By Edward
Vigils past and present are making the headlines around the world, but the most currently volatile democracy in the world is still worth watching. In fact, it may soon be very much the center of quite a bit of conflict.
Since we last left our players in the small Central Asian nation of Kyrgyzstan, exiled president Askar Akayev has been told not to rush home, unjailed northerner Felix Kulov has quit southerner Kurmanbek Bakiyev’s interim government (amid rumors he has his eye on the presidency); folks have begun to recognize that it was poverty, much more than any thirst for democracy (or anything our President said) that fueled the revolution; and the US has been assured by the new Kyrgyz government that we can keep our air base there. So, relatively speaking, all is well, no?
Actually, not even close. More pressing than who will succeed Akayev is the very real threat of a Kyrgyz civil war. The Agonist’s Sean-Paul Kelley offers an excellent analysis of the issues and players in his essay on Global Politician titled "Kyrgyzstan: Why Tulips Are Not Roses (Or Oranges)." As Kelley notes, the potential for war is due to a strong divide between those in the north and those in the south:
Most ethnic Kyrgyz who live in the north are drawn from a cultural milieu of clan-based nomadic horse shepherds loosely affiliated with Islam, whereas Southern Kyrgyzstan is full of Islamized Uzbeks dependent upon the rapidly deteriorating cotton monoculture of the Ferghana Valley. Here it is not uncommon to see women donning the veil, Wahhabist relief organizations and the occasional Saudi built Mosque. Indeed, the IMU (Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan) derived most of its support from the Ferghana.
[…]
The problem of Kyrgyzstan cannot be reduced into prettified sound bites. It’s not enough to equate developments in Kyrgyzstan as a fight between ‘free peoples’ and ‘despots.’ It is a divided nation sandwiched between several larger, thirstier and hungrier powers, all of who are competing for its attention. While other nations in similar historical circumstances have turned such a geopolitical situation to their advantage, cohesion and shared goals were the rule internally. One resource Kyrgyzstan needs but doesn’t have is stability. It also needs time. It doesn’t have much of that either.
The thirstier and hungrier powers include, Russia, the US, Uzbekistan, and the very worrisome behemoth next door, China:
Already China has one unstable neighbor in North Korea. They don’t need or want another. How will they behave if Kyrgyzstan disintegrates?
Furthermore, China doesn’t appreciate U.S. meddling in what they consider to be their backyard. China’s problem with American influence in the region stems from the perceived hypocrisy of Bush’s "War On Terror." From the Chinese perspective it’s a war that should include the separatist threat in China’s Xinjiang province. However, in Washington, mum’s the word.
In fact, Stratfor, a corporate intelligence firm widely considered to be a barometer of neo-conservative strategy, writes "[the] Chinese don’t believe the United States is obsessed with Al Qaeda any longer. They believe the Americans are obsessed with China, and they see events in Kyrgyzstan as a security threat."
Further on that point, as noted in Jewish World Review by George Friedman, the Chairman of Stratfor (you know, "The Shadow CIA"), the US has shifted its focus from the War on Terror to its pre-9/11 priorities, namely Russia and China:
In geopolitics, we believe in the law of interconnections. Even political events that appear random or mysterious never occur in a vacuum, but as a result of identifiable circumstances and as responses to current and future problems. Nowhere will this principle be more evident in coming weeks than in Russia, Iraq and China.
Obviously, all of these are areas that concern the United States, but I now view Russia and China as growing in importance and possibly soon taking precedence over Iraq, in something resembling a return to Washington’s pre-9/11 priorities.
[…]
Beijing has sent several clear signals — shuffling around the heads of major banks, for example — that financial pressures are growing. China is now playing one of its last big cards: the call to patriotism.
This emerged with the recent anti-secession law targeting Taiwan, but even more recent events — including regime change in neighboring Kyrgyzstan, a new U.S.-Indonesian military cooperation agreement and even actor Richard Gere’s promotional visit to Tokyo (where he literally tangoed with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi while plugging his film "Shall We Dance?") — will only add to China’s sense of embattlement. (Gere, of course, is a Buddhist and outspoken critic of China’s claims to Tibet, and Japan is a historical rival.)
Logic, therefore, dictates that the most sensible move would be for China and Russia to form an alliance — one that would relieve pressure on these two poles by stirring up trouble for the United States in sensitive areas of the Middle East. At this point, it remains to be seen whether capabilities will align with logic.
As Kelley suggests, Kyrgyzstan’s best hope for not losing big time to the conflicting interests of Beijing and DC is to get its act together quickly and make them both pay for what they need (the US needs the air base and China needs Kyrgyz water). The temptation to let trouble brew (by not helping to unite the factions) must be strong for both China and the US, but it would be a morally damnable offense. Watch this space….
Kyrgyzstan, the USA and Central Asia
Machiavelli would have been impressed…
Alan Woods | London | March 31, 2005
One week ago, demonstrations overthrew the government in Kyrgyzstan and drove the former Soviet republic’s government from power. On Thursday March 24th, Askar Akaev, president of the Central Asian republic for 15 years, was forced to flee the capital, Bishkek, after protesters took the government headquarters. A new government has been proclaimed, although the future for the remote republic is uncertain.
The coverage of these events in the western media is, as one might expect, superficial and misleading. Amidst all the usual sentimental verbiage about “people power” it is impossible to detect the slightest element of a serious analysis. There is no attempt to lay bare what interests are involved, and what the role of the big powers is. Suddenly, without any explanation, Kyrgyzstan’s “tulip revolution” joins Georgia’s “rose revolution” and Ukraine’s orange one. The reader is invited to take solace from the bare assertion that democracy always triumphs in the end, Good defeats Bad, Light over Darkness and so on. In other words, we have not the slightest idea of what is happening.
More:
Machiavelli would have been impressed…
A hardnosed Marxist analysis.
Edward,
What a farce! The U.S. being described as a thristy and hungry power. While your information is interesing… one can’t really take your commentary seriously.
abc2a,
What type of power is it?
Major powers are always hungry and thristy; it’s the nature of the beast.
abc2a
I don’t think that the Agonist is referring to the US (and possibly not to Russia, though being one door down would qualify it) so to dismiss the information based on Edward’s extension is a little short sighted.
I think that the specific point made by the Agonist is that water may lead neighboring nations to attempt to get involved (hence the “thirstier”) This point has been submerged quite a bit with 9-11, but I suggest you take a look at Shiva’s Water Wars” The counter argument might be that water purification/desalination is more amenable to technological progress than more energy efficiency, however, I think that it the discussion of the Mitsubishi desalination plant in Mexico suggests that such large scale technology may have adverse effects.
The U.S. being described as a thristy and hungry power.
The US borders Kyrgyzstan?
The U.S. being described as a thristy (sic) and hungry power
Hmm, you are contesting the point. To determine the truth, we will first need some facts. First, in how many countries does the US have military bases? Which countries? And what are the corresponding numbers for Russia, Uzbekistan, and China? Second, what percentage of the world’s arms are sold by the US, and to whom are they sold? And again, what are the corresponding numbers for Russia, Uzbekistan, and China? Get the answers to those questions and then we will consider the matter with facts in hand.
And Anarch, when we get an answer to question #1, you will have an answer to yours as well.
abc2a,
It really is a shame when people think in a linear and literal fashion instead of a more rounded one. I’m curious abc2a: have you ever been to Kyrgyzstan? Have you ever driven from Osh to Bishkek? And then from Bishkek, across the At Bashy Range, over the Torugart Pass into China? Have you ever been to Kashgar in Xinjiang, which sits right over the border from Kyrgyzstan? Have you ever seen a sandstorm rise up out of the desert and engulf Kashgar, making it resemble night, when indeed, it is three in the afternoon?
Have you ever taken a road trip from Samarkand to Bukhara and seen the desert of Uzbekistan?
When you have, well, then I guess we can take your commentary seriously. Until then, you might want to brush up on the subject (not to mention some basic geography) and expand your thinking a bit. People fight over water. It is THE most essential resource on the planet. And although our wonderful world is 75% water, only 3% of it is potable. Interesting, isn’t it?
Edward,
Thanks for highlighting the Friedman essay. I was not aware of it and in it he makes some very interesting comments. I’ll be busy this weekend pondering some of them. 😉
What a farce! The U.S. being described as a thristy and hungry power.
I calls ’em like I sees ’em.
Considering the US has an air base in Kyrgyzstan, I think that gives the US all the responsibilities of a “neighbor” as well.
Sean-Paul,
Hey! Long time no speak… How’s that book going? 🙂
Stan,
Book is coming along slowly. I was sidelined by a serious illness I picked up in China. But, I’ve got the Turkey, Georgia and half the Azerbaijan and half the Kyrgyzstan chapters finished.
I’ll have a copy for you when it is done!
Hope you’re OK. Take it easy, health comes first!
Sean-Paul
Tell us more about the book. (If my googling is correct, it’s about the Silk Road) I’m particularly interested in the Koryo Saram in Kyrgyzstan. Obviously, if it doesn’t work to be discussing something that you are writing (I’m often that way, so I understand) no worries.