Final evaluation Netherlands participation in ISAF 2006 - 2010

the deployment to Afghanistan. If it demonstrably led to more efficiency,and in consultation with the ministries of Foreign Affairs and Finance, incertain specific cases the decision was made to allow an exception to theHGIS rules by transferring funds from the HGIS part of the Defence budgetto the regular Defence budget. An example is keeping open the LogisticSupport Unit in Eygelshoven for repair work to materiel brought back fromAfghanistan.The toll taken by ISAF on the ‘Conduct of crisis-management operations’budget was considerable. Supplementing the HGIS ‘Conduct of crisismanagementoperations’ budget was also required to accommodate thefour-year mission in Uruzgan. There was little scope for prioritisation withinpolicy article 20 instead of adding to the budget. Many of the missions thathad already been planned were related to international obligations. Thislarge-scale and long mission thus took a great toll on the HGIS 'Conduct ofcrisis-management operations' budget. On average, during the 2006-2010period, around 78% of the total budget was used for the militarycontribution to ISAF. The decision for the Netherlands to make an extensivecontribution to ISAF over a period of four years meant that there was littlefinancial room for other (crisis-management) operations.In addition to the expenditure funded by the HGIS, the mission in Uruzganalso gave rise to costs funded by the regular Defence budget. These costswere the result of changes in the concept of operations and the loss ofmateriel in combat and due to major wear and tear. The Defence budgetwas not sufficient to fund all the necessary expenditure, so funds wereadded to it. For instance, the Bos and Van Geel funds were added to allowinvestment in new materiel for the mission. Additions for operational lossesand for the purchase of the Bushmasters were also required.The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has funded an amount of approximately EUR373 million from the HGIS for the Dutch participation in Uruzgan. Thesefunds made a considerable contribution to development cooperationactivities, specifically in Uruzgan and, more generally, in Afghanistan as awhole.6.3 LessonsThere are lessons to be drawn from the Dutch participation in ISAF. Somelessons are important for future missions, others relate mainly to thecontext in Uruzgan. Some lessons have already been applied, others are yetto be.6.3.1 General lessonsa. If ambitious goals are set, sufficient resources must be madeavailable to achieve those goals. Changing circumstances demand adegree of flexibility in the deployment of extra resources.b. Prior to a mission, specific result indicators should preferably beformulated (for instance for the development of security or of trustamong the population). These can then be used for monitoring andevaluation.c. For missions in fragile states, the transfer of responsibility to thelocal authorities should be one of the initial objectives.Page 108 of 133