A member of the
Afghanistan National Security Forces frisks voters on
Saturday. Are Western
reports of a successful election fact-based, or
self-serving tales for the
audience back home?
The Afghan Polls: Don't Believe Western Hype (The Frontier Post,
Pakistan)
"Proclaiming Saturday's polls 'historic' or a 'landmark' is
not only premature, it is a crude show of linguistic acrobatics and histrionics.
Hadn't this galaxy of voices said the same about the 2009 elections? And what
came of that? ... In the scrutiny that emerged after the polls, the Afghan
election complaint commission threw out a stunning million votes as bogus. Though
President HamidKarzai was
widely accused of stealing the election, foreign hands, particularly those of
America, were also involved in the heist."
A man in Kabul waits in line to vote on Saturday: Are Western media reports and those from officials a bit too positive when it comes to the success of the 2014 Afghanistan elections?
Quite
remarkably, Afghans have passed through presidential and provincial council
elections. With the turnout over 58 percent, these were incontestably quite
impressive. By all media accounts, men and women exhibited tremendous
enthusiasm exercising their franchise, and young people in particular were at
the forefront of those making a beeline to polling stations. By every
definition, it was a really spiritedly, hard-fought contest with
wide-participation.
However,
the hyperbole and overstatements made by media networks, commentators and pundits,
are, by and large, nothing more than self-interested statements meant for show.
Sure,
the Taliban had threatened to disrupt the voting, even carrying out
high-profile killings in the run-up to the elections. However, no sane mind or
objective observer would have blown the threat so out of proportion as the intelligentsia
and media have done. After all, the Taliban also threatened the 2009 Afghan
elections, yet even then, Afghans, both male and female, turned out in their multitudes.
Given
this, it is hyperbolic to scream about how Afghan voters defied the threats of
insurgents. This is even more true when other nations have passed through the
electoral process in far more hostile conditions, as have the Iraqis recently. In
the case of Iraq, they first went to the polls when their land was in the throes
of profound and multifaceted militancy and terrorism. Now again, they are
preparing to do so, even as the monster of sectarian and confessional
bloodletting has viciously raised its vile head once again, throwing the
beleaguered nation into the black hole of irretrievable mayhem.
Nor
should the pundits forget that Saturday's election was not just for president,
but for provincial councils. They should remember that those who threw their
hats in the ring for the presidential race were not only fearsome warlords who
hold segments of the electorate under their thumbs and at their beck and call,
but the local influential, carrying plenty of clout over flocks in their
respective constituencies. Commentators, the media and the punditry seem not to
have reckoned with the role played by these powerful contestants in mustering this
turnout while burnishing their own electoral bids for the presidency or provincial
council seats.
It
also happens to be the case that polling couldn't be held in at least 10
percent of polling stations, of which there were more than 6,000. That should
tell you that things in the war torn land aren't as hunky-dory as projected by
the feel-good announcements of commanders from the occupying armies and their
political bosses back home. These are simply meant to justify to their peoples the
blood and treasure their governments have invested in the Afghanistan campaign.
Even
the media accounts cannot be considered all-encompassing. Quite understandably,
their spot reportage has been confined primarily to the relative security of
urban centers, rather than the sprawling countryside that houses the bulk of
the population, particularly in the south and east.
with
worldwide reach throughout
In
any case, Afghanistan coverage by Western media has been carried out mostly by conformist
embedded journalists, colored profusely by commanders in the occupation armies,
and profoundly infested with information from Kabul-based foreign diplomats and
foreign-funded NGOs and civil society groups. The worth and veracity of such
reportage can be well imagined. A credible appraisal and assessment of Saturday's
election will likely be possible once fuller results and details are announced
by the election authority, and based on complaints filed with the complaint
commission. Proclaiming Saturday's polls "historic" or a "landmark"
is not only premature, it is a crude show of linguistic acrobatics and histrionics.
Hadn't this galaxy of voices said the same about the 2009 elections? And what
came of that?
In
any case, the election process has now entered a crucial stage, and its outcome
will be made or marred depending on whether the contestants accept the results.
And there lies the rub. The 2009 poll turned out to be a spectacular damp squib, as it
drew cries of foul from around the world. In the scrutiny that emerged after
the polls, the Afghan election complaint commission threw out a stunning million
votes as bogus. Though President HamidKarzai was widely accused of stealing the election, foreign
hands, particularly those of America, were also involved in the heist. And Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, his main challenger, pulled out of the
run-off crying that he expected to be robbed again. So it remains to be seen if
the contestants will accept the results this time round.
Chances
are they will not be, especially if ZalmaiRassoul turns out the victor. He is widely viewed
as Karzai's man. Karzai's elder brother Qayyum, at
his behest, pulled out of the presidential race. As reports of official
influence-peddling and free-floating voter registration cards are already widely
available, there is every chance that the results will be strongly questioned and
challenged by the defeated candidates, even if a candidate other than Rassoul romps to victory.
The
question of whether that land can return to peace, security and stability will
also remain wide open, given that the presidential race remains cluttered with
warlords who fought the Taliban, are now lethally resurgent, and must be
engaged for any grand national reconciliation to occur.
For
Pakistan, this election means a lot, with candidates that are ill-disposed
toward this country. One hopes that the Islamabad establishment is making its
calculations earnestly.
