National Profile of Internal Displaced Persons (IDPs) in Afghanistan

Table of Contents

Page

Executive Summary2 I. INTRODUCTION..5 A. B. C. D. E. Note about Methodology..5 Background6 Major IDP Populations.7 General Findings.12 Trends.13

II. Numbers Summary17 Annexes...22 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Displacement in the Southern Region.24 Displacement in the Western Region..29 Displacement in the Central Region...35 Displacement in the Eastern Region...38 Displacement in the Southeastern Region..43 Displacement in the Northern and Northeastern Regions47 Displacement in the Central Highlands..51

Executive Summary

This report was prepared by UNHCR, under the auspices of the National IDP Task Force and in close cooperation with the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation (MoRR), which endorsed the report on 10 November 2008. The data is valid as of August 2008. The profiling was undertaken pursuant to a recommendation of the Representative of the Secretary-General on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons following his visit to Afghanistan in August 2007. The purpose of the profiling was: (1) to know how many people were internally displaced (2) to know where they were displaced; (3) to know why they were displaced ; (4) to better understand their assistance and protection needs; (5) to better understand displacement trends, so as to assist the government to develop a comprehensive and integrated national IDP strategy; (6) to assist the humanitarian community to respond more effectively to IDP assistance and protection needs. In preparing the profile, no attempt was made to do any census or re-registriation of IDPs. Instead, the report pulls together the different surveys that have been done in different regions of the country, particularly by UNHCR offices in the field, by provincial Departments of Refugees and Repatriation (DoRRs) of the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation (MoRR), and by UNAMA. Often, numbers are estimates rather than firm figures. What the profiling makes clear is that Afghanistan is highly complex with different displacements having occurred at different times, in different parts of the country and for different reasons. Thus, finding durable solutions will be neither easy nor quick. The profiling identified 235,833 IDPs nationwide. The bulk of this population is comprised of a protracted caseload of 166,153 individuals displaced as a result of conflict in the period prior to and after the fall of the Taliban in 2001, or as a result of drought of the 1990s which impacted severely on Kuchi (nomads) in the north, the west and the south. These IDPs are largely living in camp-like settlements in the south (119,958), the west (29,690) and the southeast (12,341). In addition, there are 52,422 returnees from Pakistan since 2005 (21,102 in the period 2005-2007 and 31,320 in 2008) who became IDPs upon their return to Afghanistan, because they are unable to return to their places of origin for security reasons, landlessness, or lack of basic services or work opportunities. These have largely settled in spontaneous camps in the Eastern Region. The statistics also include new conflictaffected families (9,901 individuals) -- people displaced since 2002 as a result of conflict (between tribal or ethnic groups, often exacerbated by disputes over land and

property or access to scarce resources such as pasture or water), insecurity and human rights violations. What the above statistics do not capture are two additional groups. First, those called battle-affected individuals/families who have been impacted by fighting between the international forces/Afghan National Army and anti-government elements. These number in the thousands displaced in 2007 and 2008, but definitive numbers are difficult to determine because most are short-term IDPs who return to their homes after the fighting ends, and because insecurity in the "war zones" makes access and verification almost impossible. The other major group are the persons forced into displacement by the severity of the continuing drought, coupled with the high cost of food. As displacement in this case is a traditional coping mechanism, whereby families leave their villages, or send the men to the cities or the neighbouring countries to work, it is hard to differentiate between displacement and economic migration. Certain trends emerge as we look to the future and the type of contingency planning that is required to address likely IDP scenarios: an increase in battle-affected displacement if the fighting continues and the security situation deteriorates further; an increase in displacement if the drought continues and the economic situation does not improve; an increase in secondary displacement by returnees if their return is not sustainable in their places of origin; an increase in IDP populations as a result of conflict over land and resources unless the issue of land and property is adequately addressed Lastly, the profile suggests the need to focus on local integration as a durable solution for the protracted caseload unable to return to their places of origin.

I. INTRODUCTION internally displaced persons are persons or groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to free or to leave their homes or places of habitual residence, in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalized violence, violations of human rights or human-made disasters, and who have not crossed an internationally recognized State border. UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, 19881

A. Note about Methodology This report was prepared by UNHCR, under the auspices of the National IDP Task Force and in close cooperation with the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation (MoRR), which co-Chairs the National IDP Task Force together with UNHCR. All UNHCRs Sub-Offices and Field Offices in Afghanistan, the two Regional IDP Task Forces (one in Hirat for the West and one in Kandahar for the South), as well as all participants of the National and Regional Task Forces (which include other UN agencies, international and national NGOs, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, and interested government/donor agencies) were asked to contribute to and/or to review the document. The document was then formally adopted by the National IDP Task Force at its meeting on 10 November 2008. (The numbers are, however, valid as of end August 2008.) As noted below, the preparation of the report was a direct response to a recommendation of the Representative of the Secretary General on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons following his visit to Afghanistan in August 2007. In preparing this National Profile of Internal Displacement across Afghanistan, it was not possible and no attempt was made to do any census or registration of all IDPs in the country. The last major data collection on IDPs took place in 2004, when a very detailed profiling of the IDPs camp population in the camps/settlements of the Southern Region was conducted by UNHCR. For several years thereafter, the size of the population of the camps/settlements in the South was calculated by subtracting those who UNHCR assisted to return from the total recorded in 2004. Since then, there have been a number of surveys in different regions of the country. These, however, have been performed by different actors, at different times, using different methodologies. For example, in the Western Region, in one day on 19 February 2008 the Department of Refugees and Repatriation (DoRR) Herat, with assistance from the Deputy Governor and under instruction of the Minister of MoRR (who was then visiting the Western region), mobilized some 300 government and other staff from the departments of Education (DoE), Rural Development (DRRD), Disaster Preparedness (DDP) and Refugees and Rehabilitation (DoRR) and from the Afghan Red Cresent Society (ARCS) and did an
The UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, drafted between 1992 and 1998 when they were endorsed as a framework by the Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), does not specifically mention displacement as a result of natural disaster. Subsequently, in the context of the tsunamis, hurricainse and equakes which hit parts of Asia and the Americas in 2004/5, the IASC supported the development of Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and Natural Disaster (June 2006) which in effect extend the Guiding Principles to victims of natural disasters.
1

unannounced simultaneous blitz survey in the three IDP settlements in Hirat Maslakh, Shaodayee and Minarets. The purpose was to see how many families and individuals were living in the three camps. Subsequently, quite a detailed profiling was done of Minarets, one of the three camps, with the involvement of both DoRR and UNHCR. In the South, in May-June 2008, DoRR did a re-registration of the IDPs in Zhare Dasht, Maywand and Punjway to confirm which of the families who had been profiled in 2004 were still in the settlements, but only registering new births, not families who had not been registered earlier. Simultaneously, UNHCRs sub-Office was conducting a detailed profiling of a small sample of the settlement population to find out what their intentions were regarding return and what their needs were in displacement. Because of security concerns, no similar re-counting or profiling was done in Mukhtar IDP settlement in Hilmand. In the Northern Region, UNHCRs Sub-Office has very detailed information on all IDPs from the protracted case load. This is not the case in the Southeast Region because of insecurity or in the Central Region, because so many IDPs are invisible within informal urban settlements. One notable inconsistency in the statistics we have is that for some of the caseload, we know not only how many families there are but how many individuals. Elsewhere, we have only the number of families. In the latter case, to determine the total population, we multiple the number of families by six, assuming each family is comprised of six people, though we know many of the families are considerably larger. Therefore, many of our numbers are estimates rather than firm figures. This should not, however, matter enormously as the purpose of the profiling is to find durable solutions for those in displacement and, in that case, estimates of the size of a group are often sufficient.

B. Background In 2002, when the Taliban-regime fell from power, there were approximately 1.2 million internally displaced Afghans throughout the country. The majority of these IDPs were to return spontaneously to their places of origin over the course of several years. Some 98,654 families (489,525 individuals) were assisted by UNHCR from 2002 to October 2007 on the basis of a Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Government of Afghanistan, UNAMA and UNHCR which gave UNHCR a lead support role in relation to IDPs2. In 2005, a National Policy was endorsed by the Consultative Group (CG) on Returnees, Refugees and IDPs, which placed an increased emphasis on the promotion of durable solutions through voluntary return and local settlement in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and affirmed the lead role of the Afghan Government. The 2005 Strategy further offered a clear delineation of responsibilities: UNHCR would continue to play an active role in relation to Protection IDPs notably in assisting the Government of Afghanistan to address obstacles to return and to provide assistance for their return to their places of origin, whereas government authorities would take an increased ownership in identifying solutions for IDPs victims of natural disasters (floods, drought).

2 The Letter of Understanding was signed on 6 June 6 2002 and stipulated that the main responsibility of UNHCR at the national and sub-national level will be to assist the MoRR in ensuring the assistance and protection needs of all people of concern to the Programme Group (returning refugees, IDPs, and communities receiving returnees) are adequately met and that solutions to problems of displacement in Afghanistan are identified and pursued.

Over the next several years, UNHCR continued to assist those IDPs prepared to return to their places of origin. However, by 2008, it was clear that the return had become a trickle. For a variety of reasons including continued insecurity in large areas of the country, inter-tribal and personal conflict, landlessness, drought, and lack of job opportunities or basic services in rural areas the solution for the majority of the protracted caseload of displaced persons would not be the Governments preferred solution, i.e., that they go home. In August 2007, the Representative of the Secretary General on the Human Rights of Displaced Persons, Walter Klin, conducted a working visit to Afghanistan and made a number of observations regarding the displacement in Afghanistan. He noted, inter alia, that internal displacement in Afghanistan is a highly complex phenomenon; its causes include not only armed conflict and natural disaster such as drought and flood, but also inter-communal tensions and human rights violations; it has occurred across different periods of time and has been of varying duration; some people have been displaced because of a combination of factors, and some have been displaced multiple times; and, because of both the complexity of causes and the limitations of access to parts of the country affected by armed conflict, no one is entirely sure of the magnitude of the displacement. Consequently, one of Walter Klins recommendations was that a national assessment and profiling of the displacement situation be undertaken. On the basis of this, UNHCR could assist the Government to develop a comprehensive and integrated national strategy which addresses the needs of IDPs relating to assistance, protection and durable solutions, with particular attention to the needs of vulnerable groups. As well, such a profiling could assist the humanitarian community to respond more effectively to IDP needs. One must, of course, be pragmatic and realistic: where IDPs are displaced in areas over which the government has little or no control, or where it is not possible for government or humanitarian actors to intervene, expectations will need to be tempered by those on-the ground security realities. C. Major IDP Populations In 2008, the internally displaced in Afghanistan can be divided into five major categories: (1) A protracted caseload of about 166,000 people internally displaced as a result of conflict in the period prior to and after the fall of the Taliban in 2001, or because of the intimidation and attacks of the local commanders in the north after the fall of the Taliban, or as a result of drought which impacted severely on Kuchi (nomads) in the north, the west and the south. These IDPs are largely living in camp-like settlements in the south, the west and the southeast. One particular group merits special mention here the Kuchi of the Registan desert who had lived there with their flocks for centuries. They comprise at least 60% of the IDPs in Maywand and Punjway in the south, currently estimated at 21,500 individuals. Now, with 90% of their livestock lost, the water tables drastically low, and no end to the drought, return is not sustainable, though many continue to ask for assistance to go back. The humanitarian and protection concerns of the protracted caseload are wide-ranging and varied and can include: the danger of being evicted from the places in which they are living (no security of tenure); threats to their safety (as some of the areas in which they live are only marginally under government control); lack of livelihood opportunities,

including lack of affordable public transportation to labor markets; no access or inadequate access to basic services (especially, education, health, social welfare); at times lack of enough food and water to cover nutritional needs, especially for children, lactating women and the elderly; lack of civil documentation and no access to free legal services. (2) New conflict-affected IDPs. There are new IDPs that have fled their homes as a result of conflict, insecurity and human rights violations since 2002, especially the past few years. People here fall into two categories: (a) Battle-affected First are those called battle-affected who are the individuals and families impacted by fighting, largely in the southern, but also in the southeastern, central and eastern regions, between the international coalition forces [i.e., the International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF) and/or US-led Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)] and the Afghan National Army (ANA) on the one hand, and anti-government elements (AGEs) or the Taliban on the other. Many thousands of battle-affected were displaced in 2007 and additional thousands in 2008. For example, local officials in the three conflict-affected provinces of Kandahar, Hilmand and Uruzgan estimated that 80,000 people were displaced due to the conflict in 2007.3 With regard to the June 2008 military operation in the Arghandab district of the Kandahar, local officials reported 6,973 families who were displaced from their homes to the outskirts of Kandahar City, where assistance (food and NFIs) was provided to them. UNAMA reports that for the first 6 months of 2008, 12,646 families of battle-affected populations in the Southern Region received assistance from UN agencies. On a smaller scale, we have similar situations in other regions. For example, in the North, during the first half of July 2008, conflict between AGEs and representatives of the Naghara Khana village in Qaisar district (Faryab province) caused around 150 families to leave their village for nearby villages. Through the intervention of government, by providing greater security in their village of origin and food assistance, these families returned home during the second half of July. But many of our numbers are largely estimates and the picture is incomplete. We are unable to feel confident about the figures we have for those impacted by the fighting because our limited access to the war zones makes verification impossible. We believe that many of the battle-affected people originally from Punjway, Zhare Dasht, Maywand etc. remain quite close to their homes (Arghandab is only a few kilometers from Kandahar City) and that most though not all -- return after the fighting ends. However, if the IDPs flee to major city centres, as many have, or if their houses and property have been destroyed or their land confiscated, they are likely to remain in displacement for longer periods of time. As well, there are those who have been threatened or targeted as collaborators by the insurgents and feel too insecure to return.

Afghanistan: Conflict-affected displacement major humanitarian challenge - Afghan Red Crescent, IRIN, November 2007.

The humanitarian and protection concerns of the battle-displaced would include: the need for water, food, shelter and possibly NFIs (including bedding, clothing, cooking utensils) as many families flee with few or no possessions; compensation for destroyed property, crops, irrigation systems and livelihoods so they can restart their lives when the fighting ends; emergency health care and emergency schooling; possibly tracing of children separated from parents; protection from attacks by AGEs (who might consider them collaborators) or by government forces (who might suspect them of being Taliban sympathizers). (b) Victims of Inter- or Intra-Tribal Conflict There are also others who have been forced to leave their homes as a result of conflict between different tribal or ethnic groups or even conflicts within a single tribe. One example is the current and long-standing conflict between the Hazara farmers in the Central Highlands and the Kuchi largely Pashtun pastoralists, who have traditionally taken their flocks to Wardak, Ghazni, Ghor and Bamyan provinces in the summer. The fighting in June 2008, like the fighting last year, led to deaths and injuries, the destruction of property, and the displacement of perhaps as many as 7,000 families, some to Kabul but also within the Central Highlands. Now that the fighting has ended and a peace Commission has been established, the Kuchi have withdrawn and the IDPs have returned to their villages. However, there is no assurance that the Commission will negotiate a solution that is acceptable to both parties and the violence may recur again next year. There are similar conflicts in other parts of the country. Part of the protracted caseload, but illustrative of the type of conflict that still manifests itself, the Gujar IDPs in the northeast (270 families) are displaced because Tajik commanders are occupying their land and property. Immediately after the fall of the Taliban, Gujar were displaced mainly to Nangarhar, Baghlan and Kunduz provinces as a punishment for their support for the Taliban. Since 2006, 254 returnee families of the Nasir tribe have been living in Paktika province in the southeast, forced to leave their homes in Zabul province because of a fight over land ownership with the Shamalzai tribe. And there are many disputes between sub-groups of the Pashtun, frequently, as with the cases mentioned above, involving bitter disputes over land, property or access to resources. Fortunately, however, thus far these have not led to large scale displacements. The humanitarian and protection needs of such victims of conflict will initially be for water, food and shelter, as well as possibly for clothing, bedding and other NFIs, for emergency medical care and health needs, emergency education, tracing of lost children or other family members. It will, subsequently, be for assistance to return home (i.e., with transportation costs), to rebuild their homes, damaged irrigation systems, destroyed livelihoods (possibly need for seeds and tools and to replace livestock); possibly for programs of dialogue and reconciliation; possibly for free legal assistance. (3) Returnees and deportees from neighboring countries in secondary displacement. We have a very large number of Afghan refugees more than 180,000 individuals between 1 January and 15 July) who have returned to Afghanistan from Pakistan or Iran this year. While the 2008 return may not reach the 2007 figure of over 365,000 returns, it is a substantial number

for Afghanistan to absorb. Some of these returnees left voluntarily because the cost of living and food, particularly in urban areas, shot up this year, or because they knew their Proof of Registration (the basis on which they could stay in Pakistan) would expire in 2009. Many others were pressured if not forced to return by the closure of camps (notably, Jalozai in Pakistan) or the clearance of No-Go-Areas (in Iran). Many of the returnees have lived abroad in urban environments for over 20 years, and could not conceive of going to rural Afghanistan, where they could expect neither job opportunities nor services, and where they may have no land. The return of some has also been delayed or prevented by the presence of landmines.4 Thus, while the majority of the returnees from Pakistan went back to their areas of origin, a not inconsiderable portion more than 5,200 families (approximately 31,200 individuals) of approx. 23% have not done so. Most are in the Eastern Region, where they have created four temporary settlements in Nangarhar (one of them has been formally recognized as township for land allocation to returnees) and one in Laghman, assisted by the international community and by the Government with water, food, health services, non-food items and temporary shelter. The population in two of these settlements continues to increase daily. In addition, there are also some 200 Pashtu speaking Baluch families who returned from Jalozai camp to Sholgara district (Balkh) in late May, but are unable to settle in their area of origin though they bought land there because of a dispute with the surrounding Khalili (Pashtun sub tribe) Shia community. They are, consequently, living in a precarious camp-like situation in a buzkashi field in Sholgara district. The Provincial Governor has sent a governmental delegation in mid June to verify the land ownership and to mediate on the land dispute should it not belong to the government. Serious efforts are on-going to find a durable solution for these returnees, so that they do not become IDPs in secondary displacement, but for the present, they need to be considered part of the humanitarian displacement caseload. In 2005, there were large numbers of Afghans living in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan who were forced to return to Afghanistan (30,792 families 171,665 individuals5), some after the onset of the winter in November, because the Pakistani authorities closed the camps in FATA. A substantial number of these were Kuchi who had left Afghanistan just after the Russian invasion in 1979, who no longer had animals, had no land to return to, and who consequently ended up in secondary displacement, settling in 11 open-air settlements in Khost.6 This year, 163 families (851 individuals) who were Amayesh II registered Afghans in Iran returned from the No-Go-Area of Qazvin to drought affected villages in Shebirghan, provincial
4

According to the Afghanistan: Landmine Monitor Report 2007, the Afghanistan Landmine Impact Survey (ALIS), completed in 2005, found 2,368 communities and more than four million people affected by mines, and identified some 715 square kilometers of hazardous areas, concentrated in 12 of Afghanistans 32 provinces. Despite the release of more than 100 square kilometers of land since then, the estimate of contamination has increased, as a result of new survey and information generated by the return of refugees to previously unoccupied land. Updated estimates at the end of May 2007 put total contamination at 778 square kilometers. Moreover, while casualities are down in 2008 to 44 people/month injured or killed by mines, as against 100/month a year earlier (over 70,000 Afghans were killed or disabled by According to UNHCRs database of returnees from FATA in 2005. Interviews with Kuchi leaders in Gardez (April 2008) and in Kabul (July 2008).

landmines in the last two decades of the 20th century), there are also reports now of Taliban remining areas in Hilmand Province.
5 6

10

capital of Jawzjan, and in Sare Pul provinces in the north of Afghanistan. One of the villages is completely destroyed and has been deserted for the last 20 years, forcing returnees to seek temporary settlement in other villages. None of the returnees have houses and are now being accommodated by relatives or other members of their communities. One of the three villages they returned to faces a severe water shortage because of the drought. While most of the returnees have expressed their intention to stay in Shebirghan, it is likely that many will be obliged to send male members abroad to secure income. And, if the return proves unsustainable, this population will be at risk of displacement in the future. Their main problems are destruction of the houses, landlessness, drought-related problems and lack of job opportunities. In this regard, one need also to note the large-scale deportation of illegal migrants from Iran this year, primarily single males, more than 180,000 by late July. While these would be considered economic migrants and not IDPs, many of the single males will gravitate to the cities in search of employment and become part of the urban squatters living in informal settlements. The humanitarian and protection needs of these displaced persons will first and foremost be for land where they can settle that is safe and where they will not fear eviction (security of tenure) and for livelihood (job opportunities so they can earn a living to take care of their families). They will also need access to all basic services (water, health, education, public transportation). (4) Displacement as a result of Food Insecurity This past year, Afghanistan has also seen considerable displacement as a result of food insecurity. The causal factors are clear: a very harsh winter (2007-2008), followed by a drought, particularly in the north and the west of the country, with severe crop loss, and with hunger and poverty exacerbated by the unexpected rise in the price of food globally. The Joint Emergency Appeal launched by the humanitarian community in Afghanistan in July 2008 to address the high food price and drought crisis notes that the heaviest impact of the food insecurity has been on the Balkh, Samangan, Sari-Pul and Jawzjan (in the North); Badghis, Nimroz and Ghor (in the West); Logar (East); Wardak (Central) and Khost (Southeast), where, in each case, more than a quarter of the population has been significantly affected. In Balkh province, where a locus infestation threatened the crops in April, large scale displacement occurred in May. Shortages of food and drinking water resulted in some 2,000 families from the Alborz community of Chimtal district leaving their villages a movement that quickly swelled to over 6,000 families to set up camp beside the river near to Chishma-e-Shefa but still in Chimtal district not far from Mazar-e-Sharif. The joint strategy of the Government and the humanitarian community, to forestall the emergence of IDP camps in the province and to counter those trying to politically exploit the situation, was to deliver food, water and food for work programs back in their villages, not where the people had pitched tents; and this seems to have successfully stemmed a large exodus from northern villages. In the middle of May 2008, around 200 Arab families from Shiram area joined 100 families in Sangtoda area of Sare Pul province who were displaced also last year due to the food and water insecurity in their villages of origin. While their needs are great, this type of displacement has been qualified as seasonal displacement. At the same time in May, some 200 Pashtun/Balooch people in Sozma Qala District of Sare Pul province started to make a camp due to food insecurity, but they were encouraged by the provincial government to return to their villages where assistance (food and NFIs) would be provided. All this caseload returned as requested.

11

However, we are beginning to see considerable displacement now taking place in the West as a result of both the worsening security and drought, with IDPs moving towards Hirat. These movements will need to be carefully monitored. The humanitarian and protection needs are first and foremost water and food if possible to prevent displacement. Once people are displaced, shelter is immediately added to their needs. And, if they use up the seeds they should have saved for the next years planting, they will need new seed as well. Plus, of course, access to basic services in displacement especially health and education. (5) Internally displaced in Urban Areas

Finally, there are an indeterminate number of internally displaced people living often precariously with family or friends, or sometimes in squatter settlements that have sprung up around most of the major cities. These are often difficult to identify as they have blended into the large indistinct mass of urban poor, generally surviving by doing day labor and other menial tasks. We do know that there are substantial numbers of IDPs living in Kabul, which is a magnet attracting people from across the country, though we have only identified some of them. One should note that the population of Kabul has increased from 1.5 million in 2001 to 4.5 million in 2007, and other cities such as Kandahar, Hirat and Khost have also seen IDP influxes. As the Representative on Internally Displaced Persons noted in his August 2007 report, the extent of urban displacement is difficult to pinpoint because many IDPs have partially integrated, more than 50% of urban Kabul consists of irregular settlements,7 and who an IDP is depends in part on self-identification, particularly where such persons are living individually as opposed to collective groups. In a certain sense, if these people had originally left their homes as a result of insecurity, persecution or man-made disasters and many did -- they have found their own solution to displacement i.e., they have locally integrated, without assistance, albeit often at a very low level of subsistence. Others, who have migrated from the rural to the urban areas, attracted by the prospects of more economic opportunity and services, would be considered economic migrants and not IDPs, though the distinction is often a difficult one to make. While not part of the IDP profiling, they certainly are part of the humanitarian problematique and difficult to disentangle from the displacement picture. The humanitarian and protection concerns regarding displaced persons in urban situations are wide-ranging and will vary on whether they are squatting on land that is not theirs or living with host families. As with the protracted caseload, there is a concern that these people not be evicted; that their shelters are adequate, and they have adequate fuel, clothing and bedding, especially where winter is harsh; that they have access to clean water and to latrines, to reduce the risk of epidemic diseases; that their children are vaccinated for measles and polio; that they have adequate food; access to basic health and educational services. D. General Findings What the profiling of the populations internally displaced makes clear is that we have highly complex phenomena with different displacements having occurred at different times, in

Anuj Chopra , Afghanistan Faced with Severe Housing Shortage, World Politics Review, 18 October 2007.

12

different parts of the country and for different reasons -- and finding durable solutions will be neither easy nor quick. One enormous obstacle to addressing displacement is land and property claims/disputes and, relatedly, the fact that many of the IDPs are landless, and that the value of land, especially in and around urban centres, has skyrocketed in the past few years. Another, is a mindset or worldview held by many Afghan leaders both in national and local government (and partially reflected in Afghan law) -- that if you were not born in a province, district, town or village, then you really dont belong there, even though the Afghan Constitution (article 39) recognizes that Afghans have a right travel or settle in any part of the country (except in regions forbidden by law). Hence, for example, Presidential Decree 104 On Land Distribution for Settlement to Eligible Returnees and IDPs makes entitlement to receive a plot of land in a specific province dependent upon the individual/family originating from that province.8 And hence the view of many Governors that IDPs can stay temporarily in their province if they cannot return to their places of origin because of security considerations, but that local integration should not be considered a permanent solution. Ethnicity is clearly a factor in many situations, with local authorities afraid that by letting people from other ethnic groups settle, they may be changing the demographic and hence the political -- balance of the area. Another enormous obstacle to finding durable solutions for those in displacement is the lack of job or livelihood opportunities, and basic services (notably, water and sanitation, education and health) in large areas of the country. While this is a challenge faced by all Afghans, it is particularly daunting for people who have been uprooted and lived in exile for long periods of time. It is therefore, vital that development and poverty reduction programs take special account of IDPs and returnees when they are drafted. Of course the issue of security remains a paramount concern, and if hostilities continue to escalate, displacement may not only dramatically increase, it may take on new dimensions. Particularly linked to insecurity is the fact that large areas of the country not only in the south, but also in the west, the southeast, the east and even areas of the north, are now becoming no-go areas where humanitarian access is effectively denied. Not only is access denied by AGEs or the Taliban, it may also be blocked by local commanders and warlords, whose private militias and not the police or the Afghan National Army hold sway in the area. E. Trends As one looks to the future and to the type of contingency planning that should be done to address the likely IDP scenarios over the coming year, several trends are evident. First, as documented in UNDSS and UNAMA reports, we are likely to see more displacement as a result of fighting between international and Afghan government forces on the one hand and insurgents (Taliban and other AGEs) on the other, not only in the Southern Region, but also in the West (in Bakwa, Gulistan and Pur Chaman districts of Farah and possibly in Nimroz where the level of violence has recently increased), in Badghis (especially Murghab district) in the North, and in all the provinces in the East bordering the tribal areas with Pakistan, but especially Nuristan, Kunar and Khost. There will probably also be displacement as a consequence of the
8

The one exception to this general rule is that someone might get land in a neighboring province if there is none available in their province of origin and the neighboring province has the absorptive capacity.

13

Talibans growing strength in certain areas of the central region: the past month, we saw the first displacement from Parwan to Kabul city as a result of an increased Taliban presence, and a vicious attack in which the Taliban targeted and killed four international aid workers from the International Rescue Committee, in broad daylight, in Logar, on the main road to Kabul. There have also been a heightened number of incidents in Kapisa.. Humanitarian access to much of the country has deteriorated dramatically and many, notably the ICRC,9 believe that access has never been worse, including in the 1992-1993 period when you could at least negotiate with Commanders who had an understanding of what a humanitarian response meant. Now, the nature of the insurgency is very different. As the Special Rapporteur on Education to the Human Rights Council said in the statement he issued (on 15 August) following the killing of the IRC workers who had been supporting education in Afghanistan: Their [the Talibans] attacks on schools, teachers and others working on education are systematic, not random. They are part of a deliberate attack on human rights, on equality for women and on any attempt by their fellow citizens to control their own destiny. Not surprisingly, as the conflict has intensified, we have seen more and more civilian casualties. According to UNAMAs figures, during 2007, there were more than 1,500 non-combatants killed as a result of fighting between Anti-Government Elements (AGEs) and government forces in 2007. In the first four months of 2008 UNAMA Human Rights Team documented over 500 civilian deaths as a direct result of insurgency and counter-insurgency operations, which represents an increase of almost 80 per cent compared with the same period last year. This undoubtedly affects peoples perceptions about their safety. Thus, the assumption that we have made, that most battle-affected IDPs do not move too far from their homes and rapidly return home once the fighting has ended is likely to be seriously challenged. Already, we are seeing groups of battle-displaced from Hilmand in the South and from other provinces in the Central region going to live in and around Kabul City, either with friends and family or in squatter settlements. Secondly, the displacement as a result of the drought in both the West and the North -- needs to be carefully monitored. While, thus far, it appears that this displacement has been kept in check by the Government policy, largely supported by the international humanitarian community, of providing food and water in the affected villages to those who are most vulnerable, if this aid does not reach people fast enough, or if the aid pipeline is interrupted for any reason, we are likely to see people leaving their homes and drawn to where they believe they will more readily get assistance. IDP camps, which we have largely been able to avoid thus far, may be something we will need to contend with in the future, meaning that shelter as well as water and food will need to be provided and a Camp Management Cluster may need to be created. What we already see, in both the North and the West, is the phenomenon of families sending their male members fathers and sons either to the larger cities in Afghanistan or to Pakistan or Iran. While this economic migration is a traditional coping mechanism, the numbers climb when the challenges to survival increase. However, the higher cost of living in Pakistan (that has actually contributed to raising the numbers of refugees voluntarily returning to Afghanistan) and Irans announcement, that it is going to cut its food and other commodity subsidies and replace them with cash transfers to the very poor in Iran, will impact significantly on Afghan workers there, who will not be eligible for the cash transfers. Essentially, it means that the remittances that the
9

See, e.g., IRIN, Humanitarian Needs Growing as Conflict Spreads ICRC, 8 April 2008, where ICRC is quoted as expressing deep concern about the intensification and spreading of armed conflict in Afghanistan.

14

Afghan workers abroad are able to send home to their families will be substantially lower. This may greatly increase the vulnerability of the many households in Afghanistan who are heavily dependent on these remittances. As regards the major population return of refugees from Pakistan back to Afghanistan following the closure the last two years of two major camps in the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP), Jalozai and Kachagari, in 2007, returns from Pakistan topped 357,000. While the number in 2008 will probably be somewhat lower, returns as of mid August, has already reached the figure of 210,000 and there has been little slowing of the rate of approximately 1,000 per day crossing the border. With approximately 23% of the returnees not returning home but settling into temporary settlements (and a current returnee caseload of over 30,000 from this year and 20,000 who returned between 2005 and 2007), we are likely to face serious overcrowding and shelter problems which will need to be addressed before the winter. It is also important to follow the extent to which returns which are on-going, largely with respect to the repatriation from Pakistan, but also the deportations from Iran (over 180,000 by beginning of August 2008), largely of single males who go back to their families are sustainable. The absorptive capacity of Afghanistans rural areas has probably not only been reached but surpassed in many areas. The consequences of this are likely to be an outflow from the villages to the urban centers. And while these people would be considered as economic migrants rather than IDPs, they are certain to inter-mingle with and impact on the IDP humanitarian caseload. As well, we are likely to see increasing conflict over land and resources (especially water) that may lead both to violence and to displacement unless more comprehensive measures are taken to improve land use management. The fighting between Kuchi and Hazara over pasturelands in the Central Highlands is perhaps the most prominent example, but certainly not the only one. Thus, as work begins to focus on finding durable solutions for the protracted caseload, the IDP Task Force and other coordination mechanisms for dealing with displacement will need to continually and carefully monitor new and potential displacements.

15

IDP Consultation in Herat

16

III.

Numbers: Summary (all numbers are approximations)

Southern* Protracted caseload Total: Western** Protracted caseload New Drought-affected Total Central Protracted caseload New conflictaffected*** Total Eastern New conflict-affected 2008 Returnees 2005-07 Returnees Total Southeastern* Protracted caseload+ New conflict-affected* Battle-affected Total North and Northeastern++ Protracted caseload Total Central Highlands+++ TOTAL 365 365 0 43,197 1,843 1,843 0 235,833 1,943 254 127 2,324 12,341 1,524 759 14,624 577 5,220 3,517 9,314 3,462 31,320 21,102 55,884 427 2,321 4,915 7,236 5,925 1,083 7,008 29,690 6,598 36,288 22,841 22,841 119,958 119,958

918
1,345

* without battle-affected IDPs ** without battle-affected IDPs and without deportees from Iran *** does not include the Hazara IDPs in Kabul as a result of the June-July 2008 fighting in the Central Highlands + does not include data on the Mullah Khel IDPs because of a lack clarity about those figures ++ does not include drought-affected and other small groups for which we do not have accurate information +++ does not include recent conflict IDPs as they have all returned

home

17

The chart above estimates, conservatively, that there are approximately 235,000 internally displaced persons in Afghanistan, of which of which about 132,000 are the protracted case load. However, the total does not include most of those who are battle-affected or many of those who are drought-affected. Nor do the numbers reflect whatever invisible IDPs there are in the large urban concentrations who have not self-identified as displaced persons, or who have not been identified through other means, or any of those deported from Iran, some of whom inevitably end up in displacement. In the latter two cases, both of these are considered more as economic migrants than as IDPs. The humanitarian caseload that displacement poses in Afghanistan may, therefore, be substantially larger than the above numbers suggest. If one looks at number of IDPs by reason for the displacement across the country, one gets the following chart. They, of course, do not capture either the recent battle-affected or droughtaffected caseload.

Reason for Displacement Protracted Caseload New Drought-affected* New conflict-affected Returnees in displacement Battle-affected* Total

No. of Families 31,501 1,083 1,749 8,737 127 43,197

No. of Individuals 166,153 6,598 9,901 52,422 759 235,833

These numbers are clearly unreflective of the real caseload, which amounts to many thousands of people.
Reasons for displacement 180,000 166,153

Individuals

120,000

60,000

52,422

6,598 0 Protracted Cas eload New Droughtaffected*

9,901 759 New conflict-affected Returnees in dis placem ent Battle-affected*

18

Internally Displace Persons (IDPs) Caseload by District of Displacement - end Aug 2008
FAM = Families M = Males F = Females IND = Individuals TOTAL M 51 57 26 39 61 436 179 31 61 940 11,988 16,830 3,977 14,438 13,946 61,179 6,294 777 387 7,458 1,766 4,042 2,234 294 245 196 10,982 2,316 1,579 2,142 92 2,130 483 28,501 IDPs Caseload F IND 49 100 54 111 25 50 38 77 59 120 419 855 172 350 29 60 59 120 903 1,843 11,518 23,506 16,170 33,000 3,821 7,798 13,871 28,309 13,399 27,345 58,779 119,958 6,047 12,341 747 1,524 372 759 7,166 14,624 1,696 3,462 3,884 7,926 2,146 4,380 282 576 235 480 188 384 10,552 21,534 2,226 4,542 1,517 3,096 2,058 4,200 88 180 2,046 4,176 465 948 27,383 55,884

Region North North North North North North North North North North Total South South South South South South Total Southeast Southeast Southeast Southeast Total East East East East East East East East East East East East East East Total

Location of Displacement Province District Balkh Nar-e-Shahi Balkh Balkh Faryab Almar Faryab Maimana Kunduz Kunduz Kunduz Kunduz (Bagh-e-Sherkat Sett.) Takhar Baharak Takhar Iskamish Takhar Kalafgan Hilmand Kandahar Kandahar Kandahar Kandahar Khost Paktika Paktya Kunar Kunar Laghman Laghman Nangarhar Nangarhar Nangarhar Nangarhar Nangarhar Nangarhar Nangarhar Nangarhar Nangarhar Lashkargah (Mukhtar Sett.) Kandahar (Kuchi sett.) Maywand (Qala-i- Shamir) Panjwai (Mushan&Kuluqan) Zhari Dasht Khost (Matun), Terzai & Bak Terwi Gardez Asad Abad Sirkany, Khas Kunar, Shigal, Marwara & Asad Abad Mihterlam Qarghai Surkh Rod Surkh Rod Khohgyani / Surkh Rod Kuzkunar/Behsud Jalalabad Surkh Rod (Upper & Middle SM Samarkhel Surkh Rod (Lower SM) Unknown (Jamaly)

FAM 20 17 10 17 24 171 70 12 24 365 4,705 5,500 1,745 5,418 5,473 22,841 1,943 254 127 2,324 577 1,321 730 96 80 64 3,589 757 516 700 30 696 158 9,314

IND% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 10% 14% 3% 12% 12% 51% 5% 1% 0% 6% 1% 3% 2% 0% 0% 0% 9% 2% 1% 2% 0% 2% 0% 24%

19

West West West West West Total Central Central Central Central Total Totals

Hirat Hirat Hirat Hirat Kabul Kabul Ghazni

Hirat (Maslakh) Hirat (Shaydaee) Hirat (Minarat) Unknown Kabul Paghman Ghazni

2,866 1,636 447 1,083 6,032 910 18 417 1,345 42,221

8,769 5,005 1,367 3,365 18,507 2,581 46 1,063 3,690 120,275

8,426 4,809 1,314 3,233 17,781 2,480 44 1,022 3,546 115,558

17,195 9,814 2,681 6,598 36,288 5,061 90 2,085 7,236 235,833

7% 4% 1% 3% 15% 2% 0% 1% 3% 100%

Breakdown of IDPs by Region of Displacement - as of end Aug 2008 150,000 Number of Individuals Individulas 100,000 119,958
Females, 115,558, 49%

IDPs Sex

55,884 50,000 14,624 1,843 0 North South Southeast East West Central 36,288 7,236

Males, 120,275, 51%

20

Afghanistan IDPs - Caseload by Region & District - No. of Individuals in Displacement - 10 Aug 08

Branch Office Kabul

Geographic Information and Mapping Unit Operational Information Section

TURKMENISTAN

UZBEKISTAN

TAJIKISTAN CHINA

Nahri Shahi Balkh

Kunduz

Baharak

Kalfagan

Ishkamish

North 1,843
Almar Maymana

East 55,884
Hirat Paghman Kabul Mihtarlam Kuz Kunar Qarghayi Jalalabad Surkh Rod Khogayani

Asadabad

Hi gh la nd

Ce nt ra l

West 36,288

Central 7,236
No Window

INDIA

Ghazni

Gardiz Khost(Matun)

PAKISTAN

So

ut 14 heas ,62 t 4

South 119,958

Waza Khwa

Boundaries International Region Province District

Maywand Lashkar Gah

Zhari Kandahar

ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN

Panjwayi

Number of Individuals By District of Displacement

Note: This map does not reflect the full extend of IDPs displaced as result of recent battle or drought
Page 21

20,001 to 33,000 10,001 to 20,000 1,001 to 10,000 351 to 1,000 50 to 350

(6) (2) (8) (3) (8)

Data Date & Source: UNHCR sub/filed offices Jan - 10 Aug 2008

Annexes

22

IDPs from Helmand in Chahari Qambar, Kabul

23

ANNEX 1. DISPLACEMENT IN THE SOUTHERN REGION The Southern Region has the largest protracted caseload of IDPs in the country an estimated 22,841 families and 119,958 individuals. In the four main camps (i.e., excluding the Kuchi living in and around Kandahar), approx. 66% are Pashtun and about 31% are Baluch (largely Kuchi or semi-Kuchi). The numbers are as follows:

District/Province Zhari, Kandahar Maywand, Kandahar Punjway, Kandahar Kandahar City, Kandahar Lashkar Gar, Hilmand Total

Settlement Zhari Dasht Qala Shamir Koloqan & Moshan Kuchi settlements Mukhtar

Families 5,473 1,745 5,418 5,500 4,705 22,841

Individuals 27,345 7,798 28,309 33,000 23,506 119,958

a. Zhari Dasht IDP Camp, Kandahar: located some 14 kilometers outside of Kandahar city in Zhari district, houses 5,473 families (27,345 individuals) who are registered as IDPs with the DoRR. This is the number that confirmed by a re-registration conducted by DoRR in May 2008, adjusted to take into account the 171 families who had decided to return to their places of origin in July 2008. Many of these people were initially displaced at the end of 2001, from areas in the north and the west, to the Chaman waiting area a no-mans land between Afghanistan and Pakistan -- and then relocated in Zhari Dasht in 2002, 2003 and 2004. Currently, the camp has IDPs displaced from the west (Hirat, Farah and Badghis), the north (Balkh, Saripol, Faryab and Jawzjan), the northeast (Takhar), the southeast (Paktika) and the South (Kandahar, Uruzgan , Zabul). Of these, 97% are Pashtuns, 2% Baluch, and 1% other. b. Qala Shamir Camp, Maywand: has a population of approximately 1,745 families, as of DoRR re-registration in June/July 2008 (approx. 7,798 individuals), which includes approximately 550 families who moved there in 2007 from Marghar in Punjway when that area became too dangerous. The population is about 73% Baluch, 26% Pashtun and 1% other. Many of the inhabitants, including those from Marghar, are Kuchi or semiKuchi, uprooted between 1999 and 2003 because of drought in the Reg desert and the consequent death of their livestock. In 2001 (??) the situation of some of the Kuchi in Registan, particularly those living in remote areas, reached a critical point and some were airlifted and others evacuated by heavy trucks provided the Talaiban authorities. They were then settled in Maywand or Punjway districts of Kandahar. In 2002, as a result of intervention by UNHCR, their settlements were recognized as IDP camps. While many of the Kuchi elders say that they would like to return to Registan, such a return is not currently sustainable, given the continuation of the drought. c. Punjway (Koloqan and Moshan) IDP Camps: 5,415 families, as of DoRR reregistration in June/July 2008 (approx. 28,309 individuals), of whom 35% are Pashtun, 64% Baluch, and 1% other. Most of the population originates from the Reg and

24

Punjaway districts of Kandahar province and were displaced between 1999 and 2003 by the drought and the death of their livestock. Many are Kuchi or semi-Kuchi. d. Kuchi camped outside Kandahar City: According to a survey conducted by the Government (DRRD, Kuchi Directorate and Economy Department of Kandahar) and WFP (via its International Partner IP HAPA) in August 2007, there are some 5,500 Kuchi families (about 33,000 individuals) living in 51 settlements on the outskirts of Kandahar city and the surrounding villages. These people had been nomadic and had moved with their animals (sheep, goats, camels and donkeys), migrating in the summer to the districts of Sahjoy (Zabul Province) and Muqur (Gazni Province) and in the winter to Registan and other districts in Kandahar province. Some families are reported to come from Badghis Province. After seven years of drought and the loss of their animals, these Kuchi are more or less settled and earn their living as day laborers in Kandahar City, and with some elderly men and women reduced to begging in the streets. The needs assessment conducted in 2008 underscored their need for food, drinking water and better shelter, and for educational and health facilities to which they have very limited access. e. Mukhtar Camp, Hilmand: in Lashkar Gar district, 4,705 families (23,506 individuals). There has not been any recent re-registration of the population in Mukhtar. Data from 2006 indicates that 91% of the population is Pashtun, 6% Tajik, 2% Baluch and 1% Hazara. They were displaced between 2001 and 2003, with the fall of the Taliban, from the west (Badghis, Hirat, Ghor), the north (Faryab, Jawzjan, Saripul), the East (Kapisa, Laghman), the southeast (Ghazni), the south (Hilmand, Uruzgan, Kandahar) and some from the center (Kabul, Logar). Many fled because of security issues, threats, the occupation of their land by armed groups, and the breakdown of law and order while other fled because of the drought, the loss of their livestock, and food shortages. In the Southern Region, we also have the largest number of battle-affected IDPs though, as noted above, most of these do not travel far from their homes and return home when the battle moves elsewhere. We have the data compiled by UNAMA, which reports that, in 2007, over 40,000 families (i.e., upwards of 240,000 individuals ) were assisted in the Southern provinces of Kandahar, Hilmand and Uruzgan with food aid and non-food assistance by UN agencies, largely at the request of, and on the basis of numbers reported by, Government offices and verified (to the extent possible) by implementing partners of the UN. For 2008, reporting for the first 6 months found that a total of 12,646 families (or over 75,000 individuals) were assisted by UN agencies in the Southern region. These numbers do not take into account the battle-affected families assisted directly by PRTs or the international forces, which often provide food and nonfood items as well as pay compensation to people for damaged property or loss of life. Nor does this factor in those displaced families which are assisted by the International Committee of the Red Cross often the first assistance people fleeing fighting are able to receive. The UNAMA data is as follows: Date Assistance requested for this displaced by battle No. of families affected 15,003 6,847

January 2007 and later January 2007 and later

January 2007 and later

10,136 families from Panjway and Zhari took shelter in Kandahar and 4,876 displaced in various villages Families in Lashkar Gar, Hilmand, displaced from Sangin, Musa Qaka, Garmser, Nahri Serat and other districts Displaced to Tirin Kot, Uruzgan

720

25

February 2007 18 February 2007 27 February 2007 13 May 2007

23 May 2007

June 2007 September 2007 26 September 2007

2 October 2007

4 November

4 November 2007 4 November 2007 4 November 2007 20 November 2007 Total Number reported in 2007 January/February 2008 March/April 2008 March/April 2008 March/April 2008 May/June 2008 May/June 2008 Total assisted in first 6 months of 2008

Assistance requested for families displaced from Musa Qala, Hilmand Request to assist 3,200 families displaced from Sangeen and Kajaki districts of Hilmand Displaced from Nawzad district living in Gereshk and Lashkar Gar, Hilmand Request for assistance for 2,050 families displaced in April-May by fighting in Sangeen, living in Lashkar Gar and Grishk districts. Governor of Khandahar requested food for 500 families of Sangeen district, Hilmand 300 of which fled to Arghandab, 100 to Ghorak and 100 to Kandahar City Families displaced to Chora, Uruzgan DRRD requests assistance for 1,744b battle affected families from Garmser, Hilmand but only 722 verified DRRD requested assistance for families displaced from Dihrawoud, 220 of whom had moved to Trinkot and the rests in various villages DRRD reported on families displaced from Nahr-isaraj district to Bazar Grishk and outher surrounding areas of Lashkar Gar, Hilmand ANDMA requests assistance for 421 families displaced from Kajaki, Hilmand to Arghandab, Kandahar ANDMA reports families displaced from Sangeen district, Hilmand living in Arghandab, Kandahar ANDMA reported families displaced from Musa Qala, Hilmand, living in Arghandab, Kandahar ANDMA reported 223 families displaced from Dihrawud, Uruzgan, living in Arghandab, Kandahar Request for assistance for additional families from Garmser, Hilmand

1,600 3,200 2,960 2,050

500

817 722 1,600

554

421

101 298 2,110 540 40,043

Families of Sangeen and Sarwan Qala assisted in Khandahar Families of Musa Qala district, Hilmand assisted Families of Derhrawood district assisted in Derhrawood, Uruzgan Families of Dehrawood district assisted in Terinkot, Uruzgan Families in Arghandab district, Hilmand, assisted in Arghandab Families of Garmser district, Hilmand, assisted

673 2,000 1,150 350 6,973 1,500 12,646

26

Battle displaced Families in the Southern Region who received assistance in 2007/2008
45,000 40,043 40,000

35,000 30,330 30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

12,646 8,473

10,000

5,000 0 0

3,367 0

2,876

3,470 673 Nov/Dec 07 Total 07

3,500

Jan/Feb 07 Mar/Apr 07 May/Jun 07 Jul/A ug 07 Sep/Oct 07

Jan/Feb 08 Mar/A pr 08 May/Jun 08

Total 08

27

Afghanistan IDPs - Southern Region Protracted Caseload No. of Individuals in Displacement - 14 Aug 08

Branch Office Kabul

Geographic Information and Mapping Unit Operational Information Section

Baghran

Chora Shahidi Hassas Khas Uruzgan Kakar

Uruzgan
Tirin Kot

Uruzgan Zabul
Musa Qala Dihrawud Naw Zad Kajaki Nesh Miya Nishin Daychopan Arghandab Shahjoy

Kandahar Hilmand

Zabul
Washer Sangin Ghorak Nahri Sarraj Khakrez Shah Wali Kot Mizan Naw Bahar Qalat

Zehray Dhast 27,345

:
Tarnak Wa Jaldak Shinkay Atghar Shamulzayi

Mukhtar 23,506

:
Arghandab Maywand Nad Ali Lashkar Gah Zhari Arghistan Kandahar Maruf

:
No Window

Nawa-I- Barak Zayi

Hilmand

Kandahar

Kuchi Camped outside Kandahar city 33000

Maiwand (Qala-i- Shamir) 7,798

Panjwayi Daman Garmser Spin Boldak

Panjwayi (Mushan&Kuluqan) 28,309

Reg(Khanshin)

Registan

Shorabak

Dishu

Boundaries Province District Province center

Page 28

: IDP Settlement/Camp

Data Date & Source: UNHCR sub/filed offices Jan - 10 Aug 2008

ANNEX 2 DISPLACEMENT IN THE WESTERN REGION

(1) Protracted Caseload The protracted caseload in the Western Region of Afghanistan is largely concentrated in three settlements around Hirat city. These were surveyed by the DoRR in February 2008, and found to comprise nearly 6,000 families with a population of close to 30,000, as follows: Settlement Maslakh Shaydayee Minarets Total Number of Families 3,465 1,938 522 5,925 Number of Individuals 17,195 9,814 2,681 29,690

Since the first IDP camp was established in Hirat in 1992, there have been six IDP camps or settlements in the Western Region. Three still exist today: Maslakh (set up in 1998), the largest of the settlements, housing 12,000 families at its peak occupancy in 2000; Shaydayee (established in 1994), housing 4,500 families in 2000; and Minarets (established in 1994), with a population of 7,779 in 2002; and City Transit Centre (CTC), Rawzabagh and Rawashan (which no longer exist). These sites were often the first place of choice for people displaced as a result of conflict, drought or other disasters not only from Hirat province but from the neighboring provinces including Faryab, Badghis, Ghor and Farah, even attracting people from as far as Hilmand, Bamyan and Uruzgan. Hirat city was the magnet as it offered security, job opportunities for both skilled and unskilled labor, and access to services with aid agencies concentrated there. As conditions improved in their places of origin, the displaced began to return to their homes, with the first organized and assisted voluntary return in the Western region beginning 25 February 2002. A total of over 98,350 individuals went back home that year. In 2003, the trend continued with more than 48,000 returning voluntarily with assistance in the form of both food and non-food items (NFIs) from WFP and UNHCR. Thereafter, assisted return slowed to a trickle, with only 107 individuals recorded as being assisted to voluntarily return in 2007 and only 80 families (who went back to Murqab in Badghis) in 2008. In a survey conducted in Minarets in April, 97% of the population stated they had no intention of returning and IDPs in Maslakh expressed similar views when informally interviewed in February. Those who remain in these settlements - the protracted caseload can be divided into three groups: (a) families unable to return because of the drought and the loss of their livestock, primarily Kuchi from the north (from Badghis and Faryab), or from the south and the central highlands; (b) families a mixture of Hazara, Tajik, and Pashtun who are landless and have nowhere to return to; some of them are from Ghor, Bamyan and Uruzgan and some from neighboring villages around Herat city; and (c) families unable to return because of the continuation of the ethnic/tribal or personal conflict that led to their initial displacement, most of them Pashtun from the north

29

(Badghis and Faryab). Frequently, these Pashtuns, who lived as a minority in Tajik or Uzbek areas, were considered to have supported or collaborated with the Taliban, were then targeted by Northern commanders, and are still not welcome back in their areas of origin. (2) New Displacement In addition to this protracted caseload, the Western Region has seen substantial new population movements. These include three major groups: battle-affected, drought-affected and deportees from Iran, although this latter group are not be considered as IDPs, and are not profiled here. Recently, the DoRR Offices in the Western Region issued the following chart regarding displacements for the first seven months of 2008 1 January to 6 August 2008.
Province of origin Nimrooz Ghor Herat Farah Badghis Total Province of origin Farah Farah * Herat Badghis Total Province of origin Badghis Badghis Total Province of origin Ghor Ghor Total Province of orgin Nimrooz Nimrooz Total Province of displacement Herat Herat Herat Herat Herat Province of displacement Farah Herat and other provinces Farah Farah Province of displacement Badghis Herat & other provinces Province of displacement Ghor Other provinces Province of displacement Nimrooz Other provinces Family 1 29 79 21 20 150 Family 169 460 10 53 692 Family 255 145 400 Family 313 0 313 Family 0 0 0 Individual 8 144 560 114 111 937 Individual N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Individual 1469 868 2337 Individual 1467 0 1467 Individual 0 0 0

* 50% went to Iran, 50% have been displaced within Farah province, or have gone to Hirat and other
provinces. The source of information for DoRR Farah is the district governors. Given the limited access to most of the areas where IDPs have reportedly been displaced to, it is difficult to confirm the displacement.

30

Afghanistan IDPs - Western Region Protracted Caseload No. of Individuals in Displacement - 14 Aug 08

Branch Office Kabul

Geographic Information and Mapping Unit Operational Information Section

Ghormach

Charsada Jawand Chaghcharan Dawlat Yar

Bala Murghab

Badghis Hirat
Muqur

Ghor Maslakh 17,195

Gulran Koshk Ab Kamari Qala-I- Naw

Badghis
Qadis

Farah Nimroz

Koshki Kohna

Shaidayee 9,814

Kohsan

Zanda Jan

:
Ghoryan

Hirat

Karukh

: Injil
Pashtun Zarghun

Chishti Sharif Obe

Ghor

Guzara Tulak

Shahrak

Du Layna

Minarets 2,681 Hirat

Adraskan

Farsi

Saghar Taywara Shindand Pur Chaman

Pasaband

Anar Dara Bala Buluk

No Window
Khaki Safed Pusht Rod Qala Ka Farah Shib Koh Dilaram Lash Wa Juwayn Khash Rod Bakwa

Farah

Gulistan

Kang Chakhansur

Zaranj

Nimroz

Chahar Burjak

Boundaries Province District Province center

Page 31

: IDP Settlement/Camp

Data Date & Source: UNHCR sub/filed offices Jan - 10 Aug 2008

(a) Battle-affected displacement While not on the same order of magnitude as the battle-affected displacement in the Southern Region, it is estimated that more than 3,000 families (approx. 18,000 individuals) were forced to leave their homes in 2007 as a result of insurgency and counter-insurgency operations. Ten such movements were identified of which three are most significant: The displacement of some 8,500 persons in Shindand district of southern Hirat, due to Coalition aerial bombing. This area has been affected by criminality, insurgency and inter-tribal warfare for a number of years and produced a mass displacement to Hirat in 2004. The displacement of approximately 3,900 persons from the centre of Badghis province (largely ethnic Pashtuns from Murghab and Ghormach), due to a combination of ethnic tensions and maltreatment by Uzbek police in the context of an armed operation, and pressures and maltreatment by insurgents. While most families fled to surrounding villages, over 300 came to Hirat. The movement is reminiscent of a similar mass uprooting from Badghis and Faryab in 2002. In April 2008, 80 families of these families who were living in Shaidayee settlement and in Nawabad requested and received assistance from the IDP Task Force -- to return to Murghab. Another 268 families from that area have also indicated an interest in returning but have not yet done so. A displacement of an indeterminate number of persons from northern Hilmand to western Farah, allegedly due to a poppy eradication operation, and/or conflict between insurgents and government/international forces. There were also reports in November 2007 of insurgent activity in Farah causing displacement of dozens of families to Hilmand. These areas are no-go areas for UN staff and confirmation of populations movements, or assessments of needs there, is difficult.

Regarding causes of new displacement, an analysis by UNHCR field staff suggests that, of the newly displaced, 93% are Pashtuns, 5% are Tajik and 2% other. Regarding the reasons for displacement: 54% were displaced as a result of combat or attacks initiated by governmental or international forces; 25% were displaced as a result of violations of human rights or infractions of International Humanitarian Law by governmental or international forces; 6% of displacement was caused by inter-ethnic/inter-communal violence or by combat or attacks initiated by armed groups other than insurgents or government/international forces; 5% of displacement was caused by pressure from criminal groups and violations of human rights or infractions of International Humanitarian Law by insurgents; 10% various other reasons. In 2008, battle-affected displacement has again been recorded, though at somewhat lower levels, as well as displacement resulting from tribal conflict and land disputes, including the following: a large number of families displaced as a result of air-raids in July on Zirkoh, in Shindand district of Hirat province, of whom some 300 have come to Shindand center. 15 families displaced from Khust village of Khak-Safeed district to the city of Farah as a result of aerial bombing.

32



28 families displaced to the Gorgi area of Farah, having fled their homes in Shiwan, Bala Buluk district, due to insecurity 214 IDP families living in Cheghcharan district of Ghor, due to land disputes and other problems in their related areas 45 families displaced from Khak-Safeed district of Farah province to Farah city as a result of a tribal dispute 172 families from the Tulak district of Ghor, displaced two years ago to Shindand in Hirat because of a land dispute with another tribe 100 Hazara families displaced from Ghorak village, of whom 30 are living in the vicinity of Chackcharan city, 20 went to Mazar-i-Sharif, 8 to Kabul and 42 to Hirat and Sangtakht wa Bandar in Day Kundi.

It is also the general understanding of authorities in Farah that an estimated 50-100 families are leaving the province on a daily basis, heading to Hirat, Nimroz and Iran because of general insecurity and drought. (b) Displacement due to Drought In the Western Region, the provinces of Ghor and Badghis have been severely affected by drought, which followed last years harsh winter, as well as a locust infestation. In Ghor, the rain that arrived late was limited so that even irrigated lands did not produce a good harvest. In June, an initial assessment conducted jointly by Central Disaster Management Team (CDMT) and NGOs working in the area concluded that, as a result of the drought, 22,550 families were vulnerable and at risk in 351 villages in 10 districts of the province. An assessment in Badghis in July found that 80% of the farmers failed to harvest their cereal crops. Too little rain which came too late, locusts, and a lack of improved water management have created a humanitarian situation, with the area suffering from a shortage of drinking water, food, fodder, and employment opportunities. Information provided by the DoRR in Ghor is that there are families that have been in displacement for the past two to three years as a result of drought (compounded by poverty, lack of employment, the harsh winter and scarcity of drinking water). This old caseload comprises 583 families displaced to Chakhcharan center. The majority of these 359 families come from various villages in Chakhcharan; 96 families from Daulatiyar district, 47 from Charsada, and the remaining from the Taiwara, Pasaband, Lal Sarjangal and Dolina districts of Ghor. As a strategy to prevent large-scale displacement, the Western Region (like the Northern one) has opted to provide assistance to those in need in their home villages. New displacements have nonetheless occurred, with initial reports indicating that an estimated 500 families have become IDPs as a result of the drought this year. Reports at the end of July are suggesting that several hundred families are leaving Ghor daily for Farah and Hirat as a result of the rise in the price of food and the drought. What information we have of displaced communities is the following: 91 families (64 from Charsada and 27 from Pasaband) in Ghor displaced to Chackcharan center during the past 4-5 months most families from three Charsada villages who have moved to neighboring villages because of a lack of drinking water and food 60 families arriving in Herat, 29 from Ghor province, 21 from Purchman district of Farah province, and 10 from Murghab district of Badghis province 92 families displaced by drought from various districts of Badghis to Qala-e-Naw in the centre of the province

33



2 families displaced from Daulatyar district of Ghor to Chakhcharan 53 families displaced from Gunbad village of Qadis district in Badghis province to DehNaw village of Khak-Safeed district in Farah province

It is also expected that people engaged in the pistachio harvest in Badghis, which will shortly end, are likely to move towards Hirat, as these families are economically among the worst off in Badghis and their harvest income is very small. If enough assistance is unable to reach people in their villages, it is likely that the numbers displaced will be significantly higher. An assessment made by the Sub-Office of UNHCR in Hirat on 7 July, was that, if food and assistance does not arrive soon, at least 300,000 people (approx. 50,000 families) could be affected in various districts of Ghor.

Kuchi in Maslakh Settlement, Hirat

34

ANNEX 3 DISPLACEMENT IN THE CENTRAL REGION

The Central Region, which comprises the provinces of Kabul, Kapisa, Panjshir, Parwan, Wardak, Logar and Ghazni provinces, contain a number of IDP communities that we have been able to profile, including some living in and around Kabul city. There are also others in areas that are not accessible to UNHCR such as Ghazni and parts of Wardak. The caseload includes both IDPs of long-standing and also new IDPs, forced to leave their places of origin for a range of reasons ranging from conflict and protection reasons such as commanderism and local enmities. (The focus of UNHCR Sub Office Kabuls attention are these populations who have been displaced for conflict and protection reasons, rather than those who have relocated because of natural disasters or for socio-economic reasons.)

(a) The protracted caseload The protracted caseload, as detailed below, adds up to some 427 families (2,321 individuals), which is certainly an underestimate of the number of long-standing IDPs in Kabul City. Screening exercises of squatter settlements have been conducted in the past to assess which persons have been displaced for protection reasons. In situations where it is difficult to locate and identify individuals (as opposed to groups) as IDPs in a large city, such individuals are likely to fall out of the IDP statistics. Many are, undoubtedly, living under very difficult economic circumstances on the margins of the city and of society -- part of the undifferentiated urban poor, and often without the social safety net they had in their places of origin. Those groups which have been profiled include 369 Pashtun families (2,031 individuals), 18 Tajik families (90 individuals), and 40 Hazara families (200 individuals) as follows: 186 Pashtun families (1,116) displaced from the Tagab district of Kapisa province and the Sarobi district of Kabul province, currently settled in District 9 in Kabul City. Of these, 170 families originally fled to Pakistan in 1998; they returned to Afghanistan in 2004, but could not go back to their place of origin because of insecurity, and were joined in 2008 by 16 families newly displaced from Tagab. 18 Tajik families (90 individuals) who came from Taibuti, Bamyan in 1993 and currently live in Paghman district of Kabul Province. 40 Hazara families (200 individuals) displaced from Daykundi province to Kabul City in 2002 and 2003. 150 Pashtun families (750 individuals) who fled from Guldara district of Kabul Province to Kabul City in 1998 as a result of fighting between Taliban and the Northern Alliance, and currently live in Districts 16, 8 and 5. They are unable to return because of the hostility of local commanders, as well as water diversion and property occupation. 33 Pashtun families (165 individuals) who arrived in 1998 in Kabul City from Siman Niyazi village, Charikar, Parwan province, then the frontline of fighting between the Taliban and the Northern Alliance. Their land was subsequently occupied by local armed commanders.

35

(b) Recent conflict-affected IDPs In addition, there are IDPs in the Central Region displaced by recent conflict (at least 918 families and 4,915 individuals), whether as a result of insurgency and counter-insurgency, ethnic/tribal fighting, or because of conflict over resources or property. This number does not include the Hazara IDPs from the recent fighting in Behsud I and II of Wardak province (see under the section for the Central Highlands) who are living in private houses and with relatives in Kabul city, as that number has not been verified and information provided by community leaders has proved unreliable. Spontaneous returns to Behsud from Kabul have already started. There are also unknown numbers of IDPs living in villages in Wardak who fled insurgency and counter-insurgency operations, Taliban threats and most recently the Behsud conflict. It has not been possible to profile such groups because of UNHCRs lack of access to areas of displacement due to security. The following groups have been profiled. Displaced Living in Kabul 150 Pashtun families (750 individuals), from Kote Ashro village, Maidan Shahr center, Maidan Wardak province, who fled the insurgency and counter insurgency operations that began mid-September 2007. 20 families (100 individuals), Pashtun, from Bodrab village, Tagab district, Kapisa, who fled in 2006 and are now in Bagrami district, Kabul province. Approximately 280 families from Sangeen district of Hilmand who fled insurgency and counter-insurgency fighting that started in December 2007, currently living in SubDistrict 5, Kabul City. From an earlier group of 229 families (1,145 individuals), a few families returned but others came to join them in April-May 2008. In July 2008 about 50 more families who are related to the community leader arrived (the latest additions have not yet been profiled). 6 Hazara families (30 individuals) who fled insurgency in Gizab, currently living in District 5 in Kabul City. 4050 families from Kohi Safi district of Parwan Province who moved to Ghazi Abad main village and surrounding sub-villages in Dehsabz district of Kabul Province in July 2008, as a result of growing insecurity in Kohi Safi and AGE infiltration from Tagab. Twelve of the families in Ghazi Abad were interviewed by UNHCR.

Living in Ghazni 352 Hazara families (1,760 individuals) who fled fighting in Uruzgan Khas district of Uruzgan Province in November 2007 and are settled in the Nawabad area of Ghazni City. 65 Pashtun families (325 individuals) who fled insurgency in the Qarabagh district of Ghazni province in December 2007 and are in displacement in Ghazni Centre.

36

Afghanistan IDPs - Central Region IDPs Caseload No. of Individuals in Displacement - 14 Aug 08

Branch Office Kabul

Geographic Information and Mapping Unit Operational Information Section

Paryan

Panjsher Parwan Kapisa Kabul Wardak Logar Ghazni

Shinwari Salang

Khenj (Hese- Awal) Bazarak Shutul

Panjsher
Rukha Unaba Dara

Sia Gird ( Ghorbund) Shekh Ali

Hisa-i-Awali Kohistan Kapisa Koh Band Hisa-i-Duwumi Kohistan Mahmudi Raqi Nijrab Chaharikar Bagram Alasay

Parwan
Surkhi Parsa

Istalif Farza

Qarabagh Kohi Safi Tagab

Kalakan Guldara Dih Sabz

Shakardara

Wardak
Jalrez

Paghman

Kabul
Kabul Bagrami Surobi

Maydan Shahr Chahar Asyab Nirkh Day Mirdad Mohammad Agha Khaki Jabbar

Protracted caseload 2321 Recent conflict affected 2740

Chaki Wardak

Puli Alam

Logar
Khoshi

Azra

No Window

Ghazni
Nawur Rashidan Jaghatu Saydabad

Baraki Barak Charkh

Khwaja Umari Zana Khan

Kharwar

Bahrami Shahid (Jaghatu) Ajristan

Wali Muhammadi Shahid Ghazni Dih Yak Waghaz

Malistan Qarabagh Jaghuri

Andar

Giro Muqur Ab Band

Gelan

Nawa

Boundaries Province District Province center

Page 37

: IDP Settlement/Camp

Data Date & Source: UNHCR sub/filed offices Jan - 10 Aug 2008

Recent conflict affected 2085

ANNEX 4 DISPLACEMENT IN THE EASTERN REGION

The Eastern Region includes the Provinces of Nuristan, Kunar, Laghman, and Nangarhar. There is no documented protracted caseload in the region, although there are IDPs who settled in Jalalabad in the Russian period. What we know is that there are approximately 3,000 families in Farm Hade, 4,000 families in Herarshai, and an indeterminate number in Samarkhel. But these groups have not been profiled and are not considered part of the humanitarian caseload. There are, however, some new conflict-affected IDPs and there is a now a large number of returnees from Pakistan who have not returned to their places of origin, but have set up temporary settlements in Nangarhar and Laghman. Type of IDP New Conflict-affected 2008 Returnees from Pakistan 2005-07 Returnees from Pakistan Total Families 577 5,220 3,517 9,314 Individuals 3,462 31,320 21,102 55,884

IDP caseload in East

35,000 31,320

Individuals
28,000

21,102 21,000

(a)
14,000

7,000

3,462

0 New Conflict-affected 2008 Returnees from Pakis tan 2005-07 Returnees from Pakis tan

New Conflict-affected There are 577 families (approx 3,462 individuals) from Nuristan who were displaced to Kunar Province at the end of December 2007/beginning January 2008 as a result of insurgency operations. These include Nuristanis, a tribe perceived as being affiliated with the Coalition and labeled Government spies by the insurgents. While the Coalition has three bases in Nuristan, this is a Taliban stronghold and the AGEs control all the access roads. Those who fled received death threats from the AGEs. The IDPs have received food and NFIs from a variety of sources including Government, PRT and UNHCR. Most of the displaced have gone to villages in Nari and Barikot districts of Kunar where they are living in rented houses, or in tents and improvised shelters, or with relatives. Some have gone to Jalalabad and Beshud district and others to the

38

Chitral area of Pakistan. It is unlikely that they will be able to return home in the near future as the security situation is getting worse.

(b) 2008 Returnees from Pakistan In the Eastern Region, in the first seven months of 2008 (until 2 August), a total of 22,638 families (125,531 individuals) were repatriated to the Eastern Region of Afghanistan from Pakistan. A substantial number of them came from Jalozai camp which was closed by the Pakistani authorities following the Tripartite agreement with the Government of Afghanistan and UNHCR. While most of the returnees have been able to return to their places of origin, a significant portion (about 23%) more than 5,200 families and approximately 31,200 individuals have not been able to do so, either for security reasons, or because of landlessness, or for economic or other reasons, and remain in secondary displacement. The numbers are as follows:

Place Chamtala Lower Shek Mesri Mihterlam Desert Siasang Tangi 2 Total

Families 3,589 80 730 64 757 5,220

Individuals 21,534 480 4,380 384 4,542 31,320

They include the following people in the following settlements: i. Chamtala Desert, Nangarhar The settlement is located 26 kilometers west of Jalalabad, bordering Surkhrod and Khogyani districts. According to an assessment made 30 June 2008, there are 3,589 families residing in Chamtala, including 275 families who were transferred from Farm Hada in mid-June. The majority of them are 2008 returnees from Jalozai camp who originate from Khogyani, Hisarak and Sherzad districts. They have built make-shift shelters and are living with their family members. Before the war, many of these returnees were hamsaya10 who either farmed the land or tended the animals of landlords. Chamtala settlement was officially designated as a Land Allocation Site on 5 June by the Governor and the Minister of Refugees and Repatriation. Elders claim that there are more people in the settlement than the estimates show i.e., some 4,500 families and that more will be coming. No doubt, the prospect of being allocated land is serving as a magnet, although the Land Allocation Committee (LAC), which has started short listing applicants for beneficiary selection.ots in Chamtala. (There are 6,300 plots available in Chamtala, to be allocated to eligible applicants in accordance with Presidential Decree 104. The plan is to allocate 3,000 plots to the current residents.
10

Hamsaya is one of the three pillars of Pashtunwali the rules and regulations of the Pashtun tribes and refers to an informal system of power similar to the relationship between lord and vassal (or clientism). The word hamsaya means friend is Pashto, but the term is applied to a man who abandons his home because of poverty or a blood feud and seeks the protection of an elder in another village.

39

In addition to these returnees, there are also 200 families of disabled people who had previously been living at Farm Had and were transferred to Chamtala in mid-June. These 200 families will also be receiving plots in Chamtala.

ii. Lower Shek Mesri, Surkhord, Nangorhar. This is a temporary settlement of 80 families (480 individuals) all from one clan from the Torghar area of Khogyani district, whose village of origin is in a remote mountain between Nangarhar and Laghman province. They are unable to return because they lack land, living conditions there are very severe, and there is no access road. A homogenous community, the group has squeezed themselves onto a strip of land adjacent to the old Lower Sheik Mesri settlement. DoRR Nangarhar has confirmed that the families are permitted to remain in the site.

iii. Mihterlam Desert, Laghman This settlement is 7 kilometres from Mithterlam town. While this land is hot, sandy and subjected to strong stormy winds, a total of 579 returnee families (559 from Jalozai camp) have settled there. In addition, there are 11 families who returned in previous years. According to the DoRR of Laghman, the number has actually increased to 730 families. They are mainly poor people from the Andror, Badpakh and Garoch areas of Mihterlam and claim they cannot return to their places of origin due to tribal conflicts, very difficult access to the area or landlessness. The Provincial Government has started to complete the works needed to convert the site as regular settlement for returnees with a potential capacity of 4,000 plots. So far DoRR has demarcated 200 plots. The Provincial Governor has requested one-room-shelter assistance for eligible families living at this site.

iv. Siasang, Surkhrod, Nangarhar There are 64 families on this disputed site which the provincial authorities maintain is government property. The families have been asked to leave but refuse to do so. This includes 21 families originating from Qarghaee, Laghman who claim to have received land in the area from their tribal elder (Nasier). Another 2 families, from Sherzad district, claim to have purchased the land and/or that it was given to them by the elders of their Saak tribe. As well, 42 Kuchi families have settled in this area and claim to be landless in their place of origin. v. Tangi 2, Kuz Kunar/Behsud, Nangarhar As per an assessment carried out on 21-22 July, there is one group of 307 families who initially settled in Tangi 2, of whom 39 families were absent during the assessment. All these settlers are from Kunar province: i.e., from Pech Valley, Chapa Dara, Watapur, Shigal and Khas Kunar districts. They claim that they cannot go back to their places of origin because of security concerns and landlessness. The Provincial Government has agreed to allow this group to stay in Tangi 2 on a temporary basis. The site where they are staying has been demarcated, and regular two-room shelters will be constructed for eligible families. There is also second group of around 450 families, who returned to Afghanistan in April 2008, but who only recently arrived in Tangi 2. These families had first gone to various

40

villages in Behsud, Chaparhar and Jalalabad. However, as they do not own land where they first settled, they decided to relocate to Tangi 2. After several discussions with the Kuz Kunar community, the latter agreed to allow this second group to remain in Tangi 2 in a site adjacent to the first group; and the district and provincial authorities have agreed to the delivery of water to the community. While DoRR Kunar had offered this group an alternative site for temporary settlement with possible land distribution in Kunar in the near future, the returnees did not accept this offer because they had security concerns about the return area. If land allocation proceeds apace, a durable solution will be found for a substantial portion of this caseload, and others that arrive, if they find they are not eligible for land allocation, may eventually return to their places of origin. Some portion of this caseload will, however, find themselves in secondary displacement in Afghanistan. (c) Returnees from Pakistan between 2005-2007 In addition to those who have returned to Afghanistan from Pakistan in 2008, there are 3,517 families who returned from Pakistan between 2005 and 2007 who are still living in temporary settlements. These include the following: Province Nangarhar Laghman Kunar Total Families 2,100 96 1.321 3,517 Individuals 12,600 576 7,926 21,102

i. Nangharar 516 Kunari families, repatriated from FATA camps in 2005, staying in Saracha, Samarkhel, Ada Akhunzada, Lajigar, Samarkhel and Hesarsha 400 Kuchi families, repatriated from FATA camps in 2005, staying in Samarkhel, Upper Sheik Mesri and Barikab 300 Kuchi families repatriated from Katchagari in 2007, staying in Middle Sheik Mesri 30 Arab families repatriated from Katchagari in 2007, staying in Samarkhel 696 families (different tribes), repatriated from FATA camps in 2005, staying in Lower Sheik Mesri 158 families repatriated in 2006 and staying in Jamaly ii. Laghman 96 families who returned in 2005 and 2006, staying in Zangir, Quargai

iii. Kunar
1,321 families repatriated in 2005 form FATA camps who are staying in Sirkanay, Khas Kunar, Shigal, Marawara and Asadabad

41

Afghanistan IDPs - Eastern Region Returnees from Pakistan 2005 - 2008 & New Conflict Affected IDPs No. of Individuals in Displacement - 14 Aug 08

Branch Office Kabul

Geographic Information and Mapping Unit Operational Information Section

Nuristan Kunar Laghman Nangarhar
Bargi Matal

Kamdesh Mandol

Parun

Nuristan

Du Ab Waygal Wama Shaygal wa shital Ghaziabad Nari

Daulatshahi Nurgaram Chapa Dara

Bar Kunar

No Window

Dara-I-Pech

Wata Pur

Dangam

Kunar
Asadabad Marawara Narang Chawkay Dara-I-Nur Nurgal Sarkani

Alishing

Alingar

Laghman

Returnees 2005 - 2007 7926 New conflict affected 3462

Mihtarlam

Khas Kunar Kuz Kunar Qarghayi

Returnees 2005 - 2007 576 Returnees 2008 4380 Siasang - Returnees 2008 384

Bihsud

:
Surkh Rod

Kama Jalalabad

Goshta

:
Hesarak Khogayani

Nangarhar
Bati Kot Lal Por

Lower Shikh Mesri - Returnees 2008 480 Returnees 2005 - 2007 12600 Tangi 2 - Returnees 2008 4542 Chamtala - Returnees 2008 21534 Boundaries Province District Province center

Chaparhar

Rodat Muhmand Dara Shinwar

Shirzad

Kot Dur Baba Pachier Agam Deh Bala Acheen Nazyan

Page 42

: IDP Settlement/Camp

Data Date & Source: UNHCR sub/filed offices Jan - 10 Aug 2008

ANNEX 5 DISPLACEMENT IN THE SOUTHEASTERN REGION The Southeastern Region of the country, addressed by UNHCRs office in Gardez, covers the provinces of Paktya, Khost and Paktika . The SE is a very conservative area in which the Taliban have a great deal of power; in September 2006, the Governor of Paktya was killed by a suicide bomber. The area is also extremely poor, politics is in the hands of tribal groups, there is a lot of intra-tribal conflict (Pashtun against Pashtun) and the reach of government is limited. Paktika and Khost are difficult to access, although there is a regular UNAMA helicopter flight to Khost city, and UNAMA and UNHCR have a small presence there. There is a protracted caseload of approximately nearly 2,000 families and a small case load of new conflict-affected families and battle-affected IDPs. a. The protracted case load The protracted caseload is comprised of 1,943 families (12,341 individuals) according to a survey conducted in July 2008 by WFP. 11 These are people who voluntarily returned to Afghanistan from the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Area) of Pakistan when the camps there were closed in late 2005. Most of them were Kuchi who had migrated with their cattle between Pakistan (where they wintered) and Afghanistan (walking between Khost, Paktya and Logar in the summer). When the Russians invaded, this group left Afghanistan on a more permanent basis to escape the fighting and bombing and were forced to give up their cattle and their nomadic way of life. When they returned in 2005, their population had expanded by more than 300 percent and they did not have land in their place of origin or houses to support this enlarged community. They, therefore, settled in Khost where they were able to find work. (Khost is warmer than in Patkya, agriculture is more substantial, and there is the poppy cultivation to provide a seasonal income.) These IDPs initially lived in 13 open-air settlements in Khost Centre, Terizai and Bak districts of Khost province, though only 8 of these settlements still exist, and they are no longer open-air as the IDPs have build more permanent shelters on these sites. They are the following: Settlement 1. Khani Khwar 2. Kundi Sahara 3. Farm Bagh 4. Chargoti 5. Kaga Zawar 6. Mangas 7. Wacha Khwara 8. Badam Bagh TOTAL Families 257 14 280 138 78 14 868 294 1,943 Individuals 1,472 98 1,668 902 515 95 5,539 2,052 12,341

Of the groups documented in the Chart above, we have more detailed information about the population in some of the settlements listed. In Badam Bagh, for example, of a group of 232 families (1,376) who are being asked to relocate because the area where they live is to be redeveloped, we have data that 170 families originate in Khost, 9 families are from Paktya, 76 from Paktika, 2 from Kabul, 7 from Kapisa and 2 from Kunduz. Those families who originate from Khost are being evaluated by the Land Allocation Committee to see if they are eligible to
11

In 2006, when this group was initially surveyed, there were 2,292 families totally 12,402 individuals.

43

receive a plot under Presidential Edict 104. For the rest, some other solution will need to be found as there is very strong resistance to the idea of allocating scarce land to people who do not originate from Khost. A similar situation has emerged for the Wacha Khwara settlement, where some of the IDPs will have to relocate. There are, however, certain elements of the protracted caseload about which our information is poor or confusing. For example, one of the original open-air settlements Bak (Ghasho Sam) -was on a piece of land which both the Kuchi IDPs and the Babakar Khel tribe claimed. There were 380 Kuchi families (1,949 individuals) living in the settlement in 2006. Several fights broke out between the protagonists, the last of which took place in 2006 and led the Kuchi to leave. When they evacuated Bak, they went initially to the Sorwai Pan area and later scattered to various locations. Apparently, they have now regrouped and settled in a valley on the western side of Khai Khwar, almost 10 km from Khost City. But they have not been assessed and are not in the above statistics. Also not in the statistics are 7 families (49 individuals) in another of the closed settlements, Babrak Tana, and 9 families (59 individuals) who had lived a settlement called Sarkay Teega. In both cases, it is suggested that these families may have moved to Logar province, but also that they may return to Khost for the winter. More puzzling yet, however, is the situation of a group that identify themselves as the Mullachel (or Mullah Khel) tribe, part of the 2005 FATA return. In this case, they were forced back to Afghanistan in November 2005 after the onset of winter, their homes bulldozed by Pakistani security forces, and without Voluntary Repatriation Forms (VRFs). The leaders of this group claim that their community is comprised of 2,222 families and that they are living in 6 villages in Ali Shir district, a highly insecure area which abuts Pakistan. Others suggest that many of them actually live in the 8 settlements described above, and that others may be living on the Pakistani side of the border, or migrating. It is, however, impossible to get better information because of the insecurity of the area. They are also not included in the statistics presented here. (b) New-conflict IDPs There is group of IDPs who are living in the Terwi district of Paktika, comprised of 254 families (about 1,524 individuals). These IDPs are from the Nasir tribe who are originally from the Shamalzai district in Zabul. After they returned to from Pakistan in 2005, they went back to their area of origin but were chased away by Shamalzai tribesmen because of an old property dispute. (c) Battle-affected IDPs Beyond this, there are other people affected by fighting who become IDPs in the Southeast, though we have little information about their numbers or their condition. What we know is as follows: 26 March 2008, DoRR Gardez informed UNHCR of the arrival of 5 IDP families (27 individuals) from Mirman Daw village in Greghk District, Hilmand Province, fleeing conflict there. 35 families who originate from Gardi Seri, Paktya province, living in Gardez town, having fled fighting between Coalition Forces and insurgents, air strikes and insecurity 87 families from Paktya, also fleeing fighting and insecurity, living in several villages (Sahak, Tameer and Ghandak) near Gardez.

44

Afghanistan IDPs - Southeast Region IDPs Caseload No. of Individuals in Displacement - 14 Aug 08

Branch Office Kabul

Geographic Information and Mapping Unit Operational Information Section

Ali Khail (Jaji)

Battle affected 759 Khani Khwar 1472
Jaji Maidan Dand Patan Sabri Bak

Laja Ahmad Khail Ahmad Abad

Paktya

Chamkani

Sayed Karam

Paktya Khost
Jani Khail

Paktika
Gardiz Mosa Khail Qalandar Zurmat Shawak Nadir Shah Kot Zadran Mata Khan Shamal Mando Zayi

Khost(Matun)

::: : :: : :

Tere Zayi

Khost
Sharan Nika Ziruk Spira Tani Gurbuz

Kundi Sahara 98 Farm Bagh 1668 Chargoti 902 Kaga Zawar 515

Yosuf Khel

Sar Hawza Urgun Gayan

Yahya Khel

Omna

Badam Bagh 2052

Sarobi

Mangas 95 Wacha Khawa 5539

Zarghun Shahr

No Window

Jani Khel Barmal Dila

Paktika

Waza Khwa

Gomal

New conflict affected 1524

Wor Mayi

Turwo

Boundaries Province District Province center

Page 45

: IDP Settlement/Camp

Data Date & Source: UNHCR sub/filed offices Jan - 10 Aug 2008

IDPs in Kabul

46

ANNEX 6 DISPLACEMENT IN THE NORTHERN AND NORTHEASTERN REGIONS Although there are people from northern provinces living in displacement in both the Western and Southern Regions unwilling or unable to return, the Northern and Northeast Regions do not themselves have a large protracted IDP population. There have, however, been recent displacements because of the continuing drought. And, while these displacements have been relatively small scale the past few years, this year threatened a different situation. According to the Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development, based on a survey across 500 locations in the north, the drought has resulted in the almost total failure of the wheat crop in rain fed areas and a 50% failure in irrigated areas. Coupled with the sharp rise in the cost of food, an alarming food security situation emerged. (a) Protracted Caseload At the present time, the protracted caseload in the North and Northeaster Regions, the numbers are as follows: Province Balk Faryab Kunduz Takhar TOTAL Number of Families 37 27 195 106 365 Number of Individuals 211 127 975 530 1,843

In Balkh Province: Protracted IDPs in Nahrshahi district. Around 20 Pashtun families (100 individuals) in Shahrak-e-Afghania village, the remaining part of a group of around 300 Pashtun families from the remote and arid Omakai village of Zare district in Balkh province. A semi-nomadic group, whose winter home was in Omakai, they left Zare in 2001, after the collapse of the Taliban, accused by Uzbek commanders of collaborating with the Taliban, and sought shelter in villages around Mazar and in surrounding districts. In 2006-2007, UNHCR assisted 220 of these families to return home, while some others repatriated by themselves or locally settled. The remaining 20 are unwilling to return because they have personal security concerns. Unfortunately, those who have returned to Omakai and those who have settled in Boybachaqaq village in Sholgara district are both facing legal challenges to their right to settle on land they considered to be theirs. As well, in June 2008, it was clear that are both in serious need of water and food assistance. Protracted IDPs in Balkh district: 17 Pashtun families (111 individuals) in the centre of Balkh district, the remaining part of a group of around 100 IDP families who originate from Dawatabad and Sherintagab districts of Faryab province, displaced in 2001-2002 for security, drought and economic reasons. In 2007, UNHCR assisted 43 families from the group to return home and others have repatriated or relocated by themselves. These few remaining families do not wish to return for security or other reasons.

47

Balochi returnees from Jalozai (in Pakistan) 200 families (1,200 individuals) who returned to Sholgara district on 23 May and who are residing temporarily in a Buzkashi stadium in Sholgara pending solution of their land issue. Government efforts to find a durable solution for their settlement is going on and for the time being this group is considered a caseload which is temporarily displaced and in need of assistance.

In Sare Pul Province: In Sayeed Aabad district: 25 Pashtun families in Zaka village who returned from Kandahar 2-3 years ago and who are unable/unwilling to return to their remote village because of a land dispute and insecurity. They hope to have land allocated to them in Zaka. According to the Head of DoRR in Sare Pul, this caseload has no security problem and they could return to their places of origin in Sayad District or they can stay in the present area which they have purchased. Some of them requested DoRR/NRC to help them with shelters in the places of origin and some on their purchased land in Zaka village. In Sozma Qala district: 30 Aimaq families (Dari speaking) in Qala Qala village, originating from Dara Zamchi/Awqaf village in Sancharak district. There is no confirmed information about them. In Kohistanat District: 10 Aimaq families in Kalakhana village originally from Ghor who left their place of origin in 2006 because of economic/drought problems; and 20 Aimaq families in Chiras area who left Ghor in 2005 for similar reasons. They have not yet been assessed. In Sare Pul Center: 100 Arab (Dari speaking) families in Sang Toda area who came in 2007 from their homes in Shiram area of Sare Pul because of drought. In 2008, around 200 more families have come to the same area again due to the drought and for economic reasons.

In Faryab Province: Battle-affected IDPs in Maimana: 17 families (77 individuals) out of some 300 families who had been displaced from the Pashtun Kot district in July 2006 by military fighting; while the rest have returned, these prefer to remain in Maimana city and the surrounding villages for economic reasons. Field Unit Maimana and DoRR state that these displaced people can go back to their places of origin if they want to as they is no longer a security problem there. Protracted IDPs in Almar district: 10 Tajik/Uzbek families (50 individuals) in Biglar Village and Qaraye valley, originally from Quzat village of Kohistan district, displaced more than 20 years ago after brutal killings between the families of two commanders. Protracted IDPs in Khohistan district: 15 families (75 individuals) displaced from villages in the Gurziwan area by a local commander with security or economic reasons for not returning. As per UNHCRs assessment in June 2008, these displaced people have already managed to return to their places of origin on their own.

48

In Samangan Province: About 75 families behind Karta-e-Khorasan village of Aybak city, from various districts of Samangan, who came there two years ago primarily for economic reasons and are living in makeshift shelters on government land. These are considered economic migrants rather than IDPs. About 20 families in Shahikhail village of Aybak from Dara Payan district, who came in 2007, also for economic reasons, are living with family or friends and are considered economic migrants.

In Kunduz Province: Protracted IDPs in Bagh-e-Shirkat area of Kunduz. 171 Gujor IDP families (855 individuals), part of a group of 277 Gujor families displaced in 2001/2002 from Farkhar district of Takhar province and unable to return because of security issues. Protracted IDPs in villages around Kunduz city. 24 Pashtun families (120 individuals) displaced in 2001 from Bolak Jalyer village in Bangi district of Takhar province, unable to return because of security concerns.

In Takhar Province: Protracted Conflict IDPs from the 277 Gujor families displaced from Farkhar district in 2001-2002, and unable to return for security reasons: 70 Gujor families (350 individuals) in Baharak district; 24 Gujor families (120 individuals) in Chenar Village of Kalafgan district, and 12 families (60 individuals) in Ishkashim district.

There are no known IDP groups in Baghlan or Jawzjan provinces. (b) Drought affected In 2008, the first concrete manifestation of displacement as a result of drought in the north occurred in early June as some 2,000 families left their villages in the Alburz area of Chemtal district, Balkh Province and trekked towards Mazar, setting ups shelters near Chesma e Shafa area, still in Chimtal district. The number of families rose to over 6,129 in late June. Most of those displaced were Arab and the displacement may, in part, have been motivated by an attempt to stake out a land claim in Chimtal; the movement was also, undoubtedly, motivated by the hope that the displaced would be in a better position to make the case for assistance. The response of both Government and UN agencies was to offer assistance, but to help transport the families from Alburz back to their homes -- to provide water and food there, not in the places of displacement. The strategy, which was largely successful, was to avoid assistance in displacement serving as a magnet for further displacement. This notwithstanding, there was and continues to be displacement from villages Darzab to Jawzjan Center, to Kunduz, to Sari Pul and to Pakistan. There has also been displacement from Mainmana to Pakistan. We are here seeing traditional mechanisms for coping with seasonal drought. The numbers are difficult to calculate with any precision as reports are sporadic: e.g., reports of 1,636 families displaced from 3 districts in Faryab or 500 families displaced from Qush Tepa district in Jawzjan. This year, to more systematically address the humanitarian challenge that the drought posed, a Water and Sanitation (WASH) Cluster and a Food and Agriculture Cluster were established in the North.

49

Afghanistan IDPs - Northern Region Protracted Caseload No. of Individuals in Displacement - 14 Aug 08

Branch Office Kabul

Geographic Information and Mapping Unit Operational Information Section

Jawzjan Balkh Kunduz Badakhshan Takhar Faryab Sari PulSamangan Baghlan

Shaki

Darwaz Darwazbala

Takhar 530 Faryab 127

Qarqin Kham Ab Khani Chahar Bagh Khwaja Du Koh Andkhoy Qaramqol Mangajek Dawlatabad Mardyan

Kuf Ab Khwahan Shighnan Raghistan

Balkh 211

Kunduz city 120

No Window Baghi Shirkat Darqad Chah Ab 855 Yangi Qala

Khwaja Bahawuddin

Yawan

Badakhshan
Kohistan

Shortepa Sharak Hairatan Kaldar Imam Sahib

Shahri Buzurg Yaftal Sufla Fayzabad Dashti Qala Takhar Arghanj Khaw Rustaq Argo

Shahada

Khwaja Ghar

Baharak Wakhan Khash

Jawzjan

Chahar Bolak Nahri Shahi Balkh Khaniqa Fayzabad Mazari Sharif Marmul Chimtal Feroz Nakhchir Chahar Kint Sholgara Hazrati Sultan

Qalay-I- Zal

Kunduz

Baharak

Kalfagan Kishim

Darayim Tashkan Jurm Warduj Ishkashiem

Kunduz
Chahar Dara

:
Bangi

Taluqan

Dawlatabad Shibirghan

Aliabad Khanabad Baghlani Jadid

Namak Ab Chal

Tagab (Kishmi Bala) Yamgan (Girwan)

Zebak

Ishkamish Aybak Dara-I-Sufi Payin Khuram Wa Sarbagh Burka Guzargahi Nur Farang Wa Gharu Kuran Wa Munjan Warsaj

Shirin Tagab

Qush Tepa Sayyad

Sari Pul

Almar

Khwaja Sabz Posh Darzab Maymana Bilchiragh Pashtun Kot

Gosfandi Kishindih Sangcharak Zari

Samangan

Baghlan

Puli Khumri Khwaja Nahrin Hijran (Jilga Nahrin) Dahana-I- Ghuri Khost Wa Firing Dih Salah

Faryab
Gurziwan Qaysar

Dara-I-Sufi Bala

Sari Pul
Kohistanat Balkhab

Dushi Ruyi Du Ab

Andarab Puli Hisar Khinjan

Kohistan Tala Wa Barfak

Boundaries Province District Province center

Page 50

: IDP Settlement/Camp

Data Date & Source: UNHCR sub/filed offices Jan - 10 Aug 2008

Aqcha

Balkh

Khulm

Dashte Archi Hazar Sumuch

ANNEX 7 DISPLACEMENT IN THE CENTRAL HIGHLANDS

This Region includes two Provinces Bamyan and Daykundi. In addition to this, Lal wa Sargenal district of Ghor and Behsuds I & II districts of Maidan Wardak province also fall under the UNHCR Area of Operation for the Central Highlands. There is no protracted case load in this region. However, there are some 20 IDP families from Kijran and Gizab districts living in Nili Centre in Daykundi Province. These are political IDPs who were driven out of their homes because of their political affiliation with and support for the Government. These IDPs are extremely vulnerable and live in a precarious situation as they can be targeted by AGEs even in Nili. As well, in the past two months, the region has seen substantial displacement as a result of the outbreak of fighting between Hazara farmers and Kuchi nomads in Bihsud I and II, districts of Wardak Province. The fighting intensified in July as a result of which 20 Hazaras and 9 Kuchi were killed, dozens wounded on both sides, and thousands of families displaced. This is a conflict that has gone on for years between these two communities: the Kuchi (predominantly Pashtun) who in summer travel with their flocks to the pasturelands of the Central Highlands, and the Hazara, Afghanistans third largest ethnic group, the dominant group in the Central Highlands. The conflict is in part over the rights to grazing land but it is also political. Kuchi elders complain that since the overthrow of the Taliban government in 2001, Hazaras have enjoyed strong international support and been given opportunities in government and other decision-making bodies, while the Kuchi have been marginalized. For their part, Hazara elders believe the Kuchi to have been collaborators of the mainly Pashtun Taliban and feel that they should be held accountable for that. They also argue that the laws (both national and Sharia) on the basis of which the Kuchi claim pasture rights are being misinterpreted: that pasture land close to a village belongs to that village and land usage cannot be given away to others without the consent of those villagers. Thousands of families were displaced internally from Behsuds I & II to the outskirts of the Baba mountains and to the areas of Beshud II where there was no fighting. The displacements were not only from the conflict zones, but also from surrounding areas, as families who feared that the fighting might reach them also fled. As of the 28 July, 403 families were displaced from Behsud to Bamyan Center or to the Kalo valley of Shiber district, while there were more Harzara families who fled to Kabul The conflict was mediated by a Presidential Commission and the Kuchi were asked to leave the area; they only did so only at the end of August, when they normally leave the Highlands. The situation will be clearer after the result of a Governmental assessment mission and a separate inter-agency assessment mission are completed.

51