Friday, February 19, 2010

Does the Karzai regime have a democratic pulse?

Hamid Karzai came to political power in Afghanistan in December of 2001, in which he was selected interim president of Afghanistan at the Bonn Conference. In 2004, Karzai won the Afghan Presidential election with 55.4% of the vote and in the backdrop of election fraud. In 2009, Karzai won the Afghan Presidential election with less than 50% of the vote, in which he won a runoff election because his main rival, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, withdraw from the runoff due to rampant electoral fraud up to that point. Since only 20% of Afghans turned out for the 2009 Presidential election, Karzai had the support of less than 10% of the Afghan voting public.

Prior to the Presidential election and without consideration of the 2009 electoral fraud, the FDA did a study of the three main candidates, and ranked them as follows:

1. Hamid Karzai (23.9% grade—F grade)
2. Dr. Ghana (22.2% grade—F grade)
3. Dr. Abdullah (20% grade—F grade)

The failing grades reflected the FDA assessment that the Karai, Ghana, and Abdullah did not represent the better interests of the Afghan people as a whole.

Since, the beginning of Karzai's reneign in Afghanistan, the US and its allies have been at war with the Taliban.

Is Karzai regime a democratic government? Does the Karzai regime represent the will of the Afghan people? Is there a pulse of democracy in Karzai regime?

Since the Karzai regime represents less than 10% of the Afghan voting public, and it is complicit in rampant electoral and governmental fraud (none of which has been prosecuted), and the US and its allies implanted democracy in Afghanistan through the 2001 Bonn Conference, the FDA concludes that there is no democratic pulse in the Karzai regime. However, there is a skeleton (or structure) of democracy due to the efforts by the US and its allies to implant western democracy in Afghanistan.

It is unclear to the FDA how a skeleton of implanted democracy can be brought to life?

Democracy centers on the people. So the fact that democracy was artificially implanted in Afghanistan, is a move that is contrary to the spirit of democracy. Therefore, the FDA concludes that the skeleton of democracy in Afghanistan will always be no more than a skeleton, unless the people of Afghanistan themselves will democracy.

FDA 2009 Afghanistan Presidential Evaluation

No comments:

Leave a Comment

Thank you for sharing your perspective.