|
SILENCING CENTRAL ASIA: THE VOICE OF THE DISSIDENTS
Testimony from US Congressional Hearings on Central Asia
5 U.S. FOREIGN POLICY INTERESTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN CENTRAL
ASIA
Ariel Cohen, Ph.D., Research Fellow for Russian and Eurasian
Studies, the Shelby and Kathryn Cullom Davis Institute for
International Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
U.S. Interests in Central Asia
Central Asia, geopolitically and economically, is an important
region of the Eastern Hemisphere, occupying areas adjacent
to several nuclear powers, such as Russia, China, India and
Pakistan. It is located in proximity to a potential nuclear
power, Iran, and is a major repository of oil, natural gas,
gold, uranium and other minerals.
While historically predominantly Turkic and Moslem, Central
Asia was influenced by Russia, which conquered it during the
second half of the nineteenth century and continued its rule
during the Soviet period. However, currently, Russian influence
is increasingly being supplanted by that of China and Islamic
movements and forces, some of them militant, with bases in
Afghanistan, Pakistan and beyond. To the lesser extent, Turkey
and the West - the United States and the European Union -
have influence as well. In the future, the competition for
influence in Central Asia is likely to increase.
On July 16, the presidents of Russia and China signed a Treaty
for Good Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation in Moscow.
This treaty is the first such agreement between these two
Eurasian powers since Mao Zedong signed a treaty with Joseph
Stalin of the USSR in 1950, four months before the outbreak
of the Korean War. The 1950 pact was clearly driven by anti-Western
sentiments.
The motivations behind this new treaty are much more complex,
and involve serious geopolitical, military, and economic considerations.
In a sense, it is a logical product of the improvement in
Sino-Russian relations that began under the last Soviet leader,
Mikhail Gorbachev. It also should be taken as a signal to
the Western world that a major geopolitical shift make be
occurring in the Eurasian balance of power, with serous implications
for the United States and its allies.
The treaty comes on the heels of another significant security
arrangement: On June 14, Russia, China, and four Central Asian
states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan)
announced the creation of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
(SCO), a friendship ostensibly aimed at confronting Islamic
radical fundamentalism and promoting economic development.
Taken together, the formation of the SCO, coupled with the
July treaty signing, portend an important geopolitical transformation
for Central Asia, Russia and China. These two regional giants
are positioning themselves to define the rules under which
the United States, the European Union, Iran, and Turkey will
be allowed to participate in the strategically important Central
Asian region.
The U.S. has several important state interests in Central
Asia. It should strive to:
Deny one country or a group of countries, such as Russia
and China, the ability to dominate the region to the exclusion
of American presence; and deny China the ability to establish
a new sphere of influence in the region
Prevent the transformation of Central Asia into a base for
radical Islamic forces, such as the Taliban or Usama Bin Ladin's
organization, including stopping these entities from establishing
training camps and bases of operations in the region and frustrating
any attempts to subvert or take over Central Asian governments;
Prevent the region from becoming a major corridor for drug
trade into Europe and the Commonwealth of New Independent
States
Ensure access for U.S. companies to energy and other natural
resources and markets in the region
Encourage and support the development of civil society, the
rule of law and transparent market economy
Thus far, achieving these goals has been difficult, especially
in the areas of the observance of human rights and support
of legitimate political dissent.
Geopolitical Context of U.S. Policy in Central Asia
Opposition to the United States as the sole superpower is
akey component of the developing strategic partnership between
Moscow and Beijing. In addition, both Russia and China are
concerned about Moslem radical movements in their territories
and around their borders. Since the 1970s, the Turkic Moslem
Uighurs in the Western Chinese province of Xinjiang, 7 million
strong, have been conducting a violent struggle for independence.
They have killed police and soldiers, planted bombs and robbed
banks. In 1997, Uighur militants exploded a bomb in Beijing,
wounding 30 people. They have also developed connections to
radical Islamic movements and are training in religious schools
(medrese) and camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Uighurs also
reside in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, across the border with
China.
The stability of Xinjiang is important to China. It is seen
as a test case of central control, relevant to Beijing's grip
over Tibet and Inner Mongolia. Xinjiang is also viewed as
a traditional buffer against Turkic Moslem invasions from
the North-West. The province also contains three major oil
basins: the Turpan, Jungar and Tarim, with up to 150 billion
barrels of reserves, according to some optimistic estimates.
Last but not least, the People's Liberation Army maintains
numerous bases and nuclear weapons testing grounds in the
region, which could be threatened if the Uighurs gain control.
Russia is in a similar position as it enters its seventh
year of conflict in Chechnya. Radical Moslem penetration of
other North Caucasus autonomous republics, such as Daghestan,
is increasing, as evidenced by non-Chechen participation in
terrorist activities in Russia. The Russian leaders fear a
chain reaction among the country's 20 million Moslems.
In the long term, the threat of Moslem insurrection in Central
Asia could well become more serious. The ruling regimes, allied
with Russia, suffer from a lack of legitimacy and are bereft
of democratic process. With economic reforms in the Central
Asian countries sputtering or stalling, corruption is running
rampant, GDPs are flat, and living standards are abysmally
low. These conditions provide fertile ground for Islamic radicals,
who are busily recruiting and training the next generation
of Jihad warriors. The radical, drug-pushing Taliban regime
across the Amu Darya river is particularly menacing.
The flood of drugs and weapons across the Tajik-Afghan border
is a challenge to the Russian expeditionary force (the reinforced
201st Infantry Division), while indigenous support for the
Taliban, as well as the pervasive corruption and political
maneuvering that characterize both Moscow and Dushanbe, prevent
Russia and the Tajiks from effectively countering the Islamic
rebels.
The secular, authoritarian, and corrupt regimes of Central
Asia rely upon their traditional ties to Moscow as a form
of life insurance. And Russia believes it must either fight
the Islamists in the deserts of Central Asia or face them
in Northern Kazakhstan, where many ethnic Russians reside.
Russia finds its options limited. It can either face the
instability in Central Asia on its own or to bring in China
as a partner. Beijing views Central Asia, with its weak governments
and rich natural resources-especially oil and gas-as a future
natural sphere of influence. The recent institutionalization
of the SCO demonstrates that Moscow and Beijing hope to be
the decisionmakers in Central Asia, possibly to the exclusion
of Turkey, Iran, and the United States. What remains to be
seen is how effective the two counties will be against the
Taliban, the Islamic Front of Uzbekistan, and the Bin Laden
organization.
Sources of dissent: the failure of post-communist reforms
in Central Asia
Since the collapse of the USSR, all five Central Asian states
have been ruled by the Soviet-era nomenklatura, the communist
elite which attempted to transform itself into nationalist
leadership. Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are still
ruled by the men who were in charge in the mid-1980s, while
Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are governed by leaders who have
been in power since the early 1990s. However, instead of following
models of democracy and market reforms, all these leaders
have either largely ignored the reform process, as is the
case in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, or made some attempt
to initiate economic reforms, but then backtracked and are
now mired in unprecedented corruption, lack of transparency
and criminality. It is little wonder these regimes are quickly
run out of legitimacy and popular support, and have to revert
to brazen manipulation of their political system, or outright
authoritarian methods, to remain in power and fight off political
challenges.
Economically, Central Asia's resource rich countries, such
as Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, with their huge oil and natural
gas deposits, suffer from glaring inequities in the distribution
of wealth. In both countries, only the ruler, his family,
and a few political allies and cronies benefit from the energy
riches, while the majority of the population suffers from
low incomes, social underdevelopment, diseases and environmental
pollution.
In poor countries, such as Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the
situation is desperate. When hit by drought or other natural
disasters, rural dwellers are often on the verge of starvation.
The populations of the two countries turning en masse to drug
trafficking and other illicit activities. High unemployment
levels among young males are a sure-fire prescription to fuel
militant Islamic movements, as numerous examples from Algeria
to Indonesia demonstrate.
While the people are dissatisfied, and often desperate, the
rulers are most of all interested in their own power and political
survival, as well as personal enrichment. They are doing everything
possible to deny the development of legitimate channels of
protest, such as political parties and the free media. Instead,
the aggrieved population is turning to radical Islam's promises
to deliver "the true path" of Allah, even at the price of
great personal sacrifice and suffering.
Silencing the Voices of Dissent
According to human rights organizations such as Amnesty International
and Human Rights Watch, the national commission on human rights,
opposition media, and activists both in the respective countries
and in exile, as well as the eyewitness accounts of Western
experts, the Central Asian governments generally attempt to
paint all opposition with one brush - that of international
terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism.
The existence of the Islamic threat in Central Asia is undeniable.
However, it is important to distinguish between militant Islamic
radicals, moderate Islamic activists, clerics and politicians,
and secular, Westernized human rights activists. By persecuting
the two latter categories, the ruling regimes tend to isolate
themselves and increase the possibilities of social upheavals
which could result in the deposition of these regimes in the
future.
It is also important to emphasize that without developed
political channels for redressing grievances, ensuring freedom
of worship, facilitating political change and the rule of
law, striving for manageable levels of corruption, and protecting
freedom of the media and freedom of association, thousands
of Central Asians: Uzbeks, Turkmen, Kazakhs and others, will
swell the ranks of radical organizations, such as the Islamic
Front of Uzbekistan, the Moslem Brotherhood, and others.
Banning genuine political parties, such as Erk and Birlik
in Uzbekistan, the National Republican Party led by the former
Prime Minister Akezhan Kazhegeldin in Kazakhstan, or Ar-Namys,
led by the former Vice President Felix Kulov in Kyrgyzstan,
is a sure way to incur criticism abroad and fan the flames
of dissent at home.
The degree to which dissent is repressed is uneven throughout
the region. Turkmenbashi (Chief-of-Turkmens) Saparmurad Niyazov's
Turkmenistan is the most oppressive, with all the trappings
of a totalitarian dictatorship. Niyazov was proclaimed president-for-life
by his tame parliament. He built a 40-foot golden statue of
himself, which rotates to follow the sun. He regularly purges
Turkmenistan's libraries and schools of books he dislikes.Opponents
to Niyazov are kept in extremely harsh imprisonment for lengthy
periods; after being forced to publicly confess their guilt
on national TV. The lives of many of the regime's opponents
are threatened. Religious minorities, including Christians,
are constantly harassed.
There is no independent media, and heavy censorship of the
Internet and news from abroad, as well as restrictions on
travel, are in place.
President Islam Karimov's Uzbekistan developed an ideology
which is based on worship of the past, including the cult
of Amir Timur (Tamerlane), in whose honor a shrine was erected
in the center of the capital city Tashkent. Tamerlane's empire
covered most of today's Central Asia, but reached as far as
Russia in the West, and China and India in the East. This
is an outright cult of military power and territorial aggrandizement.
Uzbekistan is holding between 15,000 to 30,000 political
opponents and religious activists in its jails. Many reports
claim that some people are arrested for as little as wearing
a beard or traditional Moslem garb. According to local and
Western human rights organizations, torture is widespread,
despite Uzbekistan being a signatory of the international
convention banning torture.
At one point, between 70 and 80 percent of all mosques were
shut down under the pretext of lack of registration. There
are very few, if any, attempts to find a modus vivendi with
moderate Moslems. The Uzbek government hopes that Russia and
China will support its authoritarian policies, if Uzbekistan
initiates rapprochement with Moscow and Beijing, and distances
itself from the West. However, the slow pace of economic reforms,
and threats from radical Moslem organizations on its borders
may ultimately provoke destabilizing hostilities, and it is
not clear whether China and Russia will be capable of protecting
the Karimov regime.
The leadership of Kazakhstan also demonstrates a heavy hand
in dealing with political opposition. As in other Central
Asian countries, libel is a criminal offense, and insulting
the president often is a cause for criminal prosecution, as
Madel Islmailov, the leader of Workers' Movement found out
in 1999. Other opponents of the regime, such as Mikhail Vasilenko,
Petr Svoik, and Mels Yeleusizov, a leader of the environmental
movement, have been placed in administrative detention.
Freedom of the press suffered a heavy blow when the Franklin
Press, a printing house supplied to Kazakhstan with American
taxpayer's funds, was forcibly sold to a company controlled
by Dariga, President Nazarbaev's daughter. Boris Giller, the
founder of the leading privately-held free media company,
Caravan, was forced to sell his asset and has emigrated from
the country in 1998. Dariga Nazarbaeva, the owner of Caravan,also
controls most of Kazakhstan's electronic media.
Freedom of the media is extremely important, as Mr. Nazarbaev
is reportedly under a at least one grand jury indictment in
this country, according to a report by Seymour Hersh in this
month's issue of the New Yorker. No official Kazakhstani newspaper
is permitted to print this news, as by law all personal information
about the president and his family is a state secret. In addition,
according to a new law, the Parliament granted President Nazarbaev
immunity from prosecution for any and all crimes committed
while in office, with the exception of high treason.
It was hardly surprising that President Nazarbaev lashed
out at the last Shanghai Six summit against the United States,
accusing Washington of being too didactic and aggressive in
promoting democracy. Today in Kazakhstan, opposition newspapers
are often harassed and even physically attacked, and Internet
access is kept artificially expensive. Internet sites are
controlled by the security services, and opposition sites
are often censored.
In Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, some improvements in the mid-1990s
was followed by a deterioration in handling political dissent,
observing the rule of law and respecting freedom of the press.
Conclusion
The failure of local elites to embrace participatory frameworks
of governance and transpartent market reform, oppose corruption,
and recognize basic individual rights, has led to the current
rise in political instability. The threats of Islamic insurrections
and internal political opposition are forcing the governing
regimes to appeal to regional powers for support. The United
States should fully recognize the threat of Islamic extremism
in the region and elsewhere, as this extremism is aimed against
American interests and American citizens, as the World Trade
Center, Khobar Towers and the Cole attacks have demonstrated.
However, unfortunately, regime insecurity is also a cause
for brutality, a motivation to silence the voices of political
opposition and criticism. While this may work in the short
term, it can make things worse in the long run, including
in Central Asia.
Thus far, the U.S. Administration, EU governments, and international
organizations, have failed to convince Central Asian leaders
to follow democratic models, to make their economies attractive
to foreign investment, or to respect the pluralism of political
opinions. This is a political, as well as a civilizational
choice the Central Asian leaders have actively made, while
at the same time seeking succor in Moscow and Beijing.
Today, with Russia and China attempting to play the leading
role in the region, the chances of Central Asia embracing
democracy remain slim. However, the United States should continue
to uphold the ideas of freedom of speech, free media, freedom
of religion, and the rule of law. These ideals are not contradictory
to American political goals in the region - on the contrary,
if implemented, they would make the political systems of Central
Asian countries more sustainable and legitimate, and thus
would increase regional security and stability, enhance economic
development, and boost foreign investment.
Continue to the testimony of Oleg
Kvaytkovskyi, Executive Director, Channel 31, Kazakhstan

Email this article
Posted July 27, 2001 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org
 |
 |
The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website,
meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed
debate about the social, politcal 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.
|
 |
 |
|