Advocating For Afghan Women in Humanitarian Crisis - with Indrika Ratwatte

Indrika Ratwatte: Afghanistan remains the second largest humanitarian crisis after Yemen and Sudan. When you look at just the needs alone of the people, 22 million people or 50% of the population are in need of humanitarian assistance. How do you ensure that? While the United nations and the partners talking to the de facto authorities look at the key humanitarian needs for the population, but also ensure that the protection needs at the same time are met. This is critical. It has to be done on evidence and it is to be done through a dialogue, not a one way communication, but engagement around these issues.

Panos: Protection leadership means ensuring that the safety, the dignity and the rights of the people affected by humanitarian crisis guide every decision we make. Humanitarian leaders in field operations need to work together to advocate and to keep attention firmly on those most at risk. Protection is everybody's business. Welcome to the Protection Leadership Podcast. Today I'm in Kabul, Afghanistan, one of the most complex protection environments in our sector. A country where there is rules, regulations, restrictions that have been put in place that are impacting the lives of, of millions of people and of course in particular the lives of women and girls. I will be discussing on the protection environment, the leadership role and really the decisions, hard decisions that are made on a daily basis with Indrika Ratwate, the Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary General Resident Coordinator, Humanitarian Coordinator in Afghanistan, the Triple Hattit as we call it. So Indrika, very welcome to the Protection Leadership podcast.

Indrika Ratwatte: Thank you very much, Panos, great to be here and uh, great to have you here in Afghanistan.

Panos: Thank you. I cannot think really of, uh, many other leadership positions or in the sector which brings such a complexity, really looking at the political, the humanitarian, the development and bring it out in a context that is impacting the lives of millions of people in the country. So I'm really happy you're with us and thank you for sharing your reflection and really kind of more your diplomacy skills and how to bring it all together. So Enrique, I wanted to ask you, you're leading one of the most complex protection environments where as I said, you know, lives are being impacting lots of people. So how do you see, um, this protection kind of risks and what's your perspective in an analysis looking at it within the context of Afghanistan?

Indrika Ratwatte: I think, Panos, as you said, Afghanistan remains the second largest humanitarian crisis after Yemen and Sudan. And I think when you look at just the needs alone of the people, 22 million people or 50% of the population are in need of humanitarian assistance, uh, protection support solutions, then top of that complexity we had in 2025, a huge return, the largest Return of Afghans To Afghanistan ever 2.8 million returnees coming to Afghanistan. And on compounding some of these complexities, you had climate change and natural disasters, severe uh, drought affecting 70% of the population who are agrarian in terms of livelihoods and an earthquake. So it's kind of the perfect storm of everything happening at the same time. And uh, here in lies the challenge of how do you ensure that while the United nations and the partners talking to the de facto authorities look at the key humanitarian needs for the population, but also ensure that the protection needs at the same time are met. And I think here comes the balance. One has to do in principle pragmatic advocacy around the key protection issues at the same time bringing the programmatic delivery for people that gives you also the space to make that protection action real on the ground. I think the balance we try to strike together and um, of course one has to not at any point shy away from saying what the protection issues are. This is critical. That has to be done with facts, it has to be done on evidence and it has to be done through a dialogue. And not a one way communication, but engagement around these issues. And I uh, think um, that's what we're trying to do here. It's uh, not easy. As I said, the complexities are many. That's the team spirit and I think the uh, work that the team does, also complemented by this kind of dialogue, uh, around protection leadership, is really helpful for us to continuously look at this because it's extremely dynamic, the situation.

Panos: Yeah, no, you painted uh, a picture where the complexity really from natural disasters, from drought, but also other kind of protection issues that impact the millions of lives. I want to zoom in. Specifically when you look at Afghanistan, obviously the first issue is women and girls. There have been so many restrictions in terms of movement, in terms of access to services, in terms of education, in terms of some basic civic rights that impact half the population in the country. So when you look at that in your capacity as UN coordinator, looking at humanitarian actors, the development actors, how to address these issues and the limitations particularly impacting women and girls.

Indrika Ratwatte: The first uh, point of entry around this, uh, Panos, I think is clearly talking about the fact that international obligations of the state of Afghanistan are uh, that all rights are respected of all Afghans. Number two, 50% of the population having challenges to contribute, work, educate themselves, impacts the well being of women, girls, the country as a whole, and its pathway to development and prosperity. Thirdly, I think what is also extremely important is having that frank exchange with the de Facto authorities saying, here are uh, the dynamics of these restrictions, here are the impacts. For example, where does one have the doctors, the nurses, the midwives that would enable Afghan daughters, sisters, wives, mothers to have healthcare if we don't have that space for education? How does one look at the growth of a country when 50% of its population, uh, not having the full opportunities to contribute to its growth? So this is also about Afghanistan being at peace with itself and having prosperity with its entire population engaged in this. So the fundamental rights as the obligations of the state of Afghanistan, the impact of some of these restrictions and working also around to find the spaces. And here what we've tried to do with the authorities is discuss and have areas, what we call carve outs and exemptions for the health sector, for the education sector, where female staff can go work, but also saying we need to have that space, critical space for education, secondary and tertiary culturally sensitive approaches. There are plenty of examples from the Islamic world, the oic, where this balance has been struck. But this is critically important. So advocacy, backing it up with the evidence of impact workarounds to expand the space even in these constraints, regulations, and seeing how we can advance the space. And very importantly, working with Afghan civil society, with partners, communities, that their voices are heard, that their agency is in the solutions that we work together on.

Panos: Um, yeah, no, I can hear for your voice the complexity, the sensitivity, but also your effort to go through civil society, to go through multiple channels, basically to be able to bring some change. So my question, because the restriction is obviously quite extreme and impacting many aspects, many parts of society, particularly as you said, the mothers, the sisters, the women and girls in society, is there a red line? Is there a point where you say, actually that's something we cannot tolerate anymore?

Indrika Ratwatte: I think I wouldn't frame it as red lines because that looks as a bridge that you don't cross. And I think the work we do is all about building bridges, building bridges, finding solutions to the most intractable, complex situation. So I would say again, it's the advocacy of what it should be doesn't change, that is these resistance are uh, impeding the potential of Afghan girls, Afghan boys, Afghanistan as a whole. Here's the impact. Secondly, that this is also very much in the interest of the de facto authorities and everybody to have a prosperous Afghanistan. Thirdly, making the point that here's where spaces for women to contribute make an incredible difference, highlighting that and working to expand that. We would always say on some points where humanitarian workers and protection workers are unable to perform critical life saving Duties, of course, we will come back and say we cannot be part of this because of the direct impact on Afghan women. For example, when returnees come, we have one third, often of the returnee families being single headed female households. How does one look at the protection concerns, provide support to returnee Afghan women if we don't have Afghan female colleagues with them? When the earthquake, the floods happened, Frontline. I was up, for example, in Kunar in the last earthquake in November, up in a remote area where this afghan lady lost 11 family members in one night. Wow. Her husband, her eldest sons, her brother. She became a single headed household for like 24 people. Wow. Uh, and most of the men had died. And here she was getting assistance, psychosocial support, trying as a female headed household to manage this huge number, including many, many children. And there's our front facing colleagues who were working, afghan women, national NGOs, international NGOs, UN colleagues out there working and sitting with the authorities, we create that permissive space to work. So this is also where it shows the importance of having Afghan women front facing, working, engaging, adding to the advocacy with practical work, hands on, on the ground.

Panos: Yeah. Thank you for sharing this heartbreaking example. And indeed the female led households, but also the access to services, to assistance.

Indrika Ratwatte: Absolutely.

Panos: The role of 50% of the society, including economic empowerment and so on, is really very, very crucial. Enrique, you spoke about advocacy and in fact we just came out from a two day, uh, workshop. You actually invited us, uh, me and my colleagues to come and to facilitate this kind of reflection moment in terms of how do we move forward, how do we tell the story, how do we advocate, how do we bring. And you brought humanitarian actors, development actors in the same room, which was also quite good in the political with many governments, to see how to influence and to develop an influencing, uh, strategy. So how do you see this? I mean this has been going now for the last four years and moving forward, how do you rally kind of that influencing ability? And if you can give us some examples on what can be done to bring this change on the ground, a few things.

Indrika Ratwatte: Manus. I think if you look at how in complex situations like Afghanistan, where you have acute humanitarian needs, but the real impact mid to long term to bring people out of structural poverty and development is also, as you say, the development investments. So I see it as a continuum, one side being fragility, which has to be addressed by life saving, humanitarian action, and the other side being stability. So it's a continuum of how you bring people out of fragility into stability. So that connection between the two is incredibly important in our work, in our uh, programming, in our resource mobilization. So the humanitarian development nexus, to use a cliche, uh, is incredibly important in context like this. So for example, we have looked at, on the humanitarian side, I just gave example where still um, despite the restrictions, we work with the de facto authorities and have front facing female colleagues out there. Women for women being the principal approach here. And looking at what are the spaces we can increase in health, in the health sector, how do we have more female colleagues working there? And we advocate for skill building, for trainings and other areas of engagement. And we've had some spaces where we've been able to expand it. Another area is the private sector. And this is engine of growth for this country. And there is also how one brings in the dimensions of women's empowerment. Women led MSMEs, how do you give them access to skills? How do you give them access to uh, finance, to markets? And uh, this has been a space where we've been really working in tandem with the World bank and others. For example, if you look at the data from 2022 to 2025 the Afghan Women's Chamber of Commerce has quadrupled the number of women, small and medium enterprises working in this space. Part of it is also because the tertiary space, secondary space is so truncated. Restrictions make women go more into livelihoods. But here's a space where we open it up and we have programmatic investments into These female led MSMEs, women led entrepreneurs to really expand the space through finance training and skills, for example. Another area I think which is incredibly important is also how do we have systemic approaches to expand still the space for secondary education, digital education, trying to have connectivity for certain cohorts, connectivity is not everywhere. For girl children who are in the secondary and tertiary space, this is extremely important. And continuing the advocacy at the political level as well with the DFA engaging the OIC and others to bring about examples of where the Sharia and its principles, Islamiyat curricula and regular curricula works in tandem. Striking that balance, exposing uh, the relevant authorities who do content and syllabus production, curricula production to these practices and having that exposure to see how this balance could be struck while maintaining the overall advocacy of the movement, uh, the rescinding uh, of these restrictions.

Panos: Yeah, no, I can hear, I can see your kind of how bringing the international financial institutions, the private sector, other kind of economic empowered where you talk about digital to change somehow the approach with impact on the lives of the people. Um, Indrika I also saw something very unique you did here as a resident humanitarian coordinator, which is also simplification of the system in terms of processes, in terms of coordination, uh, bringing the humanitarian development, but also even not being shy to go towards the political side. Can you tell us a little bit? And I think this falls perhaps within also the humanitarian reset. I'd love to hear more from you about these innovative approaches, really breaking new grounds on the nexus.

Indrika Ratwatte: Uh, as you said in 2024, Panason, the reality check of where we were in terms of how humanitarian action and, uh, development and basic human needs was delivering to the people of Afghanistan. And we realized there are some urgent needs for simplification. And we undertook with the humanitarian country team and the, uh, partners in the UN and the UN country team to say, let's be bold and let us look at how we, we do three things within the structures. How do we improve efficiencies, how do we improve impact, and how do we improve accountability to the people we serve and to the member states who provide the resources? So that is the three kind of, um, uh, objectives of the exercise. And we have, within the global guidelines of humanitarian action, prune down, tighten the humanitarian pillar. And what has been innovative here is bringing them together in a joint platform where the humanitarian and development basic human needs actors come together, look at data, look at evidence, how we can plan, how we can have our uh, impacts along the spectrum, as I said, of fragility to stability. It is not easy because often the silos that are, uh, there structurally, where humanitarian action and development is funded through different envelopes, the donors have bifurcated approaches. It doesn't lend itself to a natural, uh, um, coherence. So this is what we tried within some of the international guidelines, ISA principles, for example, and others. How do we do it? And we've tried to now look at this joint platform where, for example, in Afghanistan what we've done is you have the cluster system, and here the accountability is. The humanitarian principles of humanitarian action remain integral, but the joint platforms come together. For example, agriculture and food systems. Linked to the food and agriculture cluster, we have health, education, social protection and livelihoods, climate action and water displacement solutions. So key thematic areas which are also aligned with the de facto authority's Afghanistan national development strategy. So that's how we try to bring the three to coherence. But mostly that linkage we desperately need in context like Afghanistan and the strategic shift we have done in the last two years from a heavy humanitarian investment towards also gradually coming to the development side and SDG outcomes. Still there are critical humanitarian needs that need to be identified here. So we look at it very carefully saying we articulate that as critical life saving, evidence based, severity based needs. So the humanitarian plan is hyper prioritized to those needs. And then how does that jive with the others? For example, there are populations that need critical food support, high altitudes who are cut off for six months during the winter, families that are vulnerable. So pre positioning food and medicine in these areas is life saving critical. At the same time, food systems investment in certified seeds, water systems, livestock inoculation improves food production, lessens food insecurity, uh, lessens the need for humanitarian assistance. So this is where we're trying to go. Health systems similarly, so systems investments lifting people out of that vulnerability through resilience, which will bring down the humanitarian need. Because what Afghanistan needs at the end of the day is systems investment, SDG related investments which are structural, which long pre existed. Uh, the current reality of uh, where we face it, it's been there for a long, long time. So how do we lift it up? So that's what we've tried to do. It's work in progress. I think we are going the right direction and uh, my um, advocacy around it is let's be joined up, but let's also keep our silos and our logos and egos aside and let's come together.

Panos: But that simplification is so important and actually also uh, following the need of the country, the need of the people, uh, yes, there's humanitarian needs really, but clearly development and moving forward is what's needed. The Sustainable Development Goals are moving to the 2030. Talking of the development actors, um, and given the political context, are the development actors investing? Are there any constraints? Where are they in terms of really making this difference? You talked about 2.8 million people who have come back with massive need. The level of poverty, the level of need in multiple sectors. So where are we with the development actors kind of uh, investing in the people of the country?

Indrika Ratwatte: It remains challenging, uh, Panos, but let me give you also one uh, of the other shocks that we see globally. Everybody has faced but Afghanistan in particular, with still half the population having acute needs. In 2024, January we lost 33% of our budget. A billion dollars disappeared. In 2024 with the generous support of the international community, we raised almost $3 billion and for the first time over 50% was in basic human needs and development investment. So that strategic shift we were doing from humanitarian slowly to resilience and one third of that disappeared in January 2025. So this is during a time where in 2425, if you put the two years together, we had 4.8 million Afghans coming back, a 10% increase in the population.

Panos: Wow.

Indrika Ratwatte: And you have a 33% reduction of the budget. So how do we manage that challenge? So what we tried to do releasing, let us be very targeted, very specific, as I said, in our humanitarian investments and uh, they define those very challenging. At the same time having those systems investment, we have also developed very good collaboration with the uh, international financial institutions, the World bank and adb, who are also putting vertical funds into health systems, education systems, agriculture, food systems, which is balancing a bit that those structural needs There we have what is called the uh, Afghanistan Coordination Group, where the member states come together, these are the key donors for Afghanistan. Very much invested in the basic human needs part of it and really articulating the need here saying unless we are able to at a minimum even stabilize this 10% increase of this population, it has systemic impacts. From a protection perspective, the vulnerabilities, documentation, housing, land and property issues, vulnerabilities for female headed households, these are critical protection issues that get exacerbated because these uh, returnees come to poor, exposed, vulnerable communities. The de facto authorities are trying, they have tried to mobilize their own resources, support through systems and documentation, but the challenges are huge. So our pitch, our appeal, uh, to also the international community is what happens when such a huge population cannot be sustainably anchored and reintegrated. You will have continued displacement, most likely outward. There are lots of trafficking, smuggling networks that prey on the misery of people who be trying to take people out. And coping with negative mechanisms, co, negative coping mechanisms come into play. People move. If you can't survive here, you go to the best place you can survive. If you can't survive in the country, you try to go to the neighboring countries or further afield. So onward, outward migration and movement is one outcome. And the second is we say, look at the evidence. 65% of these returnees are youth, young, uh, people without opportunity, particularly young men without opportunity, without hope, is also a demographic that's exposed to radicalization. And this is also not good for security, stability within Afghanistan and beyond. So the impacts, apart from fundamental vulnerabilities is also beyond that. So my appeal, uh, and our collective advocacy to the international community is even from a perspective of enlightened self interest, invest in the stability, the protection and fundamental needs, basic needs of the Afghan population, which brings about stability in Afghanistan, obviously in the region and beyond.

Panos: No, clearly the global impact is so important and it's about stability and prosperity of the people. Ah, and keeping the hope, I guess, also alive. Now, Enrique, you talked about the dfa, the de facto authorities. I mean this is really basically the Taliban who have been in power for over four years now in the country in your senior position where you are, you meet with the de facto authorities, you meet with ministers, you meet with them. And I wanted to know kind of if you can shed some light more on the relation, on your ability to bring the sensitive questions. The issues affecting women and girls and the issues affected the millions of returnees. How is this relation and is it a unified kind of hard line position? Are there any entry points, is there any way to leverage culture, religion, values, traditions that are deeply embedded in the Afghan history to be able to bring some change and some hope, as you said, the youth, the young men or the young women for the next generation? And as the daily life is going

Indrika Ratwatte: through, I think Panos, uh, at the end of the day, and the work we, we do, dialogue and engagement is fundamental to solutions. Megaphone diplomacy, or being away from the theater and not engaging the key stakeholders, de fact authorities and others does not work. And we've seen it in many places. You got to sit down, have those difficult discussions in a respectful manner. You can still create that space to discuss very sensitive issues, which I do. I sit down with the authorities and say, how do we fix these problems? Here's the impact of some of these policies. We will always advocate that those policies are reviewed and are, uh, in line with the international obligations of Afghanistan. But in that scope, how do we unblock it? Because advocacy can't be only advocating on the optimal and not doing anything about it, saying we've advocated for the optimal. How do you move the needle on these things? So as I said, uh, the Doha political process and the roadmap that's been put by the UN is really looking at what are the needs of the international community, what are the needs of the de facto authorities, how do we have a step for step approach along this and two of the confidence building measures in that is working together with the uh, de facto authorities on counter narcotics because they have done an amazing job in eradicating poppy. 95% of uh, the country.

Panos: That's impressive.

Indrika Ratwatte: And this has impacted hundreds of thousands of Afghans who are in poppy farmers. So how do you support alternate crops for and alternate livelihoods for these farmers who that will not go back into poppy cultivation? How do you support addiction? Men, women, girls, so on undercountry narcotics, looking at an area where something positive has been done, moving on that. And the other side is private sector. And here sitting down with the authorities, looking at the key issues that the private sector raises, including men, women, big we've had dialogue, uh, access to skills training and jobs, access to finance, microfinance and other access to markets within and beyond the region. And then of course banking sector, Islamic financing. And here we have sat down and I'm happy to say that last week, for the first time, having had these dialogues outside, we had these meetings of the working groups in Kabul with the international community and ambassadors flying into Kabul, sitting with the de facto authorities and the line ministries, sitting with Afghan experts, men and women, around the same table and discussing these issues. This couldn't have been done two years ago. So we have brought about that connectivity, engagement where difficult issues and ways forward can be looked at and also acknowledging what the de facto authorities have done positively and trying to use that to have discussions around the more complicated issues. I chair, um, biannually what is called a high level coordination forum. I co chair it with the de facto Minister of Foreign affairs and the line ministries where we sit down and look at what are the priorities of the de facto authorities under the national development plans. How does that coincide with the priorities of the UN and at those areas I mentioned, alluded to before, are uh, the areas where we can work together bringing the international community and resourcing to impact those outcomes and also having a discussion with the rations. How are you prioritizing health sector, education sector, agro and uh, food security sectors, which are both big issues here. How do we work together on documentation for the vulnerable, some of the protection issues which required systemic solutions. And we have that dialogue and I do believe that uh, it's uh, critical that we keep engaging. And we also look at difficult issues like are, uh, there areas where very specific technical assistance can be provided to the technical level de facto authorities with the relevant guardrails which enhance their ability to support in issues that impact everybody. For example, disaster risk reduction. Afghanistan is the sixth most climate impacted country which has contributed zero to global warming and emissions constant disasters. But having authorities and uh, NGOs and other colleagues working in disaster risk reduction trained in this impacts everybody. These are areas where we can look at targeted technical capacity support that's good for the people and at the end of the day, keeping the Afghan people front and center in what we do.

Panos: Yeah, no, that's really vital. Uh, Andrik, I want to ask you about something Else within this sector, we have moved a lot towards what we call localization, empowering local national civil society NGOs or organizations, and in particular at a time where the resources are more limited, but not just because of resources. So to what extent kind of this empowerment of Afghan national women or organizations is part of, uh, the vision and the agenda as you're moving forward?

Indrika Ratwatte: Afghanistan is blessed with amazing human capital, including with also the returnees who bring skills with them. There are committed, dedicated Afghans here who are, uh, determined to do whatever they can to. To uplift their communities. And I think that is the strength of Afghanistan, and that is the first investment we had to make, number one. Number two, as you said, this shouldn't be tokenism of programmatic arrangements, which are looking at basically subcontracting arrangements. This is not the way to go forward. It is really giving agency, having national partners around the table that they are quintessentially part of the decision making, the delivery, monitoring and feedback. So what we try to do is really taking the spirit of localization, which is a collective, uh, commitment, results, and seeing how do we support them. For example, I manage what is called Afghanistan humanitarian fund, which OCHA, uh, manages. And in 2025, for example, 75% of the resources went to NGOs, NGOs and national NGOs, and the bulk of it to national NGOs and skills and capacity to really make them the drivers of all humanitarian and development action in this country. I think that has to be a commitment that is sustained, number one, and giving exposure also to all these national voices in fora. And that's what we do. When we had the Afghanistan Coordination Forum, the working groups bringing Afghan men and women to the table, talking about what they do, looking at their needs, and really, I would say curating the support, technical, financial and otherwise to capacitate them. It's a, uh, journey we have to invest much more in.

Panos: No, that's really great. And I think putting the funding where that's really kind of the important one to make it happen. Henrik, I want to ask you a last personal question. We've known each other for many years. You've really been a, uh, veteran humanitarian for several decades, working in multiple capacities and in multiple roles. I also really feel that a sense of hope is constantly there, but also putting people, putting rights, putting protection as a central lens with what you're doing, including your humanitarian and resident coordinator, both development as well. So what message would you like to leave after so many years to other leaders or to other more kind of humanitarian practitioners in complex environments where on a daily day basis, you have to keep the hope alive, and you have to be trying every effort, every path, every, um, route that can bring you to a solution. So I would love to hear your reflections.

Indrika Ratwatte: I think paros at a time, sadly, when you and I reflect over 30 years back, the reality today is, uh, where fundamental normative values are challenged, multilateralism is being questioned, um, international humanitarian law, and some of the very foundational elements are being questioned. It's even more important for us to look at the fundamental values of the rights regime, the UN Charter, not taking our eyes off that as a North Star one. And as you said in your podcast and in the work you do, let's demystify protection. It's about compassion. It's about diversity, it's about inclusion, it's about trust. These are universal values, and we have to work with that and engage, engage, sit down, talk, have those difficult conversations. Because at the end of the day, when you sit with people, talk with people, and bring these fundamental values, who can question compassion? Who can question, uh, trust building, who can question that everybody can contribute to the betterment of a community? You can't. So I think this is what we have to work with and be tenacious and be full of hope, because that's what makes a difference at the end of the day.

Panos: Thank you. Uh, I think I've heard you say engage, I don't know how many times, but also values compassion principles, which is really what unites humanity for what we're doing. So, Indrik, I really thank you so much for joining me today in the protection podcast, Protection Leadership podcast, and for really sharing your reflection, but also your kind of diplomatic approaches to be able to bring a change for the millions of people that, uh, are working in this country.

Indrika Ratwatte: Thank you, Varnos. Always a pleasure.

Panos: Thank you. Thank you so much. And to you listeners, I really want to say thank you for staying with us, uh, in this, uh, special, uh, Protection Leadership podcast that I'm today in Kabul in Afghanistan on a special mission that we have been here and, uh, looking forward to seeing you to the next episode. So thank you and, uh, see you soon. Bye. Bye,

Indrika Ratwatte: Sam.