Nothing quite says ‘democracy’ as a system that sanctions two certified fraudsters to legitimately vie for a presidency. The Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) findings of widespread fraud in the August 20 presidential elections have led to a rather curious result. The two men now known to have committed the most fraud are not punished but rewarded by being allowed to compete (again) for the top prize of the Afghan presidency. Afghans are incredulous.
“How can it be,” says one educated Kabuli, “that we have to choose between two known criminals? Now that we know this, should we not remove them and choose between two others who committed no fraud?”
The Afghans I have been speaking to see it this way: they will now know for sure something we have all long suspected, that the president of Afghanistan (whichever of the two it ends up being) is not above nefarious means to get what he wants.
On the other hand, Afghans have always had a much higher tolerance for certain types of corruption than westerns do. Prior to the ballot itself, many Afghans I surveyed expressed little condemnation for strong-arm tactics used by candidates such as tearing down campaign posters or intimidating voters. Indeed, some thought this was not only acceptable but even a positive sign of a potentially powerful leader.
As for the international community, we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. For the conspiracy-loving Afghans, we (and we are all Americans) have orchestrated this elaborate sham to instate the leader of our choice. Who that favoured son is depends on the developments of the day. Today it seems like Abdullah Abdullah, but tomorrow it could be back to Karzai. If a power-sharing deal is reached, that will be seen as our doing too. The more the international community bends over backwards to sustain the charade of free and fair elections, the more proof Afghans have of our self-interested meddling. It’s farcical and tragic. With no legitimate winner in the presidential race, it’s the Afghan people who lose.
{ 7 comments }
The major difference between “vote fraud” in Afghanistan and in the US is that here in the US we have rules in place for accepting or rejecting questionable ballots – of which there are many in every election, at every level of government. Afghanistan apparently doesn’t have such rules in place, so the fraudulent votes are more controversial. Neither system suffers from a significantly greater degree of bad faith.
Well, there’s that, but there’s also the problem of “ghost sites” which are basically phantom voting sites that never existed or were never set up in the first place, often in places beyond government control. The ballots for these were collected, filled out by whoever had control of the distro process for these “ghost sites”, and turned in as legit votes.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1929210,00.html?xid=rss-topstories
Well, I suppose the US does not have “ghost sites,” though I would assert that, in effect, there are locales that have the same impact. There are some locales in the US that are so solidly in the bag for one party that the likelihood of mass voter fraud is too high to not assume that it occurs. And while we do not have ghost sites, we certainly have ghost voters. Bussing in voters from outside of districts or registering homeless people are also common practice in tightly contested areas.
But, again, we have rules in place that help to mediate the disputes that arise from these games. When ballots are counted, it is standard practice to have representatives from at least the two major parties present to negotiate over what irregularities will be accepted and which will be tossed out. A buddy of mine was involved in this during the 2008 election. When I informed him that I cast a write-in vote for Seaman First Class Donald F. Duck in lieu of a candidate on the ballot, he informed me that my votes “probably weren’t counted” because both parties agreed to toss out ballots that had write-in candidates who were not actual people and he noted that this most likely resulted in my entire ballot being tossed (to include the US Presidential election, US Senator, US Rep, etc) – not just my vote for that one race. I think this might have been a misinterpretation of statute (write-in votes might be discarded as “overvotes” in some circumstances), but it was nonetheless how things worked out in practice.
The difference between our elections and theirs is not the level of corruption, but the sophistication of the laws and common practices that we have in place to address it to a degree that satisfies the people.
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the blog post From the Front: 10/21/2009 News and Personal dispatches from the front and the home front.
Julia M,thanks for an excellent post.The Afghan people have been losing for a long,long time,actually it even goes as far back as when the Arabs invaded this land and imposed their evil religion and nasty customs and habits and eversince ,the Afghan people seen nothing but misery and loss. The elections are a farce because the Afghans are not ready to conduct an election that can be considered legitimate.For this ,they need to be educated first.All AFGHANS NEED TO UNDERGO PROPER EDUCATION ABOUT THE MERITS OF DEMOCRACY AND HOW TO CONDUCT LEGITIMATE ELECTION.This will take about 5 years while the country can be run by temporary governing councils with international help.Only then the Afghans will be able and eager to conduct legitimate elections.If not,all resources will be wasted and corruption will continue ,nothing meaningful will be accomplished,US/NATO/UN will look inept,islamic fascists will be emboldened and most likely the Taliban and their supporters in Pakistan,Saudi Arabia and the Gulf oil Shieks will be the winners,and all freedom loving people who want to live without the menace or fear of international terrorists and the Afghan people will all be the losers.
Listen up Shirzay (more like Spizoy or Kharzoy) you kuuni. I suggest you go to Jalalabad and say some of this crap. You are an idiot. Try saying something meaningful, MoFo.
Hi Julia, Thanks for your post… It very much confirms my thoughts that pattern of democratisation in Afganistan is very much the same pattern of democratisation in other countries of the earth just after theirs revolutions
My favourite example is life of William Dampiers (English ‘pirate’ of early 1700) as presented in ‘Pirate of exquisite mind’.
Greetings from DownUnder…
Comments on this entry are closed.