Newsgroup: it.politica.pds
Titolo: Afghanistan election descends into farce

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/afgh-o12.shtml
Afghanistan election descends into farce
By Peter Symonds
12 October 2004
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author
Even as Afghans were still going to vote in the country’s presidential
election on Saturday, 15 of the 16 candidates launched a concerted
protest over widespread voting irregularities favouring the US-backed
incumbent Hamid Karzai. As of today, counting had still not begun as
Washington, with the assistance of the UN, attempted to find a way to
squash the opposition.
The most glaring flaw involved the indelible ink used to mark the
thumbs of those who voted in order to prevent multiple voting. On
polling day, it soon became evident that in many cases the ink could
be easily washed off. As opposition candidates were quick to point
out, this opened the way for ballot rigging on a massive scale. Other
irregularities, including under-age voters and political bias by
election officials, were also reported.
According to a briefing paper by the US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW)
last month, multiple voter registration was widespread. UN and Afghan
officials told HRW that the overall number of registered voters was
“vastly inflated”. Of the 10.5 million on the electoral roll,
estimates put the actual number of voters as low as 5 to 7 million.
The ink was meant as a guarantee that those with multiple registration
cards would be unable to use them.
All 15 opposition candidates called for a boycott, urging election
officials to stop the polling and to hold the election again. In the
cities of Kunduz and Herat, supporters of Yunis Qanooni, regarded as
Karzai’s main challenger, held protests outside a number of polling
booths. In Kabul, one resident told the British-based Independent:
“There were a lot of violations. In Wardak, one person voted 100
times. If they declare Karzai a winner, it will be a puppet
government.”
In comments to the Washington Post, presidential candidate Homayoun
Shah Assefy said he had received many calls from polling places in
southern and eastern Afghanistan complaining of irregularities that
favoured Karzai. “This was not an accident. It was pre-organised.
Yesterday I thought this was an historic day, but unfortunately it was
a black day for democracy and the future of democracy in Afghanistan,”
he declared.
The US and UN quickly stepped in to prevent the protest over the ink
debacle from exposing the election as a carefully contrived charade.
UN and Afghan election officials rejected calls for voting to be
suspended. Behind the scenes, US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad began a
round of meetings with opposition candidates aimed at pressuring them
to back down. According to the New York Times, Khalilzad “suggested”
to Qanooni that he “could best help his own political future by not
appearing to thwart the will of the Afghans”.
Well aware who pulls the strings in Kabul, Qanooni and several other
prominent candidates quickly backed down. Qanooni indicated yesterday
that he would accept the outcome of a UN investigation into voting
irregularities. The UN has already named two of the three so-called
independent experts to the panel that will clear the way for the
counting of votes to begin.
The outcome of the UN investigation is a foregone conclusion. Election
observers—both international and local—have already dismissed
complaints of rorting and declared the poll to be legitimate. The
Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) issued a
statement branding the opposition protest as “unjustified.” It grandly
declared: “October 9 was a historic day in Afghanistan, and the
millions who came to the polls clearly wanted to turn from the rule of
the gun to the rule of law.”
However, neither the OSCE nor other observer groups provided any
evidence to support their stance. The OSCE contributed 40 of the 230
international observers sent to cover more than 5,000 polling booths
throughout the country. Earlier in the year, the OSCE ruled out
sending a larger team after an exploratory mission concluded that “the
present conditions in Afghanistan are significantly below the minimum
regarded by OSCE/ODIHR as necessary for credible election
observation.”
The Human Rights Watch briefing paper noted: “Remarkably, the
[mission’s] report recommended that the OSCE should avoid observing
the election because it was likely that the monitoring process would
uncover substantial flaws and ‘challenge public and international
confidence in the process’.” In other words, the problem was that the
election process in Afghanistan was so tainted that the OSCE feared
its attempts to whitewash the poll would be rapidly exposed.
Washington’s agenda
US National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice had no doubt about the
findings of the UN panel. She confidently predicted yesterday that
“this election is going to be judged legitimate. I’m certain of it.”
Rice’s comments simply underscore the Bush administration’s contempt
for democratic rights in Afghanistan, just as in Iraq and the US
itself. As far as Washington is concerned, the purpose of the Afghan
election is to legitimise the continuing US military occupation of the
country and its handpicked puppet in Kabul, Karzai.
The poll has been timed to hand Bush a desperately needed “success” in
the lead-up to the US presidential election. Keen to deflect attention
from the deepening disaster in Iraq, Bush seized on the Afghan
election, declaring: “Just three years ago, women were being executed
in the sports stadium. Today they’re voting for a leader of a free
country.”
It is absurd to describe Afghanistan as a “free country”. The nation
remains under effective US occupation, with 20,000 US and allied
troops and a NATO-led International Security Assistance Force of 7,000
troops based in Kabul. Over the last three years, US soldiers have
roamed the country at will and openly flouted basic democratic rights,
arbitrarily detaining and torturing thousands of Afghans. Under such
conditions, it is impossible to hold any genuinely democratic election
in Afghanistan.
Washington’s neo-colonial control of the country rests on a network of
relations with regional militia leaders and warlords that assisted the
US military in overthrowing the previous Taliban regime in 2001. Many
of the more prominent presidential candidates, such as Qanooni, are
connected to these petty despots or, like General Rashid Dostum, are
warlords themselves. Qanooni, Dostum and others have all served in
Karzai’s administration and have close relations with the US.
The Human Rights Watch briefing paper documented the coercive methods
by which these militia leaders intimidated political rivals and
bullied or bribed voters to support their candidates. The report
concluded that “in most parts of the country Afghans told Human Rights
Watch that they are primarily afraid of the local factional leaders
and military commanders—not the Taliban insurgency.” As it turned out
there were very few insurgent attacks on polling booths on Saturday.
No one, however, has reported on the extent to which voters were
bludgeoned into voting one way or another by various local thugs.
Karzai is no exception. While his own political base among Pashtun
tribes in the south and east of the country is limited, he has the
backing of the biggest warlord of them all—the White House and the
Pentagon. Karzai has a close association with Washington stretching
back to the 1980s when he liaised with the CIA and other US officials
on behalf of one of the anti-Soviet Mujaheddin groups led by
Seghatullah Mojadeddi. Over the past three years, he has proven
himself as a loyal and pliable political tool for the White House.
With Washington’s backing, Karzai’s election campaign has consisted of
bribing and bullying various tribal and militia leaders into ensuring
their followers voted for him. A recent Los Angeles Times article
cited the example of the town of Jaldak where a meeting of elders
decided a month ago to back Karzai and sent out their orders.
Qanooni’s campaign manager Haji Mohammed Hashim complained to the
newspaper that those who had wanted to vote for his candidate had been
harassed by local police and election officials at the polling booths.
“As you know,” Hashim said, “many people around here are not well
educated and they can’t read or write. They are mostly tyre puncture
repairmen and shopkeepers, and whenever they go to vote, they ask for
instruction from election officials. And they say, ‘Check in front of
Karzai’s picture [on the ballot]’, which is not good. Every person
should vote independently and for whomever they want.”
While the counting of votes may take three weeks, there is little
doubt that Karzai will emerge the victor. With a notorious political
manipulator like US ambassador Khalilzad operating behind the scenes,
nothing much will have been left to chance. An exit poll conducted in
Afghanistan by the US International Republican Institute—an
organisation closely connected to Bush’s Republican Party—found that
Karzai led by a huge 43 percent over his nearest rival Qanooni and
would win without being forced to go to a second-round run-off.
To claim this election as “democratic” is a sham. The US State
Department denounced the recent elections in Chechnya as “neither free
nor fair”. But the Chechen election, which took place under a Russian
army of occupation and ensured that Moscow’s handpicked stooge was
elected, was not fundamentally different from the farce that took
place in Afghanistan on Saturday. What is described by Washington as
“a step towards democracy” and what is decried as “unfair” is
completely dependent on how the outcome will advance US economic and
strategic interests in the resource-rich Central Asian region.
See Also:
Afghanistan’s presidential election: a mockery of democracy
[2 October 2004]
The US prepares another democratic charade in Afghanistan
[4 August 2004]
Washington’s man to be installed as Afghan prime minister
[22 December 2001]
 

           Rosso e pirla
--------------------------------
Inviato via 
http://arianna.libero.it/usenet/