Hi there,

In this chaotic news cycle it may be tempting to tune out, but we hope you won’t—only an informed and engaged public can defend democracy. In these times of deep political polarization we need news that goes beyond play-by-play headlines, news that goes to the heart of each story by asking people to tell their own stories of abuses of power and injustice in their own words. If our journalism is important to you, please donate today. Every dollar makes a difference. Thank you so much.

Democracy Now!
Amy Goodman

Non-commercial news needs your support.

We rely on contributions from you, our viewers and listeners to do our work. If you visit us daily or weekly or even just once a month, now is a great time to make your monthly contribution.

Please do your part today.

Donate

Afghan Election Crisis Intensifies

HeadlineOct 19, 2009

The Afghan electoral crisis intensified today as Afghan election officials refused to accept findings of a UN-backed investigative panel that would force a runoff. The UN panel determined that allegedly fraudulent ballots reduced President Hamid Karzai’s portion of the vote to about 47 percent, less than the 50 percent threshold needed to avoid a runoff. But the Afghan Independent Election Commission, which is dominated by Karzai allies, has rejected the UN data. It is unclear what will happen if the election commission continues to reject the UN findings. Afghan law says the UN-backed panel is the final arbiter on complaints, but the Afghan election commission maintains it can contest at least parts of the investigation. The election dispute may play a critical role in the Obama administration’s decision-making process on whether to send more troops to Afghanistan. John Kerry, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, addressed the issue in an interview with CNN.

Sen. John Kerry: “It would be entirely irresponsible for the President of the United States to commit more troops to this country when we don’t even have an election finished and know who the president is and what kind of government we’re working with. And when our own, you know, commanding general tells us that a critical component of achieving our mission here is in fact good governance, and we’re living with a government that we know has to change and provide it, how could the President responsibly say, 'Oh, they asked for more? Sure, here they are,' and we know that the two critical stools of counterinsurgency aren’t going to stand? That would be irresponsible for a president of the United States.”

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Non-commercial news needs your support

We rely on contributions from our viewers and listeners to do our work.
Please do your part today.
Make a donation
Top