08/09/2004

Gaining the right to vote in faraway places

--------------------

Copyright (c) 2004, Chicago Tribune

Warlords, 8 million voters and elections in Afghanistan

By Larry Thompson and Scott Schirmer. Larry Thompson and Scott Schirmer were recently in Afghanistan for Refugees International, the Washington-based humanitarian advocacy organization.

August 4, 2004

In the Shangri-La valley of Bamiyan, Afghans happily show you their voter registration cards--but won't tell you who they will vote for in the presidential elections, twice-delayed but now scheduled for Oct. 9. Nearly everyone in Bamiyan was a refugee or displaced person 2 1/2 years ago. Today, people are home and registered to vote in what are planned to be Afghanistan's first national elections since 1969--and the first ever to elect a president.

Despite insecurity in much of the country, the number of registered voters now exceeds 8 million out of an estimated 9.5 million eligible to vote. More than 40 percent of the registrants are women.

The United States and the United Nations support the elections as the biggest step yet in a process to establish a democratic government in this poor Central Asian country, ripped apart by more than two decades of Soviet invasion, civil war and extremist Taliban rule. But the road to a successful election--and a decent government--is chock-full of potholes.

The biggest problem is the warlords. Nearly every region, city and town of Afghanistan has local unelected leaders. Some are thugs who command a few armed men. Others command armies larger than the fledgling Afghan national army and have revenue of millions of dollars weekly. The warlords make money from narcotics trafficking, smuggling and land grabs. Some warlords such as those affiliated with the remnant--but resurgent--Taliban are hostile to the government; but most pretend to cooperate. Several of the big warlords are cabinet ministers in the provisional Afghan government.

If the elections fail in the eyes of the Afghan people, the warlords will be responsible. The Taliban and Al Qaeda will attempt to disrupt the elections by terrorism and intimidation. Warlords will try to ensure that no local popular leaders rise up to challenge them and that the authority of the central government is writ small in their territory. (Our experience suggests that the warlords would not fare well in a free election.)

The United States has a contradictory policy in Afghanistan. On one hand, we support establishing a democratic government in Afghanistan and the October elections. On the other, U.S. troops in Afghanistan collaborate with warlords in their search for Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda forces. It's past time to reconcile this contradiction.

Failed elections this fall will stop progress toward democracy in Afghanistan. Anti-democratic warlords and Taliban extremists will have won a huge victory. The international community should, in its own interests, ensure that Afghans can vote safely and prevent the elections from being menaced and manipulated by the warlords. That means the use of NATO and American soldiers in Afghanistan to ensure election security. The U.S. must take the lead in this process.

The resources in Afghanistan are slender. NATO currently has 6,500 troops in Afghanistan with another 2,000 on the way. The U.S. and its coalition partners have another 15,000 to 20,000--but, to our knowledge, the coalition troops now have no plans to help in a major way with the elections.

Even if all the military and civilian resources in Afghanistan are devoted to ensuring election security, the resources still will be less than the international community has had in comparable situations in the past. In 1993, in Cambodia, 22,000 foreign military, police and civilian officials helped with the elections--and Cambodia is one-third the size of Afghanistan.

We asked a college-educated Afghan if the elections should be delayed because of insecurity. "Why?" he asked. "We'll never be a democracy if we don't start now." But if the elections fail, the Afghans likely will lose confidence in the democratic process and the country will tilt further toward becoming a narco-terrorist state ruled by regional warlords until one warlord--probably the most brutal and anti-democratic--gains control over the whole country. That happened in the 1990s, with the resultant rise of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

Progress in Afghanistan during the last two years has been extraordinary. Three million refugees have returned home. Two years ago, Bamiyan was rubble. Not a single building on the main street had a roof. Today, the town is mostly rebuilt and bustling; farmers are growing potatoes and wheat; two new hotels have been built in anticipation of a tourist trade--and we noted the presence of five Japanese tourists in Bamiyan.

Hard political decisions, however, have been put on the back burner by both the provisional Afghan government and its foreign supporters, especially the United States. Promoting successful elections and a democratic future in the country and reducing the power of the warlords are the two essential pillars of a successful policy in Afghanistan.