It’s not the voting that’s democracy, argued Tom Stoppard once, it’s the counting. In Afghanistan’s case, though, voting is as crucial as counting. If anyone thought Afghanistan had learnt the lessons it needed to learn in the last ‘democratic’ vote that allowed Hamid Karzai to extend his stay in the presidential palace for another term after months of bickering and accusations of massive fraud, they were clearly mistaken.
The parliamentary vote, lauded by the coalition as a ‘historic step forward,’ appears to be heading the way of the presidential poll. There’s talk of massive fraud and irregularities at a scale that could even dwarf the tainted presidential vote last year. Peter Galbraith, the former UN deputy special representative for Afghanistan, who was sacked for blowing the whistle on the massive fraud in last year’s presidential vote, has dismissed the elections as “significantly fraudulent.” These concerns are hardly exaggerated. As few as three million people out of nearly 12 million eligible voters are estimated to have taken part in the vote. In last year’s presidential election, at least six million people had voted even if you excluded the million and half fake votes allegedly cast to elect Karzai. The election has been also marred by heavy violence. The Free and Fair Elections Foundation of Afghanistan, a democracy watchdog, has also talked of “serious concerns about the quality of elections.” This is why it’s rather interesting that US commander in Afghanistan General David Petraeus and the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon should choose to congratulate Afghans for their courage in participating the elections. Courage the Afghans certainly have. In fact, few can beat them at the game. But it requires more than courage to go through and survive what the Afghans have been through over and over again in the past several years and decades.
Their sincerity and courage to believe in the whole democracy spectacle amid all this violence and despite the raw deal they have repeatedly had at the hands of big powers is almost infectious. This election is certainly a step forward for the nascent democracy in the landlocked country. But democracy is not merely about elections, fair or flawed, at regular intervals. The question is, is Afghanistan ready for democracy? You cannot hold an election at gunpoint and pretend all is well with the world. Democracy and occupation do not go together. More important, democracy doesn’t work when a huge population, the Pashtun majority in this case, remains beyond the pale of power and the decision making process. Obama has been keen to leave Afghanistan as soon as there’s a semblance of order in the country. This, however, would be possible only when all sections of population become part of the governing process, not through feel-good, fraudulent polls. Democracy cannot be selective.
The parliamentary vote, lauded by the coalition as a ‘historic step forward,’ appears to be heading the way of the presidential poll. There’s talk of massive fraud and irregularities at a scale that could even dwarf the tainted presidential vote last year. Peter Galbraith, the former UN deputy special representative for Afghanistan, who was sacked for blowing the whistle on the massive fraud in last year’s presidential vote, has dismissed the elections as “significantly fraudulent.” These concerns are hardly exaggerated. As few as three million people out of nearly 12 million eligible voters are estimated to have taken part in the vote. In last year’s presidential election, at least six million people had voted even if you excluded the million and half fake votes allegedly cast to elect Karzai. The election has been also marred by heavy violence. The Free and Fair Elections Foundation of Afghanistan, a democracy watchdog, has also talked of “serious concerns about the quality of elections.” This is why it’s rather interesting that US commander in Afghanistan General David Petraeus and the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon should choose to congratulate Afghans for their courage in participating the elections. Courage the Afghans certainly have. In fact, few can beat them at the game. But it requires more than courage to go through and survive what the Afghans have been through over and over again in the past several years and decades.
Their sincerity and courage to believe in the whole democracy spectacle amid all this violence and despite the raw deal they have repeatedly had at the hands of big powers is almost infectious. This election is certainly a step forward for the nascent democracy in the landlocked country. But democracy is not merely about elections, fair or flawed, at regular intervals. The question is, is Afghanistan ready for democracy? You cannot hold an election at gunpoint and pretend all is well with the world. Democracy and occupation do not go together. More important, democracy doesn’t work when a huge population, the Pashtun majority in this case, remains beyond the pale of power and the decision making process. Obama has been keen to leave Afghanistan as soon as there’s a semblance of order in the country. This, however, would be possible only when all sections of population become part of the governing process, not through feel-good, fraudulent polls. Democracy cannot be selective.
