Afghanistan's
September 18 parliamentary elections are an important and historic
milestone marking progress in the development of a stable democracy
in that war-torn country. Afghanistan elected a president, Hamid
Karzai, last year for the first time in its history, and the
elections for parliament are expected to broaden and deepen the
country's nascent democratic political system. According to recent
reports, the Pentagon may cut back the U.S. military presence in
Afghanistan if the elections proceed successfully. This would be a
dangerous gamble, given the enormity of the tasks that lie ahead
for Afghanistan's government.
This will be
Afghanistan's first parliamentary election in almost three decades.
Roughly 5,800 candidates are seeking election to 249 seats in the
lower house of parliament (the "House of People") and to the 34
provincial councils that will subsequently help select the members
of the upper house of parliament (the "House of Elders") in
2006.
The Taliban has
made a limited but violent resurgence in eastern Afghanistan and
recently launched a series of attacks to disrupt the elections.
More than 1,200 Afghans, including roughly 600 insurgents, have
been killed this year, making it the worst year of violence since
the Taliban was overthrown in 2001. Operating from bases in the
Pushtun tribal belt in neighboring Pakistan, the Taliban has
deployed small groups of insurgents across the border to attack
government forces, assassinate local officials, and intimidate
voters. At least four election workers and six candidates running
for election have been killed. On September 13, insurgents murdered
seven Afghans merely because they carried voter registration
cards.
Afghanistan's
48,000 police and 21,000 army troops will be mobilized to protect
the 6,000 polling stations on election day. These Afghan forces
will be backed up by U.S.-led coalition forces of roughly 21,000
soldiers, along with a separate force of 11,000 NATO-led
peacekeepers in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).
ISAF troops, drawn from 35 countries, presently are deployed in the
capital of Kabul and in cities in northern and western
Afghanistan.
Pakistan has
deployed about 80,000 troops along the border but has turned a
blind eye to Taliban activity among its own restive Pushtun
minority, which remains more anti-Western and pro-Taliban than the
Pushtuns who historically have dominated Afghanistan. The United
States should pressure the Pakistani government to actively disrupt
cross-border Taliban operations and arrest Taliban leaders who have
found sanctuary with Pakistani Pushtun tribes along the border.
Assuring the
security of voters on election day is a top priority. Although the
Taliban-as well as its allies in Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's Hezbi Islami
(Party of Islam) and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda movement-failed to
disrupt the October 2004 presidential elections, their insurgency
appears to have grown stronger since then.
The elections are
expected to help build the popular legitimacy of President Hamid
Karzai's young government. But the real test will come after the
elections. Popular support for the government, which presently has
little authority outside Kabul and the major cities, will expand to
the degree that the government can provide security, help grow the
economy, and provide services-especially health care, education,
and the rule of law.
The United States
and its allies must remain actively engaged in boosting the
capacity of the Afghan government to address Afghanistan's many
problems. The tasks it faces are daunting. It must protect its own
people from insurgent attacks and criminal warlords, rebuild
Afghanistan's shattered infrastructure, aid the return of more than
one million destitute refugees, and help solve the country's dire
housing shortage, appalling lack of healthcare, and massive
unemployment.
The Afghans also
will need extensive outside help to eradicate the flourishing opium
trade without undercutting support for the government. This means
helping poor farmers find alternative means of supporting their
families while cracking down on the drug lords who buy their crops,
refine the opium into heroin, and move the illegal drugs to markets
outside Afghanistan.
But the Karzai
government will be unable to resolve this long list of problems
unless its officials and supporters are assured protection from the
increasingly bold insurgents. It would therefore be a mistake to
prematurely withdraw American military forces from Afghanistan. Yet
recent news reports suggest that the Pentagon is considering
cutting U.S. troops by 20 percent by early next year if the
elections go as planned and the situation on the ground
improves.
This would be a
risky move. Afghan guerillas historically suspend most of their
activities during Afghanistan's grueling winters and return to
their home villages or camps in Pakistan to rest and regroup. They
then remobilize in the spring and resume their attacks. While the
U.S. military presence could safely be reduced during the winter
months, prudence dictates that it should be increased again in the
spring, when the fighting season resumes after the snow melts.
The ISAF
peacekeeping force also should be expanded in size and given
greater responsibility to protect Afghan cities and major
transportation routes from insurgent and criminal attacks. NATO
also should play a greater role in training the Afghan army and
police, who must begin to take the lead in restoring security and
the rule of law.
Hopefully,
Afghanistan's parliamentary elections will proceed without
bloodshed. But even in the unlikely event that they are held
without violent disruptions, the United States and its allies
cannot afford to be complacent about Afghanistan. Much remains to
be done to help Afghans build a secure, peaceful, and hopeful
future.
For more on
Afghanistan, see "Helping
Afghans Fight for Themselves," "After
the Victory: America's Role in Afghanistan's Future," and "Defusing
Terrorism at Ground Zero: Why a New U.S. Policy is Needed for
Afghanistan," all available at heritage.org.
James A. Phillips
is Research Fellow in Middle Eastern Studies in the Douglas and
Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the
Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International
Studies, at The Heritage Foundation.