President Hamid Karzai has proposed bringing forward the date for the next presidential elections from 2014 to 2013. The president announced this possibility in a joint press conference with the visiting Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, in Kabul. The president has cited the concurrence of the presidential elections with the scheduled withdrawal of NATO-ISAF forces from Afghanistan as the rationale for the proposition.

He referred to 2014 as a "heavy agenda" that cannot possibly accommodate the two landmark events. In the joint press conference with the visiting NATO Secretary General, he said that he had been considering and talking about this possibility for some time. The announcement by the president has raised many eyebrows. The principal opposition front had been dismissive of the proposition alleging the president seeks ulterior motives and that what the Constitution prescribes should be given primacy.

The master in coalition politics
What is interesting and merits further exploration is the manner in which President Karzai is taking out the political rabbits out of his hat one after another. In almost a decade of being in-charge, he has proved it beyond doubt that he is an indisputable master in coalition politics.

Being a smart politician even in Afghan political standards, he was able to deftly ride the tide of popular outbreaks of resentment towards the Americans after the recent incidents. He was able to take shrewd political advantage out of the evolving circumstances in the form of strengthening his negotiating position with the U.S. over the issue of night raids, the prisons and the strategic agreement.

It is interesting that right after the conclusion of the issue concerning night raids and prison responsibilities, he has conveniently moved onto the next one on his agenda. The U.S. has already given up on taming Karzai in the proverbial "our puppet" way of dealing with client states and their presidents.

The American side had to climb down the high horse and accept the inevitability of having to accommodate Hamid Karzai, his demands as well as the demands of his "inner circle". It is evident that the U.S. and President Hamid Karzai have reached a level of understanding involving a significant degree of give and take. The intricacies and the complexity of the give and take wheeling and dealing between the two might have very well involved the Americans turning a blind eye on Karzai's project for 2013 and beyond.

The Constitution of Afghanistan expressly forbids a third term in office for any incumbent president. The president's second term is set to end in 2014 and there would be no way he can extend it for a third term unless the Constitution is amended. As of now, there are and there have been no indications that President Karzai is after an amendment to the Constitution to this effect.

A presidential term, as enshrined in the Constitution, is five years. If the presidential elections are brought forward for a year, it would mean that the presidential term is incomplete. This might very well turn out to be the Raison d'être of the propositions and plans to bring forward the presidential elections to 2013.

An unfinished term in office means a lot and can take on many implications as well as legal and judicial interpretations. In Afghan politics, it qualifies as a perfect opportunity for opening the paths towards varied political objectives. It effectively amounts to a blank political cheque.

The judicial and legal interpretations as to what an unfinished second term implies would then become an explosive issue. Going by the track record of the judicial system in Afghanistan, it is unknown whether such interpretations will not be bent to the will of the president and the Executive. However, it is still premature to speculate about the outcome of presidential elections whether they will be held in 2013 or 2014.

The Afghanistan Election Commission has already announced its readiness to hold the elections according to the timeline enshrined in the Constitution. The Commission has not ruled out the possibility of early elections but has conditioned it on securing the assistance of international organizations that had helped it in holding the previous elections.

The reaction of the principal opposition group has been dismissive. Its spokesman has accused the president of intending to pull off yet another political drama in the hope of muddying the waters and extracting political advantage.

Under the current circumstances, going the route of the law and upholding it, is no doubt, paramount in importance. The country is going through a critical period with the drawdown of the international military coalition being already on the cards and the majority of them set to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2013.

The idea of bringing forward the date for the presidential elections can be a good idea per se but if it leads to a breeding ground for creation of yet another crisis, for which Afghanistan is ill-prepared, then it would be indeed a disservice to the cause of successfully guiding Afghanistan through the transition period ahead.

It would be the duty of the national parliament, an informed and action-oriented opposition and the people at large to be vigilant against the possible excesses and those that wish to bend the rules in the interest of personal agendas.

What is further a cause for worry is that the U.S., as Afghanistan's main international partner, is increasingly losing interest and stake in the goal of strengthening the nascent democracy in Afghanistan. Gradually, many other priorities and pressing imperatives have come to replace the initial American enthusiasm in seeing the Afghan political system achieving higher standards of a democracy.

With the deadlines becoming yet tighter and the U.S. compulsions in Afghanistan multiplying, it might very well leave the politics in Afghanistan to the way it has been for decades and centuries. Beyond 2014, we might very well see a different face of Afghan politics.

We might very well see a retreat from what has been considered the norm over the past one decade. What might gradually unfold might turn out to be the consolidation of undemocratic forces and the end of what can be characterized as "just another decade of democracy".