

UNAMA and members of the international community placed significant emphasis on the need for credible, free, and fair presidential and provincial elections on August 20, 2009. The elections were seen as a potential benchmark in the promotion of good governance, and as an indicator of the confidence of the Afghan people in and consolidation of democracy in Afghanistan. The elections were front and center in Afghan politics and in international community circles. Of particular concern to the United Nations were questions about corruption (with some evidence that there had been some problem in the registration of candidates), finding ways to handle electoral irregularities, and ensuring the safety and security of civilians prior to and during the elections. Approximately 15.6 million voters (38% of whom are women) updated their registrations. The final list of candidates included 32 presidential candidates and 3,178 provincial council candidates, 328 of whom were women. UNAMA assisted with the registration and candidate nomination process and worked to resolve controversies such as the date of the elections and questions about the powers of the President when the Presidential term expired. UNAMA contributed technical support for the election process and worked closely with the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) on its project called Enhancing Legal and Electoral Capacity for Tomorrow (ELECT), which was the primary vehicle through which the international community supported the Afghan elections. UNAMA also provided guidance to a range of actors, including the Independent Election Commission (IEC), the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC), the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, and members of civil society.

The Post Election Period

The August 20, 2009, presidential and parliamentary elections were the first elections run entirely under the auspices of the Afghan authorities in 30 years. Nevertheless, voting was unquestionably marred by irregularities, fraud, intimidation, and violence, all of which greatly affected turnout and results. The IEC released vote results slowly. Final, but uncertified, results released on September 16, 2009, showed Karzai at 54.6% and Dr. Abdullah at 27.7%. Other candidates received single-digit vote counts. The ECC ordered a recount of 10% of the polling stations as part of its investigations of fraud. On October 20, 2009, the ECC determined, based on its investigations, that about 1 million Karzai votes and about 200,000 Abdullah votes were considered fraudulent and were deducted from their totals. The final, certified results of the first round were as follows: Karzai, 49.67% (according to the IEC, with a lightly lower total of about 48% according to the ECC determination); Abdullah, 30.59%; and considerably lower figures for the remainder of the field. Thus, Karzai did not legitimately exceed the 50% + threshold to claim a first-round victory. On October 21, 2009, the IEC accepted the ECC finding and Karzai conceded the need for a runoff election; Dr. Abdullah initially accepted the runoff. A date was set for November 7, 2009, for the runoff election.

In an attempt to produce a clean second round, UNAMA ordered about 200 district-level election commissioners be replaced. In addition, it recommended eliminating about 400 polling stations where few votes were expected to be cast. Security procedures were to be similar to those of the first round.

The End Result

On November 1, 2009, Dr. Adullah said he would not compete in the runoff on the grounds that the conditions that enabled the fraud had not been adequately addressed. On November 2, the IEC issued a statement saying that, by consensus, the body had determined that Karzai, being the only candidate remaining in a two-person runoff, should be declared the winner and the second round should not be held. The United States, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and several governments congratulated Karzai on the victory. U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Clinton, praised Dr. Abdullah for his relatively moderate speech announcing his withdrawal and refusing to call for demonstrations or violence by his supporters. President Karzai was inaugurated on November 19, 2009.

U.S. and international officials publicly called on President Karzai to choose his next cabinet based on competence, merit, and dedication to curbing corruption. Some in the Afghan parliament nonetheless questioned some of his choices, and he did not achieve parliamentary of a full cabinet in two rounds of nominations during 2010; seven ministries lack permanent ministers, as of December 2010. A major U.S. and international concern remains focused on questions about the strength and legitimacy of Karzai's government and what kind of a partnership is possible.

The UNAMA Dispute

Within weeks of the August election and lead-up to the release of the initial results, a dispute ensued within UNAMA between then SRSG Kai Eide and DSRSG Peter Galbraith, which ended in the departure of Galbraith from his post at the end of September. The main issues appear to have been focused on the degree of fraud that had taken place during the election and how to deal with it. On the one hand, Eide's position was to let process run through Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) and Independent Election Commission (IEC) to ensure adherence to the constitution and electoral laws of Afghanistan. Some also say that he was willing to encourage an Afghan compromise to avoid a second round. On the other hand, concerned with rule of law and election legitimacy, Galbraith argued that the United Nations had the responsibility to intervene, and he questioned whether it would intervene, and to what extent if he did not speak out. This issue played out very publicly and there were allegations of support by Eide to Karzai and Galbraith to Abdullah. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon removed Galbraith from his post on the grounds that the dispute was compromising UNAMA's overall mission. Several Galbraith supporters subsequently resigned from UNAMA and at the time, morale within UNAMA was reported to be low. For Afghans, the concern was less about the fraud in the election itself (which many expected) but rather concerns over U.S. influence and unnecessary international interference in their election.

It is not clear to what degree the dispute affected UNAMA's overall standing and credibility. On December 11, 2009, SRSG Eide was reported to have said he would leave his post in March 2010 as planned when his two-year contract expires. Eide maintained that this decision was unrelated to his handling of the controversy over the August election or the deadly attack on U.N. staff in October 2009 (discussed later in this report.) There had already been some calls for Eide's resignation Others have suggested the need for a super envoy outside the UNAMA structure, a revival of a previous proposal that was rejected by Karzai. At the time, most agreed that there was a loss of momentum and that UNAMA would have to reassert itself as a voice in the transition strategy proposed by President Obama or risk being sidelined.

Parliamentary Elections in 2010

Parliamentary elections for the Lower House of the National Assembly, the Wolesi Jirga , were held as planned on September 18, 2010. The final results stated that 2,506 candidates (of which 396 were women) contested 249 seats. Reportedly 5,500 polling stations opened on polling day and roughly 4.3 million Afghans voted (of approximately 12 million eligible voters.) The overall security situation did not deteriorate as it did on polling day in 2009; however, there were increased incidents of low-level violence. Some feared that the difficulties that plagued the 2009 presidential election were not adequately addressed beforehand to ensure that the parliamentary elections would be free and fair. Fraud and irregularities were seen across the country. The Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) implemented measures for auditing and recounting votes, and the Electoral Complaints Commission investigated more than 5,000 complaints. In total, 4,271,908 votes were considered valid, while 1,330,782 were invalidated. The final election results were issued at the end of November and reflected a shift in ethnic representation in the Wolesi Jirga, with the Pashtuns losing 20 seats.

The 2010 elections, which were Afghan lead under the IEC, showed technical improvement over the 2009 elections. The problems encountered raise questions about how they should be addressed and by whom. Clearly there remains a need for overall electoral reform and perhaps also a need to reassess expectations of the capacity of the electoral process in Afghanistan. Before its project comes to a close in March 2011, the U.N. Development Program Enhancing Legal and Electoral Capacity for Tomorrow (UNDP-ELECT) will review lessons learned. UNAMA is expected to continue to have a role in election reform. It is not clear how the Afghan government will view this responsibility in the evolution of its democratic process. Donors have expressed a willingness to support efforts for an Afghan-lead reform process, with political support from UNAMA and financial and technical support from the international community, notably the European Union.

UNAMA's Security

On October 28, 2009, in the lead-up to the second round, an attack on a U.N. guest house in Kabul killed five U.N. workers, most of whom were assisting election teams. UNAMA then decided to withdraw or relocate up to 600 of its 1,100 international staff temporarily for security reasons. At the time this raised several questions, including UNAMA's ability to implement its mandate, the impact on other aid groups and whether they would rethink their presence in Afghanistan, and the overall view of the United Nations in Afghanistan. The United Nations is not considered neutral because it supports the government of Afghanistan in its overall mandate. But it is also not always seen as impartial. The guest house incident appears to have been election related—perhaps meant as a deterrent for participation in the then scheduled second round or possibly a comment on UNAMA's role in the election process overall.

On October 23, 2010, the U.N. center in Herat was attacked. There were no fatalities. SRSG Staffan de Mistura, in his briefing to the Security Council on December 22, 2010, commented that luck, preparation, and support from Afghan security forces and a private security company all helped minimize the impact of the attack. In observing that efforts by Afghan and ISAF forces were showing results, he also said, " ... we are detecting from anti-Government elements attempts to show on their side some spectacular attacks in order to dilute the feeling of a change of momentum. What does this mean? It means that we should be expecting and should be ready for, I am afraid, a tense security environment over the next few months. Our assessment is that the situation may get worse before it gets better." De Mistura also said that "on reconciliation and reintegration, everyone recognizes that there is no military solution ... even the Taliban do so, even if they will not say so publicly."

An agreement has been reached between UNAMA and the government of Kuwait to establish a UNAMA Support Office to ensure backup of critical data and to ensure a secure environment for technical and administrative functions. It will also serve as a relocation office should emergency conditions develop in Afghanistan.

UNAMA signed an agreement with the government of the Netherlands to transfer the Alpha compound in Kabul to the United Nations. The compound will serve as office space and residential accommodation in Kabul for up to 70 international staff and provide workspace for 80 national staff. The 2011 budget provides for the construction of security-enhanced compounds in a number of provinces.

Civilian Casualties

UNAMA also tracks progress on a major issue—the attempts of the U.S.-led coalition to limit Afghan civilian deaths caused by coalition operations. UNAMA reported that 1,013 civilian casualties occurred between January and June 2009, mostly in the south and eastern parts of the country, an increase of 24% over the same time the year before. Of these casualties, 59% were caused by anti-government elements and 30.5% were attributed to international and Afghan forces (12% could not be attributed). In 2010, civilian casualties, including deaths and injuries, increased by 20% in the first 10 months by comparison with the same period in 2009, and 75% were linked to anti-government elements. Most civilian casualties resulted from targeted attacks and assassinations by the Taliban and terrorist groups. At the same time, extensive press coverage from bombing campaigns in Afghanistan reveals that there have been a number of innocent victims of erroneous bombings. While the effort to combat Taliban and other militants continues, the potential for mistaken targets remains a risk. Claims of erroneous bombing targets have highlighted the difficulty of intelligence gathering and security problems on the ground. The issue is blurred by the recognition that the end result may not be a matter of simple human error, but rather a complex combination of factors for which it is more difficult to determine responsibility. Collateral damage includes civilian losses, considered to be a by-product of war, despite efforts to minimize innocent loss of life. Concerns about civilian casualties from air strikes, particularly in populated areas, have also focused on the degree to which this affects the Afghan population's perception of the ISAF and U.S.-led forces, and whether the international forces are doing enough to protect civilians. UNAMA has been outspoken over its concerns regarding civilian casualties. Afghans have raised concerns that increased troops may mean an increase in civilian casualties.

Organizational Issues

Resources and Expansion of UNAMA

The U.N. Security Council and member states have called for the expansion of UNAMA's presence to each of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, although that is considered an aspiration that would require major additional resources. UNAMA's regional and provincial offices are viewed by many as a means to help support the civilian surge, to further the work of national programs (such as the Afghan National Development Strategy), and to foster participation at the subnational level by the local government and civil society. In order to expand into each province, UNAMA would need additional resources and funding. The U.N. Secretary-General has stated that to meet the expectations outlined in its mandate and to sustain its progress so far, the mission will need to be strengthened.

Afghan Participation

Experts emphasize the need to create Afghan jobs and to build Afghan capacity. Nevertheless, very little has been said about the mechanics of doing so or discerning the differing views that exist within the Afghan community. The international donor community has put great emphasis on "ownership"—meaning leadership and control—of reconstruction efforts by the country itself. The degree to which Afghans feel a part of what is at stake in their country and to what has been achieved so far is unclear. Some argue that the people and government of Afghanistan are increasingly taking the lead and that the international community is moving toward a supporting role, while others argue just the opposite is taking place. Some are concerned that not enough aid gets directly to the people and that Afghans see little improvement in their lives. It is recognized by many that Afghans are a critical piece of the puzzle in their country's success. Finding ways to empower Afghans in Afghanistan emphasizes the importance of an integrated approach and one that builds needed capacity on multiple levels.

Donor Aid Effectiveness

In his June 2009 report, the U.N. Secretary-General commented on three "interlinked strategic shifts" in Afghanistan that point to the emergence of an "aid effectiveness framework." With UNAMA as the coordinator, these included (1) an emphasis on civilian efforts, (2) a focus on subnational governance and service delivery, and (3) signs that the international efforts are beginning to line up behind comprehensive government programs that, by agreement, serve as the basis for moving forward.

International Donors

UNAMA has had to address the interests of international donors that work with UNAMA, on the one hand, and the interests of the Afghan government, which often perceives its dependence on donor funds as a loss of sovereignty. President Hamid Karzai and his ministers have repeatedly voiced complaints that international aid was decided and provided directly by international donors. Karzai has called the international development efforts a "parallel government" that was not serving the needs of Afghans. He has publicly called for a higher percentage of international aid to be channeled through the Afghan government, or at least for development priorities to be determined in partnership with the Afghan government. This Afghan sentiment was supported in the Compact and the strategy outlined in ANDS. To some extent, the Afghan government remains in a weak position to insist on greater input in setting development priorities because it is so dependent on the international community for security and development funds. In addition, the international donor community provides direct budgetary support to the Afghan government through the ARTF.

International donors, for their part, have complained about widely reported corruption, waste and abuse within the Afghan bureaucracy that have hampered implementation of projects. On the one hand, UNAMA is expected to take the lead on ensuring that donors honor their commitments and align their efforts in a transparent manner behind the financing and implementation of ANDS. To sustain international support, it needs to explain both the achievements and challenges. Nevertheless, on the other hand, UNAMA is also keen to see the capacity of government institutions strengthened with accountability measures in place to provide donors with the confidence to commit funds to Afghanistan's central budget, and to ensure the Afghan government is able to tackle the problem of corruption. Aid effectiveness is a central part of UNAMA's mandate and an area where it places great emphasis in its work with the Afghan government and international donors. As part of the Kabul Process, the international community affirmed its commitment to the priorities and goals identified by the Afghan government, including aligning aid behind the government's initiatives.

Aid Coordination

The international community continues to struggle with establishing effective coordinating mechanisms and institutions to help move the development process forward. The institutional networks have altered over time, with UNAMA taking on the main coordinating role in March 2002 and, under its recent mandates, a renewed emphasis on expanding that role. The international community and the Afghan government have sought to establish a common set of goals in order to coordinate activities and utilize donor funds most effectively.

Some observers argue that the Afghan government, international organizations, NGOs, donor countries, and others are following their own priorities and programs, and therefore do not coordinate their efforts as effectively as possible. Some, however, have suggested that complete coordination may be both unnecessary and ineffective, especially when different organizations do not share common goals or strategies. For example, the United Nations, the United States, and others have in the past supported a specific strategy intended to bolster the Karzai government through development. For those in Afghanistan and the region who did not support this goal of Karzai empowerment or for those who were marginalized by regime change (such as former supporters of the Taliban regime), supposedly neutral, non-partisan humanitarian assistance could appear partisan. Part of the Kabul process aims to encourage all partners to align resources behind the government of Afghanistan's priorities. It remains to be seen how effectively this can be done. Coordination is a complicated matter, but some would argue that there should be coordination only among like-minded organizations, such as among humanitarian groups, separate from the coordination of political groups, and separate from the coordination of military oriented groups.

Sustained Support from the United States

With the Obama Administration's latest strategy for Afghanistan, other key international stakeholders are also refocusing their efforts. Some experts argue there needs to be greater U.S., including congressional, attention to the United Nation's role in Afghanistan and the implementation of its expanded priorities. Other experts say that sustained (and increased) support from the United States in the form of public statements, reporting, transparency, and oversight is critical to UNAMA and to the importance attached to its mission. And yet some are concerned that UNAMA not become "Americanized" or controlled by the United States.

Negative views about the United Nations itself could also undermine U.S. support for UNAMA. In general, Congress supports the United Nations, but it has also been critical of the organization, particularly with regard to perceived inefficiencies and insufficient accountability, duplication of efforts across agency mandates and missions, and allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse of U.N. resources. The 112 th Congress may continue to focus on broad U.N. reform efforts and priorities in general, and with increased attention toward Afghanistan, could decide to conduct greater oversight of UNAMA's activities and progress.

Other questions that have raised tensions in the past, such as how much of U.S. foreign assistance to Afghanistan should be provided bilaterally and how much through multilateral organizations like the United Nations, may also prove challenging as UNAMA manages the complexities of donor relations and policy objectives in Afghanistan.

Appendix A. Map of Afghanistan

Appendix B. UNAMA Organizational Chart

Appendix C. The U.N. Country Team

The following organizations and U.N. agencies make up the county team in Afghanistan.

Appendix D. Map of U.N. Presence in Afghanistan

Appendix E. Map of UNAMA Offices

Appendix F. Afghanistan International Community Donors List

Appendix G. Priorities in UNAMA's 2009 Mandate

The priorities below were identified by the U.N. Security Council in resolution 1868 (2009) as key areas of UNAMA's work in Afghanistan:

promote more coherent support by the international community to the Afghan government;

Promote, as co-chair of the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board (JCMB), more coherent support by the international community to the Afghan Government and the adherence to the principles of aid effectiveness enumerated in the Afghanistan Compact, including through mobilization of resources, coordination of the assistance provided by international donors and organizations, and direction of the contributions of United Nations agencies, funds and programmes, in particular for counter-narcotics, reconstruction, and development activities ;

strengthen cooperation with ISAF;

Strengthen the cooperation with ISAF at all levels and throughout the country, in accordance with their existing mandates, in order to improve civil-military coordination, to facilitate the timely exchange of information and to ensure coherence between the activities of national and international security forces and of civilian actors in support of an Afghan-led development and stabilization process, including through engagement with provincial reconstruction teams and engagement with non-governmental organizations ;

provide political outreach through a strengthened and expanded presence throughout the country;

Through a strengthened and expanded presence throughout the country, provide political outreach, promote at the local level the implementation of the Compact, of the ANDS and of the National Drugs Control Strategy, and facilitate inclusion in and understanding of the Government's policies ;

provide good offices in support of Afghan-led reconciliation programs;

Provide good offices to support, if requested by the Afghan Government, the implementation of Afghan-led reconciliation programmes, within the framework of the Afghan Constitution and with full respect for the implementation of measures introduced by the Security Council in its resolution 1267 (1999) and other relevant resolutions of the Council;

support efforts to improve governance and the rule of law and to combat corruption;

Support and strengthen efforts to improve governance and the rule of law and to combat corruption at the local and national levels, and to promote development initiatives at the local level with a view to helping bring the benefits of peace and deliver services in a timely and sustainable manner;

play a central coordinating role to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid;

Play a central coordinating to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance in accordance with humanitarian principles and with a view to building the capacity of the Afghan government, including by providing effective support to national and local authorities in assisting and protecting internally displaced persons and to creating conditions conducive to voluntary, safe, dignified and sustainable return of refugees and internally displaced persons;

monitor the human right situation of civilians and coordinate human rights protection;

Continue, with the support of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to cooperate with the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC), to cooperate also with relevant international and local non-governmental organizations, to monitor the situation of civilians, to coordinate efforts to ensure their protection and to assist in the full implementation of the fundamental freedoms and human rights provisions of the Afghan Constitution and international treaties to which Afghanistan is a State party; in particular those regarding the full enjoyment by women of their human rights;

support the electoral process through the Afghan Independent Electoral Commission;

Support, at the request of the Afghan authorities, preparations for the crucial upcoming presidential elections, in particular through the IEC, by providing technical assistance, coordinating other international donors, agencies and organizations providing assistance and channeling existing and additional funds earmarked to support the process;

support regional cooperation in working for a more stable and prosperous Afghanistan.

To work towards a stable and prosperous Afghanistan.

Appendix H. Key Efforts in Afghanistan, 2002-2008

UNAMA has outlined the following key indicators of progress between 2002 and 2008:

Health : 85% of the population has been given access to a basic package of health services. Social Protection : 2.5 million Afghans have received social support. Education and Culture : More than 6 million children are enrolled in school. Agriculture and Rural Development : 32,000 villages have benefitted from development projects. Natural Resources Management : More than 3 million have benefitted from rural water and sanitation projects. Infrastructure : 13,150 km of roads have been rehabilitated, improved, or built. National Army and Police : More than 140,000 policemen and soldiers have been recruited and trained since 2003. Disarmament and Demining : More than 7.7 million unexploded ordnances have been cleared since 2001. Democracy and Governance : 75% of voters participated in Afghanistan's first democratic elections in 2004. Justice and Human Rights : The Constitution adopted in 2004 calls for the protection of human rights. Economy and Trade : Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita has increased by over 70% since 2002. Media and Telecoms : 75% of Afghans have access to telecommunications, including over 5 million cell phones now in use.