'Widespread fraud' in the Afghan elections

Undesired Walrus

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
11,691
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8239500.stm
Further evidence has come to light of widespread fraud during the recent Afghan presidential election.

One tribal elder has admitted to the BBC that he tampered with hundreds of ballots in favour of incumbent President Hamid Karzai.

More than 600 serious complaints are being investigated, but the deadline for new complaints has now passed.

...

In the latest case of alleged fraud uncovered by the BBC, a tribal elder from Zaziaryoub district - in the eastern province of Paktia - said he had helped to fill in about 900 ballots in favour of President Karzai.

The elder says in a neighbouring village, his nephew saw one man fill in more than 2,000 ballots.

....

Just days ago, a tribe in the south made the most serious claim so far.

The leader of Kandahar's Bareez tribe said that nearly 30,000 votes were cast fraudulently for President Hamid Karzai instead of primarily for the main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah.

Where are the statements by world leaders on this issue?
 
This is a problem. One of the main problems with Vietnam was the repulsive regime we were supporting. Still, even if they are corrupt and undemocratic, it seems like they are the lesser evil compared with the Taliban/al Qaeda alternative. We allied with Stalin against Hitler because he was the lesser evil at the time. South Korea started out rather authoritarian and undemocratic too.
 
Last edited:
President Hamid Karzai takes 100% of votes in opposition stronghold

In the southern Afghan district of Shorabak, the tribesmen gathered shortly before last month’s presidential election to discuss which candidate they would back. After a debate they chose to endorse Abdullah Abdullah, President Hamid Karzai’s leading opponent.

The tribal leaders prepared to deliver a landslide for Abdullah – but it never happened. They claim Ahmed Wali Karzai, the president’s brother and leader of the Kandahar provincial council, detained the local governor and closed all the district’s 46 polling sites on election day.

The ballot boxes were taken back to the district headquarters where, tribal leaders allege, they were stuffed with ballots by local policemen. A total of 23,900 ballots were finally sent off to Kabul, the capital – every one of them a vote for Karzai.

The alleged fraud, which Ahmed Wali Karzai denies, was the most blatant example among hundreds of incidents that have threatened to make a mockery of the election.

The sheer scale and audacity of the cheating, which includes supposedly “state-sponsored” ballot-stuffing, vote burning, intimidation and the closure of polling stations in antigovernment areas, has overwhelmed the country’s fledgling Electoral Complaints Commission.

Its staff are battling with more than 2,600 reports of vote-rigging, including at least 650 deemed serious enough “materially” to influence the result.

“This is a blatant violation of the procedure and I think it is stealing in daylight,” Abdullah said yesterday.
If we accept this, I guess we lose a talking point about Iran, and their farcical election.
 
Last edited:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...tion-results-annulled-after-fraud-claims.html


Daoud Najafi, a member of the Independent Election Commission (IEC), said the commission had annulled results from 447 of about 28,000 polling stations after investigating fraud.

[...] On Saturday Dr Abdullah revealed a string of polling stations from southern provinces including Kandahar and Paktika where results had been accepted despite showing hundreds of votes exclusively for Mr Karzai.

International officials said they had been expecting up to 1,000 quarantined polling stations to be annulled on Sunday.
 
You almost seem to enjoy this situation.

So now what Firegarden? You never did answer my question.

NATO forces should leave and somehow the Afghans will sort it out themselves while simultaneously repelling the Taliban on their own sheer will power, and then a miracle will happen and democracy will flourish?

Remember what you said, the only time you tried to answer was with this:

Malalai Joya has said democracy will come as a result of the struggle of the Afghan people. I would assume with whatever means they can lay their hands on.

Is that the plan?
 
Last edited:
The problem is that we appear to be fighting for a democratic system in Afghanistan, yet there is evidence of widespread fraud which makes a mockery of the democratic system (and spits on the graves of the people who fought to defend it). The question if whether we continue to say: 'We support the democratic Afghanistan', or whether we now say 'We support a democratic Afghanistan'. If it turns out that Karzai rigged his way into the seat, do our politicians attempt to remove him, condemn him, stop shaking his hand? Should our politicians stop calling him 'President'?
 
Last edited:
That's what I said, the only thing you said was "democracy will come as a result of the struggle of the Afghan people", which is not saying anything at all, it's more of a platitude like a lyric straight from Michael Jackson's "Heal The World", and "I would assume with whatever means they can lay their hands on", which is even worse, it's a cop out that only shows that you don't have a plan, and that you really don't care about the Afghans.

You have yet again failed to respond.
 
That's your imagination.

You don't have any idea of what should be done, neither do you care. Your only concern is to put the blame on the US, and to laugh and clap your hands when things go wrong because it justifies even more blame on the US. You're just out there in the crowd booing.

The Taliban are men with guns and bombs, and a very fanatical homicidal determination. In war, not having a plan is not an option. You are irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
What I said in the other thread was:
Malalai Joya has said democracy will come as a result of the struggle of the Afghan people. I would assume with whatever means they can lay their hands on.

And, no, I don't expect the USA or any other power to supply those means. Because I don't think that the USA or any other power actually wants democracy in Afghanistan. But maybe they could be made to want it if people were not fooled by the facade of there already being democracy in Afghanistan.

So well done Malalai Joya for taking the first step towards bringing democracy to Afghanistan: telling people that it isn't already there.



-----
I realise that doesn't satisfy your need for a detailed game plan. But that's life. It's also life that those in power don't give up power unless they have to. Otherwise the UN wouldn't have 5 countries with veto power. How do democracy loving nations like the USA, UK and France justify outvoting India when their populations are smaller? They don't, because they don't have to. And neither will they make a stink about fraud unless they have to. For how long have they accepted that Karzai's cabinet contains criminals?

Turning a blind eye to what is going on in Afghanistan is not going to bring democracy to any place on Earth.
 
Last edited:
US Says Legitimate Election Vital to Future Partnership with Afghanistan

The United States said Tuesday that a "legitimate" electoral process in Afghanistan is vital to future U.S.-Afghanistan partnership. The comments came amid reports of evidence of fraud in the August 20 presidential election in which incumbent President Hamid Karzai is reported to have a wide lead.

The Obama administration is serving notice on Afghan authorities that the future U.S. relationship with the Kabul government depends on an election process seen as credible. U.S. officials also are cautioning against further release of election tallies before fraud claims are thoroughly investigated.

Possibly an empty threat, but not necessarily. Public support in the US tends to go down if our allies are not seen as good-guys.
 
This is a problem. One of the main problems with Vietnam was the repulsive regime we were supporting. Still, even if they are corrupt and undemocratic, it seems like they are the lesser evil compared with the Taliban/al Qaeda alternative. We allied with Stalin against Hitler because he was the lesser evil at the time. South Korea started out rather authoritarian and undemocratic too.
Your two alternatives leave out other choices that I am becoming more attracted to.

First, elections don't make a democracy. There are many other conditions (i.e., a free press, an informed electorate, etc.) that are not met that must be in order to have a real democracy. (Sorry, that is a crappy sentence but I'm to lazy to rewrite it.)

Secondly, using "Taliban/al Qaeda" is to equate the two and they are NOT the same. Remember, the Taliban originally started as a way to combat the warlords; they weren't completely bad guys.

I'd be happy to return to the place with a feudal system or some other loose federation of some sort. I just don't think Afghanistan is ready for a strong central, democratic government. Worse, I don't think the USA/NATO is capable of forcing into being.

I'm with that conservative leader, George Will: Time to get out.
 
Karzai on 54.1%
http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSISL308766

I guess a definite plan is better than saying "Hold on, that ain't right" -- which always amounts to nothing because the truth sure as hell isn't going to make American policy more pro-democracy. So... Who will be the first to congratulate the democratically elected leader of Afghanistan?

(Actually, I doubt it will be Obama because public pressure can work. But then that means speaking out isn't nothing. Otoh, maybe I will be disappointed).
 

Back
Top Bottom