EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Central Asian Leaders React to Developments in Kyrgyzstan

EURASIA INSIGHT

CENTRAL ASIAN LEADERS REACT TO DEVELOPMENTS IN KYRGYZSTAN
Ibragim Alibekov 3/22/05

A new specter is haunting Central Asia’s authoritarian-minded leaders -- the specter of people’s power.

Kyrgyzstan’s Central Asian neighbors have reacted swiftly, and with evident concern, to recent developments in Jalal-Abad and Osh provinces, where opposition-led protesters have established self-governing structures, or "people’s power" councils, in defiance of President Askar Akayev in Bishkek. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The leaders of Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have all taken steps in recent days and weeks � as the Kyrgyz protests have played out � to protect their regimes against the spread of the "Kyrgyz contagion," which is fueled by popular frustration with corrupt and non-responsive government.

Following the violent clashes on March 20 in Jalal-Abad and Osh, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan � Kyrgyzstan’s direct neighbors, tightened border controls, restricting movement across the frontier. On March 22, the Uzbek Foreign Ministry issued a statement stating that President Islam Karimov’s administration "could not help but experience anxiety concerning ongoing developments in Kyrgyzstan." The statement appealed to Akayev and his opponents to resolve the political crisis in "a peaceful way, without any outside interference."

In Kazakhstan, Foreign Minister Kasymzhomart Tokayev, in a statement distributed by the ministry’s press service, called on Akayev and his political opponents to find "common language" and avoid the use of force.

Over the past 18 months, people’s power has emerged as a second major threat to Central Asia’s existing order. Central Asian leaders have been on edge since late 2003, when Georgia’s Rose Revolution ousted then-president Eduard Shevardnadze. Concern grew markedly in late 2004, as Ukraine’s Orange Revolution brought a Western-oriented government to power in Kyiv. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Central Asian governments have long struggled to contain the spread of Islamic radicalism in the region. Uzbekistan experienced several bouts of Islamic radical violence in 2004. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Meanwhile, underground extremist groups, in particular Hizb-ut-Tahrir, continue to conduct anti-government agitation across the region. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

With the revolutionary mood taking root in southern Kyrgyzstan, political observers expect Central Asian leaders, in particular Uzbek President Islam Karimov, to intensify efforts aimed at stifling individuals and institutions that could encourage the spread of people’s power. Nozima Kamalova, the director of the Legal Aid Society in Tashkent, said she expects Uzbek authorities to tighten their clampdown on non-governmental organization (NGO) activity in the country. Officials have already closed down several NGOs, including the Tashkent office of the Open Society Institute. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. EurasiaNet operates under the auspices of the Open Society Institute in New York.

"NGOs are now the civil society opposition in Uzbekistan," Kamalova said. "They [NGOs] made a peaceful protest and he [Karimov] said that they were terrorists, asking why these terrorists were allowed to speak. This is the attitude of our president. If it [opposition-led protests] continues in Kyrgyzstan it [civil society conditions] will get much worse [in Uzbekistan]."

The Central Asian leader feeling most vulnerable to the people’s power threat may be Kazakhstan’s Nursultan Nazarbayev, who is slated to face re-election in December of 2006. Though Kazakhstan’s political system has become more authoritarian in recent years, the country has an active opposition movement. Kazakhstan’s spreading prosperity, fueled by the country’s abundant reserves of natural energy, has created a business class that increasingly is interested in political power as a means of protecting its economic interests.

Since parliamentary elections in Kazakhstan in September 2004, Nazarbayev has taken steps to keep his political opponents divided and off balance. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Long before the outbreak of protests in southern Kyrgyzstan -- which began amid opposition complaints that Akayev’s administration had rigged that country’s parliamentary election --Kazakhstani officials reportedly took steps to produce an electoral outcome favorable to Astana’s interests. During the Kyrgyzstani parliamentary election campaign, top Kazakhstani political consultants reportedly worked with pro-Akayev politicians in southern Kyrgyzstan.

As soon as trouble began in Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstani authorities appeared to refocus their efforts on preventing upheaval during Kazakhstan’s presidential vote. Several officials in early March -- shortly before Kyrgyzstan held its second round of parliamentary voting on March 13 �- said Kazakhstan should revise its election laws to ban mass demonstrations following nationwide elections. "There are some forces in our country who realize their weakness. They know they have no supporters and have no chance to win," pro-Nazarbayev MP Serik Abdrakhmanov told the Kazakh Service of RFE/RL. "So they plan some kinds of revolutions of orange or other colors."

In late February, Nazarbayev proposed the formation of a Central Asian union that would link Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. In advocating the establishment of such a grouping of states, Nazarbayev cited "common economic interests." But political observers said the organization could also potentially bolster efforts maintain the political status quo in the region. Both Karimov n Uzbekistan and Akayev in Kyrgyzstan have endorsed the idea. Whether or not the plan gets off the ground, however, may depend on whether Akayev can extract himself from his present predicament with his political authority intact.

Editor�s Note: Ibragim Alibekov is the pseudonym for a Kazakhstani journalist.

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.