Rival presidential candidates Dr Abdullah Abdullah and Dr Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai have met several times and resolved many of the differences between them.
Whether or not the Independent Election Commission (IEC) should declare the winner on the basis of the results of the votes or a political agreement has become a key issue. Also how to appoint ministers? On the basis of merit or patronage? Should the portfolios be divided between the two to ensure equal representation for their supporters?
The media is not privy to the discussions but sources close to both the candidates have confirmed Abdullah’s Reform and Unanimity team has laid down conditions that are either not acceptable to their opponents or pose legal obstacles.
Shadow play
Abdullah’s team is against the declaration of results by the IEC, or any indication of who is the winner or loser in the June runoff poll. It is for a council of ministers where half of the members are appointed by one camp and the other half the other camp.
Ashraf Ghani’s Change and Continuity team sees the appointment of ministers as the prerogative of the president who is the winner of the election. The runner-up, who will be the chief executive under the power sharing agreement the two candidates have agreed to, will have a consultative role in the government.
How the two rivals find a solution will be hard to say but civil society activists reason the demands by the Abdullah team are tough.
Frozan Ferotan said, “Huge amounts of money were spent on ensuring people get a chance to vote, then a 100 percent audit of the votes was conducted on the request of Abdullah yet both are going to be set aside. The call to not declare the winner is unreasonable and against democratic rules. This also casts a doubt on the whole democratic process and affects the legality of the coming government and president.”
Meanwhile the international community and UN have indicated the demands fly in the face of reasonable principles of election. Voters should decide the fate of candidates in any election.
Spokesperson for the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) Nazifullah Salarzai reminded the candidates of their commitment to the audit and recount of the votes, and requested them to accept the results. The process of auditing the June runoff votes is over. “The UN played an impartial role in the audit and annulment of votes found to be bogus,” he said.
The process of recounting, spread over several weeks because of frequent stoppages, was monitored by independent international and Afghan observers, and supporters of the two candidates, and declared to be transparent.
Abdullah’s Reform and Unanimity team had issues about the transparency of the election process, and members even demonstrated against UNAMA. An angry UNAMA threatened to stop aid to Afghanistan, and Reform and Unanimity team members said they had not organised the protests.
Realistic progress
The differences notwithstanding what the two candidates have agreed upon were significant. There is an acceptance by the Abdullah team of the position of chief executive for their leader and presidentship for Ashraf Ghani. There is an understanding that the chief executive would manage the cabinet meetings, and would report to president for further decisions.
The spokespersons for both candidates expressed their happiness about the progress made, and viewed the formation of a national unity government as more realistic.
Reform and Continuity spokesperson Mujib-ul-Rahman Rahimi, said the last round of talks was constructive and he does not anticipate any obstacles in the formation of the national unity government. His counterpart in the Change and Continuity team Taher Zahir also seemed hopeful about the future.
Still will the creation of a national unity government spark another round of feuding?
Both teams have claimed good coordination could obviate the possibility.
But Shokoofa Bahar, a Kabul resident, said in a situation where there would be two presidents “which would mean parallel governments” there is bound to be problems. “It would be better there is a permanent mediator post, in charge of sorting out differences in the two sides,” she advised. “It would be preferable the post be held by a UN staff or any other international who will mediate whenever the need rises,” she said.
Political benefit
Afghans who put their faith in democracy have had to settle for less.
Civil society activist Najibullah Rasa was pragmatic. “We should consider the principle of the agreement as a good omen and should welcome the power transition because the people are very tired and the current agreement can at least be a step forward,” she said.
The future will likely be rocky. Nasim Behman, a university lecturer, observed both candidates would be seeking to satisfy supporters. “Once again, like the current government, political benefits would decide appointments, not merit and efficiency.”
Latifa Habib of Ghazni feared the situation would strengthen the hands of the political and economic mafia. “People in power will be seeking to make good the losses they suffered during the long-drawn elections. Meeting people’s demands will have to wait.”
Follow TKG on Twitter & Facebook
