Co-sponsored by the Migration Policy Institute and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

United Nations Foundation Conference Room
May 11, 2005

Panel Moderator Dr. Joanne van Selm introduced this briefing on the situation regarding population movements and the activities of the United Nation High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Afghanistan by noting how for many observers the Afghan situation seemed to have slipped out of focus. This Washington DC briefing, co-hosted by UNHCR's Regional Office in Washington and the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), was organized to bring the Washington focus back to UNHCR's current plans to address the underlying causes of Afghan migration. It was held just as violence was erupting in parts of Afghanistan targeting the US, but also impacting UNHCR's offices there.

 Dr. van Selm introduced the speakers. The panelists were:

Ekber Menemencioglu, Director of the UNHCR Bureau on Central Asia, Southwest Asia, North Africa and the Middle East;
Salvatore Lombardo, Head of UNHCR's Afghanistan Comprehensive Solutions Unit; and
Ewen MacLeod, Senior Policy Advisor to the Afghanistan Comprehensive Solutions Unit.

The Present and Future of UNHCR in Afghanistan: A Summary

Mr. Menemencioglu informed the audience that UNHCR's repatriation efforts in Afghanistan have been the biggest assisted repatriation effort in history, involving 3.5 million people.  (In comparison, the Kurdish repatriation of the 1990s, the second largest, involved 'only' 1.9 million people).  While the repatriation itself has been relatively successful, there is still a lot to be done – particularly with regard to reintegration.  Additionally, 3 million Afghan refugees remain in Pakistan, and 0.9 million in Iran.  Thus, though many obstacles have been overcome, the most difficult part of the repatriation effort may be yet to come.

UNHCR has four major objectives to accomplish in the coming years in Afghanistan:

• Maintaining Iranian and Pakistani Confidence in the Repatriation Process.  To continue the cooperative efforts initiated in the repatriation process to date, Iran and Pakistan in particular must perceive that the number of Afghan refugees residing in their territories continues to decrease.  UNHCR desires to repatriate approximately 700,000 refugees each year for the next two years, and plans to continue the repatriation process indefinitely.
• Keeping Attention on Afghani Reintegration.  The attention span of the media is short-lived, as are those of the governments and non-profits that fund and support humanitarian interventions.  Thus, UNHCR strives to keep external stakeholders focused on the reintegration process.  This focus is especially important because the region will need substantive help from the donor community to aid with infrastructure development – including shelter, water, social infrastructure, and rural development – in sending, receiving, and border communities. UNHCR is currently working with a two to three year time frame. Even that is short compared to the perspective of the governments in the region facing these migration issues.
• Monitoring Push Factors.  As repatriation movements continue, UNHCR is committed to ensuring that they continue to be voluntary.  The organization is investigating and monitoring push factors, particularly in Iran, to ensure that they do not violate international protection standards. One point to note in this context is that irregular movements of Afghans to the European states, the US and Australia have decreased significantly over the last couple of years.
• Internal Displacement.  UNHCR is also committed to ensuring that internally displaced persons continue to be protected, and have the opportunity for return if possible.

In addition to these goals, Mr.Menemencioglu recognizes that there has been a change in the movements and profiles of Afghans. Many of those moving today, including those deciding to return to Afghanistan, are moving for socio-economic reasons, and not as a result of persecution.  Thus, UNHCR is also committed to looking at the new multidimensional aspects of regional Afghani movement, as well as investigating the negative and positive consequences of these movements – including the contribution of remittances. 

The Political and Economic Mainframe and Consequences

Adding broader perspective to Mr. Menemencioglu's introductory comments, Mr. MacLeod offered a framework of three dimensions of the political and economic situation in Afghanistan: 1) the historical political economy; 2) the current situation; and 3) the future directions.

Afghanistan: A Brief Historical Description

Afghanistan has had 25 years of interventionist conflict, from the Soviet occupation in 1979 to the post-September 11 offensive by the United States. Part of the result is a poor country, however, it should be recalled that even before the Soviet occupation, Afghanistan was an extremely poor country and remains so today.  Even without the extended period of conflict, Afghanistan's economy would most likely be comparable to many countries of the most impoverished countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.  And this level poverty is unlikely to change in the near future. 

In terms of political organization, the government's capacity for outreach was limited outside Kabul even before the Soviet invasion.  The economy had developed only a tiny private sector, largely consisting of state-supported enterprise.  For example, there were only 40,000 jobs in manufacturing in the pre-Soviet era (at which time the country had a population of 15.5 million people).

In terms of social structure, Afghanistan is a tribal society with a historically complicated ethnic composition.  Many of the ethnicities in Afghanistan derive from other countries in the region (Tajiks from Tajikistan; Uzbeks from Uzbekistan; etc). Not only is Afghanistan ethnically complicated, however. It is held together by a weak state.

Afghanistan Today

Since the signing of the Bonn Agreement in December 2001, signaling an end to the US-led coalition offensive into Afghanistan, there have been encouraging signs that the country is developing.  Kabul in particular has been booming economically, with encouraging signs of development such as satellite dishes, independent newspapers, and family/micro enterprises.

However, familiar challenges also continue.  These including:

• The tensions between modernization and conservatism;
• The direction of the political economy of the state; and
• The role of religion in the state and private sector.

There is an on-going vivid debate about the organization of the state.  Should the power be held in Kabul itself?  Should it be de-concentrated and devolved to the provinces?  Or perhaps a decentralized form to the localities – as some believe has de facto occurred - would be most effective?  These questions have yet to be resolved

The post-Bonn vision of Afghanistan is modern but has a relatively limited view of development.  While major infrastructure is being successfully built, the government continually raises only 50 percent of its operating costs, leaving it heavily dependent on the international community.  More to the point, the state and its army do not have a monopoly over power, and cannot themselves ensure stability and predictability. 

The society has also changed substantially in response to the 25-year period of violence in Afghanistan.  UNHCR reports that 6 million people (or 30 percent of the population) have been internally or externally displaced at some point in this period.  The old sociological structures, including the tribal elder hierarchy, have broken down under the violence.  And tensions continue to linger due to the presence of “commanderism,” or the rise to illegitimate power of certain individuals and groups.

Additionally, generational change has propelled an alteration in Afghani society.  The population is not only disproportionately young, but the 'new' youth have also gained a different understanding of society than previous generations.  After experiencing different living standards and conditions as a result of their displacement and experiences beyond Afghanistan, many youth have either returned to Afghanistan with different expectations, or have not returned at all.  In fact, “regional population movements,” where Afghanis move temporarily abroad and send remittances back to the country, have become more prevalent.

Afghanistan in the Future

On the verge of new parliamentary elections and a peaceful shift in power to a new government – both precedents for the country – Afghanistan is a country in transition.  In other words, it has an uncertain direction, but is clearly making progress. In the midst of these changes, UNHCR, like other organizations working in the region, face challenges, in particular to deal with the shift in the characteristics of the population at large.

Afghanistan will continue to house US and other coalition armed forces for security reasons for some time to come, and will require substantial reconstruction aid from the international community.  However, there is hope for a new regional level of cooperation – a level that will replace the country's old position as a buffer state for Cold War tensions.  Mr. MacLeod believes that Afghanistan's goal throughout the reconstruction process is to avoid making the country the fulcrum of security tensions in the region, thus allowing it to successfully develop as a transition and transit state.

The UNHCR Approach to Afghanistan

Utilizing Mr. MacLeod's framework for discussion, Mr. Lombardo described the UNHCR approach to helping improve the Afghan displacement situation.  He impressed upon the audience both the complexity of the “mixed scenarios” of population movements in the country, and the continued level of danger in the country (US forces and UN buildings were attacked the morning of the speech).  Mr. Lombardo considered potential UNHCR interventions from three perspectives: 1) the regional perspective; 2) the human perspective; and 3) the policy perspective.

Regional Perspective

In terms of regional interests, Afghanistan's relationship with its neighbors is in its infancy, but has huge potential for the future.  In terms of political and economic relationships, Afghanistan has increased activity with its neighboring trading partners. For stability to exist and continue this type of normalization of relations with Iran and Pakistan in particular, but also other neighbors, is essential.  What is also important is that all actors in the region realize that people are at the heart of this aimed-for stability.

Human Perspective

The human element is at the center of any movement toward stability.  Three major humanistic themes have become apparent in UNHCR's work in Afghanistan:

1. Afghans have preserved incredible links and networks that have helped exiled populations and the development of the society as a whole.  For example, there have been no major cases of discrimination against returnees.  As was later qualified in the question and answer session, while the obstacles facing both returnee and native Afghanis are great (including housing, clean water, and the recovery of land lost in war), both groups have chosen to establish a social network and face these obstacles together.  Returnees are not discriminated against in facing poorer conditions than those in their countries of refuge: they simply face the same conditions as all other Afghans in Afghanistan. Also, countries like Pakistan and Iran have made incredible contributions to Afghanistan, particularly as these networks continue to develop. These countries have coped admirably with hundreds of thousands of Afghans in settlements within their borders, whereas in many parts of Europe and the US, just 10,000 Afghans (or any other refugees) would cause uproar.
2. The profile of Afghans has changed in many ways from the traditional perspective.  Many Afghans were born in other countries and have no contemporary relationship with Afghanistan, even when they return to live there. 
3. Migration, both internal and external, is now part of a fundamental strategy for survival.  Research is helping to demystify the labels placed on Afghan migrants, and to put into context the contributions of migrants both to the host country and to Afghanistan.

Despite this progress, Mr. Lombardo emphasized that the picture is not perfect – Afghanistan still must contend with numerous human rights violations, including instances of human smuggling and arbitrary deportations and detentions.

Policy Perspective

There have also been a number of changes which have impacted the way which UNHCR policy toward Afghanistan has been formulated.  Examples include:

1. There has been a cultural and linguistic shift in understanding of such things as what it means to be an 'Afghan refugee'. Domestic institutions and international and non-governmental organizations in the region are coming together to promote serious policy discussion. The need for data and knowledge, including on the terminology of refugeehood and migration, is needed.
2. Outside support is required to help Afghanistan switch from a humanitarian-focused migration effort to today's more complex situation.  UNHCR can no longer sufficiently provide all the assets and skills needed to manage circular migration. It can deal with some aspects but additional assistance can and must be provided by non-humanitarian actors.
3. Afghanistan, and those observing the country, are now beginning to open the debate on how to manage labor migration and Afghans' emigration rather than their displacement.  In particular, UNHCR strives to help the nation find the right balance between controlled management of movements and over-controlling the process in a way that might inhibit beneficial migration.
4. The protection and legal aspect of UNHCR's Afghanistan policy continues to be focused on providing Afghans safe voluntary return options, but some Afghans are still in need of international protection. Some of those needing protection include people in mixed marriages between an Afghan and someone from the country in which they sought shelter during the conflict, for example.

In conclusion, Afghanistan still faces a very mixed situation.  But while there is a bumpy road ahead, mobility in this case is better than inaction.

Questions and Answers

In addition to the questions and answers already noted above, a number of discussion points also arose following the formal presentations.

One audience member asked about the Afghan dependence on remittances and how they are used in the specific Afghan context.  The panelists responded that there is no formal legal framework, but that remittances provide a valuable contribution to the country as long as they are not related to smuggling or trafficking.  Many Afghans now travel to work in Iran as a right of passage, and do not even require a visa to enter Pakistan.  Remittances from these countries are transferred by the Hawala system, which involves a trust-based brokerage where no money actually moves between countries.  Remittances may also occur in the form of goods, often to be sold in Afghanistan.  Although there is not a lot of information on what remittances are actually used for by families, most appear to be for general household consumption and to finance marriages.  However, the panelists anticipate that these funds will also be used in micro-enterprises in the future.

Another audience member inquired about whether the Afghan situation described would be one for UNHCR's High Commissioner's Forum to consider, especially in the context of return. The panelists suggested that to the extent that Afghanistan has known unconventional solutions, gathering knowledge and the lessons learned would certainly be useful to pass on for later cases. It was also noted that Afghanistan has shown that it is unproductive to remain stuck in what might be called 'the humanitarian moment'. Rather there is a need to search out and capture changing political moments.

Several audience members inquired about the access of Afghans to durable solutions other than voluntary repatriation – such as resettlement and local integration.  In terms of durable solutions, local integration is still occurring in an ad hoc fashion.  However, citizenship is not a viable solution for the 3 million people currently in Pakistan – and UNHCR has accepted that not all of the persons in Pakistan are refugees.  Thus, UNHCR has negotiated a temporary solution for the next 5-10 years to help ease tensions and develop long term plans, which will likely involve (at least in part) voluntary return over the long term.  Iran is taking a rational approach to the refugee situation there, and will allow some of the refugees to stay.

Another audience member inquired about the reasons behind circular mobility of Afghans in the first place, and asked how it has changed over time.  The panelists responded that the key drivers for Afghan migration are no longer conflict and violence.  Economic and social boundaries have been eradicated, making the availability of mobility and transnational networks more important.  In other words, conditions have significantly changed between the period of exile and the initiation of return.