New head, old problems

When Swedish diplomat Staffan di Mistura was officially named by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon hours before the launch of the important international conference on Afghanistan in London, the public roller coaster ride of his nomination had finally came to end. Early this month, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, had already told Foreign Policy magazine that di Mistura had been offered the job, adding that he had talked to him and that he was very pleased with di Mistura's selection.

The United Nations, however, wouldn't confirm the selection at the time, saying only that no official announcement had been made and that until then nothing was certain. Last Friday, Foreign Policy reported that according to a senior UN official di Mistura had withdrawn his nomination due to family reasons and that the UN had reopened its candidate search only to report on Monday that di Mistura had called Ban Ki-moon over the weekend and told him that he had changed his mind.

Notwithstanding the usual difficulties of high-profile selection processes, the episode underscores two main challenges the UN and di Mistura face in their mission in Afghanistan: Managing the relations with the UN member states and its most important partner, the United States, and establishing and communicating a coherent and credible strategy.     

Good relations with Washington

From his background, the veteran diplomat di Mistura is certainly qualified to take over the job of Kai Eide, who currently heads the UN in Afghanistan, but announced his retirement for March after a public rift over the handling of the botched Afghan presidential election which ended in the firing of his deputy.

"He certainly brings one of the most important qualities to the job, which is a good relationship with the United States and specifically with the United States military," Philipp Rotmann, an Afghanistan and UN expert with the Global Public Policy Institute, told Deutsche Welle. "The last post of di Mistura's was Baghdad as head of the UN in Iraq which has taken on a larger role in the last year or two as the US troops started to withdraw. That will certainly be a major quality that will be needed for his job in Kabul."

Di Mistura, who has decades of work experience with the UN, is currently an executive director of the World Food Program and will take over his new duties on March 1. The appointment of di Mistura puts a personally trusted official of the UN Secretary General in this important post. The selection has the support not only of the US, but also of another UN constituency:

"Di Mistura is from Sweden. So obviously this is a consolation price for the Eide appointment which went not really the way it was planned originally," Fabrice Pothier, an Afghanistan expert and director of Carnegie Europe, told Deutsche Welle. "It's a way for the Scandinavian group of countries to not to lose face on this rather failed appointment of Kai Eide."

Limited mandate

While di Mistura's is undoubtedly qualified for the post, he faces the same major predicament that the UN has faced in Afghanistan in recent years. "The real question is what type of mandate is he going to operate under," said Pothier. At the moment, experts argue, the UN in Afghanistan is relegated to a supportive role that essentially leaves it pretty much powerless.

"In terms of resources and in terms of political standing in the Western capitals, the UN is clearly third to NATO and the European Union right now in Afghanistan," said Rotmann who adds that NATO with the appointment of Britain's ambassador Mark Sedwill as the new Senior Civilian Representative to Afghanistan has further strengthened its position in the country.

"The UN should not be doing aid coordination, which it is not very effective at doing, and it should be doing the high politics, it should be doing the political process especially now that there is a consensus to talk to the Taliban," said Pothier. But at the moment the UN's mandate by the Security Council covers essentially aid coordination in Afghanistan for which it doesn't have the appropriate financial and peacekeeping resources, added Pothier. 

But for that role to change, the UN's mission member states need to change its mandate, a move that seems all but certain. On the contrary, the fact that member states and international organizations have beefed up their own missions in Afghanistan could be an indicator that the UN will have a tough time increasing its standing in the country.  

Focus on political work

"The big danger with everybody's enlargement of their aid and the civilian surge and the surge in development assistance - Germany has for instance said that it will double its development aid for Afghanistan - is that even more than previously it will flow into piecemeal projects," said Rotmann. "If Germany would be able to coordinate better both with the European partners and with the UN in the Northern region, that would certainly help the UN as well as help Afghanistan as a whole."

Instead of aid coordination the UN should focus on civilian society projects, particularly trying to engage with the Taliban, say the experts.

The UN has one of the best political staffs in Kabul with a long experience in the country and excellent language skills, argues Rotmann. "So in that sense, in terms of  providing a conduit for potential talks with the Taliban and providing the means to reach out to some of these fighters that Western strategists are now trying to reintegrate into Afghan society with certain payments the UN is probably better-placed and might have a competitive advantage over the other organizations."

His colleague Pothier agrees, noting that the UN is the only legitimate organization to drive that process. He has this advice for di Mistura and Ban Ki-moon: "Get the UN out of the aid coordination business and focus it on the political work."

Author: Michael Knigge
Editor:  Rob Mudge