From a Cultural Angle
I would like to start with an assumption and that is, Afghans have often had an affirmative outlook towards Iran’s domestic developments. Iran’s progress throughout the history has been either ahead of or concurrent with Afghanistan. Consequential developments in these two neighbors have taken place at the same periods. The constitutional movement and revolution in both countries, and foundation of Kabul and Tehran universities in early 1930s are good examples. Cultural affinity manifested in religion and language has drawn Iran and Afghanistan closer. As a result, the economic structures, in terms of production and consumption are similar.
So it was predictable that Iran’s presidential election would be closely traced by most Afghans, especially the elite and students. Speaking with my students in HeratUniversity during Iran’s election days, I found out that they are all awaiting the results and this shows how important the future of Iranians is for Afghans. I can even say that after U.S. presidential elections which led to Obama’s presidency, Iran’s presidential election was the most interesting political event for Afghans.
Regardless of its course, the election had its repercussion in Afghanistan. I think with the seven-year experience of an increasingly institutionalized democracy in Afghanistan, Afghans have become more aware of democratic benchmarks. And it is from this angle that they evaluate Iran’s presidential election.
Meanwhile, the media revolution of the 21st century and the opulence of information resources in Afghanistan, confronts people with contradictory data. A group of media criticize Iran and provide biased, magnified news. On the other hand, public media make pro-Iran interpretations. There is of course impartial press which gives justifiable analyses. This moderate, realistic group reflects the political developments and informs the public on Iran’s presidential election and the ongoing events. With these reports, most Afghans express their concern with Iran’s current circumstances.
These concerns relate to Iranian establishment’s behavior with its own citizens and Iran’s ties with other members of the international community. People’s trust in the establishment has been the most significant feature of nation-state relation in post-revolution Iran. In the international aspect, Afghans worry that the turmoil damages Iran’s relations with regional and extraregional powers and its neighbors, and leads to further instability in the region. There are nearly three million Afghan expatriates living in Iran that would suffer unrests. In other words, Afghanistan has always benefited Iran’s stability. Therefore, we all hope that our neighbor’s problems would be solved with the collective efforts of its political and academic elite.
Recently strange analyses are published in Afghan media claiming that Iran’s is destabilizing Afghanistan and tries to disintegrate the country. Are these analyses a result of Iran’s post-election developments?
Reminding a bitter reality may help. During the past decades Afghanistan has been the stage of regional competition between some regional states. In line with this policy Afghanistan is partially falls victim to policies of Pakistan or some Arab countries which fear reinforcement of ties between Iran and Afghanistan. Every now and then, puppet groups publish analyses which are not representative of the opinion of majority of Afghan elite. The prevailing view among Afghans towards Iran is one which is positive and based on historical, religious and cultural commonalities. So those analyses you referred to can not truly reflect the attitude of Afghanistan’s government and people. Those are the ideological outputs of groups which are directed from outside. In reality, neither Iran nor any other country wishes to dissolve Afghanistan. Our country itself is not prone to dissolution. During the past 250 years despite all the hardships, Afghanistan has managed to preserve its territorial integrity. Based on what we currently observe, no developments will lead to Afghanistan’s disintegration in the next 50 years.
How has Iran’s presidential election affected the electoral campaigns in Afghanistan? We have heard that Afghan TV channels are going to host debates between the candidates.
That is one example of the similarities I told you before. The campaigns are similar to those in Iran, as are posters and photos. Also, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah has chosen the color blue as his campaign color, just like Mir Hosein Musavi who used green. There are going to be debates, which are actually an imitation of U.S. presidential contests. Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai and Abdullah Abdullah have announced their readiness to attend the debates. But Hamed Karzai has not responded yet.
Do you think using the color blue as a symbol could help Abdullah Abdullah? Some Afghan media have called it a copy of Iran’s elections which it is not rooted in Afghanistan’s culture.
Colors are not the property of a single culture or epoch. Their significance rises from human’s nature. Musavi’s green had an Islamic implication and Abdullah’s blue is pleasing and relaxing. Such a choice is not a mere imitation. Meanwhile, I remind you that three different groups will vote for Dr. Abdullah in Afghanistan: Mujahideen, who have fought beside Abdullah Abdullah. The opposition to Karzai’s government, and elite who think that with Abdullah’s presidency governance may undergo reforms. The last group is familiar with the use of such symbols and even if the ordinary people do not welcome the tactic at first, elite’s reception will attract them towards it later. This color needs not to become ideological. Plus, let’s not forget that despite his Pashtun origins, the majority of Abdullah Abdullah’s supporters come from the Persian-speaking population which is quite familiar with Iran and its developments.
How is the second presidential election of Afghanistan different from the first one? I mean in terms of laws, rules of democracy, women’s participation, campaign quality etc. How has it improved?
This year elections have some advantages. First is the quality of candidates. In the first presidential election, candidates relied on their personal reputation and ethnic origins. However, in this election, it is their abilities and their respective political alliance and party which counts. Afghans have gained political intelligence throughout the past five years. In the previous election, they were fed up with all the wars and Taliban’s rule. The new generation had no experience of the elections and merely wanted to bring about substantial change. But this time, purposeful political intentions are involved. The quality of running the country is a serious concern.
The quality of women’s participation has also improved. Compared with the first presidential election, they have now become more experienced, politically and academically. Another important point is that there are no arbiter institutions in Afghanistan to disqualify a candidate. The basic prerequisites (being Muslim, Afghan citizen etc.) suffice. If anyone thinks to be capable of ruling the country, they can join the contest. Additionally, Afghanistan is in a more stable situation today and having learnt from the past elections, we need less managerial (but not financial) aides from the international community.
Isn’t the supervision of Europeans a defect?
Afghanistan is having its first experiences of modern elections and the majority may not trust the electoral procedures. With the structural defects and our country’s frail democracy, the presence of Western observers secures people’s trust and helps democratize the election process.
And how is the freedom of media in these elections?
With the bill passed in 2002 on freedom of public media, all Afghan media are free to broadcast news and reports. More than 400 newspapers and magazines and 15 private TV channels report on the elections from Kabul and other provinces. There are no restrictions and I can say with certainty that this is unparalleled among regional countries. Media’s rational criticism helps the government in the process of development and political parties in rising to power. In the long-run, such reform processes help our society to foster the spirit of democracy.
And the last question. Hamed Karzai congratulated Ahmadinejad while in Tehran protestors were still on the streets. The international community had also its doubts. What was the reason for such a hurry?
As I said, we view Iran from a cultural angle, not a political one. Hamed Karzai was probably trying to demonstrate the high level of relations between Iran and Afghanistan as a part of his attempts to gain regional support and reconstruct the country. He also wanted to counter those voices which claim that Iran is supporting Taliban. His congratulation drew criticism fro Afghan media since they expected him to wait until Iran’s presidential election was approved by the Council of Guardians. However, this measure shows the determination of Hamed Karzai’s administration to raise the level of regional cooperation and facilitate the reconstruction and stabilization process in Afghanistan.