View previous stories
	Put democracy first in Afghanistan by OpenDemocracy / New Straits Times - Malaysia Afghanistan   30 - 1 - 2006   Put democracy first in Afghanistan, by Emma Bonino. (OpenDemocracy)   As international delegates and Afghan leaders meet in London to discuss the country''s future, EU chief election observer Emma Bonino sets out the challenges and pitfalls they need to address.   While Afghan leaders and international donors gather in London this week to discuss Afghanistan''s future, Kabul is in the grip of yet another harsh winter, and most of the city''s inhabitants are without power, bar a few hours every second or third day. Although huge amounts of international money have been spent on civic infrastructure since the fall of the Taliban, material improvements have lagged behind, bringing scant relief to a largely dispirited population, who lack basic commodities and struggle daily with soaring prices.   Yet the city is bustling, and the streets stream with people. Girls in white headscarves and black gowns head for school under billboards advertising the latest brands of mobile phone. Little boys run down the slopes flying kites. And music – a vital component in Afghan life – floats in the air. The contrast with life under the Taliban''s authoritarian regime is sharp.   Kabul''s situation is paradigmatic of the contradictions still embedded in Afghan society. In December 2005, during my last visit there as Chief Observer of the EU Election Observation Mission (EU EOM), I made the case for democracy-building in Afghanistan, and it is precisely on this that the London conference needs to focus.   The "Afghanistan compact" expected to emerge from this meeting will symbolically launch the post-Bonn era. The initial rebuilding process set in motion by the 2001 Bonn agreement has come to an end: a new constitution has been announced, and a president has been democratically elected, as have the parliament and provincial councils across the country. The next phase requires a three-pronged approach: developing democratic processes within state-building; fostering civic culture; and tackling the main risks to democratisation.   Democracy''s building blocks   Efficient, accountable public institutions are crucial. The electoral system chosen for the recent elections – the single non-transferable vote – is not only extremely costly, but it also blurs representation in parliament, and thus undermines the general legitimacy of institutions it produces. In future, a more suitable electoral system is needed to ensure political pluralism.   Just and fair representation alone is not sufficient for establishing the rule of law. Much work will be required to protect basic human rights, guarantee freedom of expression, set up an independent and credible judiciary, create checks and balances that properly define the powers of each institution, and promote political party politics and other forms of "organised" political activity. The time has also come for a certain degree of decentralisation. Provincial councils have been elected; their role should now be clarified and eventually reinforced, in particular with regard to local governors directly appointed by the president.   The link between state and citizens must be strengthened, first of all by enhancing national unity and reconciliation. Here, an essential step will be to expand public participation, through recognising the role of non-governmental actors, dramatically improving the condition of women and by strengthening public and independent media outlets. The momentum gained from the recent elections should be used to pursue civic education in order to make citizens fully aware of their rights and duties, as well as the authorities'' goals and timelines. Government and parliament should make regular progress reports, detailing any problems that may have delayed results.   Overcoming obstacles to democracy   The main risk factors to democratisation are tightly interlinked. Lack of good governance impedes the termination of the vicious circle of illegal activities that breed violence and corruption, which in turn generate the law of silence and, finally, feed a culture of impunity. The consolidation of networks of local power brokers and the perseverance of illegal armed groups in parts of the country contribute to instability.   Moreover, pervasive opium and heroin production casts a long shadow over the country''s future, carrying the risk of permanently affecting politics, crippling society and distorting the economy of an already fragile state, while maintaining a "narco-elite" which finds itself increasingly at odds with the surrounding poverty.   Though everybody apparently agrees that the illegal revenue must be decreased, few seem to accept the fact that this will not happen as long as farmers remain the principal focus of counter-narcotics strategies. The illegal drug economy poses a serious threat to stability and democracy in Afghanistan, so it is crucial to promote a sincere and open-minded debate about it, and to consider the merit of different ideas and approaches. This debate must not exclude the possibility of licensed opium production for medical purposes, with quotas granted as in many other countries.   The post-Bonn compact should also carefully consider managing people''s expectations. Undeliverable promises must be avoided, so as not to reproduce the cruel disappointment that occurred after the 2004 presidential elections, when many anticipated that their quality of life would rapidly change for the better. Furthermore, suspicion about malpractices, corruption and waste can lead to disillusionment and hence to disengagement. An independent democratisation monitoring unit – composed of representatives from the government, the UN, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) and other civil society actors – should be created to make periodic comprehensive reviews and serve as an advisory body to the government on democratisation issues.   While launching the second phase of the process initiated by the Bonn agreement, the London conference will also renew the commitment of the international community over the next five years. This engagement should induce the Afghan authorities to act in a concrete and accountable manner in pushing ahead sustainable reforms in the interests of the Afghan people.   December 19, 2005   Afghanistan opens first parliament in Three Decades. (New Straits Times - Malaysia)   Afghanistan opened its first session of parliament after three decades of war, in the final step of a transition to democracy launched when the Taliban were toppled four years ago.   Afghanistan opened its first session of parliament after three decades of war, in the final step of a transition to democracy launched when the Taliban were toppled four years ago.   "I ask the nation to work with unity and national partnership for the creation of a strong and prosperous Afghanistan," the frail former king said.   The opening of parliament is the final step in the transition to democracy for Afghanistan agreed at an international conference in Bonn, Germany, weeks after the Taliban fell in a US-led attack in November 2001.   Milestones along the way have included the adoption of a new constitution in 2003 and the election that confirmed interim leader Karzai as president in October 2004.   "It is a source of great honor that after years of violence and misery, Afghanistan has taken firm steps in determining its fate," the head of the parliament secretariat Azizullah Ludin said in a speech to the opening session.   "Afghanistan has passed a great, historic test with the constitutional Loya Jirga (traditional gathering), presidential election and now with the parliamentary elections," he said.   While officials have trumpeted the occasion as proof that Afghanistan is moving away from its bloody past, analysts say the make-up of the parliament elected in September is a disappointment because of the dominance of mujahedin warlords, some of them accused of rights abuses.   The mujahedin (holy warriors) led the resistance to a 1979 Soviet invasion that ended when Moscow withdrew a decade later.   They then turned on each other in an ethnically charged battle for power that killed around 50,000 people in the capital Kabul, which today bears the scars of the conflict.   The extremist Taliban took power in 1996, imposing harsh Islamic law on the war-weary population before being toppled in a US-led campaign launched when they did not surrender Osama bin Laden after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. A handful of former Taliban are also among the new parliamentarians.   "Lots of Afghans are disappointed and cynical because they feel like people who perpetrated serious human rights abuses have been allowed back in the parliament," Human Rights Watch Asia research director Sam Zarifi said. "There"s a very clear sense in Afghan people that they want to get rid of the figures from the past," he said.   But among the new MPs are several progressives, including many of the women who had 25 percent of seats reserved in the House of Representatives, a turnaround from the days of the Taliban"s ban on women taking part in politics or even taking jobs.   Even as parliament opened, it was unclear how long its first session would last, with some officials saying it was expected to adjourn almost immediately until next year.   Hours before the opening session, three policemen were killed and one was missing after an attack by Taliban insurgents in the insurgency-hit eastern Kunar province, officials said.   The insurgency has killed more than 1,500 people this year, undermining the war-ravaged country"s quest for stability.
	Venezuela looks to boost Social Spending by Jane Monahan BBC World News   Dec. 2005   Venezuela"s populist president, Hugo Chavez, is widely expected to spend more on his government"s social programmes, both at home and abroad.   The opportunity comes following his party"s landslide victory in parliamentary elections on December 4th, after opposition parties boycotted the elections and withdrew their candidates.   Just consider the government"s recently proposed 2006 budget, where a colossal 41% of total expenditure, or $16.6bn (£9.4bn), earmarked for social programmes, is now bound to sail through parliament unopposed.   Both Anna Lucia d"Emilio, the director of the United Nations Children"s Fund (Unicef) in Venezuela, and Ramon Mayorga, the representative of the Inter American Development Bank (IADB), all agree that the country"s social programmes are easily the biggest and most comprehensive in Latin America.   The target of the huge spending is Venezuela"s huge poverty problem, afflicting more than half the population, and the profound social and economic inequalities which cause it. It encompasses three domestic programmes, says Mr Mayorga, that "strike at the heart of exclusion and which are very successful and being done at a reasonable, sustainable cost".   One is Mision Robinson, a highly effective literacy campaign which began - along with most of the other social efforts - in 2003..   Another is Mercal, a discounted food-and- household- goods shopping project established in poor urban and rural areas where no supermarkets or general food stores existed before.   Thirdly, Mayorga says, there is Mision Barrio Adentro, which translates as "into the heart of the shanty-town" - a basic preventative medicine programme.   It was organised outside the bureacracy of the Health Ministry, and by 2005 was providing free primary health care and subsidised medicines to 60% of the population - or over 14 million people - who previously had no medical services at all.   That such a programme is popular is hardly surprising. Even surveys done by opponents of the Chavez government show almost 70% of the population considers this basic health care programme necessary, and the opposition admits it.   Critics have raised questions about the financial sustainability of Barrio Adentro, as well about the complications of integrating the country"s two parallel health services.   One key difference between the two, for instance, is that instead of using Venezuelan doctors - many of whom have little experience of dealing with the poor - Barrio Adentro is staffed by 14,000 Cuban medics who have experience working in developing countries.   However, Enrique Rodriguez, a high ranking official at the Ministry of Planning and Development, says rivalry between the health practitioners can be resolved. The government, he says, has started offering scholarships to train about 20,000 young Venezuelans in Cuba and Venezuela to replace the Cuban staff. It is also carrying out a simultaneous five-year reform of public hospital staff and services.   Co-operatives   But a more significant problem - both of integration and of financial sustainability - may be posed by Vuelvan Caras ("Turning Lives Around"), a social programme aimed at creating jobs and reducing unemployment.   It is "not so successful", admits the IADB"s Mr Mayorga. Co-operatives are a key part of the Chavez programme. Take a Vuelvan Caras centre built at an abandoned fuel depot in a poor western suburb of Caracas, where brightly painted murals of Venezuela"s independence war heroes near the entrance contrast with the drab low-rise cinder blocks and ramshackle structures of the city"s shanty town.   Here, a group of elderly people work in a vegetable co-operative; 220 unskilled women, many of them housewives who have never had a job before, work in a textile co-operative; and 139 men, many of whom have not had employment for a long time, work in a shoe co-operative.   The centre, now part of a huge network of 4,600 co-operatives of every size and activity throughout the country, is evidently providing temporary employment. But how long can the cooperatives last?   The question is an important one, critics of President Chavez say, the government has vowed the co-operatives must not be a burden on the State. But it has not yet made clear how the co-operatives, which have limited management and marketing skills and resources, will fit into a market economy and compete with private firms.   Still, the recovery of the economy following the ending of oil strikes in early 2003 means funding can come out of the traditional government budget - rather than, as was earlier the case, from the coffers of state oil firm PDVSA.   PDVSA had been the main funder during the pre-2003 recession. But even now it has contributed some $2bn in 2005 - about a quarter of its annual profits.   But for supporters of Venezuela"s far-reaching programmes, where the money comes from is only a small part of what is at stake. Rather, the key issue is what happens to the groups it serves.   "In the last analysis the sustainability of the programmes is not only about money," says Unicef"s Anna Lucia D"Emilio. "The government has resources. But it also depends on how empowered the disadvantaged groups become, how they view themselves and others."
	View more stories