It’s hard to believe, but the people of Afghanistan will go to the polls in just over three weeks to choose their next president.  Though the incumbent Hamid Karzai is the clear favorite, but his return to the state’s head office is not assured as challengers Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani have gone on the offensive, and there is a laundry list of issues, from corruption, to the rise in violence, to the lack of electricity for them to criticize Karzai’s leadership on.  There is a distinct possibility that Karzai will not obtain the 51% majority needed to avoid a runoff and this would open up the possibility that his rivals could all support one opposition candidate.

One specific issue concerning Karzai during the campaign that is especially disconcerting was his no-show at any presidential debates as of yet.  Afghanistan is a troubled, young democratic society and denying the Afghan people an opportunity to see political leaders express and argue their views of how they would run the country is unfortunate to say the least.  Debates are far from perfect venues for policy discussions, but they do require a certain sense of accountability from the politicians involved.

United States Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl W. Eikenberry appears to also be displeased with the lack of ‘debate’ so far in the Afghan election.  In a Monday op-ed in the Washington Post Eikenberry backhandly criticizes Karzai for his debate no-shows, stating the….’Afghan people deserve to know the platforms and implementation plans of each candidate.’  He goes on to list crucial questions that he believes should be being discussed during this election season:

“How will the next president finish building a strong army and police
force respected by the people and fully capable of providing security?
Can the nation’s wealth be used for investment and development in an
accountable manner? How will young people be educated and trained to
develop the human capital that Afghanistan needs to move forward? What
policies will be adopted to encourage the return to Afghan society of
those who renounce ties with international terrorism and the use of
force while accepting the constitution of the nation? What are the
candidates’ ideas for governing Afghanistan; how, for example, should
the provincial councils evolve to give a real voice to Afghans across
the land? And how can the international community better partner with
Afghanistan to achieve peace, justice and economic progress?”

A solid list, but I can think of some others: What should the relationship be between the federal government in Kabul with the provinces, and vice versa?  How will the new/continuing government bring electricity to the thousands of Afghans who lack the vital economic resource?  To each presidential candidate, Who are the insurgents that can be brought back legitimately into Afghan society and governance and who are the ones that cannot?  How do the candidates view the NATO/US force presence?  How do they view the working relationship between the Afghan and US government?  What role should women play in society and governance?  How can they foster better relations with their neighbors, specifically Pakistan, Iran, etc.?

What questions would you ask Karzai, Abdullah, Ghani, etc. if you moderated a presidential debate in Kabul?

Excuse me World, how are you feeling about the NATO presence in Afghanistan?  What are your thoughts about a possible return to rule by the Taliban?

While WorldPublicOpinion.org asked the world, well almost 65% of it (actually just a few thousand scattered people), to share their thoughts on such questions in a recent survey last April and the results are both interesting and discouraging (check the PDF, not just the intro article).  The questions centered on what citizens from various countries (US, Mexico, Kenya, Russia, Pakistan, China, Taiwan, Egypt, etc.) thought about the US/NATO presence in Afghanistan, basically did they approve of it or not.

The first question asked simply ‘do you approve/disapprove’ of the UN-backed resolution that allows NATO’s effort in Afghanistan was a straight dead heat, 44% approving, 45% disapproving.  The US, France, UK, India, Taiwan, Nigeria, etc. were in favor of the mission and Pakistan, Egypt, Palestine, Mexico, Turkey, China, etc. disapproving.  The 2nd question was similar, asking whether or not one thought the NATO mission should be continued, but had a more one-sided result.  50% stated that the mission should be ended, while only 37% argued that it should continue.  While only India, US, and Kenya showed over 60% support for continuing the effort, only 13-14% of polled Pakistanis, Chinese, and Russians agreed.  Germany, a NATO member with troops in Afghanistan, had a 52% rate supporting withdrawal, a bad sign.

The next question asks the polled to put themselves into the Afghanis postion, and asking them what they believe the Afghan people want, for the NATO troops to stay or go home.  This brought similar results as the last question, 53% believing that the Afghanis want NATO out and only 30% stating that they believe the locals want them to stay.  Notably, only 9% of Pakistanis polled thought Afghanis wanted NATO to stay, this of course coincides with their own position on the issue.  Judging by rhetoric coming from President Karzai during the last year and from Presidential hopeful Abdullah Abdullah’s recent speeches, Afghanis are definitely tiring of the foreign presence on their soil, but just last January a majority polled that they want the US/NATO to stay.

The last question and its results was the most disturbing for me:  ‘If the Taliban were to regain power in Afghanistan do you think this would be very good, somewhat
good, somewhat bad or very bad?’  21% of those polled thought the return of the Taliban to power was either ’somewhat’ or ‘very’ good.  I know there are geopolitical reasons (Pakistan) and ideological (Egypt) for some to desire a return of the Taliban, but this is still an appalling large number to me.  The Taliban were one of the most brutal authoritarian governments that ever existed and they sheltered internationally dangerous criminals, their return to power is unacceptable.  4% of Americans thought the return of the Taliban to be ’somewhat good’, who are these people?

An interesting trend could also be seen in the poll’s results, though most Muslim-dominated countries (besides Azerbaijan) were siding against NATO/US policies or presence in Afghanistan, Iraq was for the most part, on the side of NATO/US.  For a country that seems more than tired with a US presence of their own, 43%, compared to 35% against, favored a US/NATO presence in Afghanistan.  The US may have a strategic ally in the heart of the Middle East afterall.

Polls like these are always deeply flawed and must be taken with about a dozen or so caveats, but nevertheless they do provide a small picture of how the world sees the Afghanistan conflict and the presence of the US/NATO in the country.