November 1, 2009

The Afghan democracy


            Opinion, by Mirino 
Is it not suspiciously strange and even hypocritical that there is no international support in favour of the conditions that Abdullah Abdullah requires in order for him to participate in the second ballot of the Afghan elections?
It's not as though he doesn't represent a considerable proportion of Afghans. It's not as though a man of his stature is of no consequence.

Yet It would seem that his requirements to insure that essential voting principles in democracy are fully respected, are not even shared by those who are sending and sacrificing troops in defence of essentially what Abdullah is trying to uphold.

Reading between the lines of a recent article in Le Figaro, it would seem that one wouldn't be alone in having such doubts about this. 

Whilst Obama is mulling over how many more troops he should send to Afghanistan, despite the opinions of those who in any case should know far better from experience, the essential issue of what Nato and the Afghans themselves should be defending, seems to be of less consequence to him.
The only explanation for this would be the tacit requirement that Karzai stays in office as president of Afghanistan.

If I were Afghan, I wouldn't be at all satisfied with this arrangement, and I would be very disappointed in such a so called democracy that I would already have risked my life for.
_____



Recommend this post on Google!


5 comments:

  1. Thanks for posting this, Mirino. I definitely agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There may well be something that I'm unaware of regarding this. Abdullah must be deeply disappointed, not only by his having to withdraw- for good reason- from the elections themselves, but by the lack of support from Europe and the USA. If this is the sort of democracy that Nato is trying to defend, it risks to lose the support of many more Afghans, and that could be fatal.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is interesting (from Telegraph co.uk) :

    Dr Abdullah said: "For the next few days I will let Mr Karzai work it out for himself.

    "I will be in the country. I will not shut any doors, but I will stick to the principles of my campaign." Humayun Shah Asifi, Dr Abdullah's vice presidential candidate, said: "We have two moderate people. Both sides are reasonable people. They have worked together in the past. I think some kind of compromise is possible."

    ReplyDelete
  4. It is interesting. An important move that puts the onus on Karzai.
    It would seem that Abdullah's decision took other aspects such as the question of security into consideration as well. Considering the proportion of fraud, it's probable that Abdullah would have benefited from a second vote. Under such circumstances if Karzai refuses to concede anything to Abdullah it would be even less to his credit. More important, he would have missed the precious opportunity to patch up the important divisions between the Afghans, made even larger by the fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting article in Le Monde today.
    No one can ever condone what the Taliban want to impose and the way they try to do it, but it's not too difficult to agree with what they are now saying concerning Karzai and the famous election results. It's certain that they won't be the only ones in Afghanistan to think in such a way.
    It's not the most intelligent move that the present American administration have made regarding Afghanistan.

    http://www.lemonde.fr/asie-pacifique/article/2009/11/03/afghanistan-les-talibans-rejettent-la-main-tendue-de-karzai_1262248_3216.html#ens_id=1228393

    http://oknotizie.virgilio.it/info/e542a0f05faa5c/afganistan_i_taliban_respingono_la_mano_tesa_di_karzai_le_monde_.html

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails