West loses its values in Afghanistan

If the Afghan elections are presented as fair, any remaining moral authority the west might have will be eroded

The elections in Afghanistan are turning out to be a game changer for the war. It was not evident until the last few weeks before the elections that the Taliban would seriously try to undermine the process. In fact, they more or less acquiesced in the voter registration that took place during winter time. Some claim that individual sympathisers with the Taliban even registered themselves. 

The Battle of the Elections is not yet over. In fact, it is likely to rage for the next few weeks and could indeed mark the beginning of the war's eulogy. As Havana Marking commented in the Observer on Sunday, it became clear to her that "whatever the outcome, whatever events unfolded, the UN, the EU, the US, and the west in general, would declare the day an unmitigated success". These institutions and their spokespeople are well on their way down this exact path but they would be wise to pause. They are gambling not only with the lives of Afghans but with fondly held western values and also with what used to be an effective (western) political weapon in the geopolitics of the world. To most people, democracy means the process of one person one vote, and the due counting of votes cast should determine who is in and who is out of power. Elections are not yet seen by the wider public as mere rituals, nor should they be.

To claim, as the EU election observer mission does, that these elections were "fair" ranks close to the statements from Comical Ali in Baghdad in 2003. In large parts of the south, less than 10-25% voted. And those that turned up probably did so at almost gunpoint or induced with bribes of one sort of another. The widely reported estimate of 40-50% turnout came out long before the polls even closed. If turnout even in Kabul was only a moderate 30% how can the average be so high?

Votes have already been counted, we are told. But it takes time to collect and sort out the data. Really? It is reasonable to suggest that whatever goes on behind the scenes now is not the scrutiny of votes actually cast but calculations about what numbers are tactically most suitable to be presented by the so-called Independent Election Commission. Should Hamid Karzai be declared the winner with 65%, or perhaps 53% will pass more easily, or even 48% in order for there to be a runoff?

Presenting these elections as "secure, credible and inclusive" – the words replacing the widely held standard of "free and fair" – will tarnish the reputation of the west for years to come. It is outright hypocrisy. Not only were Afghans cajoled into participating at great risk to their own lives, the weight of their votes are simply brushed off by western diplomats eager to legitimise to their own publics their continued military occupation of the country.

Even more worrying is that certain US diplomats seem to welcome this debacle over the elections. Most likely Karzai did not get the 50% required to avoid a second round. Only by rigging could he have achieved that. But avoiding a runoff makes sense to more people than the incumbent. Astute Afghan and international observers are worried about the polarising effect of a second round. The predominantly non-Pashtun north of the country would probably rally around Dr Abdullah Abdullah and Pashtuns behind Karzai, in so far as the Taliban would allow them to vote.

One should not be surprised if the US turns to offer Karzai backing for his claim of outright victory in the first round in exchange for more influence over his government. Perhaps by the inclusion of Ashraf Ghani or even Zalmay Khalilzad as some sort of chief executive that would diminish the power of Karzai himself. Of course, Abdullah would also have to be bought off but that seems doable. To extract the maximum from Karzai the US could threaten to play stupid and refer to the option of a runoff. Even after these violent and low-turnout elections on 20 August, some internationals hold the view that a second round would show the legitimacy of the elections and the depth of Afghan democracy. Apart from again asking the Afghans to risk their lives at another sham election it could indeed hasten the coming of an ethnically based civil war.

The Battle of the Elections is a tragic testimony to the fate of values when they meet hard political and military realities. Which dictator will feel compelled to hold free and fair elections because of western moral criticism after what is now taking place in Afghanistan? The falsehoods presented by western representatives is a further erosion of the moral authority that the US was said to have lost as a result of the global war on terror, and that President Obama has claimed he would resurrect. Only this time Europe is seemingly fully on board on the shenanigans as well. One can be rather certain that political leaders in neither Europe, Canada, Australia nor the US have the slightest mandate from their publics to throw away the general values of free and fair elections in this haphazard manner.

But everyone is of course in a bind. How to get out of this situation? First, rather than despairing over the fact that the Taliban showed their power and the government of Afghanistan showed its utter incompetence and corruption during these elections, one should consider what opportunities could arise. The elections need to be acknowledged as below an acceptable standard and an apology need to be made to the people of Afghanistan. Admitting this and that elections are no way to choose a government until there is peace, one has immediately opened up for use processes more familiar to Afghans and more suitable in the circumstances of war than the universal, western-based electoral democracy. Although a great deal of preparation would need to take place before it is convened, it seems logical that only an inclusive loya jirga with the full participation of the Taliban, including their leader, Mullah Omar, could get Afghanistan (and the west) out of this morass.

I am not saying such an option guarantees success either, far from it. But to throw away the values of democracy to find a way to continue convincing your own western public that the Afghan war is worth fighting, funding and dying for, is very close to being a criminal offence. There is a lot at stake now both for the Afghans and for the west.