Hardnews Exclusive: Afghan poll cauldron simmers

The post-election scenario is fraught with uncertainty and anxiety for Afghanistan. The US and all major countries are monitoring the situation with diverse plans of action

Shrinivasrao Shridhar Sohoni

The Afghanistan elections of August 20, 2009 were considered historic, especially, by the West. Against a background of 30 years of war, foreign occupation, insurgency, anarchy and widespread killings and destruction, democracy was seen to have succeeded in this poor, backward and conservative Islamic country.

For the first time, elections had been managed entirely by the Afghans. (The 2004 election was UN-managed.) Along with presidential elections, for the first time in Afghanistan's history poll were held to constitute provincial councils, 34 in all.

Another key feature was the emergence of women - both as voters and as candidates - that, too, not only for provincial councils seats but for the presidential office also. Till recently, it was a widely-held belief that according to Islamic tradition a woman's place was either in the home or in the grave.

The role of the national media, print and electronic, was admirable. US-style presidential debates between candidates were held on TV channels. Also, there were panel discussions, talks and analyses on TV and radio. Newspapers were full of reports covering the election issues, candidates and conditions.

There were other notable features. Mutual opponents in the last presidential election had become close partners this time. Abdur Rashid Dostum, the Uzbek warlord who stood against President Karzai in the last election, became a key Karzai supporter. The Taliban had termed the elections un-Islamic, issued 'Shabnama' (night letters) and announcements threatening to cut off fingers marked with ink.

Yet, the electorate came out and voted in millions. President Obama was quick to lead a chorus of praise by western leaders, terming the polls a victory for democracy. Indirectly, the US-led 47-nation armed force in Afghanistan appeared to have made this possible.

Strategically, the elections were considered very important. A government with legitimacy in the public eye could provide a national political mandate endorsing continued US-led intervention in Afghanistan. Democracy, it was assumed, would help lessen political and security tension and enable new political initiatives towards peace and development in the 'Af-Pak' region and beyond.

Tragically, the positive potential of the elections has been undermined. Reports have come in about 223 serious incidents of attack by the Taliban on polling day including suicide bombings, improvised explosive detonations, small arms fire, rocket propelled grenade attacks, and other acts of direct intimidation causing low voter turnout.

Over 2,000 complaints alleging poll malpractice are with the Election Complaints Commission (ECC). The ECC has declared 567 complaints serious enough to have a bearing on the overall outcome of the elections. President Karzai's prime challenger, Dr Abdullah Abdullah, is repeatedly alleging the poll stands vitiated by 'State engineering' directly under President Karzai. Abdullah's complaint has been echoed by some other candidates. President Karzai's election office has rejected the allegations terming these to be motivated attacks by candidates who know they have been defeated.

Notably, the western press, which earlier praised the election, is carrying stories discrediting the poll, highlighting allegations by Dr Abdullah heaping blame on President Karzai. A story has broken about a sharp exchange of words immediately after polling day between President Karzai and Richard Holbrooke, the US President's Special Envoy for Afghanistan-Pakistan. Speculation is rife about future government composition and leadership.