Eric Bjornlund is a co-founder and principal of U.S.-based Democracy International, and the author of”Beyond Free and Fair: Monitoring Elections and Building Democracy.” Here are his thoughts about the legitimacy of the Afghan elections.

International observers, journalists, diplomats, academics, and others often talk about whether elections are “free and fair.” This focus on the free and fair determination has encouraged international election observers to make categorical, bottom-line judgments and suggest that elections either pass or fail a test of legitimacy. Thus, today and tomorrow, international election observers will issue statements and hold press conferences that, implicitly or explicitly, offer preliminary verdicts on whether the Afghan public and the international community should view these elections as legitimate.

But the standards for a legitimate election in the context of Afghanistan are in controversy. Assessing whether the August 20 election has met such standards starts to seem extremely subjective. Is this election successful merely because it happened, because those who wanted to seriously disrupt it appear to have failed? How can we judge an election in the context of war? If observers emphasize administrative irregularities, such as problems with the indelible ink and punching of ballots that are supposed to be checks on multiple voting, then perhaps we are approaching the kinds of problems we see in normal elections.

Moreover, the election process is ongoing. The IEC is still engaged in vote count tabulation. No results have been announced. Candidates and citizens need to bring any complaints they may have to the Election Complaints Commission. Accordingly, election observers cannot really make any judgments about the process at this point, partly because they still need to collect information but more importantly because the process is still ongoing. Judgments about election day must go beyond the conduct of polling. We need to try to avoid the instinct to provide snap judgments. Accordingly, while DI will also offer a preliminary statement sharing our findings to date, our team will continue to monitor the process as it unfolds over the coming days and weeks.

Election observers and the international community more generally also need to move “beyond free and fair” in another sense. These elections are intended as part of a broader process of democratization in Afghanistan. They were the first elections administered by an Afghan-led institution. Domestic election monitors were active. There appeared to be a competitive political debate. Perhaps these elections will have been successful if they have contributed to the long-term development of organizations, institutions, and democratic processes in Afghanistan. It will be some time before we can judge whether that has really happened.