Late in in the evening of July 12, 2014, after a long session with both presidential candidates, John Kerry appeared on stage - first with both Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai and later with Hamid Karzai, the incumbent - to inform the media that the electoral deadlock was broken and soon Afghanistan would be back on course to political transition.
The deal calls for an audit of 8.1 million votes, which means that 100 per cent of the votes cast should be re-checked. This marks another world record set by Afghanistan. The huge audit process, which may take weeks, started within the 24 hours of the announcement under the supervision of the United Nations. The Afghanistan National Army and the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) are helping transfer the ballot boxes from the provinces to Kabul. In the presence of Kerry and Ján Kubiš, the special representative of the general secretary of the United Nations to Afghanistan, both candidates affirmed that they will accept the audit results. The eventual true winner will form a national unity government including all-important political entities. The final shape of that coalition government and the modalities for establishing it will be discussed later.
Some elements of the ruling elite, inspired by ethnic chauvinism, had hoped to emulate the process of 2004 and 2009 elections and install their favourites in the presidential palace. This time they have failed for several reasons. Access to social media is far more widespread than before, drawing attention to fraud when the rigging went overboard with the turnout in some of the insecure Pashtun-dominated provinces in southern Afghanistan more than doubled. Audiovisual evidence has come to light of high-ranking electoral officials engaged in rigging in favour of Ahmadzai. Most spectacular was the arrest of Zia-ul-Haq Amerkhel, the chief election manager, who was caught red-handed with hundreds of thousands of blank ballot papers. This resulted in his resignation and triggered a mass rally around the presidential palace of voters hoping for a real political transition. The opposition leaders committed to safeguarding the real mandate of the people and resisting attempts to hijack the overall electoral process.
So far, Abdullah seems to have been successful in his efforts to prove that the polls were systematically rigged, that the Afghan electoral institutions are biased and that Afghanistan still needs impartial supervision of the international community, in particular of the United Nations. The course of recent events also proves that the Afghan presidential palace team cares little about a peaceful political transition and that ethnically motivated politics still dominates Afghan institutions.
Four key questions arise from this interim political deal.
(a) Why do we still face so many hurdles in the path of a working democracy in Afghanistan?
(b) Does it mean that globally backed efforts for democratisation of Afghanistan remain fruitless after a costly mission of over a decade in treasure and blood?
(c) What will be Afghanistan's future after the complete withdrawal of ISAF, and how will Afghans cope with the huge rift between the northern and southern political approaches that have surfaced widely during these polls?
(d) And will the Afghan system survive with these imperfect institutions at a time when political crises arise one after another?
In Afghanistan, many short-term solutions have been attempted. But little is being done for a sustainable solution to ensure a calm future for Afghans from all walks of lives, ethnicities, lingual groups and religious sects.
Here are a few simple measures that could be taken:
Parliamentary democracy: This is a political system more suited to Afghanistan's state of development than the centralised presidential system. The deeply diverse Afghan society needs an accommodative system rather than a one based on division. A true parliamentary democracy - such as our neighbours in Pakistan and India, the world's largest democracy, have - could address many concerns of the ethnic groups. In this system, all sections of society have equal scope for manoeuvring their will.
Decentralisation of power: In Afghanistan, it is not enough to address the concerns of only larger ethnic groups. The smaller ethnic and lingual groups are also important for the cohesiveness of the country - socially and geographically. There is broad international experience of devolution of power. Elected district and provincial management could address many political issues.
Electoral reforms: This is not possible without a strong will to achieve a truly representative system. Although there were huge resources and international support to work out a system helpful for the survival of a newly born system in Afghanistan, nothing has materialised because of the lack of a will to work for a functional electoral system. Afghanistan still has the time to avoid further electoral disputes by implementing a substantial electoral system that could not jeopardise the integrity of the country, as well as guarantee a democracy for all.
The writer is the chief editor of Daily Outlook Afghanistan. He is currently living in Germany in self-imposed exile.
dr.yasa1967@gmail.com
dr.yasa1967@gmail.com