Western Press Question Poll Credibility
Papers report on alleged fraud, illegal block-voting, intimidation and bribery in the run-up to ballot.
Western Press Question Poll Credibility
Papers report on alleged fraud, illegal block-voting, intimidation and bribery in the run-up to ballot.
Newspapers in the European and North American countries with troops in Afghanistan have been reporting concern at corruption in the run-up to this week’s presidential and provincial council elections.
Coverage has moved from debate over the validity of the war, the effectiveness of the strategy and suitability of resources to questions about the legitimacy of the Afghan electoral process that could cloud the expected re-election of incumbent president Hamed Karzai.
A Financial Times editorial titled “Afghan dilemmas” reflects the apprehension in the western press.
“Great hope is being placed in this week’s elections in Afghanistan and in the strategic review due from General Stanley McChrystal, the United States commander on the ground. Yet, there is also widespread fear that this hope may be misplaced,” said the FT.
Across United States, British, German, French, and Canadian newspapers there are reports of fraud, illegal block-voting, intimidation and bribery in the run-up to the poll. If true, the credibility of Afghanistan’s second presidential election will be seriously undermined.
The Canadian Globe and Mail’s article “Bribes and Backroom Deals” says, “Allegations of fraud have already clouded the credibility of this election and fuelled threats of mass demonstrations in the north if Mr. Karzai's win is considered illegitimate.”
The paper continued, “The discussion among analysts, both Afghan and western, revolves around ‘acceptable levels’ of voting irregularities, an indication of just how persistent the problem is in a country where much of the population lives in remote areas, difficult to access in the best of times, much less observe on voting day.”
Voter turn-out is expected to be low. Registration stands at less than 50 per cent and even fewer are expected to cast their votes.
“In the south, election officials said they were expecting a turnout below 30 per cent,” the New York Times reported Abdul Qader Nurzai, head of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission office in Kandahar, as saying.
“Officials warn that public frustration with the war, corruption and lagging reconstruction and development is so high that many people may shun the polls,” the New York Times said.
Fear that votes will be cast along ethnic and regional lines, further destabilising the country, was expressed in the Financial Times.
Taleban attacks, which have increased by 60 per cent since October 2008 according to Le Monde, have escalated further in recent weeks.
Three large bomb attacks in Kabul in the last week, on Saturday, Tuesday and Wednesday, attracted wide coverage in the press.
The Taleban have stated explicitly they will intensify their attacks around voting day, targeting polling stations, and treating any Afghan who votes as colluding with invading forces.
The New York Times and Washington Post contrasted the process with the first presidential election in 2004 when there was little Taleban interference.
With 7,000 voting stations across the country, the Washington Post reported that at least ten per cent will not open because of security risks.
The Taleban are not the only force compromising the elections. The Times of London reported that as many as three million out of the electorate of 17.5 million (and a population of 33 million) have been fraudulently registered, mainly in southern regions.
The New York Times reported that “twenty per cent of new voting cards went to under-age boys and another 20 per cent were duplicates”.
The Globe and Mail reported accusations against supporters of Karzai and his family members including his half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, who is a member of the provincial council in the southern province of Kandahar.
Also described in the Globe and Mail are allegations that tribal leaders in the south, in the pay of political parties, are casting block votes for their regions.
All papers report Karzai’s collaboration with General Abdul Rashid Dostum, an Uzbek warlord, with dismay. Karzai, who the Times and Financial Times describe as having been abandoned by the United States and Britain, will further alienate himself from western powers through the alliance, which is viewed as an attempt to consolidate internal support, they say.
The Financial Times said that disappointment with Karzai is not limited to the West, nor is he the only source of disappointment. “While many Afghans oppose the brutal extremism of the jihadis, they resent the failure of the Karzai government to provide basic services and security, and often see western troops, and their promiscuous use of force, as a threat to their lives and livelihoods,” the FT said.
While Karzai is widely expected to win a second term (a poll conducted in July by the US International Republican Institute, and cited in Le Monde, gives him 44 per cent of the vote) the Financial Times reported the contest will be tighter than had been expected “with Abdullah Abdullah, a former foreign minister, staging a real challenge”.
Further problems relating to the outcome include the expectation that people will vote along ethnic lines, according to the Guardian.
Once votes are cast and counted, the Washington Post and Financial Times predict an inevitable dispute over the outcome.
As of June 2009, the International Security Assistance Force, ISAF, had 61,130 personnel from 42 different countries. At that time, the United States had 28,850 (expected to increase to 68,000 by the close of 2009), Britain 8,300 and Germany 3,380 (expected to increase to 4,400 by the end of the year). The other chief contributing nations, France and Canada, each have approximately 2,800 troops on the ground.
Sharon Thiruchelvam is an IWPR intern in London.
Coverage has moved from debate over the validity of the war, the effectiveness of the strategy and suitability of resources to questions about the legitimacy of the Afghan electoral process that could cloud the expected re-election of incumbent president Hamed Karzai.
A Financial Times editorial titled “Afghan dilemmas” reflects the apprehension in the western press.
“Great hope is being placed in this week’s elections in Afghanistan and in the strategic review due from General Stanley McChrystal, the United States commander on the ground. Yet, there is also widespread fear that this hope may be misplaced,” said the FT.
Across United States, British, German, French, and Canadian newspapers there are reports of fraud, illegal block-voting, intimidation and bribery in the run-up to the poll. If true, the credibility of Afghanistan’s second presidential election will be seriously undermined.
The Canadian Globe and Mail’s article “Bribes and Backroom Deals” says, “Allegations of fraud have already clouded the credibility of this election and fuelled threats of mass demonstrations in the north if Mr. Karzai's win is considered illegitimate.”
The paper continued, “The discussion among analysts, both Afghan and western, revolves around ‘acceptable levels’ of voting irregularities, an indication of just how persistent the problem is in a country where much of the population lives in remote areas, difficult to access in the best of times, much less observe on voting day.”
Voter turn-out is expected to be low. Registration stands at less than 50 per cent and even fewer are expected to cast their votes.
“In the south, election officials said they were expecting a turnout below 30 per cent,” the New York Times reported Abdul Qader Nurzai, head of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission office in Kandahar, as saying.
“Officials warn that public frustration with the war, corruption and lagging reconstruction and development is so high that many people may shun the polls,” the New York Times said.
Fear that votes will be cast along ethnic and regional lines, further destabilising the country, was expressed in the Financial Times.
Taleban attacks, which have increased by 60 per cent since October 2008 according to Le Monde, have escalated further in recent weeks.
Three large bomb attacks in Kabul in the last week, on Saturday, Tuesday and Wednesday, attracted wide coverage in the press.
The Taleban have stated explicitly they will intensify their attacks around voting day, targeting polling stations, and treating any Afghan who votes as colluding with invading forces.
The New York Times and Washington Post contrasted the process with the first presidential election in 2004 when there was little Taleban interference.
With 7,000 voting stations across the country, the Washington Post reported that at least ten per cent will not open because of security risks.
The Taleban are not the only force compromising the elections. The Times of London reported that as many as three million out of the electorate of 17.5 million (and a population of 33 million) have been fraudulently registered, mainly in southern regions.
The New York Times reported that “twenty per cent of new voting cards went to under-age boys and another 20 per cent were duplicates”.
The Globe and Mail reported accusations against supporters of Karzai and his family members including his half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, who is a member of the provincial council in the southern province of Kandahar.
Also described in the Globe and Mail are allegations that tribal leaders in the south, in the pay of political parties, are casting block votes for their regions.
All papers report Karzai’s collaboration with General Abdul Rashid Dostum, an Uzbek warlord, with dismay. Karzai, who the Times and Financial Times describe as having been abandoned by the United States and Britain, will further alienate himself from western powers through the alliance, which is viewed as an attempt to consolidate internal support, they say.
The Financial Times said that disappointment with Karzai is not limited to the West, nor is he the only source of disappointment. “While many Afghans oppose the brutal extremism of the jihadis, they resent the failure of the Karzai government to provide basic services and security, and often see western troops, and their promiscuous use of force, as a threat to their lives and livelihoods,” the FT said.
While Karzai is widely expected to win a second term (a poll conducted in July by the US International Republican Institute, and cited in Le Monde, gives him 44 per cent of the vote) the Financial Times reported the contest will be tighter than had been expected “with Abdullah Abdullah, a former foreign minister, staging a real challenge”.
Further problems relating to the outcome include the expectation that people will vote along ethnic lines, according to the Guardian.
Once votes are cast and counted, the Washington Post and Financial Times predict an inevitable dispute over the outcome.
As of June 2009, the International Security Assistance Force, ISAF, had 61,130 personnel from 42 different countries. At that time, the United States had 28,850 (expected to increase to 68,000 by the close of 2009), Britain 8,300 and Germany 3,380 (expected to increase to 4,400 by the end of the year). The other chief contributing nations, France and Canada, each have approximately 2,800 troops on the ground.
Sharon Thiruchelvam is an IWPR intern in London.
