EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Turkmenistan: The Dirty Secrets of Urban Renewal in Ashgabat

EURASIA INSIGHT

TURKMENISTAN: THE DIRTY SECRETS OF URBAN RENEWAL IN ASHGABAT
4/30/07

The second in a series of articles

The new apartment buildings stretching along Garashsyzlyk Avenue in the Turkmen capital of Ashgabat do not exactly seem uninhabited. At night, lights shine out from a few lonely floors of the 10- and 11-story structures. Locals are a little uncertain who actually lives there, though � probably government officials, they say.

Like much of Ashgabat, until recently the neighborhood looked totally different, packed with low-slung, one-story buildings interspersed with typical Soviet-era, pre-fabricated apartment houses. But since the country's dictatorial first president, Saparmurat Niyazov, set out to build a capital worthy of Turkmenistan's supposed Golden Age, homes in many sections of the capital have fallen victim to wrecking balls.

Part Potemkin boondoggle, part overbearing urban renewal plan, the changing face of Ashgabat reflects both tragedy and absurdity, two qualities that often exist side by side in Turkmenistan. Much of the city’s center has now been transformed into a monotonous expanse of polished marble facades, the bricks of which, with an autocrat’s eye for detail, must reportedly be the same size for all major buildings. The distinctive Niyazov-era architecture � a pairing of Las Vegas’ superficiality with Washington’s sterile pomp � continues to spread beyond the heart of the city. Niyazov’s death in December and the succession in February of his longtime associate, Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, seem to have done little to slow the transformation.

"These new buildings, new palaces, parks � they were not built on empty space. Ashgabat was a rather densely populated city," said Farid Tuhbatullin, director of the Turkmen Initiative for Human Rights (TIHR). "All those houses, they were just taken and [the authorities] sent the people away. Some of them received some kind of place to live, but most were simply sent out into the street." [TIHR has received grant money from the New York-based Open Society Institute. EurasiaNet operates under OSI’s auspices].

Rights groups and local observers say evicted homeowners are often denied compensation equal to the value of their property. Demolitions can occur at short notice, giving residents mere hours to pack up their belongings, sometimes at their own expense. Lucky individuals get alternate housing in a relatively short period of time, while others must wait months or more to be resettled, or receive far less valuable pieces of land outside town. Still others get nothing at all.

A man who used to live near Turkmenistan’s new Olympic stadium estimated that the authorities evicted several hundred families, including his own, in the course of the large construction project. "They kicked them out and sent them to an empty lot near Tolkuchka [a market, on the edge of Ashgabat,] and said, ’build your house here.’ How is one supposed to do that with no money?" he asked.

Another man living in an old house near the Garashsyzlyk site said the people resettled from that area had been more fortunate. "For some people it took three, six months, but they all got places to live," he said. "We will move soon, too."

The closed nature of Turkmenistan’s regime makes it difficult to determine precise figures, but various estimates put the number of people affected by the reconstruction campaign at several thousand. The US State Department’s human rights report said that most of the up to 2,500 families affected by just two major construction projects in 2006 did not receive compensation. Although the highest number of cases occurred in and around Ashgabat, residents of regional towns have also been the targets of heavy-handed evictions.

Turkmen law enshrines the right to property and allows citizens to sue for fair compensation. Unlawful evictions also violate numerous international standards to which Turkmenistan has committed to follow. However, Erika Dailey of the Open Society Institute’s Turkmenistan Project said the majority of victims are unwilling to mount a legal challenge via Turkmenistan’s skewed justice system. "You need an extremely brave lawyer and a very persistent plaintiff," she said. "I’m only aware of one case where they fought and won." Public protest is even rarer, although not unprecedented.

Justifications for the evictions vary. In some cases, city officials claim that residents have no legal right to the land, while in others, they say that they have provided adequate housing or recompense to all of those evicted.

According to Dailey, political factors also played a role in urban planning. Throughout Niyazov’s rule, she said, demolitions and evictions were used as a means to silence dissidents and to punish politicians who fell out of favor, often extending to relatives as well. Such punitive actions gained prominence after the alleged assassination attempt against Niyazov in November 2002. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Observers also believe greed is another factor that continues to drive the rebuilding campaign. Dailey said that close relationships between the government and construction firms "reportedly generated enormous kickbacks." Tuhbatullin agreed, saying, "there is information that a certain part of the cost of these contracts was returned to Niyazov via shell companies." Tuhbatullin said he expected more of the same under Berdymukhammedov.

Tuhbatullin emphasized that Ashgabat’s makeover had little to do with the interests of the average citizen. "All this is not done for the people of the city," he said. "Yes, the city is clean, but it is a pretty high price to pay."

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.