Eurasia Insight:
“SERIOUS INSTABILITY” POSSIBLE IN TURKMENISTAN WITHOUT URGENT CHANGES -- REPORT
11/19/04

Turkmenistan needs to diversify its economy and reverse the “destruction” of its education system, otherwise it faces “serious instability,” an International Crisis Group country report bluntly states. It goes on to recommend that the international community apply more consistent and focused pressure on President Saparmurat Niyazov’s regime.

The report, titled Repression and Regression in Turkmenistan: A New International Strategy, maintains that the “quiet-diplomacy” strategy for Turkmenistan is a failure. “The international response to Turkmenistan has been weak and poorly coordinated. Niyazov has successfully played different states and organizations against each other,” the report, released earlier in November, states.

Since an alleged assassination attempt on Niyazov in 2002, the president, spurred on by “growing paranoia,” has expanded authoritarian controls over society, leading to a rise in human rights abuse. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. “The government clamped down even more on dissent, and took a much stronger line against independent activity in civil society,” the report says.

Niyazov’s efforts to eliminate his enemies, both real and perceived, have extended beyond Turkmenistan’s borders, the ICG report says. “Opposition leader Avdy Kuliev was beaten up in Moscow in August 2003 by suspected Turkmen agents, an allegation backed up the next month when Russian authorities reportedly asked eight Turkmen embassy officials to leave the country, supposedly due to suspicions they were planning to murder Moscow-based dissidents,” the report said. “In April 2004 Makhamedgeldi Berdiev, a Radio Liberty journalist and human rights activist, was attacked in his home in Moscow and badly injured.” The report, which follows up on a similar study conducted by ICG in 2003, says the economic future for an overwhelming number of Turkmen citizens is grim. The report states that Niyazov’s regime relies on the country’s abundant natural resources to prop up the police state, adding that energy production is estimated at 30 percent of GDP, but only 20 percent of that revenue is devoted to social spending. The bulk of revenue is under direct presidential control – funds that Niyazov uses to maintain a large security force to intimidate the citizenry. At the same time, Niyazov has devoted sizeable sums to eccentric projects that reinforce his already well-developed cult of personality. In August 2004, for example, he approved a $43-million plan to build an ice palace in the desert outside the capital Ashgabat.

The agricultural sector, which accounts for 25 percent of GDP and which employs over half the labor force, is facing “serious decline” because of mismanagement and counter-productive policies, the report says. Unrealistic government production goals have led to seizures of seed stock, and all farmers must adhere to “Niyazov’s decision to sow seeds according to a set schedule without consideration of the weather.” The “gradual decline” in agriculture shows no signs of slowing, and the 2004 harvest is predicted to be the worst in years. With about half the young people in Turkmenistan unemployed, the continuing agricultural-sector collapse can lead to a “humanitarian crisis,” the report warns.

Recent developments in the educational sphere could have the most damaging long-term consequences for Turkmenistan’s development, according to the report. Niyazov has transformed the education system into an instrument of “heavy ideological indoctrination,” with the president’s “quasi-spiritual guide,” or the Ruhnama, serving as the paramount textbook in Turkmen schools. The system, in effect, now emphasizes political reliability over acquiring knowledge. The report cites one example at a vocational college, where 18 of the 34-hours of academic work are devoted to studying the Ruhnama and other tracts devoted to reinforcing Niyazov’s personality cult. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

“I believe [the reforms] are good for Turkmenbashi [Niyazov] to stay in power. However they are terrible for people, because it makes them dumber…Turkmenbashi is brainwashing the Turkmens by his policies and making them like sheep to herd them easily,” the report quotes one unidentified student as saying. With 40 percent of the population under fourteen, the changes in education will outlast Niyazov’s lifetime and, as quoted in the report, lead to “the creation of an isolated, stupid people dangerous for stability to the region.”

The government’s effort to cut Turkmen citizens off from information stretches far beyond the classroom, the report says. As of 2002, only eight people per every 1,000 had telephone. Meanwhile authorities closely monitor access to outside sources of information, especially the internet.

While current policies may help reinforce Niyazov’s hold over society in the near-term, they will likely leave Turkmenistan more vulnerable to instability over the longer haul. Niyazov’s management style, which relies on frequent purges to prevent challenges to his authority from within the authoritarian system, has disrupted the development of a cohesive political elite in the country. There is also no clear line of political succession. Thus, political turmoil can easily ensue when Niyazov eventually leaves the political stage. The lack of developed political institutions, combined with the ongoing degeneration in the economy and education, could produce a “catastrophe” when Turkmenistan confronts the succession issue, the report says. To minimize the risks, the report urges a drastic overhaul of the international approach to Turkmenistan. The international community so far has preferred to work behind the scenes in trying to encourage the mercurial Niyazov to moderate his policies. There are powerful geopolitical reasons for prominent regional players not to confront Niyazov. Russia, for example, is intent on developing a potentially lucrative energy export relationship with Turkmenistan. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Meanwhile, the United States has voiced criticism of Niyazov’s policies, but has nevertheless been reluctant to exert strong pressure on Ashgabat out of a desire not to upset US security interests in Central Asia. Such policies of tacit cooperation raise the chances of tumult in Turkmenistan, ICG representatives believe.

"The international community has put short-term economic and security benefits ahead of longer-term regional security, and there is likely to be a terrible price for that," David Lewis, Director of ICG's Central Asia Project, said in a written statement. "Despite its oil and gas, Turkmenistan's economy is becoming brittle, and the inevitable political succession could well be violent."

The report urges the international community establish clear benchmarks that Turkmenistan must meet, or face concrete economic and political sanctions. For instance, the report says Russia should link continued economic cooperation to efforts by the Niyazov government to restore Russian-language instruction in Turkmen schools, and to open access to Russian media outlets. Russia should also insist on the restoration of dual citizenship rights for Turkmen residents. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

In addition, the report specifically urges the United States designate Turkmenistan “a country of particular concern.” The European Union, meanwhile, should tighten its criteria for the extension of economic assistance, the report said.