Civilian aid, the vast majority coming from the United States, peaked in 2010 in Afghanistan and Washington has said it will spend less on development as it withdraws troops.

Afghan child labour fears grow as aid dries up - AlertNet

This should be of serious concern to anyone who believes that aid should benefit the recipients. The problem here seems to be that the aid has been tied to supporting the war effort and winning support for the troops rather than actually supporting and developing Afghan communities. It’s far too easy to be cynical and think that the development that has occurred is a byproduct of the presence of the troops rather than an end in itself. If aid dries up with the removal of troops then what are the locals to think about the purpose of that help?

A nation like Afghanistan should be moved to a place where they can continue without external assistance, but if removing that assistance leads to a growth in child labour then the assistance hasn’t yet done its job.

Now, of course an argument could be made for decreasing the aid at this stage in the process, but it seems like far too much of a coincidence that it heavily relates to troop withdrawal and the wind down of the ‘war effort.’

Source: trust.org

66 Notes/ Hide

  1. servant posted this