AFGHANISTAN CONFLICT-INDUCED INTERNAL DISPLACEMENT MONTHLY UPDATE JUNE 2015 KEY FIGURES HIGHLIGHTS OF THE MONTH 31,737 individuals displaced IDPs assessed /profiled – Monthly activity by conflict assessed/profiled end of May Newly profiled Decrease (due to Region end of June 2015 in June 2015 2015 (Increase) return of IDPs) South 220,744 2,834 300 223,278 Of these: West 217,869 2,565 - 220,434 23 % displaced in June 2015 Central 160,414 9,544 - 169,958 12 % in May 2015 East 146,517 1,972 - 148,489 43 % in April 2015 North 95,683 1,742 - 97,425 1 % in March 2015 Northeast 51,800 12,220 - 64,020 3 % in February 2015 Southeast 23,329 860 - 24,189 Central Highlands 79 - - 79 2 % January 2015 16 % earlier Grand Total 916,435 31,737 300 947,872 Note: This table represents the number of IDPs profiled during the month and the cumulative population profiled since Of these: 2002. Figures do not cover areas where displacement cannot be verified due to lack of access. Furthermore, there might 49 % male be displacement and return movements that are not accounted for. IDPs reached by other actors are not included in the 51 % female profiling until they are verified by the Task Forces. 57 % children Age and Gender breakdown of the profiled population End of June 2015 around 947,872 IDPs assessed/profiled PARTNERSHIP National IDP Task Force chaired by the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation (MoRR) and co- chaired by UNHCR. Regional IDP Task Forces chaired by DORR and co- Profiled conflict-induced IDPs by region of displacement and year of profiling (2012-2015) chaired by UNHCR in Jalalabad, Herat, Mazar, Kandahar and Gardez. The Regional IDP Task Forces verify and assess new displacements; coordinate and respond to IDPs' immediate emergency needs. Actual displacement trends – January 2012 to June 2015 Note: The dates in this chart represent the time of displacement as reported by the profiled IDPs. 1 UNHCR Afghanistan – Monthly IDP Update June 2015 Top 10 provinces for profiling activities by IDP Task Kunduz, Kabul, Kandahar, Kapisa and Ghazni were the main Forces during the reporting month provinces where IDPs had been profiled during the month in review, with conflict-induced internal displacement, both Province Families Individuals originating from the same provinces (e.g. Kunduz, Faryab, Kunduz 1,713 11,579 Wardak, Nangarhar) but also as cross-provincial movements Kabul 722 5,030 (e.g. from neighbouring provinces to Kabul and to Ghazni, from Kandahar 210 1,653 Helmand to Kandahar). Kapisa 230 1,482 Military operations and armed confrontations between AGEs Ghazni 210 1,407 and ANSF, in the form of insurgency activities and counter- Wardak 224 1,393 insurgency military operations, continued to be the most cited reason for displacement across the country. However, during Faryab 212 1,297 the month in review, harassment and intimidation by AGEs – Farah 192 1,183 particularly in the Eastern region and in the South-east were Nangarhar 206 1,158 also reported as the causes of displacement. Of particular Khost 128 860 relevance, since mid-June, the increased displacement in the Eastern region caused by the clashes between Taleban and non- Other smaller scale displacements have been profiled in Helmand, Badghis, State armed opposition groups declaring their allegiance to Badakhshan, Laghman, Hirat, Uruzgan, Ghor, Logar, Balkh, Nuristan, Sar-e-pul, Kunar and Jawzjan provinces. IS/Daesh. Overall Analysis The most cited primary needs of the profiled population continued to be food and NFIs, largely due to the dynamics of In June, 31,737 individuals were profiled across the country as the flight (sudden escape from the conflict areas). Most of IDPs conflict-induced IDPs. This represents a 27% decrease have been hosted by relatives and host communities, with comparing to the previous month (43,299 IDPs), largely due to others managing to temporary rent accommodations in areas the significant surge in the previous month connected to the of displacement, particularly in urban settings. Kunduz emergency situation. Population displaced in April to Kunduz were largely profiled in May, with the assessment The majority of profiled IDPs were assisted with food and NFIs continuing also in June at a lower rate (see after page 3). provided by IDP Task Forces’ members. In addition, where appropriate in accordance to market analysis, unconditional 84 % of the profiled IDPs reported to have been displaced cash assistance was provided by some of the IDP Task Force during the course of 2015 from January to June. Some profiled partners substituting the NFI package and/or the food ration. families, particularly in the Central and South Eastern region, When specific needs were detected amongst the assessed IDP reported to have been displaced during the last months of 2014. population, referral to specialised partners was assured (e.g. The reported number of profiled IDPs does not capture cases of injured children, persons with disabilities women at risk displacement that have occurred in areas not accessible by the etc). members of the IDP Task Forces and where joint assessments could not be conducted. Lack of access to displacement areas to verify new arrivals and respond to immediate humanitarian needs continued to be a The decrease of 300 IDPs during the reporting month was due challenge for the IDP Task Forces, such as in remote provinces to return of a group of IDPs from Lashkargah city to northern of the Southern region and Eastern region, but also in the districts of Helmand, which led to their removal from total North-East areas outside the effective control of the number of IDPs recorded. Government. Dialogue with other humanitarian actors such as Similar to the previous month, the North-East Region registered ICRC and the Afghanistan Red Crescent Society (ARCS) was the highest records of profiled conflict-induced IDPs, largely due maintained for their possible access and assessment of IDPs in to the displacement caused by the earlier confrontation those areas. between Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) and Non-state Situation in the major Provinces of displacement (June) armed opposition Groups (AGEs) in Kunduz Province, who were Central Region profiled also during the month of June. The second highest numbers of conflict-induced IDPs was profiled in the Central Ghazni Region, where general insecurity, military operations and During the month, the province experienced a number of sporadic clashes between AGEs and ANSF continued to security incidents including ongoing clashes between AGEs and generate less visible but more continuous forced movements of ANSF in Waghaz, Andar and Qarabagh districts, which triggered population. most of the displacements. The assessment teams of WSTA, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) – www.unhcr.af 2 UNHCR Afghanistan – Monthly IDP Update June 2015 DoRR, ANDMA, DRC, AREA (WFP’s partner) verified 210 Kabul families/1,407 individuals in the Centre of Ghazni province in Kabul remained one of the major provinces receiving IDPs, June. Out of them 153 families were displaced to Ghazni particularly from unstable areas of neighbouring provinces. provincial centre mainly from Andar, Waghaz, Abbadin, Gelan During the month of June, the joint assessment teams including and Qarabagh districts. The remaining 57 families originated DoRR, WSTA, AREA, DACAAR, WHH, DRC and district from other provinces, where instability is recurrent, such as authorities, identified and assessed 722 families/5,030 Maidan Wardak, Paktika, Logar. The displacement of some 60% individuals as conflict-induced IDPs. The majority of the families of the displaced families occurred in late 2014, while the rest (79%) have been assessed in Surobi District. While most of the were displaced in 2015, mainly in June. Armed conflict between families (88%) originated from insecure areas from within the AGEs and ANSF, military operations, general insecurity and district, few other displaced families originated from Laghman, intimidations by AGEs were cited as the main reasons that Nangarhar, Parwan, Kunduz, Helmand, Balkh and Paktia prompted families to flee. Reports also indicated increasing provinces. The remaining 80 families were profiled in abduction of civilians contributing to insecurity and possibly Gosfandara village in Bagrami district, largely displaced from having an impact on the decision to leave the areas. IDPs were Tagab district of Kapisa province. Interviewed IDPs reported found living in houses hosted by relatives and by the local armed conflict, military operations by ANSF, as well as community, and in few cases in abandoned and partially harassment by both AGEs and ANSF as the major causes of destroyed houses. Out of the total assessed families, 124 displacement. According to the IDP statements, displacement families were identified as in need for urgent humanitarian of about 12% of profiled IDPs occurred from January to April assistance. DRC assisted 43 families with cash while the 2015, while the remaining families reported to have been remaining eligible families will be assisted with food and NFIs displaced in December 2014. While in surobi District most of the from UNHCR and WFP. families had received hospitality from hosting communities, the Maidan Wardak situation in Gosfandra village seemed of concern, with families settled under tents and makeshift shelters in the mountainous The security situation in Maidan Wardak province remained outskirts, and found in poor hygiene situation and scarce access volatile throughout June 2015. Armed conflict between AGEs to services, including health. Amongst all profiled IDPs, 276 and ANSF and military operations occurred routinely, families (38%) were found eligible by the assessment team for prompting families to flee preventively or after being caught in the humanitarian assistance, particularly those in Bagrami. DRC the conflict, while some displacement was also triggered by provided cash assistance to 79 eligible families, while the conflict between non-State armed groups in Nirkh district.