It’s the eve of elections in Afghanistan but even before a vote is cast, questions are growing about how credible the poll will be. The Taliban say they will disrupt the election and there’s been more violence today. A BBC investigation suggests the election could be beset with fraud and corruption after voting cards were being sold openly.
And there are concerns about a lack of women officers assigned to women only polling stations. So will people still turn out to vote? Is it better to have an election, however flawed, than no election at all? Fleming77 tweeted WHYS saying “better an election so the Americans can leave believing they have bought freedom to the country.” However pdxmike says “You can not have a meaningful election unless the citizens are safe.” what do you think?
The US Defence Secretary Robert Gates acknowledged Taliban threats to disrupt voting created a difficult situation, but with many more polling stations and several million more Afghans registered to vote than the 2004 election, in his view, the potential for a “quite credible election” is in place.
Is “quite credible” good enough? Is there anything we can learn from other recent elections that were accused of being imperfect — Iran, Zimbabwe, Kenya?