An international conference in Bonn has promised continued support for Afghanistan after the withdrawal of Nato combat troops in 2014. But Afghan community organisations and aid agencies said the democratic gains of the past decade were already under threat from cuts in western aid budgets.
The conference — coming exactly a decade after an international agreement in Bonn to recognise the government of Hamid Karzai and the creation of a Nato-led security force — pledged to provide economic assistance to the Afghan government until 2024, when the International Monetary Fund predicts the country will become self-sufficient, largely from revenue from its mineral wealth.
The German foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle told the conference: "We send a clear message to the people of Afghanistan: We will not leave you on your own. We will not leave you in the lurch."
"The United States intends to stay the course with our friends in Afghanistan," the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said, adding that the American commitment was for the "long haul". "We will be there with you as you make the hard decisions that are necessary for your future."
But Clinton added that in return for economic support, Afghans had to live up to their commitments "on taking difficult decisions to embrace reform, lead in their own defence and strengthen an inclusive democracy rooted in the rule of law."
Wazhma Frogh, an activist in the Afghan Women's Network, welcomed the pledged support, saying: "To many people this is just another conference on Afghanistan, but for Afghans on the ground it is more important. People fear that they could lose their rights that they have won so far."
But Frogh also voiced concern that, despite the promises made at Bonn, continued support for gender equality, civil society organisations and a free media was already drying up as the West fails to escape from recession and starts cutting aid budgets. Development aid from US, Afghanistan's biggest donor by far, has fallen from $3.5 billion last year to about $2 billion this year. Within that, the budget for supporting democracy, governance and civil society organisation fell by more than half from $231 million to $93 million and the allocation of support for "rule of law" dropped from $43 million to $16 million.
"We are already seeing the impact of the cuts on the ground. There is a decrease in international aid on democracy. Projects on gender equality and strengthening the media have closed down," Frogh said.
Louise Hancock, Oxfam's policy and advocacy advisor in Afghanistan said: "The Afghan people needed to be here to hear that there will not be abandoned but at the moment it is just a lot of talk. Already there are projects on education for girls that are shutting down, and one of the biggest fears is that when the troops go, the funds will drop, and drop quickly."
Britain has pledged to maintain its development aid to Afghanistan at the current level of £178 million a year. William Hague said the the government would also be talking its allies in the next few months on how much would be spent on further help in supporting Afghan security forces after 2014.
"The conference has broadened the understanding around the world that our support will continue to be necessary. Nobody should think about walking away after 2014, whether it's western Nato nations or Arab nations," the foreign secretary said.
The Gulf Cooperation Council is due to meet in February to discuss Arab support for the Afghan economy and its security forces. There will be an global economic aid pledging conference in Tokyo in July and a Nato summit in Chicago the next month, where the final size of the Afghan security forces will be decided.
"There are three reasons why I believe that the international community will continue to be generous despite the fiscal squeeze," Simon Gass, Nato's top civilian representative, told the Guardian.
"The first is that the costs after 2014 will be a fraction of what we are spending now because of the large number of troops. Second, Afghanistan will still be one of the poorest countries on earth and would under any circumstances attract a lot of financial help. Third, if we do not fund Afghanistan, for example by not paying for the Afghan security forces, we will put at risk all we have achieved in the last ten years.
"This is a matter of self interest, not philanthropy. If Afghanistan turned back to chaos, our countries would face flows of drugs and migrants, as well as instability in a sensitive part of the world."