Stability will depend as much on the interests of former warlords as on the democratic process, writes MATTHEW GREENin Kabul
WESTERN POWERS hope a decision by Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan’s president, to accept a run-off with his main rival will repair an experiment in democracy that was almost derailed by mass fraud.
Yet creating a government with enough legitimacy for Afghans to rally round in numbers large enough to drain the Taliban of support and rescue the West’s foundering war effort will require far more than a fresh vote.
By caving in to international pressure to go to a second round, Karzai has helped the US and Europe preserve their claim that the nation-building project in Afghanistan is making progress.
If Karzai and his rival Abdullah contest a second round on November 7th as planned, western governments will be able to argue democratic institutions are – fitfully – taking root.
Diplomats in Kabul and Afghan analysts have concerns, however, as to whether a second round is desirable, given the likelihood of a repeat of the Taliban attacks that marred the August 20th poll and the challenges posed by winter weather.
They also say a fresh vote risks rekindling simmering divisions between north and south stirred up in the first round and are in any case likely to confirm Karzai as winner, given that he retained a significant lead over Abdullah even after his tally was cut to 49.7 per cent from the preliminary first-round result of 54.6 per cent.
The fundamental issue for the West is that Afghanistan’s democracy is still at a stage where even a fraud-free run-off may struggle to deliver a government with enough legitimacy to win broad-based acceptance.
Power in Afghanistan still lies to a large extent in the hands of former guerrilla commanders or politicians who emerged during the Soviet occupation in the 1980s and thrived during bitter internal struggles in the following decades.
Endemic corruption since Karzai took power in 2001 has further alienated people from his administration. Recognising that a fragile electoral process might not deliver stability, diplomats and various foreign mediators have sought to bring Karzai and Abdullah together in the hope of a power-sharing arrangement.
Karzai reiterated yesterday that he would accept a unity government – shorthand for his freedom to choose the posts his opponents would occupy. Coalitions in Afghanistan have, however, proved fragile.
Long-term stability will depend as much on Karzai’s ability to balance the competing interests of ex-warlords and their supporters as on the democratic process.
The election has weakened a deep fault line: the divide between the large Pashtun community in the south and the Tajik minority in the north. Although Karzai is a Pashtun, many in his community see him as a figurehead for a government in which their Tajik rivals control crucial posts in the army, police and secret services.
That perception helps bind together fragmented groups of Taliban insurgents drawn mainly from the Pashtun south. With Pashtun areas characterised by low turnout and a concentration of fraud reports in the first round, this community may not feel any less aggrieved with Karzai if given the chance to vote again. –(Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009)