EurasiaNet Civil Society - Authorities in Kyrgyzstan Concerned about Repeat of “Ukraine Scenario”

CIVIL SOCIETY

AUTHORITIES IN KYRGYZSTAN CONCERNED ABOUT REPEAT OF "UKRAINE SCENARIO"
2/17/05

Authorities in Kyrgyzstan have "poisoned" the political environment in the run-up to parliamentary elections, using a variety of tactics apparently designed to hinder opposition activity, the rights group Human Rights Watch has charged. Kyrgyz authorities, meanwhile, defend their actions, saying the opposition is bent on fostering disorder.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) sent a letter on February 14 to President Askar Akayev detailing government abuses, and warning that heavy-handed behavior could discredit the results of the February 27 parliamentary elections. The letter complained that officials had improperly excluded opposition-oriented candidates from joining the campaign, and had taken action to restrict freedom of assembly. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. It also cited "a series of troubling statements," that were apparently designed to "impugn and intimidate" opposition activists.

"Your government has made clear, through statements and action, its opposition to any repeat of the ‘Ukraine scenario’ [in Kyrgyzstan]," the letter said. "We would urge you to look closely at what is at the core of ... [Ukraine’s Orange Revolution]: the demand for responsive government and fair elections." The letter went on to state that ensuring a free-and-fair parliamentary election would be the best way to prevent the "Ukraine scenario" from playing out in Kyrgyzstan. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

A few days before the release of HRW’s letter, the president’s domestic critics leveled similar charges against the administration. A statement published by an opposition group in the Res Publica newspaper accused officials of using "cunning tactics" to ensure that power remains in the hands of Akayev, his family and his close political associates. "We call upon you, dear compatriots [Kyrgyz citizens], to turn out ... and not let yourselves be tricked again," the statement said.

Akayev seems impervious to such criticism. The president’s comments at an early February public appearance underscore the government’s seemingly unshakeable belief that the opposition seeks to use the elections to foment unrest and oust incumbent officials. "They have every intention of stirring up serious strife," Akayev said during a meeting with Kyrgyz elders that was broadcast on state television. He characterized opposition protests and other campaign activities as "satanic games," claiming that they were intended "harm accord in our country, bring misfortune to our people and lower our population’s living standards."

A controversy involving competing student organization helps sheds light on the government’s evident concern that Kyrgyzstan could follow in the political footsteps of Ukraine and Georgia, where incumbent leaders in both states were forced from power following bungled attempts at rigging parliamentary elections. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

In mid-January, a Kyrgyzstani youth group, calling itself Kel-Kel (Path of Renewal), announced its formation. Organizers described the group as non-partisan and dedicated to promoting electoral transparency. The target audience for the group is the estimated 100,000 Kyrgyz young people studying at higher education institutions in Bishkek. Many of these students will vote in the Bishkek constituency in which Bermet Akayeva, the 32-year-old daughter of the president, is a candidate for parliament. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Despite the declaration of political neutrality, many of the group’s roughly 300 members participated in opposition-led protests in January. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. In addition, many Kel-Kel members openly express a desire to promote turnover in the political system. "I respect Askar Akayev. His contribution to our country is significant. But today, we need to change something," said Alisher Mamasaliev, a Kel-Kel activist who was previously associated with the opposition Atajurt movement.

After surfacing, Kel-Kel immediately drew comparisons with the Ukrainian and Georgian youth groups -- Pora and Kmara respectively -- that played vital roles in the success of the revolutions in those countries. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Almost as quickly – and, in the view of some political analysts, not coincidentally -- a similar organization, sporting the same name, logo and slogans appeared on the scene. The two groups even had leaders with similar last names.

This second Kel-Kel group also professed to be non-partisan. Yet, the second group’s leader, Aisuluu Aytbayeva, speaking at a news conference, emphasized that Kyrgyzstan should take action to prevent external forces, such as Orange revolutionary fervor, from exerting pressure on domestic political developments. "We want to build our house ourselves. We want to live in sovereign and independent state," Aytbayeva said.

The two groups held dueling news conferences on January 27. The first was held by the supposed Kel-Kel clone group, led by Aytbayeva, at which she repeated earlier statements about the desire to shut external forces out of the political process. Minutes later, Chinara Aitbayeva, a leader of the opposition-leaning Kel-Kel organization, charged that authorities formed the rival group with the aim of sowing confusion among Kyrgyz citizens. Other members of the opposition-leaning Kel-Kel asserted that Aisuluu Aytbayeva was formerly an employee in the presidential administration’s press office.

The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues.

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.