|
 Afghanis, Americans, and the rest of the world waited in anticipation on October 19 for the U.N.-backed Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) that is investigating reports of fraud in the nation’s August 20 presidential election to release its results — results that will determine if incumbent President Harmid Karzai has been unequivocally reelected.
The commission released figures back on September 16 showing Karzai with 54.6 percent of the vote. According to Afghan law, if a single candidates fails to receive over 50 percent of the vote, a runoff vote must be held.
One late-breaking AP report announced that ECC investigators had thrown out nearly a third of Karzai's votes.
On the same day as the Election Commission’s announcement, Phillippe Morillon, head of the European Union election observer mission, told Reuters news that his team believed 1.5 million votes were suspicious, including 1.1 million cast for Karzai and 300,000 cast for the leading challenger, former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah. On September 14, Abdullah warned in an interview with McClatchy Newspapers that if President Karzai’s reelection is based on a fraudulent vote, the U.S.-led war against al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan will fail.
VOA news reported on October 19 that senior foreign officials visiting Kabul in recent days have urged Mr. Karzai to accept the commission’s verdict.
The report cited U.S. officials who said on October 18 that President Barack Obama will not decide whether to send more troops to Afghanistan until the election is settled and the Afghan government is ready to work effectively with the United States.
AFP noted that the ECC had published a report into mass allegations of vote fraud, and had ordered that ballots from 210 polling stations be invalidated, saying it found "clear and convincing evidence of fraud" at the polling stations, which were located across the country. The ECC also ordered the Independent Election Commission (IEC), which is the final arbiter of the election results, "to invalidate a certain percentage of each candidates' votes in six separate categories."
According to a New York Times report on October 19, an unnamed Western official identified only as someone with first-hand familiarity with the finding of a special audit committee, said they showed that Karzai had received only 48 percent of the vote. If that percentage holds, a runoff between Karzai and Abdullah would be required.
The report noted that the auditors did not immediately publicize their conclusions, but handed them over to the ECC. The report also noted it is still unclear if the two candidates would actually go through with a runoff.
The rapid approach of winter weather in the mountainous nation makes the logistics of holding another election soon impractical, and increasing insecurity in the south of the country would also present formidable challenges. Consequently, many foreign officials have suggested that the two candidates strike a power sharing deal, an arrangement both candidates have dismissed.
“I still believe in terms of where we are politically that’s its unlikely to be a second round,” the Times quoted the Western official.
AP reported that hundreds of Karzai’s supporters had gathered in the main street of the southeastern city of Spin Boldak on October 18, shouting, "We want the [election] result!" and "Karzai is our leader!"
The report quoted Ali Shah Khan, a tribal leader from the area, who said the protesters believed the August 20 vote was fair and that foreigners were delaying the results to unseat Karzai.
"We know they don't want President Karzai because he is a strong leader and he is working only for the people of Afghanistan," Khan said. "The foreign countries want a weak leader for Afghanistan. After that they can do whatever they want."
Another report from the British Times quoted Mohammad Moin Marastyal, an Afghan MP and leading member of Karzai’s campaign team, who said that the ECC had distorted the facts in a deliberate attempt to trigger a run-off vote.
“Effort has been made to lower Karzai’s vote to below 50 per cent," said Marastyal. "Now we are in a deadlock.”
The uncertainty about the legitimacy of the election poses problems not only for Karzai, but for U.S. plans to increase the number of troops it intends to commit to the anti-Taliban battle raging across the country.
The British Times noted that President Obama is soon due to meet his top advisers on Afghanistan policy although aides have made clear that no decision on increasing troops strength is imminent.
“I think it would be irresponsible and ... it would be reckless to make a decision on U.S. troop level if, in fact, you haven’t done a thorough analysis of whether in fact there’s an Afghan partner ready to fill that space,” White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said on October 18.
The New York Times quoted a spokeswoman for the American Embassy in Kabul, Caitlin Hayden, who said that Senator John Kerry was stopping in Kabul on the night of October 17 his way back from a trip to Pakistan, “to continue his consultations and discussions.”
Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that he was “not yet convinced” about deploying more troops to the increasingly unpopular conflict.
“We have a responsibility to make certain that the government here is a full partner in our efforts to be able to be as effective as we can be,” Mr Kerry said.
“I think this is a moment for President Karzai to frankly step up and help to share with the world a better vision for how the government here is going to deliver and be a full partner."
It is unfortunate that it takes a committed “liberal” Democrat like John Kerry to question the sense of sending more Americans to die in yet another pointless sinkhole. Most of the neoconservative Republicans in Congress seem as willing to recklessly spend American lives in overseas adventures as as the Democrats are willing to squander the taxpayers’ dollars for “stimulus” programs.
Interestingly, both Senators Kerry and John McCain — one of the Senate’s more “hawkish” members — are both members of the internationalist Council on Foreign Relations, their differences no doubt being attributable to some sort of scripted “good cop-bad-cop” playbook.
Only a handful of representatives and senators seem to have actually read the Constitution they have sworn to uphold and defend, and refuse to authorize any federal spending or action not specifically delegated to the federal government therein.
One such power that Congress has been too willing to give away to the executive branch over the past 60 years is the power to declare war. The last time it was used was in 1941, and all wars since World War II having been waged under executive action alone.
Photo of ECC Chairman Grant Kippen: AP Images
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
