NGO's Pawns in Terrorism?

This is a pretty comprehensive- yet cynical view - of international NGO activities in conflict and post conflict areas from The New Republic. I wrote a post last May introducing the SPOT requirement on all US government funding in Iraq and Afghanistan (and possibly to be implemented in Somalia... and everywhere?!). It stands for Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker This requirement requires all US contractors (including INGOs) to provide the US government and the military with the GPS location of all programs and the names, positions and nationalities of all staff so that the military can keep tabs on all activity and movement (including movement in, out and around the country).

There are some major points of concern here. The first is the close association this put INGOs in with the US military. It runs counter to a lot of impartial and neutral stances of many of the major players. Close association with the US government can put beneficiaries in danger of attack from non-us friendly actors. Secondly, it reduces the capacity of donors like USAID to collect information effectively. This has been highlighted by the GAO. I know that despite a concerted effort from NGO consortiums like InterAction, a few INGOs have signed contracts (whether they knew it was in there or not) which include SPOT. Contributing further to the bleak situation David Rieff paints.

A good point that is brought up in the article is the fact that in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, the goal is not really development but national security. The budgets are simply not high enough to actually conduct development per say. Moreover, one needs to look at the types of civil society and governance programs that are actually funded here. In Iraq, programs such as the Community Action Program (CAP) which was in its third incarnation during my time, was in all matter of fact a way for the government to provide lots of material stuff to communities so that they would not hate what is happening to the country - Despite what the NGO (or development company in some cases) intended it to be. Another gem included a 2 year nation-wide peacebuilding program (peace in Iraq... in 2 years!) that was intended to be a front for counter insurgency information.

I wouldn't go as far to say that NGOs are pawns. Many know exactly what is going on and fight it continuously with lobbying. In regards to SPOT it may actually work (inshallah). The US administration is reviewing how USAID operates and SPOT seems to be on the list for review after it was blasted by the GAO. However the cynicism is warranted.