Just once…

by Nathan Hamm on 8/12/2004 · 3 comments

I’d be delighted to see someone propose an actual alternative to US policy towards Uzbekistan rather than just describing the problems arising from the relationship. In the eyes of Professor Menon, I guess I’d be a Karimov apologist. Maybe it’s because I’ve yet to hear a learned fellow like him tell me what would be better. Maybe it’s because I think the goal in crafting foreign policy is to maximize the good and minimize the bad. I don’t see any way to eliminate the bad.

For some reason, after I finished the article, I thought about my thesis advisor and her reluctance to do things for the media. By no means did she say this, but I did get a slight impression that the media is not a good forum for serious political science (by no means meant to be snooty, but it’s really not). Fill in the blanks of what else I might mean by that.

P.S. For those who don’t know, I did not go to Brown. No, professors like her have to start somewhere, the West Coast’s only best buy in public education. (I’m a proud third generation alum of the institution).


Subscribe to receive updates from Registan

This post was written by...

– author of 2991 posts on 17_PersonNotFound.

Nathan is the founder and Principal Analyst for Registan, which he launched in 2003. He was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Uzbekistan 2000-2001 and received his MA in Central Asian Studies from the University of Washington in 2007. Since 2007, he has worked full-time as an analyst, consulting with private and government clients on Central Asian affairs, specializing in how socio-cultural and political factors shape risks and opportunities and how organizations can adjust their strategic and operational plans to account for these variables. More information on Registan's services can be found here, and Nathan can be contacted via Twitter or email.

For information on reproducing this article, see our Terms of Use

{ 3 comments }

praktike August 12, 2004 at 3:01 pm

“the media is not a good forum for serious political science”

Sure, but is the media a good forum for serious public policy?

In some places, I say yes.

haroon August 12, 2004 at 3:56 pm

Hmm. I think, by and large, America has been following a sagacious policy towards Uzbekistan. The challenge, however, would be in repeating that kind of relationship with other Muslim countries: In other words, sometimes, yes, alliances are necessary. But we should not be so quick to overlook egregious and blatant violations of rights, as so often happens. After all, in countries America is more distant towards, anti-Americanism abates.

This has the upside of forcing the population to eal directly with its own problems, instead of allowing things to be blamed on us, as Americans, as things are often and easily blamed…. But, in any case, crafting a foreign policy is a painful task…

Uzbekistan August 13, 2004 at 5:08 pm

Do not forgot that all these reports on human rights violations based on anonymous messages. One American researcher and public officers criticised these organisations.

Recently, Human Right Watch/Freedom House reported such “violation”, but independent research of Canadian & US experts showed that there was no violation.

Relegious is free. No limitations. But the state fights Islamic groups like Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (who killed hundreds of people, even promised to kil own parents/family), Hizb ut-Tahrir, Wahabism and others.

Hizb ut-Tahrir is legally operates in many European countries, inclding the USA. These means that these contries support terrorism. Leaflets of this group calls to kill people, who is not Muslim, first of all European/Americans and Jews.

Some interesting researches you can find here:

http://www.uzbekembassy.org/index.cfm/act/news/get/press/pr/117

http://www.heritage.org/Research/RussiaandEurasia/BG1656.cfm

There are some more reaseraches on other groups, but it will take some time to search in my archive. I do not want to spent time.

Previous post:

Next post: