The Afghanistan of the Taliban and us

Humanitarian mission in the eighties. A month’s walk to reach the north of Afghanistan. From right to left, Alain Boinet, Fahim, François and Jean-François.

History will remember August 31, 2021 as the symbol of the chaotic withdrawal of the United States and its NATO allies from Afghanistan after 20 years of a war that began with the Soviet invasion on December 27, 1979. Now that the Taliban have taken over Kabul and are likely to be there for a long time, it is time to draw some useful lessons for thinking about the new period that is beginning.

I speak here in a personal capacity as a friend of Afghanistan since a first humanitarian mission in 1980, followed by many others with Solidarités International and a constant advocacy to support the Afghan population. Let us also remember that Afghanistan played a decisive role with NGOs in the humanitarian revolution of the “duty to assist” which commemorated its 50th anniversary last year and which has since been decisive for the access of relief to populations in danger in the world.

I am well aware that in writing these lines I am leaving the humanitarian field in the strict sense. I believe that this is the moment to share my experience and my thoughts insofar as political errors, ideological errors, ignorance and conflicts generate endless tragedies. This has been the case in Afghanistan for 41 years! And then, I hear and read in the media so many approximations, errors and biases from people who have never been to Afghanistan and who basically don’t know much about it, that it leads me to speak out.

Afghans crowd at the tarmac of the Kabul airport on August 16, 2021, to flee the country as the Taliban were in control of Afghanistan. @Carlos Branson / Alamy Stock Photo

We all have in mind the images of panic at the Kabul airport, the bloody attacks of the Islamic State in Khorasan (EI-K), the chaos and fear. I have a thought for all those Afghans who have fled their country and those who have not yet been able to leave. One never goes into exile without suffering. Let us salute the commitment of all the countries, including France, who have evacuated those who have cooperated with them to protect and welcome them.

A predictable victory.

While clear-sighted observers and men and women on the ground expected a Taliban victory after the withdrawal of the Americans and their allies, no one, not even the Taliban, had foreseen such a rapid collapse of the government, the army and the police, and finally of all opponents. This is the first time in the country’s 40-year history that this has happened, and it speaks volumes about the regime that was put in place after the Bonn Agreement on December 5, 2001, following the fall of the Taliban.

The American military intervention under the mandate of the United Nations was justified after the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York by Al Qaeda on September 11, 2001, and the 3,000 victims that it caused. The mistake was to believe that the Taliban were definitively defeated after their withdrawal from Kunduz and Kabul. More serious was the political error of not inviting them to participate, along with all the other Afghan factions, even though they are very divided among themselves and sometimes as radical as the Taliban, in the Bonn agreements, even though the primary objective was to put an end to the conflict and promote reconciliation.

But what is the main cause of the Taliban’s victory 20 years later? Is it not the fact that they wanted, against all odds, to impose a Western-style political model on a country that is not Western, forgetting its identity and historical characteristics, its long tradition of fierce independence and its reputation as the “graveyard of empires”?

Taliban in Kabul on August 18, 2021 @John Smith/ Shutterstock

Hubert Védrine, former Minister of Foreign Affairs, announced (Marianne 20 to 26.8.2021) “Afghanistan is the tomb of the right to interfere” and added “We lied to these peoples in danger”. Bernard Kouchner, another former minister, has just retorted (L’Express 26.8.2021) “No, the right to interfere is not dead”. This is the whole debate between the school of geopolitical realism and national interests, and the one mainly based on human rights. However, interference in the affairs of another country is not a novelty in international relations.

Here we must remove an ambiguity that consists simply in distinguishing between humanitarianism and politics. The humanitarianism we are talking about in this article is that of neutrality, of the impartiality of aid based without exclusivity on the urgency of vital needs and the independence of these actors. If interference will never end, it is likely that Western interventionism and “state building” will be seriously revised, if not forgotten.

To return to Afghanistan, I recently thought to myself that if we had not lived in the Afghan countryside, if we had not lived with combatants in the field as humanitarians do by necessity, if we had not slept and eaten in the mosques where we were welcomed, if we only knew the cities, the elites and the leaders, it would be difficult to deeply understand this country and the majority of its population, all ethnic groups included. Gérard Araud, former French ambassador to the United States, goes so far as to say, “The Taliban are undoubtedly closer to the mores, beliefs and practices of the majority of the country than the elites of Kabul. Did we understand that the Taliban, bearers of a rigorous conservative Islamic model strictly applying Sharia law, would then become the patriots of the struggle against the foreign presence and acquire a new legitimacy among the population?

Can democracy and liberalism be imposed by force of arms and can George W. Bush’s project of “state building” for democracy be continued in Afghanistan? Bush’s “state building” project to democratize the Greater Middle East through violence by attacking Saddam Hussein’s Iraq with the consequences we know: lies, chaos, destruction, strengthening of Shiite Iran, creation and expansion of Daech whose metastases are now found in Afghanistan, the Sahel, the Lake Chad region, Liberia and which is spreading in sub-Saharan Africa towards the Gulf of Guinea.

The President of the Republic, Emmanuel Macron, has just taken stock of it by applying it to Mali: “I do not believe in “state building”: it is not up to the West to go and build a state in Mali”. And he added in an interview with the Journal du Dimanche (29.8.2021) from Iraq, where he was participating in an international conference on stability and the fight against terrorism: “We have drawn the consequences in Mali before their time of what we saw in Afghanistan.

The question now is what to do with Afghanistan, its 38 million inhabitants and the Taliban, who are likely to be there for a long time. Emmanuel Macron provided a first response when France, Great Britain and Germany submitted a draft resolution to the United Nations Security Council. This resolution aims to define “under UN control, a ‘security zone’ in Kabul” in order to continue the evacuation of Afghans who have worked with the French and other Western countries. This is one of the preconditions for any relationship with the Taliban,” he said. Discussions have begun with the Taliban in Doha and with Qatar in order to “set up airlift operations.

This is a prerequisite for a dialogue that could then be continued and expanded with the Taliban, as several countries are already doing. In the past and for a long time, many experts considered Afghanistan not to be an international strategic issue and therefore neglected it. And yet, in 40 years, this country has seen successive interventions by the Soviet Union, the United States and NATO. Finally, the intervention of the French Head of State on television on August 16 on Afghanistan has suddenly given this country a completely different status, not without reason. Afghanistan today confronts us with 5 unavoidable strategic issues that are as many challenges: terrorism, drugs, immigration, geopolitics and human rights.

The 5 strategic issues in Afghanistan.

Terrorism. At stake is whether Afghanistan can become a base for international terrorism. The double suicide bombing by Daech or the Islamic State in Khorasan (EI-K) on Thursday, August 26, is a real declaration of war against the Taliban. What distinguishes the Taliban from Daech and Al Qaeda is that the former is only interested in Afghanistan, whereas for the Jihadists it is only a base to spread terrorism and their ideology elsewhere in the world. The Taliban made a commitment with the Americans in Doha, and more recently with the Chinese, that Afghan territory would not be used for terrorist purposes around the world. They must therefore demonstrate this.

The pain of families after the Islamic Emirate bombing at Kabul airport @ John Smith/ Shutterstock

I would like also to recall some facts that are forgotten or overlooked. Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda had been in Afghanistan for a long time before the Taliban took power in September 1996. The Taliban were not informed and did not participate in the attack on the World Trade Center that led to their downfall. They probably learned the lessons of this as well as those of their refusal to hand over Osama Bin Laden, for reasons of honor since he had fought with the Mujahideen, described by the West as “freedom fighters” against Soviet troops, when they could have simply invited him to leave.

Drugs. Afghan production of poppies, from which opium and then heroin are derived, accounts for 84% of the opiate drugs sold in the world. In 2021, Afghan opium production was 6300 tons and would represent between 20 and 30% of the GNP, or between 4.1 and 6.6 billion dollars, against 18% for legal agriculture. In 2020, the area of land used for poppy cultivation increased by 37%, or 250,000 hectares, about four times more than in the mid-1990s!

In July 2000, a fatwa issued by Mullah Omar, founder and leader of the Taliban, led to a near eradication of poppies in 2001, from 4,600 tons in 1998 to 185 tons in May 2001, concentrated in the northeast. In a recent article entitled “How the West let Afghanistan become the country of drugs again” (Le Figaro 25.8.2021), Bernard Frahi, Honorary Controller General of the National Police and former Director of the UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime) regional office for Afghanistan and Pakistan (1998 – 2002), calls for “renewed dialogue” and “taking the Taliban at their word by challenging them to impose a total ban on opium cultivation”.

Migration. Many fear a vast migration movement comparable to the Syrian refugees who left Turkey for Europe in 2015. There have long been nearly 2.5 million Afghan refugees in Iran and Pakistan, mostly from the war with the Soviet Union. This year, many have returned from Iran. In addition to the 123,000 Afghans evacuated from Kabul airport since August 14, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has said it fears that 500,000 Afghans will leave this year in a “worst-case scenario,” but that “no exodus has been recorded” so far.

According to a recent UNOCHA (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) report card in Kabul, 558,123 people have been displaced by the fighting since the beginning of the year. It is also true that Afghanistan today represents a land of continuous emigration because of the fighting, endemic poverty and high demography. The Afghan border crossings are currently closed, with the exception of Spin Boldak in the southwest, where cross-border movements are common. Thus, no significant exodus is seen at this stage, but care must be taken to avoid the possible consequences of rapid impoverishment, weakening of the humanitarian effort, and isolation of the country.

Assistant Foreign Minister Wu Jianghao with the delegation led by Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar @Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Wang Yi meets with the Head of the Political Commission of the Taliban of Afghanistan Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar @Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs

International relations. The entire geopolitical balance has been destabilized by the Western withdrawal, the collapse of the regime of President Asraf Ghani and the victory of the Taliban. The Chinese did not wait for the Americans to leave before officially receiving a delegation led by the Taliban’s number 2, Mullah Baradar. Turkey, through its president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, announced its intention to cooperate. Iran, for its part, seems willing to do so, and Russia will be pragmatic if it receives assurances regarding security and terrorism. Let’s not talk about Pakistan, which has always supported the Taliban, or Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which recognized them in 1996. The question for the United States and the EU countries is whether they will give these countries a free hand in the future and what an alternative policy could be!

Human rights. This will be the major stumbling block between the Western countries and the new Taliban regime. What about elections, parliament, media, education, culture, the role of women in society? When the Taliban came to power in Kabul between 1996 and 2001, they left behind the memory of a regime that severely enforced Sharia law (stoning, public execution, amputation, harassment and physical punishment) and prevented young girls from accessing higher education and working. Recently, the Taliban, through their spokesperson, officially stated that they needed competent women, especially in education and health, and that they could work according to Islamic rules. They also asked the civil servants to stay at their posts. Isn’t this an opportunity to take them at their word and set red lines?

The test of humanitarian relief.

The first test for both the Taliban and Western countries will be humanitarian aid. Will the Taliban prevent or coerce it after their victory, and will the West stop funding it after they leave?

Najmuddin Hilal at the ICRC orthopedic center in Kabul @ICRC

Today, one in three Afghans do not have enough to eat, and 14 million people are at risk of starvation, if not possible famine, according to the United Nations. UNICEF warns that one million children are at risk of severe malnutrition. And since the beginning of the year, the fighting has caused 550,000 displaced people to require ongoing assistance. The World Health Organization (WHO) is concerned that 500 tons of medicines and medical supplies stored in Dubai have not been delivered.

The United Nations humanitarian agencies, through the voice of Martin Griffiths, the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) and humanitarian NGOs have committed themselves to remain in Afghanistan in accordance with their mission. But there is no shortage of obstacles. Will the Taliban keep their commitment when they ask the humanitarians to stay and continue their aid? This is only possible if the principles of neutrality, impartiality, independence and the practice of complete control of the aid cycle are respected: assess, implement, verify and report.

An NGO manager, active in the field since 1987, mentions several immediate difficulties. Whether it is access to banks, which are closed while the need for cash is daily, especially to pay Afghan employees, the current blockage of airports, the need for supplies of medicines, or the issue of customs clearance with the Taliban who are not very familiar with these issues.

For his part, Olivier Routeau, Director of Operations for Première Urgence Internationale (PUI), said that he had already moved on to the question of the aftermath: how do we continue to act with the Taliban in power? It turns out that this was already the case in territories already controlled by the Taliban. In the eastern province of Nangarhar, the Provincial Health Commettee is now headed by a Taleb official who facilitates working meetings. But there is still no authority and no rules established at the central level. Olivier Routeau is also concerned about the famous anti-terrorist laws (COTER) that could criminalize humanitarians. As is often the case, humanitarians must adapt to act, but all share the conviction to “stay and deliver”. For example, MSF has a hundred expatriates on the ground, and in general, Afghans working in these humanitarian health organizations in particular, are not very concerned by departures and evacuations. It is more difficult for development projects, particularly in the field of education.

Since the beginning of humanitarian aid in 1980, it has never been interrupted despite successive military and political breakdowns. It has constantly adapted to its principles and practices, and to the relationships established with Afghans for over 40 years. So much so that the United Nations (UNOCHA) has defined a framework for relations with the Taliban in a document entitled “Engagement strategy with Taliban in Afghanistan”.

Even today, humanitarians cannot leave Afghanistan and its 38 million inhabitants. Thus, UNICEF and WHO call for “the immediate establishment of a reliable and robust humanitarian airlift to send supplies” and I would also add qualified personnel to reinforce the teams on the ground.

A tentative conclusion.

How to conclude in a context of constant evolution and change? What will be the composition of a future Afghan government? Will the evacuation of Afghans be allowed to continue, and what will be the attitude of Western countries and other actors?

Basically, there are two main choices. Either seek to isolate the Taliban, or even punish them, or engage in a dialogue justified by the five strategic challenges of terrorism, drugs, mass migration, geopolitics and human rights.

Isolating and punishing the Taliban would certainly radicalize them and drive them into the arms of countries with little regard for human rights, or even Al-Qaeda and Daech, who would be strengthened in their position and influence.

The former deputy representative of NATO in Afghanistan, Mark Jacobson, a veteran of the American army, has just declared in an interview with the newspaper Libération (30.8.2021): “We have to resign ourselves to some kind of agreement with the Taliban”. No, we must not resign ourselves but understand that, without any angelism, the best way to make the Taliban listen to us on human rights and future evacuations is to dialogue with them on the resolution of the major challenges that the current Afghan reality imposes on everyone.

Isn’t the role of diplomacy also to talk with one’s enemies? And dialogue does not mean bowing down, on the contrary! Finally, in spite of the Taliban’s rough rigorism, we also know the pragmatism of the Afghans and the end of this 20-year war can ease their minds.

The first tests will concern the continuation of the evacuation of Afghans, humanitarian aid and the composition of their government.

And then, Afghanistan is 38 million human beings, nearly half of whom are under 15 years old. In 30 years, there will be 65 million of them in a country that has a structural deficit of cereals to feed its population. Finally, climate change threatens the Himalayan range of the Hindu Kush, a real water reservoir for this country which may one day run out of water for its agriculture.

Is this the end of the war in Afghanistan? Is this the beginning of a path to peace? That’s what’s at stake.

Alain Boinet.

Humanitarian impact: how to combine quality and innovation?

RCA – distribution alimentaire dans le cadre du mécanisme de réponse d’urgence – 2021

In order to best cover the needs of populations affected by a crisis, Solidarités International (SI) strives to implement qualitative and innovative solutions on a daily basis. The Department of Operations and Programs (DOAP) is the guarantor of the optimal balance between quality and programmatic innovation: reinforcing the quality of the programs implemented and developing new modalities of intervention and adapted activities are the key to the agility and sustainability of the responses implemented.

1/ What are the most effective qualitative levers for improving programs and the implementation of activities?

DOAP has several qualitative levers on which to act in order to guarantee programmatic quality.

The first qualitative lever is at the strategic level: a good humanitarian response is above all a response that solves problems that are often complex because they are multifactorial. The development of the response plan must therefore be based on a precise and holistic situational analysis, which highlights unmet needs, gaps in the existing response and the differentiated impact of the crisis on the population according to a detailed analysis of vulnerabilities. The intervention logic, inspired by the Theory of Change, makes it possible to link this situational analysis carried out at the country and/or grassroots level, and to develop a response strategy focused on solving the problem (instead of a sectoral approach). It pushes program teams to always ask the question of the rationale for the intervention and the chosen modality by answering the question: “Why are we doing what we are doing? DOAP supports teams by developing and training on these methodologies of situational analysis and theory of change.

A good response is also and above all a technical response: covering basic needs such as “eating, drinking, sheltering” in 18 crisis contexts as different as they are complex, requires the mastery of a wide range of technical skills, from the rehabilitation of wells and boreholes, drinking water analysis, physico-chemical and microbiological analysis of wastewater, waste management, drinking water and sanitation networks, vector control, infection prevention and control measures, project management assistance… for the water, sanitation and hygiene sector; market gardening, tree farming, agroecology, urban agriculture, animal health, small and large livestock breeding, fishing, fish farming, product processing and value-added techniques, value chain approach, etc. for the food security and livelihoods sector. This impressive – yet non-exhaustive – list should be complemented by skills in civil engineering, construction and rehabilitation of small and large infrastructures… The reality of sectoral technical expertise is also complementary to more cross-cutting skills such as irrigation, integrated water resources management, climate change, monitoring systems or the market-based approach and cash transfers.

Drainers in action in a latrine in a refugee camp in Bangladesh ®Solidarités International

The DOAP thus ensures the respect of technical standards through the elaboration of technical reference documents and the creation of expertise. The team brings, in addition to the daily technical support, the global vision and the consideration of the stakes related to the environment, the public health, the social cohesion and the protection in order to control the negative impact of its actions.

In order to cover as broadly as possible the range of technical expertise required to carry out its activities, and recognizing that a partnership and multi-actor approach is essential to the successful implementation of activities in the field and to the organization’s capacity building, DOAP regularly calls upon its preferred technical partners.

Finally, one of the central pillars of SI’s quality approach is based on methodological support for program management and learning. DOAP promotes a dynamic and continuous learning approach throughout the project cycle, as well as participatory, monitoring and evaluation methodologies to ensure that humanitarian action is geared towards achieving concrete changes in the lives of the populations we work for and with.

Keeping a sense of action and the perspective of the changes we are contributing to in the lives of the people at the heart of our programs is the best guarantee of the effective quality of our programs.

Sludge treatment plant, Sittwe, Myanmar. 2020 ®Marine Ricau / Solidarités International

2/ Are innovation and humanitarian action really compatible?

The crisis and fragility areas in which we work are particularly conducive to innovation because the diversity of contexts and needs as well as the constraints of implementation (security, technical, land, administrative, temporal, contextual…) that we encounter on a daily basis do not allow the implementation of a single standard solution to the complex problems encountered. Furthermore, the humanitarian imperative to respond to vital needs and to facilitate access to basic services and fundamental rights for the most vulnerable populations affected by crises, leads us to think outside the box and always seek more integrated, more adapted and more sustainable responses.

Thus, DOAP claims the role of internal coordinator of the research and innovation approach as a full-fledged lever of the quality approach: from the identification of innovative solutions emerging both from headquarters and from the field, to the evaluation and capitalization, including support for the development and monitoring of the pilot phase, DOAP ensures the emergence and replication of good practices.

However, it is sometimes tempting to give in and give up in the face of the many paradoxes involved in juxtaposing the terms “humanitarian” and “innovation”:

Donors’ aversion to risk and uncertainty leaves little opportunity for funding in the seed and start-up phases of a new project, a new approach or the implementation of an innovative solution. Paradoxically, however, the humanitarian sector is increasingly endowed with funds dedicated to the implementation of innovative solutions that have already proved their worth in various fields.
The humanitarian culture and the need for rapid and efficient implementation are still far removed from the culture of innovation, research and learning that is inexorably linked to it. The key stage of evaluation and dissemination of good practices and new solutions is also still poorly funded by donors.
Our sectors of technical expertise are conducive to different types of innovation (product innovation, innovation approach or action research). The innovation approach allows us to highlight our technical expertise and increase our credibility and reputation in the sector. However, the technical nature of the solution and the need to adapt it are both the biggest obstacles to the ability to replicate the solution identically in another context, and therefore to the scaling up of the innovation.
Finally, the long temporality of the innovation cycle (multiannual, including a long phase of ideation and preliminary development) cannot be compatible with the necessary efficiency of the solutions implemented in the short term in the phases of response to the shock (rethinking a rapid response mechanism whose short-term response cycles are repeated for many years in the context of repeated shocks, and the temptation is great to look for a more durable solution, is extremely difficult). When people’s lives are at stake, are we willing to risk answering “no” to the question “did the implemented solution work”?

All these constraints increase the risk that organizations focus on “headquarter” / global innovation (e.g. very technological) that brings more communication than impact on people. So, for innovation to solve the transition from theory to practice, we need to encourage the development of innovation in the field, for sustainable solutions that are easy to develop and replicate.

Keeping a sense of action and the perspective of the changes we are contributing to in people’s lives at the heart of our programs is the best guarantee of successful innovation.

Sludge treatment plant, Sittwe, Myanmar. 2020 ®Marine Ricau / Solidarités International

3/ Giving ourselves the means to meet the demands of the humanitarian mandate and to bring the voice of the people to the global level

In addition to being a platform for mobilizing resources to strengthen the organization’s dual approach to quality and innovation, DOAP is mandated to represent the voice of the people at the global level in humanitarian coordination bodies. DOAP represents SI on the steering committees of the EAH Cluster, the SAME Cluster, and the ALNAP Humanitarian Action Evaluation Network.

In order to move from theory to practice, also at the global level, and to be an actor of change in the humanitarian sector and thus promote its dual approach of Quality and Innovation as a guarantee of humanitarian impact, SI has been the incubator of 2 projects financed first by innovation funds, then by institutional funding: The first one, develops a system to strengthen quality and accountability of beneficiaries in the WASH sector (AQA) and the second one, OCTOPUS, allows the improvement of good practices and the monitoring of the implementation of innovative solutions related to emergency sanitation. These two projects are in the process of being transferred to the WASH sector to be integrated as a global coordination tool and approach.


OCTOPUS

Developed by SOLIDARITÉS INTERNATIONAL in 2018, the OCTOPUS (Operational Collaborative Tool Of Ongoing Practices in Urgent Sanitation) platform is an online collaborative tool related to fecal sludge disposal and treatment in emergency contexts. It aims to improve sanitation practices through the sharing of knowledge and experiences by stakeholders and experts in fecal sludge management. Case studies present detailed technical and contextual information that sanitation practitioners can draw on to adapt their interventions to the crises they face.

AQA

As of late 2018, the Accountability and Quality Assurance Initiative (AQA) aims to increase the capacity of humanitarian organizations to respond effectively and efficiently to crises by providing decision makers with the information they need to continuously adapt to changing contexts. Based on the industry’s Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control methodology, this initiative relies on the collection of simple data to support evidence-based, results-oriented decision-making, with the ultimate goal of ensuring that quality and accountability standards are met and improved over time. This project is a partnership between Oxfam, Solidarités International, Tufts University, and UNICEF, with support from the Global WASH Cluster and the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Sector.


The final word

Having a body at the heart of operations that carries this dual approach is a real organizational asset that allows a medium-sized structure to implement Quality and Innovation in the same way as large ones.

The risk-taking inherent in innovation and the development of new approaches is only possible with the guarantee of follow-up, technical support and quality control. Quality and Innovation are therefore intrinsically linked and their effects are mutually beneficial.

The multi-stakeholder approach and the ability to mobilize partners contribute to the richness of the approach and reduce paradoxes.

Behind two words and two approaches that could be considered too conceptual, the specificity of SI is to remain an operational actor in the field, always driven by the desire to remain as close as possible to the populations affected by crises.

All the qualitative levers are activated with a single concern: to maintain a sense of action and commitment for and as close as possible to the people in the most fragile and remote areas.

2004_SI_Dépliant-6p_LogiqueIntervention_PageParPage-web-mail

 


Who is Anne-Lise Lavaur ?

After studying political science and children’s rights, Anne-Lise Lavaur joined international organizations (Médecins du Monde Argentina, International Catholic Child Bureau), and became a program coordinator and advocacy officer.

In 2014, she joined SOLIDARITÉS INTERNATIONAL in the technical and quality department of the programs of which she became the coordinator eight months later. In 2018, this department evolved into the Deputy Program Operations Department (DPOD). Through the coordination of the team of technical and program referents, this department at the heart of operations guarantees the Quality and Innovation approach of the organization.