Afghanistan’s guns for hire plan imperils aid schemes

The push by Afghanistan’s president to nationalise legions of private security guards before the end of March is encouraging corruption and jeopardising multi-billion-dollar aid projects, according to companies trying to make the change.

President Hamid Karzai has railed for years against the large number of guns for hire in Afghanistan, saying private security companies often skirt the law and risk becoming militias. He ordered them abolished in 2009 and eventually set 20 March of this year as the deadline for everyone – except Nato and diplomatic missions – to switch to government-provided security.

Afghan officials are rushing to meet the cut-off with the help of Nato advisers. However, with fewer than six weeks to go, it seems likely that many components will still be missing come the deadline.

The change imperils billions of pounds of aid flowing into Afghanistan. In a country beset by insurgent attacks and suicide bombings, the private development companies that implement most aid agencies’ programmes employ private guards to protect compounds, serve as armed escorts and guard construction sites.

On 21 March, approximately 11,000 guards now working for private security firms will become government employees as members of the Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF). They will still be working in the same place with the same job, but they will answer to the interior ministry.

Officially, everyone is optimistic. However, many are worried that the entire plan could fall apart.

Contractors for the US Agency for International Development said they were explicitly told not to discuss the changeover with reporters because media attention could endanger the delicate process.

Those critical of APPF insisted on speaking anonymously.

The APPF has yet to sign a contract to provide security for any of the approximately 75 companies expected to switch over to government guards in March, according to Noorkhan Haidari, the APPF’s business manager.

International firms that are expected to act as middlemen managing the guards are also having trouble getting licences. Though about 20 companies have said they plan to register as so-called risk management companies, or RMCs, only one licence has been issued – reportedly after a wait of about two months. Others trying to acquire licences say the required documents change every day. Meanwhile, the Afghan foreign ministry has denied visas to foreign workers for at least three security companies that are trying to register as RMCs or are working on one of the exempt contracts, according to a security adviser.

These firms have been told they have to wait for new procedures under the new APPF system. Afghans working with APPF have gone so far as to urge the business licensing agency to “stop stalling the process,” according to a letter sent to US government officials.

“The painfully slow momentum of the various Afghan government entities may have scuppered the chances of a timely handover to the APPF,” the letter said.

With so much undecided, some development organisations are opting to hunker down inside their compounds until the details are worked out.

A manager with one US government development contractor said the company expects to delay visits to projects in dangerous places until all documents are finalised.

Even once the RMCs are licensed, it is unclear that they will provide an easy transition.