KABUL, 18 June 2004 — Security looms as the major challenge to Afghanistan holding elections in September, despite US President George W. Bush’s assertion that democracy in the war-wracked nation can serve as a good example for Iraq, analysts say.

If elections were to be held in September as scheduled, two months before Bush faces his own presidential polls, they would be “symbolic” rather than truly democratic because it would not be possible to ensure smooth voting everywhere in the country, said Kabul University academic Nasrullah Staniczai.

“The main problem and challenge ahead of Afghanistan’s elections is security,” the political science lecturer said.

“I believe if the international community really, fully supports the Afghan government, there is a possibility of holding elections in September, but they will be sort of symbolic elections because they will not be able to cover the whole country,” Staniczai said.

“Over the next two or three months the security situation cannot magically improve.”

President Hamid Karzai met Bush in Washington on Tuesday and at a joint press conference the US leader hailed Afghanistan’s progress toward democracy and prosperity.

“Afghanistan is no longer a terrorist factory sending thousands of killers into the world,” Bush said.

Since the fall of the fundamentalist Taleban regime in late 2001 following a US-led military campaign, a new constitution has been put in place, reconstruction has begun, more children are in school and women have returned to public life. However, the central government still struggles to assert its authority outside the capital and warlords and military commanders control much of the impoverished provinces.

Some 20,000 US-led troops are facing almost daily attacks from a guerrilla insurgency believed to be led by remnants of the ousted Taleban regime with support from Al-Qaeda.

Conditions for holding presidential and parliamentary elections now are “pretty bad” because of security and logistical reasons, including low voter registration, according to International Crisis Group senior analyst Vikram Parekh. The parallel with Iraq is that Afghanistan could be an “example of a transition to democracy from a former pariah state,” Parekh said.

But unless weapons are removed from the general population, the voting will not be fully legitimate, he added.

The government has said it will disarm 40 percent of the estimated 40,000 to 50,000 militiamen by June but so far just under 9,000 men have surrendered their weapons.

“The DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization and Re-Integration) process is a prerequisite for free and fair elections,” Parekh said.

“Civil society organizations continue to report that the Afghan people they are working with throughout the country question how free and fair elections can be held without a meaningful DDR process,” said Barbara Stapleton of the Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief. The power of local commanders and warlords could even make this process impossible, she said.

“Afghanistan may no longer be a safe haven for international terrorists in the short-term, but the very different resources that were required to establish peace and stability in the long-term, have not been committed by the international community,” she said.

“There is now a very real danger that holding elections before the country is ready will end any chance of democratic process before it has even begun.”