A summit to raise humanitarian funds for Afghanistan fell short Thursday after donors pledged about $2 billion less than the United Nations said was needed.
Just $2.4 billion was raised out of a $4.4 billion target. The United Kingdom, which co-hosted the summit, pledged £286 million ($375 million) at the summit, Germany €200 million ($221m million), and the United States $204 million.
The pledging was met with disappointment from humanitarian campaigners. David Miliband, CEO at the International Rescue Committee, said it would have “immediate and devastating consequences for the Afghan people.”
“The failure to meet this funding appeal must hang heavy on the shoulders of donors. We are fast running out of time, as hunger and humanitarian need increases every day,” Miliband added.
Fears have been growing over the plight of Afghanistan and its people since the Taliban consolidated control over the country in August. The economy is in crisis amid international sanctions on the militant group. The International Committee of the Red Cross warned at the event that humanitarian organizations cannot replace a public health sector, amid fears that Afghanistan’s system was collapsing. At least 95% of the population doesn’t have enough to eat, according to the U.N.
More than 20 million people require humanitarian assistance, with more than 1 million children at risk of dying from hunger, according to U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss.
“We need to work through the U.N. to deliver real change for the Afghan people, upholding their rights and holding the Taliban to account,” Truss said.
“But our potential to provide support will depend on how constructively the Taliban engage on key issues like the rights of women and girls and also ethnic and religious minorities,” she added. The U.K. was committed to at least half the aid it contributes to reaching women and girls, Truss said.
The U.K.’s cautious approach to engaging with the Taliban, who have been in control of public services since their takeover of the country in August 2021, has been criticized — including by former International Development Minister Rory Stewart, who said in November that the government was behaving as if it is “threatening to starve Afghans” to gain “leverage” with the hard-line Islamist group.
“Wealthy, powerful countries cannot ignore the consequences of their decisions on the most vulnerable,” U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said at the summit. “The first step in any meaningful humanitarian response must be to halt the death spiral of the Afghan economy. Without that, even the best-funded and most effective aid operation will not save the people of Afghanistan from an unimaginable future.”
“The failure to meet this funding appeal must hang heavy on the shoulders of donors. We are fast running out of time, as hunger and humanitarian need increases every day.”
— David Miliband, CEO, International Rescue CommitteeThe World Bank has confirmed to Devex that it is stopping four major projects worth $600 million that it had planned for Afghanistan over the Taliban’s decision not to allow girls to return to secondary school.
Earlier this month, the bank said that it was working to roll out the projects focused on education, health, agriculture, and livelihoods but that it put them on hold amid pressure from donors.
The bank's programs — which are being done with Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund donors and U.N. agencies — will only run once equal access for women and girls is assured, according to World Bank officials. The programs were designed to enable the international community to support Afghanistan despite the Taliban takeover and sanctions, amid a sharply deteriorating economic situation.
The approach was criticized by Ashley Jackson, co-director of the Centre for the Study of Armed Groups at the Overseas Development Institute think tank. “Slashing humanitarian aid isn't the answer,” she tweeted. “Cutting [money] … that will help Afghans survive may be politically expedient -- but it’s not smart policy. It is cruel and counterproductive, risks reinforcing the idea that female [education] … is a ‘foreign demand.’”
This article includes additional reporting from Shabtai Gold.