Afghans Brace Themselves for Saturday’s Elections

Flickr/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/afgmatters/4285124402/">AfghanistanMatters</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


There’s little reason to be optimistic about Afghanistan’s parliamentary elections on Saturday. Experts project a turnout of under five million voters, or about 30% of the registered electorate. Almost all of the 249 incumbents are running for reelection, and most are expected to win. Unsurprisingly, the Taliban have called for a boycott, and thousands of Afghan and US-led NATO troops have been forced to beef up security at polling stations around the country. Afghan authorities have made it easier on the troops—and harder on voters—by closing over 1,000 polling stations, mostly in the south and east of the country. The hope is that fewer polling stations will reduce the odds of fraud in the country’s more unstable regions. It may have the opposite effect on 1.5 million Afghans living in these areas:

Residents and candidates in these places, mostly remote villages in dangerous southern and eastern provinces, said they worry that the move will deepen ethnic rivalries by creating electoral imbalances and accelerate a growing disengagement from the Afghan central government that has fed the Taliban’s resurgence. 

Disenfranchisement could be a bad thing in the long run. But for now, NATO and UN authorities are doing whatever they think will result in a smoother election. At his monthly briefing, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said he expects the elections to be “more transparent and more reliable.” UN special envoy Staffan de Mistura agreed, saying that they would be “far from” perfect” but “much better than the previous ones.”

This all comes just as the UN decided to force a third of its Afghanistan staffers (the “non-essential” ones) to take an early vacation. “It would be naive not to take these precautions as we are a target,” said de Mistura. Many staffers, he says, were due for a vacation. Others “were told to take their holidays now.” Peeling back just as the situation worsens seems to be a popular trend this election season, as a number of election watchdog groups are opting for “assessments” over full-on “observation” missions:

Nearly all groups are cutting the number of foreign electoral experts and housing those that do come in Kabul or other relatively safe areas of the country.  The International Republican Institute, a US democracy group with a long-term presence in the country, has cut its foreign observers by around half to just five while increasing the number of Afghan observers from 40 to 160. In the last week Singapore-based Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL) has already repatriated more than half of its observers because of difficulties finding a security company prepared to provide armed guard to election monitors who need to be able to roam around polling stations.

Even the EU—who sent 120 observors last year—is only sending only seven this time around. So in the face of guaranteed bloodshed and likely fraud, is everyone throwing in the towel?

The words of opposition leader Abdullah Abdullah offer little comfort. A recent Al Jazeera report shows that fraud networks around the country have been circulating fake voter ID cards, with sales agents estimating that they’ve sold over a million during the past three months. So far, no real effort has been made to identify and destroy fraudulent voter ID cards. Abdullah, who finished second to Karzai in last year’s presidential race, says the elections should go forward as planned. “I think at this stage, the only thing that we can do is call on our people to participate in the elections and be observers and monitors [themselves by not buying] fake cards from sources.” 

Abdullah’s hopes for the electorate’s integrity may sound naive. But what else can he possibly hope for? For Afghans holding out the hope for change from the bottom up, there’s no viable alternative. The system they’ve got (with Karzai at the top) is the system they have. The UN and other international organizations’ decisions to remove personnel from dangerous areas makes sense. But it also smacks of resignation. After the countless shenanigans of the Karzais, the Salehi arrest-and-not-arrest, and still-unfolding Kabul Bank crisis, merely managing a broken electoral system and praying for a low body count may be the best anyone can hope for.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate