Afghan elections
I’ll be out in the woods again this weekend, so I’ll miss the news on one of the most important events of the year: the first ever Afghan election. I’ve been looking forward to this day ever since we invaded in 2001, but especially since I did my first Flag of the World Country Study on Afghanistan “Crossroads at a Crossroads” last April. Back then, a major issue was the tension between the warlords, who essentially ruled the rural areas, and President Karzai, who holds sway mainly in the cities. This is still a problem, of course, but if he wins decisively, the elections could bolster Karzai a great deal.
Last april, I noted that many were urging that the U.S. “aggressively” throw its weight behind Karzai against the warlords, and I agreed with them–and I still do. I wrote:
The US needs to support democracy in Afghanistan as well as Iraq, and right now Karzai is working for it, and the warlords certainly aren’t… [the administration] needs to act more quickly, cut the bonds with the warlords, and “unambiguously” throw their weight behind Karzai.
An election victory for Karzai will give the U.S. a freer hand to do this, which will be good for all involved.
Scott Norvell at Tech Central Station, reporting from Afghanistan, gives a hopeful impression of what’s happening there:
They seem genuinely excited. Almost everyone does. In the markets, people are actually talking about the vote. Some are driving around with pictures of candidates in their car windows. Posters of every hue cover the walls of central Kabul. Even one of the much-maligned warlords — men more inclined to saber-rattling than campaign rallies — jumped into the fray.A Canadian political operative with years of grassroots experience was far more realistic about this whole exercise than the people complaining about it from afar. He’s been here six months teaching democratic concepts to a citizenry that barely knows what the word means, and knows that applying western standards of acceptability in a place like Afghanistan is an exercise in lunacy.
Will this vote be perfect? Of course not, he said. Will there be problems? Of course there will be. But it’s a damn sight better than anything they’ve ever had, and baby steps are better than no steps at all.
Robert Hartfiel at the Centre for Public Opinion & Democracy has a more guarded view, but still hopeful:
Due in large part to the fear generated by both the Taliban and warlords, actual voter turnout could be as low as 5 million, several Afghan officials told HRW. Posters have recently appeared on mosques and other walls in southern Afghanistan warning people not to vote.In this context, a qualified success seems the only plausible hope. Both U.S. and UN officials concede that there will be some violence on election day. Due in part to the level violence and intimidation and to the lack of monitors on the ground, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) mission to Afghanistan will not judge the election according to the usual standards.
For all its flaws, the election process is an important step in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. There is little chance that the various armed groups can disrupt the democratic process—they are too fragmented and poorly-armed. The election will go forward, but the true test will come after the ballots are counted, when the newly-elected president attempts to exercise power outside the capital, and rein in the country’s powerful warlords.
Considering Afghanistan’s chaotic history, and the sad fact that the area is just poorly built for democracy, the fact that there is even a “plausible hope” for a “qualified success” is a victory of massive proportions. At a time when those who should know better are telling us that America’s light is “flickering,” we’re actually passing the flame on to one of the most unlikely places in the world.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. To comment, please register. No profanity, please. Non-family-friendly words will be changed to amusing euphemisms as suits the author.