Salocin

Afghan election result blurred by ink issue

There is a general fear [BBC] that the elections in Afghanistan will have been to a certain extent compromised by the discovery that badly-applied ink on the voters fingernails could be rubbed off, potentially allowing some to vote more than once. Opponents are seeking to make political currency, and are casting a shadow over what was supposed to be Afghanistan's finest hour since before the Taleban.

It's tragic to see political figures willing to tear down an establishment if they can't be in charge of it.

While there is no doubt that there were some issues with ink coming off, what this clearly demonstrates is opposition groups desperately seeking any excuse to stand in the way of Afghanistan's path towards representative democracy. One look at the voters (and there are many pictures around) and it's easy to see how happy they are to regain some control over how their country is governed.

It's also disappointing to see how something so simple could have been overlooked, although the actual extent of the problem remains to be seen.

What is apparent is that politicians in Afghanistan, much like politicians anywhere, are extremely unwilling to admit defeat, and would rather find some excuse to boycott the polls, so claiming they never participated, than accept that the process couldn't be perfect, but that it is likely to nevertheless be representative.

One would have thought that if any party was going to be taking advantage of the ability to vote multiple times, it was unlikely to be Hamid Karzai's organization. It seems extremely shallow and unfair to point the finger in this way, and thereby seek to undermine a leadership in a country that deserves a government with a strong mandate more than anyone else.

It is also clear that this country is unlikely to be able to afford a second attempt at an election, the organizational effort required is huge and extremely costly, and therefore impossible to reproduce. By calling this election into question, they push the country away from stability, and it is sad to have to acknowledge that this is probably what many of the candidates want. Unable to govern through force, private armies, spurious religious authority or historical coincidence, they found themselves as candidates in the election because it was the only way to retain their power, a step back to a weak government with a challenged mandate allows many of these individuals to fall back on old positoins of power, challenging the authority of the ruling party by casting this illusory doubt over their election.

Representative democracy works, but its politicians that screw things up. How long before they discover gerrymandering in Afghanistan?