PARLIAMENT'S FIRST SESSION: REVIEW AND ATMOSPHERICS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KABUL 002727

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SCA/FO, S/CT, SCA/A
NSC FOR AHARRIMAN
CENTCOM FOR POLAD, CG CFC-A, CG CJTF-76
TREASURY FOR APARAMESWARAN, ABAUKOL
STATE PLEASE PASS USAID FOR AID/ANE, AID/DCHA/DG
SAN JOSE FOR JANAE COOLEY
REL NATO/ISAF, AUS, NZ

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/13/2016
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR KDEM AF
SUBJECT: PARLIAMENT'S FIRST SESSION: REVIEW AND ATMOSPHERICS


Classified By: A/DCM ANGUS SIMMONS FOR REASONS 1.4 (B) AND (D)


1. (C) SUMMARY. The Afghan National Assembly ended its first
session on June 5 having achieved several key milestones,
including the confirmation of 20 ministers and the passage of
the budget. Notable trends in the first session of
Parliament included occasional hints of ethnic divisions
beneath the surface and emergent nationalism, strains with
the executive branch, and fluid legislative procedures.
Parliament will likely begin its second session on or around
July 23. END SUMMARY.

First Session: What Parliament Did and Did Not Do
-------------- --------------


2. (C) The Afghan National Assembly is off to a remarkably
strong start after its first six months of existence,
accomplishing most of the items on its agenda and debating
the security situation in Afghanistan and other significant
national issues (such as the Abdul Rahman conversion case).


3. (C) What Got Done:

- Confirmation of 20 ministers. The lower house of
Parliament (Wolesi Jirga/WJ) is still waiting for President
Karzai to nominate individuals for the five Ministerial
positions where the first nominee was rejected.
- Passage of the budget. After initially rejecting the
budget, Parliament won some symbolic concessions on payments
to civil servants and the disabled and staked out their claim
to have a legitimate voice in the budget process.
- Confirmation of two Supreme Court Justices. The WJ is
waiting for the renomination of candidates for the seven
remaining seats.
- Consideration of the Provincial Council Law. While
Parliament's consideration of this bill was only preliminary,
they did begin the process of drafting amendments and
considering substantive changes to the transitional laws.


4. (C) What Didn't Get Done:

- In the Wolesi Jirga, the formation of political groups and
the finalization of rules of procedure. Unlike the Meshrano
Jirga, the Wolesi Jirga did not complete its organizational
structure, leaving it vulnerable to extended procedural
debates during session.
- Passage of transitional laws. The Constitution called for
all transitional laws to be confirmed by Parliament in its
first session, but also stated that unless voted down by
Parliament, the laws would remain in effect. Parliament has
chosen (if only by default) to consider transitional laws
separately and substantively amend them, offering the chance
to revise some problematic existing laws (such as the
criminal code or the election law).
- Consideration of the four other positions requiring
Parliamentary confirmation. President Karzai has yet to
formally nominate candidates for the following positions: NDS
Director, Afghan Red Crescent Society Chair, Attorney
General, and Central Bank President.
- Resolve procedural issues such as the definition of a
parliamentary majority. Rather than come to a decision on
procedural matters, the Wolesi Jirga is seeking to create a
Constitutional Commission to determine how to interpret
certain aspects of the Constitution.

Ethnic Divisions and Nationalist Trends
--------------


5. (C) Ethnic divisions did not define relations in
Parliament, but matters of ethnicity did significantly shape
debate on the floor. While MPs interact easily across ethnic
(and gender) lines, and purposely avoided discussing the

KABUL 00002727 002 OF 003


ethnic composition of the Cabinet, ethnic and regional
divisions came to the fore in debate on the Supreme Court and
on security. Typical were comments such as too many of the
Supreme Court nominees were Pashtun, or that Parliament
should not confine debate on security matters to debate on
Pashtun areas. When there was a clear division, it was often
between Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns, with Hazaras acting
cohesively to advance their own interests. Ethnicity was
never paramount in any debate, however, and many MPs
countered ethnic arguments with arguments for national unity.
At the moment it appears to be more of a tool used in
personal conflicts - in particular in disagreements between
Qanooni and Sayaf. Ethnicity lurks below the surface as an
easy card for MPs to play, but by and large, thus far, the
Parliamentary leaders have been mature in avoiding it.


6. (C) A clearer trend was the nationalism expressed by
Parliament. Members of Parliament clearly stood up for
defending what they perceived as Afghan rights against
encroachment from outside sources. Whether it was demanding
Abdul Rahman remain in Afghanistan, rebelling against
international donor conditions on the Afghan budget, or
reacting to the May 29 US military vehicle crash,
Parliament's stances were consistently independent, populist
and nationalist. While Parliament's leaders worked to
restrain the most negative comments after the accident,
occasional anti-American or anti-ISAF statements were made
during open debate. In an environment where Parliament has
little control over the Afghan budget or the country's
security posture, and little exposure to larger policy
issues, matters involving national pride are likely to remain
important.

Executive-Legislative Relations
--------------


7. (C) While all MPs paid lip service to the importance of
positive executive-legislative relations during Parliament's
first six months, relations were more often strained than not
and were marked by a lack of understanding on both sides.
The high point for legislative-executive relations was the
debate on the Cabinet, which was organized in an expedited
manner and resulted in a mostly positive result for the
Karzai administration. The low point was the rejection of
the budget, marked by numerous miscommunications and
misunderstandings of the process. What marked the difference
between these two cases was the level of engagement by the
executive and the complexity of the task at hand. While the
GOA lobbied heavily for its Cabinet Ministers, it did not
satisfy Parliament's desire for information and attention on
the budget, ultimately leading to its rejection. The GOA
miscalculated the role that MPs would want to play in policy
formation and its own ability to manage their expectations.
The GOA seems to have learned from its initial missteps, but
it did not gain allies in Parliament with its initial
tactics.


8. (C) Of more concern to the GOA will be the tenor of debate
on the security situation in Afghanistan. The most commonly
heard comment from MPs is that there is a gap between the
government and the people - by which they mean a lack of
trust in the government. Most MPs stated they were willing
to fill that gap, but believed they did not have the tools
needed from the government to respond to the needs of the
people. MPs were highly critical of the GOA response to the
May 29 riots and to the perceived inability to respond
forcefully to the declining security situation in the south.
Without a noticeable change in the security situation,
particularly in the south, MPs will likely return from summer
recess with additional criticisms of the government.

Legislative Procedures Highly Fluid

KABUL 00002727 003 OF 003


--------------


9. (C) The Wolesi Jirga's legislative procedures - such as
taking votes - were very informal and changeable throughout
the first session. The agenda for debate each day was
normally decided on the day before. Debate did not generally
center around opposing opinions, but around personalities -
MPs are recognized to speak based on the order in which they
raise their hand to talk, not whether they support a
particular view (although some MPs, particularly Sayaf, are
recognized whenever they want to speak). This democratic way
of approaching debate led to haphazard discussions and anger
when Qanooni attempted to cut off debate before everyone had
spoken (which happened every day - there were always more
interested speakers than time to speak). Votes were taken
either by raising hands (for most issues) or secret ballot
(for Cabinet and Supreme Court nominations). Votes were not
officially recorded and often happened unexpectedly (leading
to anger when certain MPs were out of the room when votes
were taken). The counting of votes was also not particularly
accurate. When it was not obvious that one side was more
numerous, the two Secretaries counting red, green, or white
cards as MPs held them up.


10. (C) These procedures gave a high degree of influence to
Speaker Qanooni. Qanooni has final say over who is allowed
to speak during debate and has used that to focus discussion
and curtail very negative comments. At the end of each day,
Qanooni summarizes the debate, and his summary (jambandee) is
either approved by voice vote or show of hands. Qanooni's
hands-on management of Parliament is likely necessary to
bring order to a generally rather chaotic body, and MPs
accepted this manner of leadership for most of the session.
During debate on the Supreme Court, however, latent
resentment over Qanooni's control over debate combined with
ethnic tensions and the sensitivity of the underlying subject
of debate caused breakdown in parliamentary debate for
several days. MPs spent an extended amount of time debating
the meaning of a majority and the constitutional requirements
for Justices, objecting to any attempt by Qanooni to
summarize debate and move on. Qanooni did work through the
Leadership Committee (made up of all Committee Chairs) to
organize the agenda in a more inclusive manner, but without
political groups to designate speakers on certain issues or
some other way to manage debate, MPs may continue to focus
more on procedural rather than policy issues.

Comment
--------------


11. (C) Given the many challenges Parliament faces (from a
lack of experience to the fact that many MPs were on the
opposite side of the battlefield a few years ago),it has had
a remarkably successful first session. Not only did they
approve key legislation and review the Cabinet and Supreme
Court nominees, they maintained a generally (if not entirely)
positive level of debate and established themselves as a
force to be reckoned with in policy-making. Members of
Parliament have also been successful in making a connection
with the people they represent. Many (if not most) MPs
accept 2-3 delegations of constituents into their homes each
night, listening to their concerns (and requests for
patronage). They represent a genuine connection to people
that can be used to gain support for the government and relay
the concerns of the people to the administration. But MPs
can also be a a high-maintenance group. Maintaining their
support for the government and creating an effective link
between the GOA and the people will require a high degree of
attention to MPs from both the GOA and the international
community. END COMMENT.

NEUMANN