Afghans deserve to give themselves a pat on the back after last week's election. True, it was far from perfect, and voter turnout was less than in the previous election, but this very first Afghan-led election was an accomplishment nonetheless.
Despite threats of violence (some of which were realized), Afghans turned out by the millions and voted, leaving the polling stations with the tell-tale index finger stained with silver nitrate, proclaiming for all the world to see that they had participated. Taliban had threatened to cut off these stained fingers, and vowed that one woman, a candidate for the provincial council, would be decapitated unless she withdrew her name from the ballot. (She did not.) One wonders how many Canadians would bother to vote if they had to face such threats, not to mention the odd rocket attack on a polling station.
Likewise, Afghans were exposed to a robust competition among candidates for the presidency, with broadcast debates seen or heard by more 10 million citizens for the first time. Spared the degrading attack advertising that has become commonplace in North American elections, voters heard candidates put forward divergent views on a host of issues confronting their country.
This, in essence, is the sum of the good news from this election. As results continue to trickle in, the Electoral Complaints Commission, established by the United Nations and led by an able Canadian, Grant Kippen, is sorting through hundreds of complaints about election irregularities. Indeed, some candidates argue that the results are unreliable due to fraud and call for the election to be set aside.
There is no doubt that fraud did occur and that more than one candidate is implicated. What will be difficult to determine is whether the fraud is on a scale that compromises the outcome of the vote. The violence made it impossible for international observers to be present in vast areas of the country. The possibility of ballot boxes being stuffed, of proxy voting (especially men voting in the place of “their” women), of votes being cast on fraudulent voter identification cards (made easier by the lack of a voters' list), all of this is increased by the impact of the violent insurgency that grips Afghanistan.
The election has taken place at a time when the war that U.S. President Barack Obama has proclaimed to be one of necessity, and not of choice, is not going well. The amount of geography that is controlled by insurgents and unsafe for travel has grown and their grip tightens around Kabul, where several pre-election blasts served as a reminder that the Taliban (which is shorthand for the forces of insurgency; they are anything but a single coherent group) are able to strike pretty much at will.
The U.S. administration's frustration with Hamid Karzai's government is a poorly kept secret as the rampant cronyism and corruption of that government drive many Afghans to the insurgency. One presidential candidate, former finance minister Ashraf Ghani, told us that the Taliban narrative is no longer about the foreign troops, but about the corruption of the government. This may be true, but the failure of more than 100,000 International Security Assistance Force troops to give the Afghans the security they had hoped for after years of Soviet occupation and civil war is also a factor. In fact, the frequent civilian casualties caused by ISAF forces, as well as the ignominious violations of Afghan custom by forces invading private compounds, including women's quarters, in search of Taliban have turned the initial welcoming of foreign forces in 2001 into a distant memory.
