Why UNAMA?
I chose this mission for a couple reasons, both pertaining to my background and interest in the Middle East. As an an Iranian growing up in the United States, my understanding of Afghanistan has always been skewed by charged media coverage and the entrenched social and political bias within the Iranian community toward Afghans. The latter became most apparent when I visited Iran in 2006 and saw the discriminatory treatment of Afghans in Iran’s capital. Since then, my curiosity expanded into a long-term fascination with Afghanistan’s historical and political implications and how the United Nations in particular plans to resolve so many of these deep-seated issues.
Constraints & Wins: On the Bonn Agreement
The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, established on March 28, 2002, serves to primarily assist in creating a framework for the Afghan government and citizens to lay the foundations for modernizing development and internal stability. The mandate of initial Resolution 1401 began with the constraint of affirming the Bonn Agreement which sought to further the U.S. and NATO enforced state restructuring efforts, some critics would argue. Although, the agreement sought to fundamentally develop sound initiatives such as protection for minorities, implementation of policies regarding education for young girls, and free elections, the agreement failed to account for the blatant exploitation of a western framework on the Afghan political model. Dipali Mukhopadhyay, one of the leading researchers on Afghanistan writes that the Bonn agreement, “led to a range of issues, including government corruption and incompetency. The subsequent failures of the Afghan state, including the inability to provide basic security and social services, stemmed from the ‘overambitious reconstruction model’” therefore drawing attention to the inconsistencies of Resolution 1401. This would adopt a western condition of peacekeeping; in other words, NATO and the United States successfully hid the patriarchal proposals through unflinching statements regarding the well-being of Afghanistan’s future, “stressing the inalienable right of the Afghan people themselves freely to determine their own political future” and “reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Afghanistan.” The mandate made little progress in successfully establishing human rights and securities for citizens. In 2002, Human Rights Watch further stated that a larger number of international troops were needed and also noted that no presumable efforts had been made to integrate Afghan military. Although the mandate did have many problematic components and was definitively not achieved, it also served as a solid groundwork for the altered and restorative resolutions passed in the years following.
President Ghani and the UNAMA
Since its establishment in 2002, the UNAMA has reshaped its political scope and gathered knowledge from past errors, accrediting its peacekeeping plans and serving as a valuable insight into the mission’s two long-term goals: political affairs and development and humanitarian matters. In the years following, the UNAMA made considerable efforts to create a level playing field for Afghan leadership and internal development but not without some impending constraints.
The inauguration of new President Ghani in 2014, highlighted UN support for Afghan governance as a whole, but more specifically marked the “first-ever democratic peaceful shift of power,” in Afghanistan’s history. On September 29, 2014, the United Nations congratulated Dr. Mohammed Ghani on his presidential inauguration and reaffirmed its “commitment to cooperate with the national unity government in the country’s progress to peace, stability and development” inviting a hands-off international tone depicting the rebuilding and strengthening of diplomacy and developmental policies in the future. This notion is further cited in Resolution 2145 which took place on March 17, 2014, with comparably more inclusive and formalized language toward Afghan Transition process “ which will entail the assumption of full responsibility by Afghanistan’s institutions in the security sector” as well as the Kabul process “towards the primary objective of accelerated leadership and ownership in governance, strengthened international partnership and regional cooperation” which was of crucial importance on advancing the social and political stability of Afghanistan’s governance.
A Deteriorating Security?
Despite the significant alterations in recent years to the UNAMA mandate, some international players are still questioning where the hidden agenda lies with regard to NATO and the ISAF in regard to state interest and exploitation of Afghanistan’s capital gains. New York Times journalist, Azam Ahmed published a piece on President Ghani’s frustration with the United Nation’s control over $500 million “that bankrolls the salaries of Afghanistan’s police officers,” which illustrates the key issue of aid relationships shifting after wartime settlements. President Ghani has an agenda to redirect Afghanistan’s political and social outlining. Perhaps the consolidation of power is one aspect of Ghani’s equation, but his mistrust of the United Nations as an agency has predated back to his time in “as finance minister, and also reflect a personal distaste for some groups he sees as infringing on Afghan sovereignty.” Regardless of the which side is correct, the suspicions of Afghanistan’s democratically elected governance remain fully intact.
The most recent meeting held on March 7, 2016, issued the Secretary-General report describing the state of affairs within UNAMA’s framework as a “deteriorating security and an increasingly vocal political opposition placing] increased pressure on the Government of Afghanistan during the reporting period, despite steps towards a possible peace process” which probes questions regarding the capability of the Afghan government as well as the lack of progress toward infrastructural and humanitarian development policies. Nicholas Haysom, Special Representative of the Secretary-General and Head of UNAMA, observed that the crucial steps to support Afghanistan’s political and social reforms as well as strategies to engage with the Taliban forces must be done so through negotiation to affirm the peace and reconciliation process.
Future Prospects of the UNAMA
Ultimately, the mandate is on the path to adopting principles that will benefit and bolster Afghan capacity for progressive modernization of infrastructure and political stability. There have been considerable accomplishments, particularly during the last five years. For instance, the UNAMA has successfully dedicated time and resources to carefully document the impact of war torn conflicts on the civilian population and correspondingly served to establish party connections in order mitigate the effects and perform concrete action steps toward civilian security and protections. Human Rights Director, Georgette Gagnon, proposes a final urging of honest reporting, statistical tracking and documentation to put forth recommendations and “practical ways and means to reduce civilian casualties,” with civilian security as the paramount governmental obligation. Although there has not been a large increase in prosecution, first hand conversations with Afghan women show that many feel there has been change with the assistance of the UNAMA and that awareness of these core issues is beginning to spread.
As the United Nations and Afghanistan relations readjust to postwar political climates, there will need to be a widespread acceptance of its presence to assist in infrastructural development, Afghan security measures, and dedication to human rights establishment without forcing a westernized model. Given the direction the UNAMA is headed, the odds look favorable and as Gagnon firmly asserts, the “gains made will be sustained, will not be rolled back and will not be sacrificed.”
Comments