How not to do International Aid!

It's come to light that exorbitant sums of international aid designated to help alleviate the poverty in war-torn Afghanistan are being lavished by Western aid agencies on their own officials in the conflict-stricken country.

When international aid "comes to Afghanistan, it's spent on those people who have cars costing USD 60,000 and who live in houses with a USD 15,000 monthly rent. This money goes to these expenses -- 90 percent logistics and administration," says Ramazan Bashardost, an Afghan parliament member and former planning minister.

"I have just rented out this building for USD 30,000 a month to an aid organization. It was so expensive because it has 24 rooms with en-suite bathrooms as well as armored doors and bullet-proof windows," Torialai Bahadery, the director of Property Consulting Afghanistan said.

Meanwhile 77 percent of Afghans lack access to clean water.

More troops but not more food for Afghanistan

Foreign aid organizations say food shortages and early snows may leave eight million Afghans -- 30% of the population -- on the brink of starvation this winter. Famine could easily overtake violence as the country's top problem.

"This year people are paying on average 1½ times as much as they were in December, 2007," Susannah Nicol, a spokeswoman for the World Food Program (WFP) in Kabul said. "An average household in 2005 was spending about 56% of their income on food. That figure has risen to 85%."

With winter settling in early, the WFP has rushed 36,000 tonnes of food to areas that are normally inaccessible during the winter because of heavy snow. But international aid agencies still estimate five to 10 million Afghans out of a population of 26.6 million might not have access to enough food before the winter is out.

Britain's Royal United Services Institute says, “If the international community is found wanting, we can expect increased frustration and anger from a population which once saw the international intervention in Afghanistan as a source of hope."

Last week, the Afghan Health Ministry said more than 1.6 million children under the age of five and hundreds of thousands of women could die as a result of food insecurity and a lack of medical care.

[RAWA]

India pledges $450m aid package to Afghanistan

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced a $450-million new aid package to Afghanistan. Dr Singh asserted that New Delhi’s initiative in the reconstruction and development of the war-torn country was part of a larger effort to help the Afghan people in forging a pluralistic and democratic society.

India’s decision to allocate an additional amount of $450 million over and above the existing $750 million to meet the requirements of its ongoing and forthcoming projects in Afghanistan has come on the expected lines.

President Karzai said, ‘It is a moral responsibility as human beings to protect the lives of our women and children, and to prevent the loss of life caused by terrorism by defeating terrorism and by eliminating it completely, and thereby bringing security to our peoples and the world at large.’

[Khaleej Times]

Falling short on Afghan aid pledges

The United States has not delivered $5 billion worth of aid it pledged to help rebuild Afghanistan, and other donors have fallen short by about that same amount, a report from humanitarian groups said Tuesday.

An alliance of 94 international aid agencies said the prospects for peace in Afghanistan are being undermined because Western countries are failing to deliver on aid promises.

"The reconstruction of Afghanistan requires a sustained and substantial commitment of aid, but donors have failed to meet their aid pledges to Afghanistan," said the report's author, Matt Waldman, Afghanistan policy adviser for Oxfam.

The aid groups' report criticized the large difference being what is spent on aid and on the cost of military operations. "This is a shortsighted policy," Waldman wrote.

Previous reports by aid groups have said the international community is spending far less aid money in Afghanistan per capita -- and putting far fewer soldiers on the ground -- than it has in previous conflicts.

[AP]

More on Afghanistan