Back to Gideon RachmanBy James Blitz, the FT’s defence and diplomatic editor
The collapse of the second round of the Afghan election will be viewed by some western governments as a fiasco, one that raises questions about how legitimate Hamid Karzai really is as the country’s leader and partner to the US. But many in Nato will also be relieved today that the long Afghan election saga has finally come to an end. Clearly, there are huge questions about Mr Karzai’s standing after the election debacle, the allegations of voter fraud and the evident US frustration with his leadership. But the second round of the election, was always going to be a severe test for Afghanistan - with fears about yet more violence and fraud, and the spectre of a low turnout. Many will breathe a sigh of relief that another chapter in this electoral nightmare has been avoided.
The question is where things go from here. First, as Nato diplomats put it, there must be some accommodation between Karzai and Abdullah. The risk now is that Mr Abdullah, who leads Afghanistan’s northern Tajik minority, might begin to lead a breakaway from Mr Karzai’s rule altogether. “We urgently need to see deal between them, some kind of arrangement being pit in place. It’s the big question now and we don’t know the answer to it,” says a Nato diplomat.
But, longer term, the questions are for Karzai. How much has the experience of the last few months convinced him of the need to hit hard against corruption, to woo the parts of the Taliban that can be won over; and - most important of all - build up a credible Afghan National Army that can one day control the country’s security situation ? We do not know - and probably won’t be any clearer until well into 2010.
Related reading:
Afghan runoff election canceled (Huffington Post)
Karzai gets new term as Afghan runoff is scrapped (New York Times)
This blog covers a variety of topics from US foreign policy to European politics and the Middle East - and whatever else happens to be in the news or catch my attention. I joined the FT as chief foreign affairs commentator in 2006, after a 15-year career at The Economist which included stints as a correspondent in Brussels, Bangkok and Washington. I write a weekly column on foreign affairs, which appears in the paper on Tuesdays. Occasionally my FT colleagues contribute posts to this blog.
Geoff Dyer is the FT's China bureau chief. He has been a correspondent in Shanghai and in Brazil and has also covered the pharmaceuticals and biotechnology industries from London.
Roula Khalaf is the FT's Middle East editor. She has worked for the FT since 1995, first as North Africa correspondent, then Middle East correspondent and most recently as Middle East editor. Before joining the FT, she was a staff writer for Forbes magazine in New York. 
James Blitz is the FT's defence and diplomatic editor. He has been the FT's political editor, based in London, and Rome bureau chief. James is a former Moscow bureau chief for the Sunday Times.
Alan Beattie is the FT's world trade editor. He has previously been economics leader writer and spent two years in Washington DC as chief US economics correspondent. Before joining the FT, Alan was an economist at the Bank of England. 
Victor Mallet is the FT's Madrid correspondent. He is a former Asia editor of the FT, and, in more than 20 years at the organisation, has also worked in Africa, Europe and the Middle East. In 1990 he escaped from Kuwait after being one of the few foreign correspondents there when Iraq invaded. 
Stefan Wagstyl is the FT's eastern Europe editor, co-ordinating coverage of the region. He has also been the FT's bureau chief in Tokyo and New Delhi.
