The FUBAR Afghan election

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/july-dec09/afghanistan_10-01.html
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23113#

These links tell a scary story of how the recent Afghan presidential election was, instead of a victory for democracy against the Taliban menace, actually a major setback undermining that nation and the West's hopes for its improvement. It seems that once the Obama administration took power and Richard Holbrooke was appointed as special envoy, corrupt and paranoid President Karzai was convinced that America sought to replace him. So he plotted for months to stack the upcoming election in his favor. The UN assistance mission to Afghanistan (UNAMA), desperate for some milestones of success amidst major security deterioration and stalled development under their watch, craved a "successful election". In order to demonstrate political progress, they turned over the reins to the Afghan government, instead of running and monitoring the process directly, as they did during the last election in 2004. So that is basically a recipe for disaster. And as in America, unfortunately the preparations for election caused governmental tunnel-vision and forced all other pressing Afghan issues to the back burner (education, infrastructure, justice, armed forces training, counter-narcotics, etc.). Security was concentrated on the polling stations instead of hunting Taliban, and it showed with several brazen Taliban attacks and bombings in "secure" urban areas like downtown Kabul. NATO deaths in the summer months leading up to the election were the highest in the war's 8-year history.

As one would expect, Karzai stacked the "independent election commission" with members partial to him, including foreigners to feign impartiality. All the warning signs of major fraud were obvious prior to the election. An American diplomat and deputy special rep to the UN Afghan mission, Peter Galbraith (son of the economist John Galbraith) raised these concerns to UNAMA, and was summarily ignored by chief Kai Eide. Galbraith's investigations had shown that the Afghan election commission set up many voting stations in Taliban-controlled regions where less than 10% of the populace was expected to turn out (due to poor security and threats to their lives). Those stations were located in areas too remote or dangerous for monitoring, and probably only existed on paper. Yet after the election, thousands of pro-Karzai votes came streaming in from those locations. Karzai eventually and improbably netted 54% of the overall vote, and his leading challenger, Abdullah Abdullah has challenged the legitimacy.

Galbraith's office had collected evidence of this, and he feels that his boss deliberately suppressed it. Their professional relationship deteriorated to the point where Eide complained to Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon and had Galbraith removed. Ban chose appearances over the truth. The UN and the West were so desperate to pronounce the election a success as a propaganda blow to the Taliban that they covered up fraud. But as presidential challenger Abdullah said, the Taliban are obviously the biggest threat to Afghanistan's future, but an illegitimate, corrupt government is second. The UN doesn't seem to care. Somehow Karzai has convinced them to back him, maybe through bribery. Of course the UN's official excuse is that it has no "right" to interfere in the elections of a sovereign state, and we should be patient and let the Afghans sort it out. They do admit that fraud took place, but do not concede that the fraud was preventable, and overwhelmingly in Karzai's favor. The Obama administration and Holbrooke have been fairly quiet on the issue as well, even moreso than the disputed Iranian elections and Honduras coup d'etat.

If America, NATO, and the UN came to Afghanistan to help the people, show them good governance, and bring them into the 21st Century, then how can we tolerate this result? We toppled the "illegitimate" regime of the Taliban in 2001, but now we sit on the sidelines while a corrupt, inept political parasite (of course appointed by the Bushies) hijacks a nation that is vital to our security interests in the region. The only worse result would be if Osama won the election, legitimately (and by now I'm sure he is more popular among Afghans than Karzai). No wonder no one trusts or respects us and the Smurfs. We screw up Yugoslavia, Congo, Haiti, Rwanda, East Timor, Iraq, Afghanistan, and pretty much every other warzone we go.