Getting Real in Afghanistan

The United States had committed to building an Afghan democracy. Now, argues Sue Gloor, despite hiccups in the recent presidential election, it's time for decisive action toward alleviating fraud and developing a strong ally in Kabul.

Download pdf: Getting Real in Afghanistan

By Sue Gloor

Editor's Note: The following editorial reflects the views of the author and are not Bard College, its faculty or students.

The Aug. 20 democratic election in Afghanistan returned a less successful result than anticipated, and the international community’s resulting disagreement on how to correctly approach the flawed vote has only exacerbated the controversy.

Peter Galbraith, former American deputy special representative for the UN Mission in Afghanistan, estimates that 30 percent of front-runner Hamid Karzai’s votes are fraudulent—a result of ballot stuffing by biased Afghan election officials at inactive “ghost” polling stations throughout the country. .

Acknowledement of the extent and consequences of this fraud by the UN has been long and more complicated than necessary. The UN Mission, which backs Karzai more than any other candidate, took weeks before conceding that fraud had occurred. Top mission official, Kai Eide, then assured the world that the UN had pursued all claims of fraud, even though minimal decisive action has been taken.

Galbraith would have none of it. As he revealed in his op-ed to The Washington Post after being fired from his UN position, Eide shrugged off suggestions for a more direct investigation into the allegations of fraud, saying it would “inflame tensions in the country.” Not a very good reason for avoiding the messy outcome of a democratic attempt.

Galbraith ends his piece by calling for “resolve from the head of the UN mission in Afghanistan”—a plea that indeed must be heeded to bring about the country’s stability.

In the two weeks since, the UN and US have taken modest action, but it is insufficient considering the tasks that lie ahead. Obama is deliberating a substantial increase in American troops should the expected runoff be ordered, but admits that the decision will take time to contemplate. In the past two weeks, he has held review meetings with his national security team on Afghanistan that will hopefully result in a “modified war strategy” which could include this troop increase, according to the UN Mission.

Eide and other UN officials argue that the election, fraud investigations and runoff should be entirely Afghan-led. But the US has sacrificed too much blood and national energy attempting to plant democracy in Afghanistan to let an uncertain local bureaucracy handle such an investigation or to look the other way while its troops and the larger mission are endangered by an illegitimate vote. Hopefully Obama recognizes this duty and will enforce a US presence until sizeable progress is made in the nation.

Meanwhile, the UN has power under the Security Council’s mandate to ensure a “free, fair and transparent” election, which warrants some international interference in conflict-ridden Afghanistan.

The main goal that the UN should be striving for is a legitimate, stable Afghan government that can act as a partner to the US in creating a safe democracy. The US needs this ally to 1) combat fraudulent practices in a runoff election and 2) increase the safety of American forces if Obama does indeed follow through with the deployment of more troops to the region.