Elections in Afghanistan
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
There are up to 225 allegations of irregularity in the Afghan election held last week and the outcome is still unknown – but hotly contested on all sides. Some of the allegations are of sufficient substance and gravity as to have a bearing on the final result. Currently, both the incumbent Hamid Karzai and former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah claim to be ahead in the vote count, and some of Karzai's supporters are saying that their candidate has had a landslide victory capturing 70 per cent of the vote. Abdullah has made claims on national and international media that the vote was rigged and that fraud was widespread. The preliminary results of the presidential election are expected in a few days, but will be subject to Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) investigation. The turnout was low, there was intimidation and violence and 'irregularities' were expected by those monitoring the process.
It is becoming clear that Hamid Karzai may have to share power. This is a less-than-ideal outcome for the sponsors of this exercise in democracy – Britain, Canada and Germany plus the US – who will view with concern a protracted post-electoral wrangle. They will want to 'move on' as swiftly as possible as uncertainty or dispute about the outcome of the lection will inevitably read across to the poor and deteriorating security situation. For the US and Britain they are facing an increasingly sceptical public, who are less and less likely to 'buy' the war as days go by. An ABC news/Washington Post poll released last week showed that US public support for the war in Afghanistan has declined sharply, with more than half the US for the first time saying the war is not worth fighting – 51 per cent say it isn't, 47 per cent say it is. For the coalition that has invested lives and treasure in the Afghan conflict; having a contested or provably corrupt election will make justification of involvement to their own electorates increasingly difficult. It is going to come down to either a 'clean' second-round victory for one of the candidates or a deal between Karzai and Abdullah. The run-off if it happens will be in October; but a deal could be struck earlier than that and perhaps be a better outcome for all – except, perhaps, Hamid Karzai.
source
It is becoming clear that Hamid Karzai may have to share power. This is a less-than-ideal outcome for the sponsors of this exercise in democracy – Britain, Canada and Germany plus the US – who will view with concern a protracted post-electoral wrangle. They will want to 'move on' as swiftly as possible as uncertainty or dispute about the outcome of the lection will inevitably read across to the poor and deteriorating security situation. For the US and Britain they are facing an increasingly sceptical public, who are less and less likely to 'buy' the war as days go by. An ABC news/Washington Post poll released last week showed that US public support for the war in Afghanistan has declined sharply, with more than half the US for the first time saying the war is not worth fighting – 51 per cent say it isn't, 47 per cent say it is. For the coalition that has invested lives and treasure in the Afghan conflict; having a contested or provably corrupt election will make justification of involvement to their own electorates increasingly difficult. It is going to come down to either a 'clean' second-round victory for one of the candidates or a deal between Karzai and Abdullah. The run-off if it happens will be in October; but a deal could be struck earlier than that and perhaps be a better outcome for all – except, perhaps, Hamid Karzai.
source
Labels: 9/11, Afghanistan, Elections in Afghanistan, US Invasion of Afghanistan
posted @ 5:41 PM,
0 Comments:
Post a Comment