Collective Strength Under Pressure: A perspective from Afghanistan

We spoke to a human rights coordination organisation about the risks faced by the civil society community in Afghanistan.

As humanitarian organisations face increasingly complex threats and shrinking operating environments, collective approaches to security have become more essential than ever.

Ahead of GISF’s Global Security Conference, we spoke to a representative from the Afghanistan Human Rights Coordination Mechanism (AHRCM), who will be joining the conference to share perspectives on operating in one of the world’s most challenging environments for civil society actors.

In conversation with Ariel Voss, GISF Communications Officer

Could you tell us a bit about AHRCM and the context that you operate in?

Afghanistan Human Rights Coordination Mechanism is a coalition of several organisations, established back in August 2021 after Afghanistan fell to the Taliban. We created AHRCM to coordinate protection, advocacy, rapid response, and evacuation support for members of the civil society community, including human rights defenders, civil society activists, and journalists.

The events following 15 August were a huge shock. What became immediately clear was the huge lack of coordination between the different organisations responding to the crisis. We established AHRCM to bring organisations together across different sectors to coordinate and support one another.

Since then, we have supported not only evacuations, but also crisis response, advocacy, and documentation efforts.

What are the main security risks and challenges facing your organisation, network, and staff?

Over the nearly five years that we’ve been operating, we have encountered a broad range of risks. Most notably, a CSO member from Balkh province was kidnapped and killed. We have also had cases of arbitrary arrest, detention, and forced disappearances of the members of the Afghanistan human rights community since August 2021. And more recently, we have been dealing with mass deportations of the CSOs members including journalists, HRDs, WHRDs and CSOs members from Iran and Pakistan, which has put more pressure on our network to respond and deal with their protection inside Afghanistan.

“We have also had cases of arbitrary arrest, detention, and forced disappearances of the members of the Afghanistan human rights community.”

In some cases of arbitrary detention of CSOs members, family members have asked that we don’t speak about the incident publicly because this may place them and their wider community at greater risk. You must strategise delicately, working closely with the family and with those negotiating. But it can be challenging with social media, as the moment someone is arrested, you see the discourse on social media, and there are often comments revealing information.

Surveillance is another major challenge. Since the Taliban took power, there have been thousands of CCTV cameras installed everywhere. They’ve also placed informants in communities, as part of a sophisticated system of surveillance.

Not only is the surveillance itself a risk, but there is the additional psychological toll that comes with not being able to trust people in your community. Friends, neighbours, and even family members can’t be trusted. You can clearly see a mood of self-censorship as a result.

“…there is the additional psychological toll that comes with not being able to trust people in your community.”

The operational environment itself is also extremely restrictive. The Taliban do not allow any human rights or peacebuilding organisations to operate in Afghanistan. Organisations can do development or humanitarian work, but there can be no operations related to human rights, peacebuilding, or targeted for women.

I watched your 2024 address at the UN Human Rights Council, where you spoke about the challenges facing women and girls in Afghanistan. How has the Taliban regime affected the risks your female colleagues face?

We call the Taliban a ‘gender apartheid regime’. Being a woman in Afghanistan, even before the Taliban, was quite challenging and dangerous. The regime has added layers of issues on top of an already challenging environment.

Many women, especially former judges, lawyers, police officers, journalists, and human rights defenders, were doubly victimised when they were stripped of their professional identity. Women also face the additional pressure and shame from their families, especially around stigmatised risks such as sexual violence.

What are the challenges related to the operational presence of international agencies?

The Taliban treats international organisations very differently to local organisations. They need international money, international engagement, and recognition, which can create incentives to present a more positive image of themselves internationally.

Some international humanitarian agencies, because they are able to continue operating under the Taliban, may avoid speaking openly about the full reality on the ground. This undermines the advocacy efforts of those trying to raise awareness of the situation in the country.

For example, an international organisation operates a couple of schools, and the Taliban allowed them to have girls beyond year 7. This can be used by the Taliban to discredit those speaking out or suggest progress, despite millions of girls still being excluded from education.

Do you have any examples of successful collaboration between an international and a national organisation, and what do you think made those partnerships work well?

We work successfully with several international organisations, especially human rights organisations. Freedom House, Frontline Defenders, FIDH, the Norwegian Human Rights Fund, UN Women, and many other international organisations are all recent collaborators.

In terms of successful strategies, keep talking about things! Sometimes, we may not know how a humanitarian organisation is operating and the challenges they’re facing. On the flipside, they might not understand the human rights perspective. So fostering a better understanding of each other’s work is important. For example, a humanitarian organisation might have some difficult messages it does not feel able to raise publicly, while a human rights organisation may find it easier to broach the topic.

I think we really need to understand each other better through a clear dialogue, especially between agencies with different mandates.

“I think we really need to understand each other better through a clear dialogue, especially between agencies with different mandates.”

How do you see risk being shared or not shared between international and national actors?

Being an international organisation may give you more protection than being a national organisation. The Taliban are generally far more careful in how they deal with international staff. There is a huge difference between the way they treat Afghan nationals.

There have been instances where an Afghan and an international staff were kidnapped at the same time, and they killed the Afghan and used it as leverage to deal with the foreign government. There are also far fewer cases of internationals who have faced, arrest, detention, kidnap and torture.

At the same time, I think many donors and international actors still underestimate the risks faced by national staff. There can be sweeping assumptions made about national staff and the threats they report.

“I think many donors and international actors still underestimate the risks faced by national staff. There can be sweeping assumptions made about national staff and the threats they report.”

For example, a staff member of an international agency reported a serious threat, and the first assumption made was that the person wanted to leave the county, or maybe even fabricated the incident to find a route out of Afghanistan. There is often a tendency to dismiss or underestimate the threats that Afghans are facing.

In 2020, the Taliban issued a hit list of eight individuals, and my name was on the list. We contacted a UN agency that were negotiating with the Taliban to verify the threat and reassert that they cannot target members of the human rights community, civil society, or press. Within half an hour, we had a reply: “The Taliban do not kill members of civil society.” That same year, we saw the highest number of assassinations of civil society members by the Taliban.

You would be shocked to see the way that the lives of local staff or local organisations have been undervalued or not taken seriously. A staff member may not report a security threat to their employer because suddenly they are a liability, and especially for women, they cannot tell their family because they may face pressure to stop working.

What is one thing that you’d like donors or international partners to better understand, either about risk sharing or more broadly about how you work and how you’d like to work in the future?

Donors need to understand each unique context, and design their strategies supported by evidence from each context. A one-size-fits-all strategy will not work in different conflict situations. Strategies must take into account the complex geopolitical situation of each country.

It also feels like donors are very news driven and rely on media attention to decide where to send resources. Afghanistan is still a humanitarian and human rights emergency, but it feels like it is dropping off the agenda. Nowhere in the world are more than half the population are deprived of their fundamental human rights because of their gender.

A very small amount of funding goes to local organisations. It is easier for donors to give one big chunk of money to an international organisation that deals with everything, rather than deal with smaller projects and multiple organisations.

I also think that there is often a flawed assumption that, as local staff, Afghans face fewer risks. As a local, if anything goes wrong, it’s not just you, it’s your entire family, or your entire tribe, that can go down with you. You don’t have a government to come and negotiate on your behalf.

As a local, if anything goes wrong, it’s not just you, it’s your entire family, or your entire tribe, that can go down with you.

Later this month, you’ll be attending our Global Security and Policy Conference in London- what are hoping to take from the conference?

I think the conference is an excellent opportunity for building alliances, networking, and raising awareness about the work that we do for women and girls in Afghanistan. I hope that at the end of the conference, I will be part of a new network of partners who can exchange ideas and find solutions for the challenges we’re facing at the moment.

Image Credit: OCHA/FAO

Related: