Taliban militants determined to scuttle Afghanistan's parliamentary elections showered rockets on cities Saturday as men in tunics and women in blue burqas voted in a key test of the government's ability to fight insurgents and entrenched corruption.
I haven't gotten as worked up over elections in Afghanistan as I have over Iraq because I just don't think they are as important. Iraq is fairly central in the Moslem world. Afghanistan just isn't. Oh, it has been a jihadi Disneyland for several decades where young jihadis can dash off to fight Russian Infidels or American Infidels, or just get training to kill Infidels. So it is important that it is not a sanctuary for jihadis. But I have minimal expectations for democracy there. I just want legitimacy for a mostly nominal central government and legitimacy at the provincial and local levels where most of the practical governing that matters to people gets done.
My main goal is that we hold them with minimal violence below whatever level it is that leads Afghans to have confidence in our side. So far, so good:
Afghan security officials dismissed the attacks as "insignificant," and said they did not hamper voting, adding that 92 percent of polling stations were open.
"There are no reports of major incidents," Afghan Election Commission Chairman Fazel Ahmad Manawi told reporters.
We shall see. I think we can win here, but I also worry we will escalate our objectives beyond what we need--a decentralized state that provides enough services to be legitimate to the people and that has leaders and people friendly to us so that al Qaeda or other jihadis do not use Afghanistan as a training ground and launching pad for attacks on us or to support an Islamist revolt in Pakistan.
Oh, and I worry we'll decide to retreat even when we can win.
UPDATE: Strategypage has a good view on the elections.
