| It's 
              democracy, a la AmericaNEW YORK -- Relenting to heavy political pressure both domestically 
              and internationally, the longtime authoritarian ruler of a south-east 
              Asian country reluctantly decided to hold nation-wide elections. 
              But in a move, characteristic of most developing nations at that 
              time, he rigged the elections in his favour.
  A 
              cartoon published in a newspaper caricatured his response to a complaint 
              of massive voter fraud. "I promised to hold elections," 
              the president was quoted as saying, "but I never said anything 
              about counting the votes."  We 
              have two elections that are coming up soon where US-installed puppet 
              governments -- both in Afghanistan and Iraq -- are trying to prove 
              they will soon have Western-style democratic nations.  Afghan 
              President Hamid Karzai says he is determined to hold elections later 
              this month despite the fact that he cannot even get out of his security-laden 
              stronghold to campaign for votes. But then who's counting the votes?  Karzai 
              is so heavily guarded by US mercenaries and barricaded by barbed 
              wire -- and heavy artillery -- that he remains totally isolated 
              from his own people. When he flew out of his fortress last month 
              to meet his political supporters in an outlying province, someone 
              fired a missile at his helicopter.  The 
              missile missed its mark, and both Karzai and his helicopter were 
              rushed back to Kabul. Neither refused to land on terra firma. So 
              much for electioneering and campaign swings.  The 
              Bush administration, which installed Karzai in power, wants to prove 
              that it can turn Afghanistan into a multi-party democracy in a country 
              still being ravaged by warlords.   But 
              anyone with knowledge of contemporary history knows that nobody 
              has succeeded in bringing Afghans under disguised military occupation 
              -- not the British, not the Soviets. The Americans are heading for 
              a lesson in history.  The 
              situation in Iraq is equally pathetic. Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, 
              another American quisling, was in Washington DC last week telling 
              US Senators and Congressmen that Iraq would be a free and democratic 
              nation after country-wide elections in January next year.  Allawi 
              is bunkered in the heavily fortified, US-controlled "Green 
              Zone" inside the capital of Baghdad. According to a New York 
              Times report last month, the Americans have even installed a device 
              that is capable of monitoring the body heat of anyone approaching 
              Allawi thereby thwarting suicide bombers, the hallmark of the ongoing 
              Iraqi insurgency. Allawi seems more isolated than Karzai.   When 
              Allawi addressed a joint session of the US Congress last week, someone 
              discovered that some of the phrases he used were similar to those 
              used earlier by President George W. Bush. The speculation is that 
              both speeches were written by the same person. Allawi just delivered 
              what the Americans had written for him.  He 
              came to the White House to proclaim that he would hold countrywide 
              elections in Iraq as scheduled, despite the disenfranchisement of 
              hundreds and thousands of Iraqis in provinces where polls cannot 
              be held because of violence.  "I 
              stand here today as the prime minister of a country emerging finally 
              from dark ages of violence, aggression, corruption and greed,'' 
              he told Congressmen.   When 
              Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was asked last week how Iraq could 
              hold free and fair elections if entire provinces are shut out of 
              the electoral process, he rambled along: "Let's say you tried 
              to have an election, and you could have it in three-quarters or 
              four-fifths of the country, but in some places you couldn't go because 
              the violence was too great. Well, that's so be it. Nothing's perfect 
              in life. It's better than not having an election -- you bet!"  So 
              Rumsfeld's argument is that even if hundreds and thousands of voters 
              are deprived of voting, the elections are still legitimate because 
              nothing's perfect in this world -- and specifically if the election 
              suits the interests of the United States.  If 
              any other country in Asia, Africa or Latin American holds such an 
              "imperfect" election, the US would surely have raised 
              hell -- or even threatened to cut World Bank loans.  Coming 
              from Rumsfeld, this is no surprise, because some Americans think 
              that that vote count in the state of Florida for the US presidential 
              elections in 2000 (in which Bush was declared the winner) was in 
              itself a fraud-- and far from perfect.  In 
              an op-ed piece in the Washington Post last week, former US President 
              Jimmy Carter says that even today Florida lacks "some basic 
              international requirements for a fair (US presidential) election" 
              in November this year.  The 
              ex-president, who heads the Carter Centre in Georgia which has monitored 
              over 50 national elections worldwide, thinks that Florida's polling 
              agents are "highly partisan."   Obviously, 
              such a situation may not ensure "fair and free elections" 
              in the US in November. If so, should Afghanistan and Iraq be far 
              behind? |