The endless alphabet soup of international organizations that began to grow at an exponential rate over the past 50 years are now involved in virtually every part of the developed world. Whether they revolve around politics, economics, society or business, these institutions operate to increase the current globalization revolution and to lessen distances once believed unreachable.

Many involved in humanitarian issues work to alleviate the plight of innocent citizens trapped in hostile environments, as well as promote awareness of their grave situations throughout the international arena. One such organization is an agency of the established United Nations, the United Nations’ High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). This agency was formed in 1951 with the primary objective of resettling refugees in the aftermath of World War II. The degree of success that this particular organization achieves is dependent on many factors, many of them beyond its control, but which nonetheless determine its success and efficiency, or lack thereof. UNHCR is involved in various countries, many of them currently situated in the developing world, such as Afghanistan, which has experienced a massive onslaught of refugee crises going as far back as two decades. 

The activities of UNHCR in this country have improved, and continue to improve, the plight of refugees, easing some of their difficulties. However, many of the policies and agendas are impeded by internal conflicts as well as by attitudes of neighboring countries toward Afghan refugees. These problems only worsen the situation and often render the actions of UNHCR inefficient, undermining not only its autonomy in conducting its tasks, but leading to a sense of failure in the eyes of the international community .

The 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan led to the efflux of a massive number of refugees. It is a number so large that for the past 18 years, Afghanistan has held the largest refugee caseload in the world. From 1985 to 1990, the number of Afghan refugees reached a staggering peak of 6.2 million in Iran and Pakistan alone, being a little less than half of the world’s total refugee population.  After the fall of the communist regime in 1992, there was a great influx of Afghans returning from their asylum countries. Again in 1993, after fighting broke out among competing political factions in the capital of Kabul, a new round of refugee movements erupted, placing further burdens on UNHCR, which was already striving to deal with the repatriation process. By the beginning of 1999, there have been more than 4 million returnees from both Pakistan and Iran, many of them with direct assistance from UNHCR, making it a record for the largest assisted repatriation program. Based on these statistics alone, it is quite obvious that UNHCR has had a great impact on the rate of returnees to Afghanistan, and that its repatriation programs have had a degree of partial, although by no means complete, success .

UNHCR has implemented various programs for the repatriation of Afghan refugees to their homes.  Each year, a minimum of 100,000 refugees repatriate back to Afghanistan from Iran, Pakistan and other distant countries in which they had sought asylum during the years of turmoil. UNHCR assists refugees in Iran in financial grants and wheat, and organizes convoys to aid returnees who have a long and difficult journey back home. Other proposals are designed to place added benefits on the standard repatriation projects and thereby further encourage the process. Some include transportation allowances and escort services so that the payment of bribes at border checkpoints is unnecessary, as this factor plays a major role in determining whether or not families will be able to afford the return trip. Many groups who do not receive repatriation packages often join these convoys to receive the benefits. Expansion of these projects is under way and refugees are keen to voice their input so that UNHCR policies can better focus on their needs .

In Afghanistan itself, many micro-development or quick-impact projects are taking effect to improve the economy and the reconstruction of the society. These include irrigation and sanitation methods, agricultural development and income-generating projects aimed toward women so that they can support themselves. As a result of some of these developments, fields that had been abandoned for more than 10 years are once again producing agricultural crops such as wheat and fruits. Over 90% of the population is now occupied with productive activity. Through these operations, UNHCR is contributing to the stabilization process, and at the same time, encouraging the return of more refugees once proof of a degree of stability is evident to them .

However, the development of facilities, such as that of health, can also have negative side effects on the society. Under the Taliban government, doctors are not allowed to charge fees. Consequently, many medicines donated by the U.N. are being sold on the black market, damaging the practicality of new clinics. On one hand, development projects are for the benefit of the population, but on the other, they may prove to have adverse results, which might ultimately lead to corruption as a prevalent factor in the reconstruction process .

These projects are by no means a guarantee that more people will return home. They are merely one of a number of factors, all of which must be taken into account to determine a group’s decision for repatriation. Clan fighting and tribal or religious differences can also impede the rate of return, as can an inherent fear of insecurity in the future. Fighting between competing factions began in 1992 after the Soviet withdrawal and led to another wave of refugee activities soon after the civil war began in 1993. The rate of return has also diminished because many are very uncertain of the future of Afghanistan and the constant waging of war in all parts of the country. Most of the refugees are secure in asylum countries and do not have any desire to once again uproot their families only to return to a place that holds even more misery. In their current locations refugees have access to schools, health services, electricity and income-earning opportunities, to name just a few of the benefits that are virtually absent in Afghanistan. They have little incentive for repatriating other than the desire to live amongst their own once again. However, there are also many who express a desire to return home even with the current security situation because they feel that conditions have improved under the authority of the Taliban .

Many of the refugees sought protection in the neighboring countries of Iran and Pakistan after fleeing persecution and life-threatening situations. At the beginning of the refugee crisis, most of the Afghans were easily absorbed into the economies and societies of these two countries. They benefited from state education, medical facilities and employment opportunities. In some places of Pakistan, refugees were placed in refugee “villages” where, although they were distinct from the rest of society in that they lived in camps, they were not closed off and were allowed to move freely .

In general, at first refugees were treated with enormous generosity both by the government and the citizens of the asylum countries, thereby making it more difficult for their return home. The situation in modern day Afghanistan is not conducive to the lifestyles of refugees who have lived in these asylum countries where they have had much freedom and many more opportunities. This is especially true for the women, many of whom do not wish to return to Afghanistan, where they will be banned from working. Most of them are the primary breadwinners of families that have lost husbands, fathers, brothers and sons in the war. Therefore, if they cannot earn a means of living, they will be in far worse conditions than they would be in any foreign country. These factors play an immense role in UNHCR’s attempt at dealing with refugees and helping them in the entire repatriation process, from providing sufficient maintenance of refugee camps, to supplying repatriation packages, to managing a proper reintegration program .

In more recent times, the two major asylum countries of Iran and Pakistan have not been as open to Afghan refugees as in the earlier years. The large number of refugees has no doubt placed great burdens on the economies of both countries. Iran has even gone so far as to dig a huge ditch along the border with Afghanistan so as to deter the thousands of Afghans trying to illegally sneak across. Iran had signed a repatriation agreement with UNHCR in 1992 with the presumption that in three years, most refugees would have left and returned to Afghanistan . 

However, Iran continues to host the largest number of Afghan refugees in the world, and it fears that Afghanistan may bring along terrorists amongst its refugee population. Iran’s dissatisfaction with the current refugee crisis may also be due to the fact that even though it hosts nearly 2 million refugees, it receives aid enough to cover only 100,000 refugees, or 1% of the total funds of UNHCR. The agreements with UNHCR concerning repatriation have mostly failed because of Afghanistan’s civil war and refugees’ unwillingness to return to such hostile conditions .

They may soon be willing to take this choice rather than remain in Iran and face destitution because of Iran’s recent crackdown on foreign workers to fight the high unemployment rates of its own natives.  Many Afghan refugees had their residence permits taken away and are being forced to either leave, or live in refugee camps isolated from mainstream society. Under pressure by the Iranian government, UNHCR has increased grants to refugees if they proceed back home. This agreement with Iran will also allow refugees to return through exit channels, which will provide them with better, faster services and facilities .

The situation of refugees in Pakistan is not much different from that in Iran. Many times, Pakistan also attempted to close its borders to Afghan refugees, but this proved unsuccessful. Pakistan welcomed the refugees during the Soviet invasion and thereafter, because it brought massive military aid from the West along with the necessary humanitarian support, leading to prosperous businesses in many of the cities. Ever since the civil war began in Afghanistan, the open arms were quickly transformed into hostile glares, as Afghan refugees were blamed for the problem of drugs and weapons, amid diminishing western aid. UNHCR also decreased aid by 85% and now targets only the most vulnerable of the refugees such as widows, orphans and the disabled. As other international organizations followed suit, the Afghans soon became unwanted guests .

As with many intergovernmental organizations, UNHCR has had to compromise some of its programs so as to comply with the prevailing conditions of state governments, which has often led to obstacles in the full implementation of its policies. The fact that Afghanistan has an unstable political situation plays a dominant role in the entire refugee crisis. The volatile and ongoing conflicts in and around the capital of Kabul have led UNHCR as well as other relief organizations to scale down their agendas because of the continuous need for evacuations or relocations due to the lack of security .

In 1998, all U.N. agencies had to withdraw from southern Afghanistan because of the increasing harassment of workers by the Taliban regime. Female UNHCR staff were banned from working ever since the city of Kabul fell to the Taliban in 1996. Other UNHCR workers had even been arrested, leading to the temporary suspension of UNHCR operations. Through much negotiation, the Taliban authorities assured security to all staff members working in areas under their control and UNHCR has received indications that their female staff will resume work shortly so that female refugees can be given attention and sufficient support. Again in 1999, the United Nations imposed sanctions against this already war-torn nation in an unsuccessful attempt to force the Taliban to hand over Saudi dissident Osama Bin Laden. These sanctions caused mass demonstrations and destructive violence against UNHCR offices, even burning them to the ground. These examples prove that both internal and external actions play a decisive role in obstructing the work of major international, as well as non-governmental organizations .

Ultimately, the tools available to UNHCR and other organizations are limited and are in the hands of the political and economic situations of the countries in question. UNHCR does not have the capability to end civil wars, to compel the governments to respect their citizens’ human rights, or to prevent the deliberate and forceful displacement of a great number of civilian populations . 

Resolving the refugee crises is not just an autonomous act that is left up to UNHCR and its ability to perform efficiently; it is up to member states and is an integral part of the world’s efforts to establish a more peaceful and secure world through agreements and understanding. The more willing the countries are to compromise, the greater the ability of UNHCR to promote its programs, and the greater the degree of success it will achieve. Refugees need to be given basic human rights, whether they are men or women, Sunni or Shi’a, doctors or construction workers. The government must be able to attract education professionals who can rebuild the civil society and provide a stable foundation for economic and societal development after more than twenty years of war and destruction .

An estimated 2.6 million refugees still remain, with anywhere from 500,000 to 2 million more in Pakistan alone. A stable government, along with a cooperative international community, is the only way to guarantee complete repatriation of these refugees. Until a more permanent peace and stability is achieved, however, refugees will continue to flee a situation that poses uncertainty for them in the future. It is merely human nature to relieve oneself of stress and a life-threatening means of existence .

Saadia Ali is a freelance writer for Islam Online from Washington DC. For feedback, e-mail saadman1@yahoo.com