Skip to footer

America's big assist for Afghanistan democracy

For all its faults as a democracy, the US was able to persuade the two candidates in Afghanistan's third democratic presidential election that they must compromise on a vote recount and power sharing after the result. The world has invested too much in Afghanistan to let it fall to the Taliban or Al Qaeda.

|
AP Photo
Presidential candidates Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, center, and Abdullah Abdullah shake hands during a press conference in Kabul, Afghanistan, July 12. Secretary of State John Kerry, behind, said both candidates are committed to abiding by the results of the "largest, most comprehensive audit" of the election runoff ballots possible.
  • By the Monitor's Editorial Board

Usually after holding three elections, a young democracy gets the hang of it. The vote count is trusted. The loser accepts defeat with equanimity. The reins of power are transferred peacefully. The greater good has been decided, for now, by a majority.

The third democratic presidential election in Afghanistan, held June 14, seemed on track to achieve that ideal. Voter turnout was strong despite Taliban threats to disrupt the election. And the two candidates, both well educated and relatively clean, were the best the country had to offer.

But when the results were announced July 7, the country came close to splitting up. The ballot count seemed to defy logic. The apparent loser, Abdullah Abdullah, threatened to set up a parallel government, perhaps by force. Even the declared winner, Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, cited vote fraud that was likely perpetrated on his behalf by local warlords.

The country seemed to be following Iraq in a near-collapse of its new democracy. All the investment in Afghanistan by the United States and other countries since 2001 might have been lost.

But then after two days of genial but forceful persuasion, Secretary of State John Kerry helped turn things around. The two candidates agreed to a full recount of ballots by the United Nations. And in a display of charity, they agreed that the runner-up will work under the new president as chief executive of the government. They even embraced each other.

Each man had to be reminded that democracy serves all the people. It is greater than personal ambition and any political divisions driven by ethnicity, clan, tribe, or religion. A nation is secure, stable, and tolerant when people know they have fairly chosen their leaders.

The deal to share power also reflects a bow to an important cultural trait in Afghanistan of not diminishing a person’s “good name.” One result of the deal may be that the country will move to a parliamentary system rather than its current American-style, winner-take-all presidency. Face-saving bargaining comes easier in such a system.

Last May, when President Obama announced the US would withdraw all remaining American forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2016, he also said that “the future of Afghanistan must be decided by Afghans.” Yet to keep the country from falling again into the hands of the Taliban and perhaps Al Qaeda, the US needed to offer one more big assist after this third election. Perhaps by the fourth one Afghanistan will finally get the hang of it. Democracy has a way of giving shape to a people’s unifying identity, if only they fully accept the ideals that come with it.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to America's big assist for Afghanistan democracy
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2014/0715/America-s-big-assist-for-Afghanistan-democracy
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe