<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Early Election Shenanigans</title>
	<link>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/</link>
	<description>neweurasia\'s latest on Tajikistan</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 11:45:48 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-70</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 22:15:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-70</guid>
		<description>Fair points.  I think, however, that there is definitely a place - and room - for more objective "lists" like the OSCE, as well as more analytical reports looking into more intangible substance.  Both have their strengths and weaknessses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fair points.  I think, however, that there is definitely a place - and room - for more objective &#8220;lists&#8221; like the OSCE, as well as more analytical reports looking into more intangible substance.  Both have their strengths and weaknessses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tajik Boy</title>
		<link>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-69</link>
		<dc:creator>Tajik Boy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 22:07:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-69</guid>
		<description>This is exactly my point. It seems like OSCE standards could be described as a list of things that, if fulfilled, would make elections fair. I don't rule out the possibility that in Russia and most former soviet republics the government can plant fake opposition candidates and do it in such a way that would make observers believe that a real political struggle is taking place. 

Only when candidates like Khodorkovsky appear we can see the reality as it is. I am not really approving the actions of the CA countries since they are just a repetition of what has happened in Russia. Personally I think no CA country in its current form has a real and independent political will. They all are influenced by their bigger "brother" Russia. It is just dissapointing that OSCE seems to be satisfied as long as "election fairness checklist" is completed, without looking into the substance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is exactly my point. It seems like OSCE standards could be described as a list of things that, if fulfilled, would make elections fair. I don&#8217;t rule out the possibility that in Russia and most former soviet republics the government can plant fake opposition candidates and do it in such a way that would make observers believe that a real political struggle is taking place. </p>
<p>Only when candidates like Khodorkovsky appear we can see the reality as it is. I am not really approving the actions of the CA countries since they are just a repetition of what has happened in Russia. Personally I think no CA country in its current form has a real and independent political will. They all are influenced by their bigger &#8220;brother&#8221; Russia. It is just dissapointing that OSCE seems to be satisfied as long as &#8220;election fairness checklist&#8221; is completed, without looking into the substance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-68</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 21:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-68</guid>
		<description>TB,
Here is a&lt;a href="http://www.osce.org/item/8144.html"&gt; statement by the OSCE on the Russian presidential election in 2004&lt;/a&gt;:



&lt;blockquote&gt;The Russian Presidential Election on 14 March was generally well administered and reflected the consistently high public approval rating of the incumbent president but lacked elements of a genuine democratic contest. In addition to a dearth of meaningful debate and genuine pluralism, the election process failed to meet an important commitment concerning treatment by the state-controlled media, in particular television on a non-discriminatory basis. Those are the conclusions of the International Election Observation Mission which deployed 340 observers from 39 countries to monitor the election.&lt;/blockquote&gt;



Not exactly screaming about unfair elections, but not exactly a positive review either.  I wonder what they will say about the next one in Russia....

You make a good point; there is sort of a double standard out there in some respects.  But I think the CA countries are learning pretty quickly.  In this example, restricting some voices and propping up others is  a pretty shrewd move, I would say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TB,<br />
Here is a<a href="http://www.osce.org/item/8144.html"> statement by the OSCE on the Russian presidential election in 2004</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Russian Presidential Election on 14 March was generally well administered and reflected the consistently high public approval rating of the incumbent president but lacked elements of a genuine democratic contest. In addition to a dearth of meaningful debate and genuine pluralism, the election process failed to meet an important commitment concerning treatment by the state-controlled media, in particular television on a non-discriminatory basis. Those are the conclusions of the International Election Observation Mission which deployed 340 observers from 39 countries to monitor the election.</p></blockquote>
<p>Not exactly screaming about unfair elections, but not exactly a positive review either.  I wonder what they will say about the next one in Russia&#8230;.</p>
<p>You make a good point; there is sort of a double standard out there in some respects.  But I think the CA countries are learning pretty quickly.  In this example, restricting some voices and propping up others is  a pretty shrewd move, I would say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tajik Boy</title>
		<link>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-67</link>
		<dc:creator>Tajik Boy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 21:12:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://tajikistan.neweurasia.net/2006/02/06/early-election-shinanigans/#comment-67</guid>
		<description>My belief is that all elections in former Soviet Union are somehow not quite free. The exception could be Baltic countries who have long been held back by Russia. The trouble is that some countries cover their unfairness more effectively than others. Russian Duma for example is all pro-presidential. Situation with Khodorkovsky shows how real opponents get crushed. There is no real opposition whasoever, yet I don't see OSCE screaming about unfair elections. I suppose it is more evident in the example of CA countries that haven't learned how to cheat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My belief is that all elections in former Soviet Union are somehow not quite free. The exception could be Baltic countries who have long been held back by Russia. The trouble is that some countries cover their unfairness more effectively than others. Russian Duma for example is all pro-presidential. Situation with Khodorkovsky shows how real opponents get crushed. There is no real opposition whasoever, yet I don&#8217;t see OSCE screaming about unfair elections. I suppose it is more evident in the example of CA countries that haven&#8217;t learned how to cheat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
