UK aid budget cuts have halted vital programmes in Afghanistan

Landmine clearance and polio vaccination drives have suffered due to funding reductions

Concerns have been raised by the UK's aid watchdog over the reduction in funding for Afghanistan. PA

The UK's aid watchdog has raised concerns over cuts to the humanitarian assistance budget that have led to vital projects in Afghanistan being halted or delayed.

In its report, published on Thursday, the Independent Commission for Aid Impact highlighted that reductions to the UK’s funding commitment for 2022-23 have resulted in programmes for polio vaccinations and the clearance of landmines and improvised explosive devices being suspended.

Funding for humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan 2022-23 had already been reduced to £246 million and the budget for 2023-24 has been lowered further to £100 million.

It said “funding unpredictability” has hampered the UK’s approach as the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan continues to worsen and there is little prospect for improvement.

The commission has also warned the economic and humanitarian situation in Afghanistan remains “dire” almost two years after the Taliban takeover.

The UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs has reported that 28.3 million people – two thirds of Afghanistan’s population – will need humanitarian assistance in 2023, a 16 per cent increase from 2022 and a 54 per cent increase from 2021.

Commissioner Sir Hugh Bayley, who led the report, said the aid reduction has affected Afghanistan.

“As the humanitarian situation continues to worsen in Afghanistan, and women and girls’ hard-won rights are being lost, we felt it was important to look again at how the UK is supporting the people of Afghanistan through the aid programme,” he said.

“While the UK has played an important role in the international aid response since the Taliban takeover, our information note shows that the reduction in UK aid funding has led to programmes that directly benefitted Afghan people being stopped or postponed.

“It also highlights the lack of a UK diplomatic presence in Afghanistan which might undermine the effective management of the UK’s contribution to the international aid response.”

The report raised six questions for the UK's International Development Committee to scrutinise.

It urged the body to look at how the UK and other donors can maximise the impact of humanitarian assistance while minimising the benefits which accrue to the de facto authorities and how the UK can move beyond a crisis response towards other modes of development assistance that can build durable local capacities and reduce dependence on humanitarian aid.

A girl pushes a wheelbarrow loaded with water cans in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. AFP

Developing a strategy to help protect the rights and opportunities of women and girls was also recommended.

The report raised the issue of how the UK should respond to the risk of other donors disengaging from Afghanistan as a result of growing insecurity and if it should make a case within the international community for wider engagement with the Taliban.

It revealed the Foreign Office lost half of its complement of employees following the fall of Kabul and now has a team of a little more than 80 working on supporting Afghanistan.

However, the staff are based either in the UK, Qatar or Pakistan and the commission questioned whether a physical presence in Afghanistan, when security conditions allow, would enable the UK to exercise more effective oversight of UK funding on the ground.

While the UK is still considered to be a “big player” in Afghanistan, the commission said that many stakeholders think London is not sufficiently engaged with decision makers in the country, reducing its ability to understand the operating context.

It also reported that the agencies delivering humanitarian aid in Afghanistan want the UK and other donors to play a stronger role in engaging with the Taliban to ensure a credible aid response.

The report highlighted the risk that the absence of a UK diplomatic presence in Afghanistan could undermine the oversight of aid as well as influence over the international humanitarian response.

Earlier this month, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres confirmed the world body would stay in Afghanistan to deliver humanitarian aid but warned of a severe shortfall in financial pledges for the humanitarian appeal for the country.