International Investigation in Kyrgyzstan?

Image by dwrawlinson via Flickr

The bloody inter-ethnic fighting in southern Kyrgyzstan, centred for the most part in the city of Osh, remains the subject of conspiracy theorists and confusion. However, I don’t find these arguments that have been put forward for an international investigation compelling.


Was the violence due to third party instigation? Probably, considering that the Kyrgyz Republic has suffered little from ethnic violence since independence. Osh is a predominantly Uzbek city, but there is little to indicate that the majority of Kyrgyz bore any sort of animosity toward the majority. Only in 1990 has the area seen this type of violence which has more to do with culture than ethnicity. The third party may indeed be the Bakiyev family whose removal from power cost their clan a great deal – both in power and money. Bakiyev’s son, who ran a particularly venal and corrupt operation, lost control of his cash generating vehicles of water and hydro-power, not to mention his percentage interest in the casino at the Hyatt in Bishkek. Attempting to destabilize the interim government by provoking attacks against Uzbek’s in southern Kyrgyzstan would be one, albeit short-sighted and ineffective ways of reversing the results of the revolution. Ineffective because, should the violence had continued it almost surely would have provoked a Russian military intervention and Moscow was decidedly in favour of the interim government. Furthermore, Tashkent might have intervened as well, although Russian troops would have likely prevented that from ever taking place.


Would Russia have been so cynical as to incite civil war for the sole purpose of sending troops to assure control over Bishkek? This does not seem plausible for two reasons. The first is that they supported the ouster of Bakiyev in the first place. Not the least because he reneged on the deal to toss out the NATA (read US) airbase in Manas, but also because he was completely unreliable – for anyone. The second reason is that Russia would need an invitation to rescue the interim government, which never came. The last thing Russia needs is another Georgia either politically or militarily.


Finally, it is difficult to follow the reasoning behind the claim of Islamic extremists. There is no evidence of any type of Islamic militancy being behind the events. It is in the interests of Tashkent – who threw the militants out of the Ferghana valley – and Bishkek to share any information regarding Islamic militant activity. The fact that the Uzbek military made no move to intervene makes this scenario exceedingly unlikely.


Which brings me back to the original point. Why convene an international investigation? The threat to stability in the region is certainly a concern – but not to the UN which would take forever to come to a conclusion while simultaneously irritating everyone in Bishkek, Tashkent and Moscow and accomplish, as usual, nothing.

An investigation by the OSCE, currently chaired by Kazakhstan, might be of some use, but to what end? To assign blame? That would be an enormous waste of time and might raise the temperature rather than the opposite. A regional discussion would be useful, behind the scenes and one not aimed at identifying a culprit. In Central Asia issues such as this are not discussed publically. They are addressed in private and in Astana, Bishkek or Tashkent. Keep in mind that the Kazaks treat the Kyrgyz as their little brothers, with more than a little condescension. The Uzbeks are the largest and most powerful country in the region, a fact that causes concern in the Kremlin, and not inclined to be tolerant of bad publicity. The Kyrgyz are fiercely proud and already feel put upon by the US, Russia, China and the rest of their neighbours, except the Tajiks, who are in worse shape.

Predictions

And off we go.

In the 1st year of the next decade (yeah, yeah, I know - it really starts in 2011. Well, that's not the common usage, so live with it.) I'll indulge in a couple of predictions.

Prediction 1 - The last free and fair election in Ukraine will be in January if Yanukovich wins so he can fulfill his threat to end "democracy".

Prediction 2 - The new Russian empire will expand and consolidate its hold on Central Asia, Ukraine and the South Caucuses.

Prediction 3 - The US will increase its military footprint in the Baltics and Poland to counter the newly imperial Russia.

Prediction 4 - Turkey will flex its newly found military, economic and (most importantly) cultural muscle in the Middle East, most of the time against the wishes of the US and Israel.

Prediction 5 - Iran will continue to experience shocks to its social system with a concomitant reduction in its ability to interfere abroad until it reaches a tipping point - at which time they will do something stupid.

Prediction 6 - There will be a ground assault on Somali pirates.

Prediction 7 - The "surge" in Afghanistan will not achieve its intended goals, and the Afghan military will continue to be the phantom army of the 21st century.

Prediction 8 - Political relations between Germany and the US will continue their slide as Germany becomes more reliant on Russia for energy and trade.

Prediction 9 - The Israeli government will continue its illegal construction activities on Palestinian land despite international condemnation and new fighting will erupt between Hezbollah and Israel.

Prediction 10 - All the previous predictions will change as the inevitable chaos theory takes over.

Welcome to the next decade.

Nabucco

Image via Wikipedia

The Nabucco pipeline agreement has been signed. This pipeline is designed to pump gas from Central Asia to Europe without transiting Russia. That's good news for Europe. The bad news is that there is no gas yet to fill it, is far from complete and would need support from Iran and Armenia.

Still, it is a good start and should start to focus Russia's attention on its inappropriate use of energy as a foreign policy weapon against Europe.

Turkey and China

It is difficult to understand the rhetoric, now highly charged, coming from Prime Minister Erdogan, who referred to the crack-down on Uighurs in the northwestern Chinese province of Xinjiang a “genocide.” That is not a term that Turkey tosses around easily, given the issue with the Armenian claims of genocide by the Ottoman Empire.

Clearly, there is domestic pressure on the ruling AKP to take a strong stand, but aside from that it is difficult to understand why Turkey would deliberately poke China, a major trading partner, in the eye with an inflammatory condemnation and statement that it would raise it in the UN Security Council. The latter is unlikely since China would need to give permission to raise the issue, which is clearly considers internal.

So, what's up with Turkey? I understand that the Uighurs are Turkic and Muslim. But Turkey has even less connection with them than the other Central Asia Turkic peoples. I suspect that the escalation is due to local politics as the AKP wants to establish its leadership in the Muslim world closer to home.

China's response has, so far, been dismissive. Whether this escalates to involve the trade and political relationship between Turkey and China is the next stage.

Meeting in Moscow

Image by eesti via Flickr

The meetings being held as I write in Moscow will decide how the US and Russia will deal with each other for rest of 2009 and perhaps beyond. The US wants Russia's help with Afghanistan, Iran and Palestine. Russia wants the US to draw back from Eastern Europe, Georgia and Central Asia. Both Russia and the US want to sign a successor treaty to START.

Russia has stated that the US can transport non-lethal and lethal materials over and perhaps on its territory for the Afghan effort. This will not come without a quid pro quo. The question is - what will the US give up? The BMD's in Poland will likely be postponed. The US will also likely agree to draw back a little on efforts to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. In the former, there is simply no strong desire and in the latter, the current government behaves too eratically to be considered an ally.

The BMD placement is really not a big deal since they are of questionable utility and Poland has just received significant military hardware from the US (50 F16) and will soon deploy Patriot missles as well. This will allow Poland to feel a little more secure and will satisfy Poland to the extent that it needs to at the moment. What else can the US give up? Very little, I would imagine, without damaging its credibility in Eastern Europe.

Ultimately, aside from a reduction in nuclear arsenals which both countries want, the geopolitical differences are not that flexible. I don't expect much to come out of the meeting other than a new START treaty, postponement of the BMDs and a temporary lull in the expansion of NATO.

Russian Reaction to Manas

Well, that didn't take long.

According to a report in Kommersant today Russia characterized the new lease agreement with the US for use of the Manas airbase a “dirty trick” and the Russians intend to make a “corresponding response”. The new agreement allows the base to be used as a “transit center” for nonmilitary supplies. Moscow, not being entirely stupid, said through their Ministry of Foreign Affairs that calling the base a transit center is just “a cosmetic alteration”, adding that “The real nature of the U.S. military presence in Central Asia has not changed, which goes against the interests of Russia and our agreements with the Kyrgyz government.”

Given the nature of the the Kyrgyz leadership and its parliament, why Moscow would have believed them in the first place is a mystery. I expect the "corresponding response" will be a significant reduction in the funds promised by Russia to the Kyrgyz Republic for throwing out the US.

It should be pointed out, I suppose, that base priviliges had also been cancelled for 10 other NATO countries supporting the Afghan war. Have they been allowed back in?

Manas

Image via Wikipedia

Stays open, according to a report on the BBC.

The government of the Kyrgyz Republic is arguably the most corrupt in Central Asia - although the Tajiks give them a run for the money. The details of the new deal for using Manas airbase have not been released; but, I would bet the ranch that the lease payments will be considerably increased. That would make up for President Bakiyev's losses during the current world-wide recession. His son would, of course, get half the rent with which to play. The government will be happy. Moscow will have a different reaction.

UPDATE: The new rent is $60 million. Three times the original amount. Your welcome, Mr Bakiyev - don't forget your Swiss banker.

Nabucco moves forward?

This is interesting news and a surprise (at least to me). The pipeline would not be finished until 2014 at the earliest, but the biggest question was who would be willing to fill it. None of the Central Asian countries would likely consider agreeing to do so at this time for several reasons, it seems. The first is that they would be unwilling to irritate Russia as the pipeline is specifically designed to avoid Russia and lessen European dependence on Russian gas transit and supplies. The second reason is that it is a long way to go - crossing Iran and the mountains to Turkey - while the Caspian is a huge barrier to piping gas from Central Asia.

From a geopolitical standpoint, this announcement must be a blow to Baku which has watched Turkish negotiations with Armenia with some degree of concern. Nabucco crossing the Caspian would have needed to cross Azerbaijan, giving it some degree of leverage with Turkey and Turkey has been very cautious in dealing with Russia which is calling the shots in the South Caucuses. Iraq eliminates that problem for Turkey and gives it more room to maneuver with Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia.

Nation Building

The US is indulging in nation building in Afghanistan, which never was and never will be a nation. Spending funds to provide schools, roads and livelihoods is fine, and if military protection is needed to support this effort and help make it sustainable, then so be it.

But, the world now has two more governments, Iraq and Afghanistan, whose social and political foundation is based on the denial of human rights to large segments of their populations. The denial of rights, often brutal and deadly, is based on a twisted version of basic human rights that asserts the priority of traditional ways and which cannot be criticized, particularly if those actions are based on religion. Taken to the extreme (or not in the case of Afghanistan)religious beliefs can allow anything, including murder and torture, so long as they are grounded in past practices sanctioned by those in power. To point out that this might somehow be wrong is to be branded as prejudiced.

Sorry. I do not believe that we should respect, tolerate, much less fund, any belief that advocates denial of basic human rights whether in the name of religion, tradition or anything else that smacks of "this is our way". It is merely an excuse for brutal discrimination to maintain or re-establish the status-quo ante.

The US and other nations have been spending billions of development aid in Afghanistan, yet the government has recently enacted a law that forbids women to leave the home without obtaining the permission of their husband. Iraq now has a full fledged fundamentalist regime that has dismembered the rights of women and other religious groups. Is this why the US and the rest of the world are pouring money into these newly minted 12th century regimes? Whatever happened to conditionalities?

I apologize for the rant which was caused by reading this today. The tacit approval implied by failure to tie funds to behavior through conditional funding that subsequently results in the re-deployment of abusive beliefs and actions, is outrageous. In fact, all - all of Central Asia was socially better off under the Soviets because at least they enforced equal treatment of women and men and held these perverted religious ideas in check. Let the Russians take back Central Asia for the sake of civilization.