Afghanistan election: a feat to behold

Despite Taliban threats against voters, Afghans are eager to cast ballots in Saturday's pivotal presidential election. The world must support their desire to consolidate their triumphs since 2001.

AP Photo
Afghan women push to enter a room to register for the coming presidential elections in a school in Kabul March 18.

Voters in Afghanistan have two big reasons not to go to the polls April 5 in a critical presidential election. A quarter expect the ballot count to be fraudulent. And the Taliban vow to kill anyone who tries to vote. To make their point, Taliban fighters temporarily took over the election commission headquarters in Kabul on Saturday.

Yet despite this perception of fraud and the fear of terrorism posed by insurgents, voter turnout is expected to be high. Surveys show three-quarters of Afghans plan to cast ballots. And the reasons they give pollsters help explain their enthusiasm: The country’s young democracy is still too fragile not to vote, and it has brought too much progress for the country to return to the days of rule by warlords or the Taliban.

For the established democracies in Europe and the United States, where voter apathy is a big worry on election day, Afghanistan’s brief experience with elections remains an inspiration – despite its many flaws. The US and other nations, which have invested so much in Afghanistan since ousting the Taliban in 2001, need to remember this strong democratic sentiment. The election results could be messy and the outcome may be delayed if a runoff is needed. But the seeds of freedom are well planted despite the country’s stony ground of poverty and violence.

This will be Afghanistan’s third presidential election since 2001, but one that will mark its first peaceful and democratic transfer of power. President Hamid Karzai is barred from running again. In addition, the leading candidates say they plan to sign a bilateral security agreement with the US. The pact would allow at least 10,000 American troops to remain in the country to help train Afghan forces and prevent a resurgence of the Taliban and Al Qaeda. 

The US military presence is necessary because Afghan forces still need backup. US aid is also necessary to sustain the notable achievements in the economy, women’s rights, education, and basic infrastructure. The world’s fifth poorest country, Afghanistan saw the greatest improvement of any country in human development between 2002 and 2012, according to the United Nations.

The Taliban have been weakened by both the gains in democracy and in quality of life. The group’s recent attacks on election-related offices reveal both its desperation and its ideological dislike of freedom. If the election is seen as largely fair, the next Afghan president will likely be in a strong position to persuade many Taliban followers to join the political process.

In surveys, Afghans say they seek peace and better justice as much as they do an improved democracy. For this election, they will be largely in charge of monitoring polling places. Far fewer foreign observers are involved. Afghans are very aware of the ballot fraud in the 2009 election and eager to prevent it in this one. Such seeds of hope in a budding democracy are well worth watering.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

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.