Comments on: Kyrgyzstan: Protests Continue

By: Michael Hancock

Michael Hancock — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:02:47 +0000

From what I’ve seen in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Kid is pretty much on the money. I met some IMF consultants and other World Bank types scouting out situations in KZ, and I had a chance to ask them what they were doing, for who, why, and what was the point. Different kinds of development [to help the average Kazakh, they said], but the money for that development goes to the consultant, on whose advice they hire foreign contractors, who then bring in largely foreign labor, with the most basic work going to local Government Contracted support. In South KZ, this is being done to improve COTTON irrigation, among other things. Good lord. Why are they trying to save the Aral? And they still grow rice in Kyzylorda, of all places. Rice in the Desert.

But I’m off subject.

I entirely agree with Kyrgyz Kid that the West needs to wake up and take responsibility for its business actions. Politicians may not be at fault, but they could try to reign them in, or at least point out that the exploitation of the poor and uneducated isn’t actually one of America’s Foreign Policy Ideals.

By: Kyrgyz kid

Kyrgyz kid — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 05:28:57 +0000

IMF and WB guys really messed up Kyrgyz economy. Roots of Kyrgyz corruption and poverty gain its legs from IMF and WB “reforms”. Kyrgyz people ain’t blind. What they see is the neo-colonial ways of treating of Kyrgyzstan by West. Cameco’s Kumtor gold mining big fraud, demise of Kyrgyz industry by PESAC “reforms”, US airbase rent payment corruption fiasco, unpopular HIPC initiative, corruption involved in Western “aid” (wide Kyrgyz public knows that so called IMF and WB “aid loans” were merely a fraud, and came as “technical” loans, and were channeled mostly back to US accounts as “consultancy” fees.
That all happened once upon time in Latin America.
I know that IMF and WB policies are hated there. Those neo-colonial policies triggered leftist movement in Latin America. History repeats itself.
If you want to be respected and to be partners further with Kyrgyzstan, learn to deal with us with a little bit of honesty.

By: Michael Hancock

Michael Hancock — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 17:59:10 +0000

Well, no matter what happens, we’re all going to sit at home. I’m pretty sure we’re just interested parties. That’s a polite way of saying “Monday morning quarterback.”

I’m willing to say that this protest may well evolve into something else, and I’m not about to say that anything done politically in America is done smarter or more purely for the people. That seems a bit beside the point, to bring Western politics into this.

I just don’t think we should feel so bad, or so good, when we hear about the “rising troubles in Central Asia.” Until there is more independent journalism [I don't mean Russian reporters from Vremya, Pravda, etc] in the area, we should take what we hear with a chunk of salt.

Mostly I just hope that the Kyrgyz can work something out without the country falling to pieces. They don’t have a lot going for them other than Tourism, it would seem, and that’s something that always suffers in political crises.

By: Brian

Brian — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 16:31:45 +0000

Ok, I’ll give you the fact that this is more orchestrated than it may at first seem, and that some powerful figures are behind the people protests. But first, that’s not that unusual. Even in developed democracies, supposed “people power” moments are orchestrated by powerful interest groups. You think that anti-gay marriage and minimum wage initiatives on the ballot are there because of pure people power instead of being an attempt to advance one political party? Second, if what the reformists are asking for can genuinely make the government a little less authoritarian and a little more representative then it’s probably worth it.

What’s the alternative anyway? We agree that Kyrgyzstan’s revolution didn’t go as well as hoped. So now what? Sit at home and hope that Bakiev works out all the problems?

By: Jonathan P

Jonathan P — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:46:44 +0000

… and just how would Sean have known about these events, since they took place after he made his comment?

I think his point was that it seems that people in Kyrgyzstan (including many politicians and police) are willing to put their necks on the line for the sake of some kind of debate over the direction of the country. And, at the same time, the president is willing to allow them to do this for awhile before he calls out his dogs.

Can you imagine several thousand people gathering in Tashkent for something like this? Do you think it would last 6 days without a violent incident?

By: Laurence

Laurence — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 12:06:39 +0000

Sean, What about this report:

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan — Government supporters and opposition demonstrators clashed Tuesday in the Kyrgyz capital, throwing bottles, lobbing rocks and beating one another with sticks.

Interior Ministry troops tried to separate the protesters, setting off what appeared to be smoke bombs that released tear gas.

Opposition lawmakers gather to pose for photographers after a special session at the parliament in Bishkek, Tuesday, Nov. 7, 2006. Opposition lawmakers voted early Tuesday on a new draft constitution that would trim the powers of President Kurmbanbek Bakiyev. It is unclear what legal weight this move by opposition lawmakers would carry since only a minority of lawmakers were present. (AP Photo/Misha Japaridze) (Misha Japaridze – AP)
PHOTOS

The week’s events from around the world, captured in pictures.
» VIEW THIS WEEK’S PHOTOS
Save & Share Article What’s This?
Digg
Google

del.icio.us
Yahoo!

Reddit
Facebook

Three ambulances could be seen carrying injured people away from the square. Russian news agencies, quoting the Kyrgyz Health Ministry, said six people had been hospitalized, including four with gunshot wounds.

The clash erupted as the two camps held rival rallies in the center of Bishkek on the sixth day of anti-government protests aimed at forcing President Kurmanbek Bakiyev to resign.

Earlier Bakiyev angrily rejected an overnight move by opposition lawmakers to adopt a new constitution.

“Some lawmakers tried to usurp power last night,” Bakiyev told a news conference. “Without getting a quorum, in the still of the night and secretly from the people they went ahead, ignoring the (current) constitution and the law.” A quorum is considered to be 51 lawmakers.

Is this really “a sophisticated discussion about their constitution”?

By: Michael Hancock

Michael Hancock — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:09:11 +0000

Not to rain on anyone’s parade, but I am not nearly as optimistic about this Tulip Two Revolution. These protests are not symbolic of anything except some improved organizational skills. The idea that the ‘people’ realize they have any control over their government, or the right to control it, is ridiculous to me. The Soviet Union is not dead, friends – it’s merely changed its face to keep up with the times. These people are marching on the White House because someone told them to. It is as organized as any of the “protests” or “rallies” in Central Asia. When they aren’t organized, you see Andijan, or Bishkek last year, with the looting and vandalism. It is my belief that this is entirely playing into the hands of some people in the current administration. If the parliament isn’t happy and wants more power, I don’t think there’s anything that can be done about it. Granted, I’m not in Kyrgyzstan, but I think I have a bit of a handle on how Central Asians, ethnicity notwithstanding, view their government.

And, as Amira was getting at, what about the rest of the country? What’s the opinion from Osh and Naryn?

However, I’ll say that I’m curious about the Akims resigning and “joining the opposition.” I hardly think anyone would suddenly see the light because of a protest – it’s probably just opportunistic band-wagoning. But still – aren’t the Akims all presidential appointees, as in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan?

I’m interested to hear arguments against my pessimism. I hope I’m off on this, but I’ve been jaded by almost two years in Central Asia. I can’t help but think that all of this is being completely misunderstood, and that the press is being someone’s puppet.

By: David Huwiler

David Huwiler — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 06:19:31 +0000

I agree that Kyrgyzstan may well be leading the way in Central Asia. For years the Kyrgyz people were passive in the face of massive corruption and ineptitude. That is changing. After March 24, things are not the same in Kyrgyzstan, and people realize that they have the right–and the means–to change the government when it does not serve their needs.

By: Amira

Amira — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 02:50:58 +0000

I’ve not been able to find much about the rest of the country’s views on what is going on in Bishkek. Is there any support in the south?

And how are things going in Bishkek outside downtown? I’d heard the universities were closed on Thursday, but I doubt that has continued, or even if they all were. And are stores open? Is the merchandice being taken out of the stores like it was in the spring? Are people out on the streets?

By: Sean R. Roberts

Sean R. Roberts — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 02:38:54 +0000

I agree with Brian. I don’t see any other Central Asian countries ready to have a sophisticated discussion about their constitutions. It is interesting that Kyrgyzstan is often seen as the least “progressive” of the popular regime changes in the former USSR. People in Kyrgyzstan at least are discussing real issues about how the country must get from where it is now to where it wants to be.