Andijan Tragedy Served as Catalyst for Increased Repression in 2005 – Human Rights Report

The watchdog group Amnesty International said in its annual report released May 23 that Central Asia, especially Uzbekistan, suffered from an "overwhelming climate of impunity" as officials in the region continue to restrict human rights.

The Andijan events of May 12-13, 2005, in which Uzbek security forces allegedly gunned down hundreds of Uzbek civilians, served as the catalyst for a region-wide move to curb individual liberties and press freedoms, the Amnesty International report indicated. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. In its section concerning events in Uzbekistan in 2005, the human rights group noted that Uzbek authorities used Andijan as a "pretext for a further clampdown on political freedoms in the name of national security."

Andijan's impact was also felt in neighboring Kyrgyzstan, where hundreds of Uzbeks fled during the hours immediately after the massacre in order to avoid likely Uzbek government reprisals. Many Uzbeks found a safe haven with friends or relatives living in southern Kyrgyzstan, and thus were not officially registered as refugees. Those housed at the Besh-Kana refugee camp experienced numerous hardships, as "Kyrgyzstani authorities did not provide physical protection from the Uzbekistani authorities." Bishkek supposedly gave Tashkent lists of refugee names and their Uzbek addresses, the report said, adding that Uzbek security services "put pressure on relatives to persuade refugees to return."

In June 2005, Kyrgyz authorities removed four men from the refugee camp and handed them over to Uzbek officials. Back in Uzbekistan, the four men "were reportedly detained incommunicado, and at least one of them was tortured," Amnesty International said. Another four Uzbeks remain in Kyrgyz custody pending a decision on whether or not to return them to Uzbekistan. Last July, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees angered Tashkent by organizing an airlift for 439 of the Uzbek refugees to a temporary home in Romania. Most eventually settled permanently in other European countries.

Since Andijan, a steady stream of Uzbeks has made its way, one way or another, to Kyrgyzstan, where the newcomers continue to struggle. Many live quietly without enjoying the protection of official refugee status. Thus, they cope with the constant possibility of being taken into custody and returned to Uzbekistan, where a prison term, or worse, would await them.

On the eve of the first anniversary of the Andijan events, Kyrgyz security officials prevented Uzbek refugees from staging a protest in Osh, Kyrgyzstan's southern capital. In Bishkek, meanwhile, human rights activists and several Uzbek refugees gathered for a commemoration, laying a wreath in front of the Uzbek embassy.

Edil Baisalov, the leader of the Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society, a Kyrgyz non-governmental organization, said last year's Andijan-related refugee crisis posed the first major democratization test for Kyrgyzstan's new government, which took power following the March revolution. Despite shortcomings in the Kyrgyz governmental response, the state passed the test, Baisalov maintained. "The Kyrgyz people went through their first post-March 24 international crisis with honor," he said.

"Despite huge pressure from [Uzbek President Islam] Karimov, we managed to relocate many refugees to third countries," he continued. "This was probably one of the few bright spots in the history of the [Bakiyev administration]." [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Baisalov claimed that because of "unlawful acts by some law-enforcement officers" about 100 Uzbek asylum-seekers have been forcibly repatriated during the course of the past year. "One day, these actions will receive due investigation and deserved punishment," he vowed.

One Uzbek refugee, identifying himself Egamnazar Shaymanov, said he was not particularly afraid about the threat of forced repatriation. "It is quite safe here," he said. "The Uzbek security services extended their hand as far as Kazakhstan or Ukraine and forced the authorities there to deport Uzbek refugees, but it didn't work out here."

Even so, he said he hopes to be able to start a new life elsewhere. "The living conditions [here] are not so good. But, then, refugees are always poor," he said with a bitter smile. "Although local organizations try to help us, rent is very expensive. My wife and I have no permanent place to live."

Asked whether he would like to return to Uzbekistan someday, Shaymanov shakes his head, signaling a negative response. He seems to have lost hope in Uzbekistan's ability to get back on a democratization course in the near- to medium-term. "It's not just Karimov," he said. "When Karimov leaves, there will be another one like him. The problem is not in individual people. It's the system."