Afghanistan after Karzai

US strategic interests will be enormously affected by the outcome of Afghanistan’s presidential elections. With the vote for Hamid Karzai’s replacement looming, as well as elections for provincial councils, it is time to set realistic expectations and make sure US actions relate to its interests. Informed, patient diplomacy by the United States would go far in ensuring that the substantial gains made in Afghanistan over the past decade, at great cost, are not lost due to haste.
Regardless of the efforts of the international community or the improving electoral bodies in Afghanistan, the April 5 elections will be corrupt, filled with fraud and marred by violence.
At this point, the US needs to understand that what is most important in these upcoming elections is Afghanistan’s long-term stability. This is best achieved through a peaceful transfer of power to a new president with authority recognized broadly by Afghans. Democracy is, of course, important, and beyond a point its neglect would undermine stability, but the priority should not be on holding perfect elections. Afghans are likely to tolerate many types of procedural irregularities and small-scale fraud. Widespread violence and a breakdown of the tenuous political balance are likely only if these manipulations are seen as overtly propelling into office a candidate with little national support.
The power transfer started by these elections is likely to take months. A run-off is likely. Time will be needed to resolve disputed vote counts. Karzai needs an honorable exit, but he must exit.
The US and other international actors need to shape their initial response carefully in the days after the voting. For example, turnout is not likely to say much about the long-term effects of these elections. In an honor-based system, accusations of fraud are an attack on one’s prestige as much on his politics, which will lead to more such accusations. These reports are not as important as whether leaders decide to use these complaints as political tools in an attempt to overturn the elections.
How the international community responds to such accusations is critical. The initial US response should be more focused on maintaining calm than on assessing how free the elections were; it should leave space for Afghan reactions to dominate. All of the political steps that are bound to follow Saturday’s voting must be Afghan-driven, but this does not contradict the need for a strong US diplomatic role in maintaining the peace. Washington would be wise to prepare for a role as a quiet referee and potential mediator in the negotiations over fraud that is likely to emerge. It will take generations for democracy to take root in Afghanistan. The US should continue to declare its support for the most transparent and clear elections possible, but the inevitable failure to achieve a perfectly free and fair vote should not trump the primary US goal of a peaceful transfer of power. Without such a peaceful transition, there is little hope for the future of Afghan democracy anyway.

- The Washington Post