For the first time in more than two decades, international election observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe will not be watching an American election. According to MS NOW, the Trump administration declined to invite them, which puts Washington in the exclusive club of countries that have done the same: Russia and Belarus. That's the whole list. Three names.
The Guest List Has Exactly Two Other Names On It
Let's start with the company we're keeping. MS NOW reports that the United States joins only Russia and Belarus in excluding OSCE observers from its elections. Not "a handful of authoritarian states." Not "several countries with troubling records." Two. Russia and Belarus.
This is the organization that has monitored American elections for more than two decades without incident. Observers show up, watch the process, write a report, and leave. It is the democratic equivalent of a home inspector, and the administration has decided it would rather not have anyone look at the foundation.
The OSCE itself called the decision "regrettable," which in diplomatic language is roughly equivalent to a normal person screaming into a pillow.
The State Department's Explanation Is a Masterpiece of Nothing
So why do it? MS NOW asked, and a State Department spokesperson said the OSCE "should focus its limited resources on elections where it can have the greatest impact."
Read that again. Slowly. The United States government is telling a monitoring organization that it is simply doing the OSCE a favor, saving it the trouble of watching the largest and most consequential democratic exercise on the planet. How thoughtful. How considerate of their budget.
Notice what the answer does not say. It does not say observers were unnecessary. It does not say American elections are beyond question. It says the observers have better things to do. That is not a reason. That is a brush-off with a bow on it.
Meanwhile, the DOJ Is Sending Its Own Monitors
Here is where the timing gets ugly. MS NOW reports that the exclusion of OSCE observers comes as Democrats and election integrity experts have raised concerns about potential election meddling, after the Department of Justice announced plans to send its own monitors.
So the neutral, independent, international observers are out. The Justice Department's monitors are in. Same election, different referee, and one of them answers directly to the administration whose party is on the ballot.
Maybe that's a coincidence. Maybe the two decisions have nothing to do with each other. But if you were designing a system to make people suspicious, you could not do much better than swapping outside witnesses for inside ones right before the vote.
Human Rights Watch Says the Quiet Part Out Loud
The reaction from watchdogs was blunt. According to MS NOW, Human Rights Watch said the move "fuels fears of serious human rights concerns around the upcoming elections."
That is a sentence you expect to read about a country with a leader who has been in power since before your kids were born. It is not a sentence you expect to read about the United States, a country that spent decades lecturing others about free and fair elections and sending its own people abroad to watch theirs.
We have been the ones holding the clipboard at other people's polling places. Now we are slamming the door on anyone who wants to hold one at ours.
Shaheen Calls It What It Is
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told MS NOW the decision "risks undermining public trust in America's safe and secure election system." She called it "deeply antithetical to the spirit of freedom, democracy and transparency that defines our elections."
She also made the point that should be embarrassingly obvious: the U.S. should hold "itself to the same standards that we would expect of any other democracy."
That is the heart of it. If we demand transparency from other countries, we do not get to opt out when it becomes inconvenient. A rule that only applies to everyone else is not a standard. It is a threat.
The Dingo Take
In 1936, Germany hosted the Olympics and spent months scrubbing the place down for foreign visitors, hiding the worst of it behind fresh paint and polite smiles. Today's version is cheaper and lazier. Skip the paint. Skip the visitors. Just don't let anyone in to look.
That's what this is. You do not turn away independent observers from an election you are confident is clean. Confidence invites scrutiny. Confidence says, "Come on in, take notes, we've got nothing to hide." The only people who bar the door are the ones who'd rather the notes never get written, and right now the only other governments doing it are Russia and Belarus. Think about that. Of every country on Earth, those are the two that looked at this policy and said, "Yes, that's our guy."
Maybe nothing is wrong. Maybe the midterms will be spotless and the administration just has a thing about paperwork. But you cannot spend years teaching Americans to distrust the vote, then remove the neutral witnesses and send in your own, and act shocked when people ask questions. The rest of the world is watching anyway. The administration just made sure none of them get a badge.
Comments