Comments on: Kyrgyzstan: Protests in Bishkek

By: Laurence

Laurence — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 16:44:09 +0000

Former Indian ambassador M.J. Bhadrakumar has published an interesting analysis of recent Kyrgyz events in the context of US-Russian struggles for regional influence in Central Asia, in The Asia Times.

By: Kyrgyz kid

Kyrgyz kid — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 04:27:06 +0000

IMHO: British Govt is behind disturbances in Kyrgyzstan. They have their interests in multi-billion dollar gold mining industry in Kyrgyzstan. There is information that Kyrgyz opposition leaders met with British Ambassador. They are hoping to topple Bakiev, install puppet Kyrgyz Govt, and lay their hands on Kyrgyz gold and uranium. Those so called “demonstrators” are simply street trumps, each hired for 10 dollars and bottle of vodka per day. It’s all about money and control.

Look at the faces of so called opposition:

http://diesel-i.elcat.kg/uploads/post-21692-1162476656.jpg

Blair’s lobbying for gold firm backfires
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl…3/ai_n16054815
Independent, The (London), Feb 3, 2006 by Saeed Shah
Tony Blair has received a strongly worded rebuke from the Kyrgyzstan government over his efforts to lobby the country on behalf of an AIM-listed mining company.

The Prime Minister wrote a private letter to the President of Kyrgyzstan, Kurmanbek Bakiyev, last month in support of Oxus Gold, which had its mining licence for a project in the country removed by the Kyrgyz government. Mr Blair had suggested in the letter Kyrgyzstan was not living up to its obligations under his global anti-corruption initiative and the affair meant “there is a real danger of damage to Kyrgyzstan’s reputation in the international financial markets”.

The Kyrgyz government delivered an angry reply from Mr Bakiyev yesterday, who told Mr Blair: “We need not be reminded of our obligations under the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative…. My government is committed to implementing these international agreements and we seek your help in their legitimate fulfilment.”

The Kyrgyz government, elected last year after a popular revolution, said Oxus had not fulfilled its obligations to develop the Jerooy gold mine. Mr Bakiyev wrote: “Based on Oxus Gold’s irresponsible and unlawful behaviour, we have no confidence they and their subsidiary will meet their contractually mandated obligations to our government.” Oxus said it had fulfilled the conditions of its licence.

By: Ude

Ude — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 19:24:14 +0000

The President is doing the same thing US Presidents do. They don’t allow power to leave the Presidency and go to Congress. It’s tied up by lawyers. Bush does this really well. The only time power is taken from the President is when it’s going to be a Democrat. Congress generally goes along.

The Tulip Revolution is blamed on the US/CIA, so there probably is not much more left there with AID,etc. Nathan Hamm/Hale is real familiar with this and the ‘Stans’-they were all supposedly US backed and that is why no one got too carried away with the ‘dictators’ fates.

Youg professionals? Maybe Peace Corps could help, but they already there with the coups, etc.

By: Brian

Brian — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 18:16:12 +0000

Kyrgyzstan rather needs young professionals, who can deal with challenges posed by 21 century. That is the way to go.

That’s the truest thing I’ve heard all week.

By: Kyrgyz kid

Kyrgyz kid — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:15:17 +0000

Opposition is doomed to fail, with their mediocre leaders. Noone of them has had an experience in dealing with real economy matters, noone. They are all much of the talkers, not doers. Melis Eshimkanov, for instance. Or Rosa Otunbaeva, former communist, transformed into democrat, what is her value? Or Tekebayev, who is no more than intellectual trash, how he’s going to lead masses?

Or Edil Baisalov, with his excessively pompous wedding party and “US puppet” reputation, is he going to win hearts of people?

They are all but human trash. Do not count on them winning.

Kyrgyzstan rather needs young professionals, who can deal with challenges posed by 21 century. That is the way to go.

Kyrgyzstan: Mass Protests Falter
http://www.iwpr.net/?p=rca&s=f&o=325114&apc_state=henh

By: Laurence

Laurence — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 22:23:49 +0000

BTW There are some good updates on the situation at Ferghana.ru, IMHO...

By: Bertrand

Bertrand — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 17:48:11 +0000

It doesn’t take all that much research to know that the U.S. government is by far not the major funder of the International Crisis Group. Given the U.S. contribution to the organization, it is difficult to believe they are under any sort of control from the U.S. People need to check these things out before making judgments.

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 16:05:20 +0000

I don’t think the ICG is simply a US government puppet because it accepts government money, the same way that government funded PBS doesn’t tow the government line. ICG has been very critical of US policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, which certainly is more of a high-profile theater than Kyrgyzstan. Sure it’s possible that they may be a tool of the state department, but show me evidence.

I think Michael Hall is right, in the idea that these protests could tip the country either way. Good things could come out of them if cooler heads prevail, but if they don’t then watch out. The threat of a coup could either help or hurt Bakiev, depending upon how scared he is and how news of it affects the opposition. Giving the opposition the constitutional reform that they want may sap support from those who want his overthrow.

By: anon

anon — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 12:40:28 +0000

A sincere question — why should the US have a position? It seems what the US wants is independent countries in the region that can think for themselves. It seems that sitting back and watching while the various parties argue themselves to some sort of equilibrium is not a bad policy. So far, it doesn’t seem that there are many heroes in this tale…

By: Laurence

Laurence — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 12:31:14 +0000

Nathan, Thank you for this. I wonder what the role of the US might be? Is this “unfinished business” from the Tulip Revolution?

Certainly the US has the leverage to tell the opposition to “cool it.” Hall sounds like ICG is holding back from endorsing a coup, and given NGO-US government ties (USAID funds ICG, I believe), it may reflect official thinking at some level. A weak position, but better than calls for violent “regime change.” If I were the US government, I’d tell the opposition to “cool it.” Quit while you are ahead.

If matters get ugly, Bakiev may be forced by events to crack down hard–if only to show he’s no Akayev…