Despite this, disability NGO’s sector including confronts various challenges given the complexity of their task. This includes the unplanned emergence of new NGOs, the lack of funding, and the excessive accountability to the government [2], lack of managerial skills in handling the work of these NGOs as well as the lack of coordination and cooperation between NGOs themselves. An example of NGO’s lack of coordination is evident even among orthopedic INGO’s and results in duplication and a drain on resources. Policies should pay special attention to empowering the disabled community and leading the ‘disability movement’ nationwide. NGO in Afghanistan have the potential to grow into partners that complement the government’s vision for achieving comprehensive and equitable development, especially in rural areas.
The current democratic environment in Afghanistan has created an unprecedented opportunity for Afghan people including those with disabilities to mobilize themselves into groups and organizations. Based on the above analysis, it could be argued that there is no such thing as a ‘disability movement’ in Afghanistan with clear structure and operation. What exists are scattered weak organizations and self-help groups of disabled people, all of which are characterized by little political awareness. The Afghan Australian Rehabilitation and Development Organization AARDO contributes to the weak disabled community in the country.
Existing disability organizations depend largely on donor support, mainly external support. However, the external support has been affected by a general donor fatigue and by the fact that many donors have priority other than disability issues. Therefore, future donor support should focus on increasing the capacity of disabled people’s organizations to enable them
There is no unanimously recognized umbrella organization for disabled people in Afghanistan. A power struggle is going on among the disabled community with physically disabled war veterans fighting to take the lead. The number of organizations claiming to be an umbrella in Afghanistan reflects the competitive and non-collaborative environment within the disability community. This organization has a few members in the regions but due to lack of resources, is unable to maintain a proper communication with regional members.
Overall, there is a lack of understanding of each other’s roles, problems and potentials and this hampers the development of a ‘disability movement’ in the country. For example, most are unclear about their mandate or mission and this results in confusion concerning their specific role as advocacy organisation versus service provider (i.e. deaf associations). It is in fact questionable whether ‘movement’ is an appropriate term in the Afghan context, given that the majority of Afghan Australian Rehabilitation and Development Organization are service providers rather than being political players trying to influence the political agenda.
It can be concluded that the unification of AARDO, together with capacity building program especially in terms of leadership training and management skills, and supportive policies are prerequisites for the development of Afghan ‘disability movement’ in the future.
