On August 25, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued a specific license to allow U.S. government employees, grantees, and contractors to continue delivering aid to Afghanistan. This license is inadequate to meet the needs of humanitarian groups and the people in Afghanistan who depend on them, as it fails to protect many aid programs and will require individual organizations to apply for the license. Read C&SN’s take here. (September 1).
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) hosted an event with key experts and practitioners in the fields of sanctions and humanitarian aid, offering in-depth analysis of the current crisis, the impacts of U.S. sanctions on the ground in Afghanistan, and the ways in which the U.S. government might address those impacts. Watch the event here. (September 2).
Reuters reports on the specific license issued by OFAC on August 25, highlighting that the license expires on March 1, 2022. Daphne Psaledakis has the story. (August 31).
Husain Haqqani of the Hudson Institute outlines some of the severe consequences of U.S. sanctions for Afghan civilians, and for NGOs working in Afghanistan. “With the serious potential for a nationwide humanitarian crisis, it would make sense to rethink the blunt instrument of sanctions.” We couldn’t agree more. Read his take in the Washington Post. (August 27).
*Mischaracterizing actions taken by the U.S. Treasury Department, the Wall Street Journal reports that Treasury has given aid groups the OK to continue delivering aid. This is not necessarily the case. Treasury has expressed its desire to facilitate the ongoing delivery of aid in Afghanistan, but has so far only issued a limited license that allows only some groups who first seek and then get approval to continue their programs. Ian Talley and Mengqi Sun report. (August 26).
Representatives from the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), CARE USA, and the International Rescue Committee (IRC) highlight President Biden’s public commitments to support humanitarian aid in Afghanistan, and call on him to live up to those commitments by supporting unfettered humanitarian access, committing additional funding for humanitarian programs, and providing clear humanitarian exemptions from current and future counterterrorism sanctions. Read their take in Just Security. (August 25).
Adam Smith, a Partner, Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher LLP, offers a detailed look at the challenges posed by U.S. sanctions laws in the Afghanistan context, and at some of the policy options available for Treasury to address those challenges. Read his take in Just Security. (August 23).
Nicholas Miller and Doug Rutzen of the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL) unpack the threats posed to humanitarian aid by U.S. sanctions, draw on recent lessons from the designation of the Houthis in Yemen, and offer three specific policy proposals the U.S. government should take to address the humanitarian crisis. Read their take in Just Security. (August 23).
