In mid-2001, the prospects for progress in one of the world's largest and most complex refugee problems were remote. The extremist policies of the Taliban regime, deepening poverty and a crippling three-year drought had generated a major internal displacement problem and driven new population flows across Afghanistan's borders. The new exodus added to the estimated 6 million Afghans that had fled to neighbouring countries since 1980. Moreover, disillusioned by the state of their homeland, increasing numbers of Afghans had left the region and sought asylum throughout the world.

Given such unpromising circumstances, few would have imagined the dramatic change in Afghanistan's fortunes that 12 months later propelled one of the largest repatriation movements in modern history. By the end of 2002, well over 2 million Afghans had returned home from Pakistan and Iran. The repatriation continued throughout 2003 and 2004, with figures passing the half-million mark each year. At the same time, the return of internally displaced persons gathered pace and secondary movements beyond the region declined sharply.

Perhaps the most influential factor behind this remarkable turnaround was the growing confidence that flowed from international re-engagement in Afghanistan. The Bonn Agreement of December 2001 provided a political road map and timetable that presented the most persuasive opportunity for peace and reconciliation in more than a decade. It was underpinned by strong expressions of donor support for economic and social reconstruction at the Tokyo conference on Afghanistan in February 2002. Taken together, these moves renewed interest in the search for a solution to what had seemed an intractable refugee situation.

The huge repatriation movements since 2002 have partially alleviated a humanitarian concern that has persisted for more than two decades. They also provided valuable opportunities for political cooperation between Afghanistan and its neighbours on an issue that has been a source of considerable regional tension. Currently, the legal and operational framework for the management of voluntary repatriation is provided for by tripartite agreements which are serviced by regular working-level meetings. The confidence-building these exchanges permit will be critical to ensuring continued progress as the full consequences of the protracted displacement from Afghanistan become apparent.

The Governments of Pakistan and Iran, the two countries most affected by the presence of Afghan refugees, have long insisted on repatriation as the preferred solution. They have been steadfast in their opposition to local integration, especially in view of the large numbers involved. At the same time, they have implicitly acknowledged that the nature and composition of the Afghan populations on their territory has changed. Indeed, even before the fall of the Taliban both governments had periodically asserted that Afghans were predominantly economic migrants rather than refugees. They are also aware that long-established Afghan communities have formed close links with their host societies and have considerably expanded pre-conflict patterns of seasonal labour migration.

While the emergence of a recognized government in Afghanistan has partially removed an important obstacle to solutions at the inter-state level, serious economic, social and security concerns remain. These are of a magnitude that may take many years to overcome, and their solution will depend primarily on the establishment of a politically and financially viable state. The problems are reflected in the pattern of return to date, with comparatively few Afghans choosing to return to the south, southeast and central highlands, areas that are especially troubled by insecurity, drought and poverty. Moreover, long exposure to higher standards of living and better public services and employment opportunities have had a profound impact on long-staying Afghan communities in general, and the younger generation in particular. There is reluctance, both among those who are very poor and the comparatively better off, to return to a country where socio-economic indices are still among the lowest in the world, and where protection and human rights concerns persist.

Recognizing that tensions would eventually emerge over the scope and duration of the agreements on voluntary repatriation, UNHCR launched a policy initiative in mid-2003 to explore more comprehensive approaches. While supporting voluntary return as the preferred durable solution, it argued that a purely humanitarian and refugee-oriented perspective would be insufficient to address the more complex challenges of development, poverty, migration and demography that have emerged.

To this end, it has promoted inclusive consultations with donors, governments, civil society and Afghans themselves to devise policy and management arrangements for the future. There is broad agreement that continuing support for Afghanistan's reconstruction and the management of population movements as part of normalized bilateral and regional relations should be key objectives for the coming years. Progress in these areas would enhance sustainable reintegration and solutions for the remaining Afghan populations in the neighbouring countries. To achieve this, there was agreement that development and technical cooperation funding should increasingly replace humanitarian aid in the years to come.

During this transition period, finding a workable balance between Afghanistan's absorption capacity and the high returns, and between voluntariness and the pressures on asylum space, will remain key protection concerns for UNHCR. In the longer term, the transition from the international policy and solutions architecture of the refugee regime to the regional and bilateral management of population movements should be completed as the concerned states normalize relations. Within this overall perspective, UNHCR will focus increasingly on the identification of those individuals in continuing need of international protection and asylum.

Box 6.1 The Zambia Initiative and the Ugandan Self-Reliance Strategy

Chapter 7 Internally displaced persons