Mediaboss Marketing

Since the Taliban returned to power in 2021, Afghanistan has once again come under scrutiny for consistent allegations of human rights violations perpetrated mainly by the group.

At the same time, given that Afghanistan was completely dependent on foreign assistance before 2021, aid cutbacks, sanctions, and banking restrictions imposed by foreign governments including the United States have fuelled an economic and humanitarian crisis in the country since the Talibans return.

While donors should continue to press Taliban leaders to end their violations of the rights of women and girls, limiting support to Afghanistan to ever-dwindling levels of humanitarian aid to isolate them is not the answer.

The question as to how orwhether governmentsshould deal with the Taliban assumed greater importance after a UN meeting in Doha earlier this month between envoys from more than 20 countries. The meeting the first with Taliban attendees went ahead without women representatives from Afghanistan after the Taliban made clear its opposition to their participation and any discussion of womens rights.

The gathering was meant to discuss Afghanistansfinancial and banking crisis along withdrug trafficking and the impact of climate change important issues that also disproportionately affect the lives of Afghan women.

Outrage by Afghan womens rights groups led the UN to lamely hold separate talks with Afghan women and civil society representatives the day after the Doha discussions. But the question left hanging in the ether is how to address Afghanistans protracted economic crisis and worsening poverty without signalling support for the Talibans abusive policies.

Many countries and most multilateral institutions that have maintained a working relationship with the Taliban have limited their interactions to modest forms of technical support in the banking sector andessential services like internet and electricity, in addition to humanitarian aid.

In funding these services, donors are maintaining a distinction between isolating the Taliban authorities and trying not tocause further misery forAfghans, who face rising poverty, a crippled banking system, and the worseningfloods-and-drought fallout of climate change.

Income-related poverty has worsened, and humanitarian aid that is insufficient to meetgrowing needs is nosubstitute for a functioning economy.

Since well before 2021, countries including the US and UK also continued talks with the Taliban over counterterrorism andmutual concerns about ISIS-K, the Islamic State armed group that has carried outattacks abroad as well astargeting the Talibanand Shia Hazaras inside Afghanistan.

Ongoing engagement between the US and UK and the Taliban reflects their shared history. Afghanistan wasalmost completely dependenton foreign funding during the 20 years of war following the US-led invasion after 9/11. The suspension of most of those funds in August 2021 sent the Afghan economy into a freefall from which it is yet to recover.

Income-related poverty has worsened, and humanitarian aid that is insufficient to meetgrowing needs is nosubstitute for a functioning economy. In addition, while this aid has been a lifeline for Afghans facing widespread food insecurity and a brokenpublic health system, it is shrinking, as donor countries tire of the Talibans intransigence and prefer to deal with other global crises.

There is no way to address Afghanistans acute problems while bypassing the Taliban altogether. But given that the Taliban have also interfered with humanitarian assistance by blocking women from jobs at UN agencies and international aid organisations except in healthcare, nutrition, and education, what can be done?

For the long term, even more important than humanitarian aid is assistance directed at durable solutions on a national scale and not just on a project-to-project basis in essential areas such as water management, irrigation, agriculture, climate adaptation, and public health.

A humanitarian aid worker in Afghanistan told us that his Afghan female colleagues are able to work because his group prioritised principled engagement insisting with the authorities on the need and right of women to work, to run businesses, and to receive aid equally.

Otherhumanitarian actorshave been able topush back on interference because they had a long history of dealing with both the former government and the Taliban and, most importantly, because they had strong backing and funding from donor countries.

However, even if some women have returned to office jobs with aid groups, far fewer have been able to actually deliver aid in communities, and none have been able to take leadership positions in government; a contrast with the previous Afghan administration in which some women served as governors and ministers. In addition, their participation depends on time-consuming negotiations and local solutions that may not be replicated from one province to another.

But given that women and girls have suffered the most under the Talibans abusive policies they have not only been restricted from education beyond the sixth grade and many work opportunities, but they are also among thosehardest hit by the humanitarian crisis such principled engagement is the only viable choice.

For the long term, even more important than humanitarian aid is assistance directed at durable solutions on a national scale and not just on a project-to-project basis in essential areas such as water management, irrigation, agriculture, climate adaptation, and public health. The World BanksApproach 3.0 also sets out a principled approach that supports bank-financed projects implemented by and for women, outside the control of the Taliban.

Such developments are crucial because women and women-headed households havehigher rates of food insecurity, which contribute to increased chances of malnutrition-relateddisease, child labour, and early marriage. Water scarcity and Afghanistans increasingly intense cycles ofdroughts and floods also disproportionately harm women and girls.

There are no quick fixes for Afghanistan. But building resilience in these areas would also reduce Afghanistans dependence on humanitarian aid, while improving food security and access to essential public goods in the long run.

Read more here:
How to engage with the Taliban, if you have to - The New Humanitarian