- As in Iraq, hopes of timely democratic elections are
fading in Afghanistan. The new UN envoy, Jean Arnault, says longstanding
plans to hold presidential and parliamentary polls in June are still alive.
But in practice, slippage over one or both seems unavoidable.
-
- Lack of security in the country beyond Kabul is the main
obstacle. Afghanistan has been experiencing the worst upsurge in violence
since the Taliban were overthrown in 2001; over 550 people have died since
August. Recent suicide bombings, a phenomenon previously unknown in Afghanistan,
have underscored the threat. British and Canadian peacekeepers were among
the victims last month. Afghan and foreign aid workers, de-miners and reconstruction
companies have been targeted by the insurgents, who include al-Qaida and
Taliban remnants, and who continue to terrorise swaths of the south and
east.
-
- A spokesman for the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, has
warned ordinary Afghans that participation in the elections will expose
them to reprisals. Afghanistan has about 10.5m eligible voters, but so
far only about 1 million have been registered. Mr Arnault says he hopes
to open 4,200 registration centres by May.
-
- Hope is the operative word in this context. Despite agreeing
last October to expand their 6,000-strong peacekeeping mission beyond Kabul
and one or two other centres, Nato countries have failed to come up with
additional troops on the scale required. At the same time, an internal
Nato report appeared to criticise the UN for not moving quickly enough
to organise the polls. But as the EU commissioner Chris Patten has suggested,
holding successful elections on schedule will be impossible if security
does not rapidly improve. This is the primary responsibility of allied
forces. Mr Patten was also understandably unimpressed by the Nato-led force's
efforts to curb the opium trade, which has boomed since the 2001 invasion.
Russia accuses Nato of ignoring heroin trafficking in return for the loyalty
of regional warlords.
-
- By far the largest, most powerful military force in Afghanistan
is American. The US has over 10,000 troops there. But they keep themselves
apart from the under-strength Nato operation. They are concentrating instead
on big spring offensives on either side of the border with Pakistan. Advancing
Pakistani troops are to be the "hammer" that forces fleeing insurgents
on to the waiting US "anvil". An unspoken aim is finally to kill
or capture Osama bin Laden, if they possibly can, before George Bush faces
his own voters. Afghanistan's elections are, it seems, a tad less important
than America's.
-
- Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited
2004
-
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/comment/story/0,11447,1154651,00.html
|
