Aid, Conditionality and Reconstruction in Afghanistan

Wednesday, November 29, 2006 - by Dr. Jonathan Goodhand, Senior Lecturer, SOAS, University of London, UK
 

Presented by: Dr. Jonathan Goodhand, Senior Lecturer, SOAS, University of London, UK. Moderator/Discussant: Dr. Ali Wardak, Author NHDR 2007, Centre for Policy and Human Development (CPHD). Date, Time and Place: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 from 10:00 to 12:00 a.m. at CPHD.

Dr. Jonathan Goodhand studied at the Universities of Birmingham and Manchester, with qualifications in education and development. He worked for some years managing humanitarian and development programmes in conflict situations in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, and has extensive experience as a researcher and advisor in South and Central Asia for a range of NGOs and aid agencies, including DFID, SDC, ILO and UNDP. His research interests include the political economy of aid and conflict, NGOs and peace building and ‘post conflict’ reconstruction. Dr. Goodhand’s recent publications include: Aiding Peace and The Role of NGOs in Armed Conflict.

Students and lecturers of Kabul University and members of international community attending the lecture organized by CPHD

This speach was based on a paper which explores the role of international aid donors in Afghanistan since the signing of the Bonn Agreement. More specifically it looked at whether aid conditionality’s can be an instrument for peace consolidation. In Afghanistan geo-strategic and institutional concerns have on the whole led to an unconditional approach to assistance by International actors. It is argued that large inflows of unconditional aid risk re-creating the structural conditions that led to the outbreak of conflict. Aid conditionality’s needed to be re-conceptualized as aid-for-peace bargains rather than bribes for security. Some forms of conditionality are necessary in order to rebuild the social contract in Afghanistan. This finding has wider relevance for aid donors and it is argued that they should reconsider orthodox development models in 'fragile state' settings. Rather than seeing conditionality’s and ownership as two ends of a policy spectrum, the former may be a necessary instrument for achieving the latter.