More Legitimate, Less Fragile, Less Liberal? The Adoption and Adaptation of Elections in Afghanistan

Abstract

This chapter challenges the way in which political fragility is defined by international actors in reference to Afghanistan. One of the world’s 15 ‘extremely fragile’ states, according to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the country is considered vulnerable ‘to risks inherent in political processes, events or decisions’ (OECD, States of Fragility, 2016, 23). An exploration of one such political process—elections—in Afghanistan demonstrates how narrow definitions of fragility and a lack of legitimacy, measured according to international liberal criteria, serve to dismiss local adaptations of elections as undemocratic. Yet these adaptations are the very means through which elections are cemented in to the broader political landscape, and in the longer term, may counter fragility. The chapter considers two trends in Afghan elections since 2004: first, the increased usage at the local level of preexisting political practices influencing electoral processes, such as collective decision-making and consensus, but the decreased efficacy of the same. At the same time, a second trend has seen each electoral cycle provide the stage for more sophisticated and impactful forms of fraud as the perceived perks of a seat in parliament or on a provincial council have increased exponentially. Elections that were intended to reverse political fragility and bad governance have done the opposite. The chapter argues that it is not the ‘Afghanisation’ of elections that renders them increasingly undemocratic or fraudulent but instead broader contextual factors including a vast flow of unchecked international resources, elite competition to control the process, a lack of rule of law, and persistent international intervention in electoral outcomes related to simultaneous military stabilisation. A different approach to elections—one that prioritises familiarity with candidates and resilience against outside interference, above liberal principles—could enhance political legitimacy at the local level. Efforts to counter political fragility can only begin when legitimacy is defined locally.