- MENU
- HOME
- SEARCH
- WORLD
- MAIN
- AFRICA
- ASIA
- BALKANS
- EUROPE
- LATIN AMERICA
- MIDDLE EAST
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Argentina
- Australia
- Austria
- Benelux
- Brazil
- Canada
- China
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Hungary
- India
- Indonesia
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Korea
- Mexico
- New Zealand
- Pakistan
- Philippines
- Poland
- Russia
- South Africa
- Spain
- Taiwan
- Turkey
- USA
- BUSINESS
- WEALTH
- STOCKS
- TECH
- HEALTH
- LIFESTYLE
- ENTERTAINMENT
- SPORTS
- RSS
- iHaveNet.com
Paul Kennedy
Almost two generations ago, out of the ashes that were the Second World War, our forefathers bequeathed to us the idea and the very institutions of global civil society. They were proclaimed in
Those visionaries pointed us to many rights, and thus to many futures, but key to it all was the rule of law, the right to free speech, and the right to vote for the government that would represent you and those who thought like you.
Also, and critically, the founders of our international order pointed to the responsibility of all citizens to accept peacefully a fair, popular vote even if that would mean one government handing over to another should the general election go in favor of the successful opposition party.
In all mature democracies -- think of Britain, Japan, Brazil, India -- it is taken for granted that a ruling party defeated in the polls gently hands over the offices of state to the winners. In other countries, where powerful forces exist who feel threatened by free speech and free elections, this is not the case.
There is another interesting and vital aspect to this matter of asserting natural freedoms that deserves more attention from the world's media than it gets, and it is this: making sure the voting is fair.
For almost 20 years now,
Most likely, the political parties that are running in the electoral process will divide along ethnic, linguistic, regional, religious and class lines. The contenders will often be recent enemies, so why should anyone in their right mind agree to the "other" being in charge of the electoral process, of collecting and counting the votes? No way! Why fight for years and reluctantly agree to a U.N.-brokered ceasefire, just to have the electoral campaign distorted by rigging the votes, or have the process disturbed by violence?
This is where a
On the ground, the more important work is carried out by experienced election monitors from different parts of the globe. They are dispatched to the voting stations across the country in question; they sit next to the ballot boxes; and, when the voting time is up, they duly count the votes, checking on each slip for its validity (it's not easy in areas of great illiteracy, but they have figured that one out as well).
When the votes are sent off, usually under U.N. guard, to the central tally office, the national election figures are released. More important still, the head of the election-monitoring process issues a statement about whether the election has been true and fair. Generally, the monitors accept that there will always be some dubious or rigged local elections, or technical malfunctions (think of
This extraordinary procedure, which started in
But that brings us to the main point. The very act of holding free and fair elections in troubled parts of the world, where anti-democratic elites, radicalized rebels and agitated fundamentalists are determined to block the advance of constitutional rights and parliamentary freedoms, is a risky business. Election monitors are the peacekeepers, so praised in Christ's Sermon on the Mount; but as He himself realized and experienced, those who strive for justice and freedoms are quite likely to provoke brutal responses.
The process of fair and free elections can, of course, be frustrated by less brutal and more cunning methods: drawing the boundaries in a way convenient to the ruling party, bribing groups of voters, hijacking election boxes, deliberately miscounting the votes, intimidating citizens about the loss of their livelihoods if they vote in the wrong direction, and all the other tricks.
Observers of election skullduggery in the "rotten boroughs" of early 19th-century
But now let us come to the Taliban, whose assault upon fair and free elections is of a totally different order of magnitude: It is simply not interested in vote skullduggery, but in the extirpation of the electoral process itself. How else can one explain their deliberate attack, on
In the words of the
Of course, conscious-stricken Western democracies will agree that Secretary-General
But my sense is that those Western democracies are generally doing their best, in this troubled world of close to 20 (!) international or civil conflicts; some of them are really straining to help out, though others are laggards. Still, responding to
Two countries are far behind their special international responsibilities here, and anyone who studies the U.N.'s many burdens comes to know it. They are
The time has come, I think, for
Russia and the PRC to step up to the plate. The time has come for them to join in the protection of the gallant, unarmed
This set of thoughts is not, therefore, just about the sheer evilness of The Taliban's attacks on U.N. election monitors and aid workers. It is also about certain Great Powers who insist on special privileges, but without responsibility.