Abdullah Abduallah pulls out - should we?

Abdullah Abdullah, Hamid Karzai's main rival for office of President of Afghanistan, has withdrawn from the scheduled November 7 runoff election there, saying his demands for ensuring a fraud-free election had not been met. However, he stopped short of calling for his supporters to boycott the vote.

The BBC recaps the results that led to the runoff:

An investigation by the UN-backed Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) led to Mr Karzai's share of the vote dropping to 49.67% - below the crucial 50% plus one vote threshold needed to avoid a second round.

Dr Abdullah was adjudged in the end to have won about 31% of valid votes cast.

That's accurate - but it neglects to point out that Abdullah gained in percentage only because he had fewer votes declared fraudulent than Karzai did - a point lost in reports on the Afghan elections now focused exclusively on Karzai's numbers.

Few (in or out of Afghanistan) actually want a runoff election; weather, security, and voter apathy in the face of a predictable outcome are among the reasons - and "power sharing" is the ultimate goal. Current actions by any participants in the contest should be viewed as tactics used to gain leverage to negotiate from positions of strength. Karzai benefits from an Abdullah concession prior to an offer to participate; Abdullah from an offer to participate in the government without first offering that concession. This, in short, is the situation in Afghanistan today.

While most reports explain that the legitimacy of the Afghan government would be damaged if the runoff elections proceed without Abdullah's participation, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton offers a dissenting point of view: "We see that happen in our own country where, for whatever combination of reasons, one of the candidates decides not to go forward," she said. "I don't think it has anything to do with the legitimacy of the election. It's a personal choice which may or may not be made."

Clinton's comments may be an indication that the Obama administration is not pleased with Abdullah's action; a concession and an acceptance of a position in the Karzai government would have been the quickest solution to what's now become a domestic dilemma confronting the American president. A reasonably quick establishment of a new Afghan government with a diminished role for Karzai was desired following the August elections, and potential American troop levels were the centerpiece of negotiations. But Karzai resisted pressure, ultimately supporting his position by declaring the existing Afghan constitution would be followed and runoff elections would be held. These drawn out negotiations forced the Obama administration into a series of apparent delays on a decision to respond to General Stan McChrystal's request for additional forces, the latest of which occurred this week. After indicating a decision on troops would be made public sometime "between November 7th and 11th" (immediately following the runoff), sources in the White House are now indicating no announcement is likely before November 20th. But while tying troop levels to election results rather than strategic requirements could ultimately prove disastrous for military efforts in Afghanistan and lead to serious questions of government legitimacy among the population there, President Obama's domestic political opponents have attacked him for what they describe as "dithering" on the decision instead.

From all indications, Abdullah is the Obama administration's preferred partner in Afghanistan, and a man who's shown early signs of American political savvy. Last weekend he assured CNN viewers "the president of the United States is doing the right thing" by taking his time to deliberate Afghan troops levels, but warned Fox viewers that General McChrystal's additional troops were needed to reverse his country's deteriorating security situation.

And in a move away from neutrality, Western officials are beginning to (anonymously) signal their desires. Descriptions of Karzai as "belligerent as hell" and Abdullah as a man who's "done a great job of elevating himself as a statesman on the international stage" are beginning to appear in media coverage, as the odds of Afghans getting a (second) vote on the matter grow increasingly dim.

But while the Obama administration would like to see Abdullah holding a substantial position in a re-tooled Afghan national government and has tied potential troop increases to the outcome, this week the president requested data on provincial governments in Afghanistan, suggesting he would be willing to "work around" any national government there altogether.

Meanwhile, the deaths of British, American, and Canadian troops in Afghanistan during the final days of October pushed the already record-setting monthly death toll there higher still - and even before the "record numbers" were announced Obama's approval ratings on Afghanistan were plunging.

Previously:

The Plan Unveiled

Hanky panky

Smokescreen

The wicked game

Round two

- via email, facebook, twitter, etc.