"Afghanistan Must Sit in the Driver's Seat"

Observers agree that the drugs economy contributes to insecurity in Afghanistan, especially in the south of the country. So far, efforts to reduce opium poppy cultivation and to promote alternative crops have hardly borne fruit. Mohammad Ehsan Zia, Minister for Rural Rehabilitation and Development of Afghanistan, elaborates on how to improve the situation.

​​Last year nearly nine percent of the Afghan population was involved in poppy cultivation. Opium exports were equivalent to 50 % of Afghanistan's licit gross domestic product. Given these figures, is it realistic to think of a drug-free Afghanistan?

Mohammad Ehsan Zia: Yes, it is very realistic and we are aiming to reach that goal in the near future. You must keep in mind opium exports were worth $2.7 billion last year, and that only 20 % – $560 million – went to the growers, according to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime.

The traffickers and the international mafia are making big money. Opium cultivation and drug trafficking are the major reasons for instability in Afghanistan. Drug cultivation may look very lucrative, but it really contributes to poverty – and increasingly so. When there is no security in a country, how can there be economic prosperity?

But according to UNODC figures the income of poppy growing farmers is much higher than that of farmers who grow other crops, as wheat, for instance.

Zia: This is a very artificial calculation. Farmers who grow opium lose other possible sources of income. For example, agriculture and animal husbandry go hand in hand in Afghanistan. Farmers who grow other crops can also keep animals, such as a dairy cow, a donkey for transportation, goats or sheep. But if they grow poppy they don't have fodder from their plants to feed the animals. Instead they have to buy it, and if they lack the money they have to sell their animals. We must not only focus on what people get from their land but also on other possible sources of income.

Is such diversification of incomes part of your "Alternative Development" strategy?

Zia: Yes. We focus on agriculture, horticulture and animal husbandry. We do not only do so on the primary level to increase agricultural output and livestock production. Rather, we also want to invest in the processing of agricultural products in order to add value to them and to increase the incomes of people in the rural areas.

What products are you thinking of?

Zia: For example, Afghanistan produces a lot of apples each autumn. But because local markets are rather small during the harvest, farmers export the fruit to Pakistan at a very low price. The apples go to Quetta and Peshawar where they are cold-stored or are processed into jam. And then they are re-imported to Afghanistan.

​​You can find Afghan apples throughout the year in Kabul markets, but they do not come from Afghan farmers but from Pakistani merchants. The same holds true for onions. The problem is that we don't have any means for the preservation of our agricultural produce. Or take livestock production. The wool we export to Pakistan, for instance, is unprocessed. Factories in Pakistan add much value in production processes.

International donors and the Afghan government will spend $490 million for "Alternative Development" projects in 2005/2006. However, UNODC expects that poppy cultivation will rise again this year. What is going wrong?

Zia: Honestly speaking, it is simply too early to expect a sustainable reduction in poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. In every Afghan village you are faced with at least five problems: lack of roads, lack of potable water, lack of irrigation, lack of schools and health facilities, and lack of employment opportunities. Investments so far have focussed on the most urgent infrastructure needs.

For example, Afghanistan was severely affected by a drought from 1999 to 2004. In many parts of the country the surface water disappeared and the groundwater levels fell. In consequence, people suffered under a severe lack of clean water. That was an issue the government had to deal with.

So far, we were not able to address other issues sufficiently like creating employment or establishing rural enterprises which would add value to our agricultural produce. These needs are yet to be met. Only then can we expect a significant reduction in poppy cultivation.

Is the international support for drug eradication and "Alternative Development" heading in the right direction?

Zia: Donors have invested a lot of money. The Afghan government appreciates this assistance. But when we assess the impact of the international assistance so far, we are a little bit disappointed. The reason for this disappointment is that the money is not allocated through the national budget but through parallel structures built up by the donors.

Let me put it this way: Poppy cultivation and drug trafficking are national problems in Afghanistan that have to be solved with the national institutions in the driver's seat. Otherwise, poppy growers and drug traffickers will never trust the government and instead say: "You send us police and the military to destroy our fields, but you don't make us any development offers."

The international community has to recognize that in any post-conflict situation a prerequisite for consolidation of peace and stability is a sense of trust between the state and its citizens.

So donors should channel their funds through the national budget…

Zia:… through the national development programmes. This is the only way to overcome the problem.

But most donors are still funding their own bilateral projects?

Zia: Yes, donors argue that the capacities of the Afghan state are still too weak to do otherwise. But the capacities will remain weak and our ministries will not learn if they do not get the resources to do things.

From time to time media reports quote farmers complaining that drug policies in Afghanistan are too narrow-focussed on eradication and not providing alternatives. Is that correct?

Zia: There is some truth to it. The need for development and alternatives in Afghanistan is far larger than what is actually provided. Building a road and connecting a village to it does not help farmers whose poppy fields have been destroyed.

Infrastructure is important, but these farmers would also need extension services, facilities to store their legal produce so that it does not spoil, and they would need alternative employment opportunities. This would give people confidence that poppy is not the only option for them.

The Paris-based Senlis Council reports that farmers in Helmand will take legal action against the British government because it didn't compensate them, as promised, for destroying poppy fields. Is that so?

Zia: I don't think that the British government made a nation-wide promise to all farmers whose fields have been destroyed. Everyone knows that to compensate farmers was the wrong strategy. That approach resulted in increased production, so it was not continued. The strategy changed to communal projects rather than providing individual cash compensation.

What do you think of the Senlis Council proposal to licence Afghan farmers to grow opium for medical uses?

Zia: The Senlis Council is lobbying for the wrong purposes. The government and the people of Afghanistan will never promote this approach.

Why not?

Zia: Because Afghanistan is situated in such a volatile part of the world. The whole region is suffering from social, economic and political turbulences. It is simply not possible to control drug trafficking. Who will control the Russian drug mafia? Who will control the 1,400 km long border between Afghanistan and Pakistan? One of the reasons for the increase of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan is the successful eradication in Pakistan. It simply crossed the border and slipped into our country.

Some argue that eradication in drug-cultivation countries will fail as long as global demand and black market prices remain high. Should drug-consumption countries in Europe and North America change drug policies for "Alternative Development" in Afghanistan to succeed?

Zia: It is clear that high demand for drugs has a bad effect on our efforts to curb supply. But drug cultivation is a national problem for Afghanistan. Although we would like to see consuming countries to do their best to reduce demand, we take the responsibility for what is happening in our country. Poppy cultivation is damaging our security, our economy and our national sovereignty. Therefore we are committed to eliminate opium poppy in our country, regardless how big the international demand is.

Interview: Tillmann Elliesen

© Magazine for Development and Cooperation 2006

Qantara.de

Afghanistan
Drugs Problem Deeply Ingrained in Society
In Afghanistan, the world's main producer of opium, poppy cultivation was down for the first time since 2001. However, a UN report warned that it could go up again this year. Ratbil Shamel reports

Drug Economy in Afghanistan
"It's a Matter of Development, Not Counter-Narcotics"
The battle against the drug economy in Afghanistan has failed so far. The Senlis Council, a think tank for international drug policy, has made a surprisingly simple proposal: poppy cultivation should not be suppressed, but put under state control. Tillmann Elliesen interviewed Emmanuel Reinert, Executive Director of the Senlis Council

Afghanistan
Dilemmas of Fighting Drugs
In times of hardship and war, cultivating opium became a strategy of survival for farmers in Afghanistan. The fact that they have no sense of wrongdoing makes it difficult to draft policies to stall production. By Conrad Schetter