The World

By 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:

FT page on Afghanistan

Afghan runoff election canceled (Huffington Post)

Karzai gets new term as Afghan runoff is scrapped (New York Times)

McChrystal Lite (AEI)