RUNOFF CANCELLED. WAR GOES ON

Hamid Karzai has been elected Afghan president for a second term.  This decision was reached by the independent electoral commission when the incumbent head of state's only rival, Abdullah Abdullah, refused to stand in the runoff scheduled for 7 November.  In the mean time, cancellation of the runoff and the declaration of a Karzai victory did not alleviate in the least the country's political crisis; it has become an arena for uncompromising civil war and protracted antiterrorist military operations by an international coalition.

Naturally, holding a presidential election runoff in Afghanistan might to some degree have fostered legitimization of the political authority established in the country after the military operation launched by the USA and the West against the Afghan Taliban movement.  The failure of the first vote, which took place on 20 August and which was marred by numerous irregularities, as recognised by the complaints commission and the UN, forced Karzai to agree to a runoff and dealt a serious blow to the legal and moral standing of the incumbent authorities.  However, Abdullah, who sought the runoff, decided to withdraw from the race a week before it was scheduled to take place, citing the fact that none of the key officials on the electoral commission, which had been accused of a mass rigging of the results of the first vote, had been fired.  It became clear that talks between Karzai and Abdullah, held with direct support from the West in the hope of achieving a coalition of the two leading politicians of the "new and democratic" Afghanistan, had failed.  The electoral headquarters of the incumbent president and the former foreign minister missed the chance to seal a broad power-sharing agreement.  In the aftermath, Abdullah unleashed a new salvo of criticism against the authorities after the runoff election was cancelled.  "The electoral commission's decision has no legal basis.  The new government will not be able to address the problems it faces because it has no popular support," Abdullah said.

The major powers, including the USA, Britain, Russia and the United Nations, congratulated Hamid Karzai on his victory in the election.  However, everyone knows that Karzai, who effectively controls only a minor portion of the territory of Afghanistan, is now in an even weaker position.

"Karzai will now be a weak leader, and his legitimacy will be a problem for him, both within the country and outside," said well-known France-based political analyst, Yama Torabi.  However, in his opinion, there are no winners in this election, only losers.  Abdullah lost because he left the political arena and he will not be part of the future political leadership of the country.  Karzai lost because he will have a very weak government.  And ordinary Afghans lost because they lost their political right to take part and vote in free and fair elections."

For the USA and its allies, the creation of a functional state with a government recognized by the majority of the population was, of course, the main priority in the list of strategic goals pursued in Afghanistan.  Washington understands that without legitimate government, it is impossible to persuade the Afghan people that life under Western-sponsored Karzai will be better than under the tribal chiefs and field commanders.  The fact of the weakness of Karzai's powerbase further worsens prospects for the NATO troops and international coalition, who are suffering serious losses in the war with the Taliban, an organization under the shadow of Osama bin Laden and his terrorist Al-Qa'ida.   A terrorist action against the UN guest residence, in which five members of the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan were killed and nine were wounded, has to be viewed as a direct challenge to the international coalition from the Taliban.  Immediately after the attack, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon arrived in the country and made it clear that his organization would review its presence n the country.  Because diplomatic and civilian staff in the UN mission and UN specialized agencies do not feel secure in the country any longer, half of them will be moved from Kabul to the country's northern areas, where the Taleban is virtually inactive, and some UN staffers will leave Afghanistan.  According to The New York Times, the UN decision testifies to further deterioration in the situation in Afghanistan, where the international security troops under NATO's aegis have been trying for eight years to uproot the Islamic underground, although without success.  And the UN mission itself, which usually refrains from direct criticism of the Afghan authorities, has now accused Hamid Karzai of being unable to achieve normalization of the situation in the country.

The latest events in Afghanistan indeed show that the Taliban has regrouped its forces after the defeats of 2001-2003 and is now on the counteroffensive.  The fear which it managed to instil in Afghan society during the election and which played its role in the failure to hold elections in the manner which the USA and its allies wished, only proves its strength.  For the Taliban, both Karzai and Abdullah are nothing but puppets in occupiers' hands, which is why some Afghan voters who went to the ballot box felt that there was a threat that the radical fundamentalists would take revenge on them.

However, now that the election is over, the West had to send Kabul a signal that things cannot stay the same as during Karzai's first presidential term.  And, first and foremost, there is a need to uproot the greatest evil to which the Afghan leadership proved susceptible.  US President Barack Obama, who congratulated Karzai on re-election, made a strong request, or in effect demanded, that the fight against corruption in the country must intensify.  At the same time, Obama stressed, "Karzai's rule will be judged by its deeds, not its words."

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, for his part, urged Karzai to arrest corrupt officials and said that the Afghan president must take specific measures to eliminate corruption from Afghanistan's ruling circles.  This meant that it was necessary to get rid of corrupt entourages, to arrest and punish them, Mullen pointed out.

London supports Washington's position.  British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that Hamid Karzai's government became "synonymous with corruption" and warned Karzai that British support for the Afghan Government will depend on the effectiveness of reforms in the country.  Brown delivered his speech at the Royal College of Defence Studies in London, where he voiced his "anticorruption" statement, soon after an Afghan policeman trained by British specialists killed five Britons.  The conclusion to be inferred from Brown's statement might affect the future of counterterrorist operations in Afghanistan.  "I am not prepared to put the lives of British men and women in harm's way for a government that does not stand up to corruption," said the British prime minister.  He made it clear that British assistance to Afghanistan, including an increase in the military contingent by 500 service personnel, which had been announced earlier, would depend on the success of Karzai's reforms.

After these tirades by the leaders of the powers which brought the incumbent Afghan leader to power, Hamid Karzai had no other choice but to promise to put an end to the "disgrace" of corruption immediately after he is sworn in as head of state.  In his first post-election statement, Karzai said he was ready to form a new government in consideration of the interests of all groups of Afghan citizens and even urged "brothers from the Taliban to accept the country as it is."  Speaking on national TV, he again urged the irreconcilable opposition to return to normal life.

Will they heed the appeals of the winner of the Afghan elections?  For now, there is no sign that people who have declared a war to the last drop of blood against the West will answer in the affirmative.  However, the latest developments in the region show that the epicentre of the war is already moving from Afghanistan to neighbouring Pakistan, which is becoming a new field of operations for the Taleban movement.  And Pakistan's nuclear status only further increases the global importance of the West's battle with the Taliban.