Wonder of wonders… an official in a former Soviet state is critical of US-style democracy. This time, it’s the Kyrgyz state secretary, who told university students that US-style democracy has been a disaster for Kyrgyzstan.
The adoption of the American model for development has not created prosperity in Kyrgyzstan, the Central Asian republic’s state secretary said Wednesday.
…
“Kyrgyzstan’s friends in the person of the U.S. are pushing the country toward democracy, where freedom of speech reigns, but we are not getting richer or better-fed from this democracy,” Adakhan Madumarov told professors and students of the Kyrgyz State University.
He also said that the mass media is holding back state development by reporting on murder and scandals, urging them to stop. He praised Kazakhstan as a model, connecting its prosperity to its “discipline.”
The first point of rebuttal that comes to one’s mind is that Kyrgyzstan’s system of government has never even remotely resembled the USA’s. And continuing, one might feel tempted to point out that both the weakness of rule of law and the Adakhan Madumarov’s at the helm are much more to blame for Kyrgyzstan’s problems.
This post was written by...
Nathan Hamm – author of 2040 posts on Registan.net.
Nathan founded Registan.net 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 clients on Central Asian affairs, specializing in how socio-cultural factors shape risks and opportunities. Follow him on Twitter or drop him a line.
{ 35 comments }
Interesting. So I guess if no one in Kyrgyzstan ever knew that someone tried to frame the speaker of Parliament by planting drugs in his bags at the airport it’d be a richer and better place by now. Well I’m sold.
Let’s list the assumptions in Madumarov’s argument:
1 – Kyrgyzstan has a political system sufficiently democratic to reap the benefits of having a democracy.
2 – Democracy by itself will lead to economic prosperity.
3 – If democracy does not lead to economic prosperity, it is therefore not worthwhile.
4 – Kazakhstan’s economic prosperity is a result of its authoritarian model.
I find many of these questionable at best, but then government officials (of any country) are not paid based on the quality of their argument, but rather how many people like what they hear.
U.S. serviceman in Kyrgyzstan fatally shoots civilian in response to a ‘threat’
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-12-06-kyrgyzstan_x.htm
I’ve read an article. Oh my God. Article full of blatant lies.
BTW, what happened to allegedly “abducted” USAF major Jill Metzger? I saw an article in Valdosta Daily Times that she was abducted and tortured by Kyrgyz terrorists, when in fact, she sneaked out of base to have abortion surgery to conceal her adultery.
If Kyrgyzstan had followed the Kazakh model, Madumarov would of course not be state secretary at all, but would have been locked up long ago. Maybe that would have been better for Kyrgyzstan, but I presume that is not what he meant. Anyway, the post of state secretary is always reserved for some no-hoper to mouth off against ‘democracy’ and other foreign evils. Old bishkek hands will remember fondly the good old days of osmonakun ibraimov and his expletive-filled diatribes against US ‘interference’. At that time Madumarov was just another lonely defender of … er.. freedom of speech and democracy.
The thing with US democracy is that it does not exist. Military Industrial complex runs the country. So called “elected” presidents are no more than puppets. Democracy – the game of rich and powerful. The same holds true for Kyrgyz “Democracy”. Dwight Eisenhower long time ago warned about misplaced power of Military Industrial complex.
New motto:
There are lies, blatant lies, and USAF major Jill Metzger.
Well, I think that’s a level of nuance that’s an order of magnitude below the threshold of Kyrgyz politics.
James, I was going to say that what’s even worse is that this stuff is bought hook, line, and sinker. But, Borat/Kyrgyz Kid helped me out by proving the point.
“that both the weakness of rule of law and the Adakhan Madumarov’s at the helm are much more to blame for Kyrgyzstan’s problems.”
Completely agree, even though I do not believe myself that ‘Western democracy’ (either the US or EU model) will take root and work in Kyrgyzstan and the rest of the region. Too far out of its element. That the present regimes have no future, is also clear. But the alternative will not be ‘Western democracy’.
What happened in Kyrgyzstan was the mere adoption of democratic rethoric and façade by Soviet-shaped compradore elites who paid *lip service* to democracy and adopted its jargon for the sake of the donor $€ attached.
The result is a democratic package for something that is basically a neo-feudal, clanic system and a cleptocracy. *That* is what basically screwed up and brothelised the country.
First, the term “western democracy” or western-style democracy is nonsensical rhetoric, created to justify a Kremlin movement away from a liberal media controlled by corporations or individuals. Attaching the term “western” to the idea of democracy was simply to play into Russian and Slavic resentment in the past decade against the US and Europe. It is unfortunate that the US and West have been turned into a virtual scapegoat for many Slavic, Russian, and CIS problems – but that is the current political environment of those countries. If those in power actually owned up to their mistakes and misdeeds, they would be thrown out of office.
Democracy is a very simple idea, and it certainly exists in the US, regardless of what “Borat” might like to imagine otherwise. The mere fact that corporations have a right and ability to represent their interests to the government reinforces the American democracy; it certainly does not dissolve it. Are there problems with the undo influence of corporate money in US politics? Certainly. But considering the US low unemployment rate and highest per capita PPP in the world, economic problems are not among them. Neither do we suffer from a lack of freedom, particularly when compared to the current state of the nations of the former Soviet Union.
It is simply silly to imagine that Kyrgyzstan has come even close to a democracy to date. Even sillier to imagine that adoption of democratic values will ultimately solve the underlying economic problems in that nation.
It would be VERY DEMOCRATIC if criminal USAF serviceman Zakaria Hatfield were to face justice and court martialed in Kyrgyzstan. Until then “Democracy” in Kyrgyzstan will be just a rhetoric. Let’s start from basics.
BISHKEK, Dec 7 (Reuters) – Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev said on Thursday U.S. servicemen and women stationed in his Central Asian state should no longer enjoy immunity from prosecution after the fatal shooting of a truck driver.
Alexander Ivanov, a 42-year-old ethnic Russian who worked as a fuel truck driver, was shot and killed on Wednesday by an unidentified U.S. Air Force airman at a checkpoint leading to a U.S. airbase in the country’s main civilian airport.
“It would be appropriate for military based in Kyrgyzstan to bear responsibility for any illegal acts they carry out, in accordance with Kyrgyzstan’s laws,” Bakiyev told U.S. ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, according to a statement from his office.
Ivanov, a father of two, had no criminal record, Kyrgyz government officials said. He was killed by two pistol shots to the chest, police said.
Bakiyev said Kyrgyz police should be allowed to question the airman and he should not leave the country until an investigation had taken place.
In a separate security incident linked to the base in September, a U.S. Air Force major went missing for several days after a shopping trip in the nearby capital Bishkek.
Major Jill Metzger reappeared unharmed. According to U.S. media, she said she had been kidnapped, although Kyrgyz police sources questioned the assertion and she was flown out of the country within hours of being found.
Well, I think the cases of Metzger and Hatfield might not be fair and may not be right, but it has little to do with democracy as a form of government. I don’t know the cases very well, and maybe I wouldn’t agree with them – democracies do make mistakes, and powerful democracies can make big mistakes – but Madumarov was attacking one fundamental principle of democracy: free speech and free media. Do you think that the media should be censored by the government, so that in the future things that embarrass your own government might never be known?
“Madumarov was attacking one fundamental principle of democracy: free speech and free media.”
Same thing is happening right now in USA, US “free media” is being gagged on Metzger and Hatfield cases. FOIA requsts are being rejected in Metzger case.
Madumarov is clearly seeing, that US establishment is not practicing what they preach: “free media” and “free speech”.
He was worried by US double standards. That’s what got lost in translation from Russian into English.
What you guys lost in translation:
The idea behind Madumarov’s speech was about “Sovereign” vs “Managed” Democracy.
NB: Brian, you are forgetting, that Democracy is literally “rule by the people”, from the Greek δημοκρατία where demos is “people,” and kratos is “rule”. Kyrgyz people now want SOVEREIGN democracy in contrary to “Meddled” democracy in Iraq which proved to be a ready recipe for imminent disaster. Madumarov sees double standards with US policies, it supports dictators all over the world like Saudi dictators, (Saddam Hussein was installied in power in Iraq by CIA btw), and threaten democracies like Iran. Yes, you’d be surprised to hear that Iran IS democratic republic, where people elect their headhonchos.
All those CIA sponsored oppositions rallies in November, 2006 in Kyrgyzstan are classified as meddling with Kyrgyz “SOVEREIGN democracy”.
You are positively fluent in Newspeak and living proof that the Cold War still continues in the minds of some. Marxism-Leninism may not animate the conversation, but the doublethink is all the same.
If you want to make claims like the one about censorship over Hatfield and Metzger, try backing them up. There’s reporting on it. The conventional wisdom here in the US is that Metzger is hiding something, but we aren’t going to go dragging her into the spotlight. Hatfield’s case is being reported on plenty here and journalists are pursuing leads and bringing information to light.
And if you want to talk democracy and political philosophy, know your chops. “Managed Democracy” (or what is sometimes called “delegative democracy”) is what exists in Russia, and what regimes across Central Asia want to have. It looks kind of like democracy, but it’s run by a dictator. It can be an entirely sovereign state and usually is. “Sovereign Democracy” is another bullshit term created by Russian political scientists that in essence means the same thing. As Gleb Pavlovsky might put it, under it, the state decides democracy is whatever it wants it to be. It sounds nice because it plays into old Soviet-era fantasies about outsiders, usually Americans, as the reason for your failures. They want to steal from you, hold you back. The reality is that your own leaders and your “friends” in Moscow do enough of that that our contribution is hardly noticeable.
And if you’re calling Iran a democracy, but not the US, you’re incredibly facacta.
The ‘military-industrial complex’ got beaten in the last US election. There’s plenty of democracy here.
It’s odd how you can twist what Madumarov is saying into the best possible interpretation (ie. he’s attacking America and not the idea of an open society in Kyrgyzstan), while you can pick some examples of America acting inappropriately (some of which I would otherwise agree with you on) and claim that America is not a democracy and doesn’t have free speech or a free media, etc.
I find it odd how America is constantly blamed for ‘meddling’ so much yet Russia seems to get a free pass despite occupying Central Asia for a hundred+ years, despite that it also has a military base in Kyrgyzstan, despite its overt arm-twisting of Kyrgyzstan in the SCO, despite having a large military presence in neighboring Tajikistan, despite forcing Tajikistan to sell most of its main resources to Russia, despite the brutal Russian war in Chechnya, and despite the fact that the former leader of Kyrgyzstan is living in Moscow right now.
It is clear, you all see only one side of the coin, if you was not born in Kyrgyzstan or at least have been there for a while, you will never understand anything about it, all you capable of is to create your own illusions, which are not even yours, their were created by your media ! and you still believe that you have own opinions,
You know only what you r allowed to know!
Fair enough so long as you agree everything you think you know about the world outside of your home country is only what you are allowed to know and agree to refrain from commenting on it.
America has no interest in the welfare of Kyrgyz citizens instead only the welfare of its own citizens. It can be argued that acting in this way the US government is serving its people in the correct way. The US has had a weak, if not corrupt, foreign policy since the 1960′s. Their interest lies in weakening Russian influence and imposing itself on an area that China has strategic energy interests.
The cases of the shot Russian and the missing general are frankly a smoke screen. One messed up American major doesn’t mean anything and do you think anyone really cares about a dead Russian? Look at the demographics – him dieing is hardly bucking a trend. Time for people to face facts. The US don’t give a damn about Kyrgyzstan. Screw them for as much cash as you can get – treat them with the respect they treat you.
There’s money there for us to screw them out of?
What people don’t seem to grasp is that the US cares about the success of developing and unstable states largely because it is in our interests. Stable, democratic, prosperous states are not going to be sources of or havens for threats to us or our allies. Why do we care about Russia and China? Because they are sources of false stability and long-term instability.
IMF and WB acted Economic hitman in Kyrgyzstan. The aim of reforms was to destroy post Soviet era industry in Kyrgyzstan. Roots of Kyrgyz corruption and poverty gain its legs from IMF and WB “reforms”. And it is amazing, that the same lads talk about promoting “democracy” in Kyrgyzstan. Either, your head, Nathan is in clouds, having lost touch with reality, or you are becoming profocient in “double speak”.
The subtlety of this modern colonial empire building puts the Roman centurions, the Spanish conquistadors, and the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century European colonial powers to shame. We EHMs [Economic Hit Men} are crafty; we learned from history. Today, we do not carry swords. We do not wear armor or clothes that set us apart. In countries like Ecuador, Nigeria, and Indonesia, we dress like local schoolteachers and shop owners. In Washington and Paris, we look like government bureaucrats and bankers. We appear humble, normal. We visit project sites and stroll through impoverished villages. We profess altruism, talk with local papers about the wonderful humanitarian things we are doing. We cover the conference tables of government committees with our spreadsheets and financial projections, and we lecture at the Harvard Business School about the miracles of macroeconomics. We are on the record, in the open. Or so we portray ourselves and so we are accepted. It is how the system works. We seldom resort to anything illegal because the system itself is built on subterfuge, and the system is by definition legitimate.
I think someone’s been reading a little too much Chomsky.
“I think someone’s been reading a little too much Chomsky. ”
I am reading rather statistics before and after US imposed PESAC deindustrialization program in Kyrgyzsrtan.
Why don’t you add some history, sociology, anthropology, and political science to your list? Believing that corruption in Kyrgyzstan has its roots in Western economic programs and not in, for example, its Soviet legacy proves how sorely you’re in need of them.
Purpose of Certain corrupted powers\’ HIPC program is to trap naive countries like Kyrgyzstan. Right now, economic hitmen from IMF and World Bank are pushing Kyrgyzstan into total submission of HIPC program. Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan should learn from sorry story of Kyrgyzstan not to believe \”democracy\” agenda of wolves in sheepskin. Kyrgyz people have no objections to real democracy, it is welcome indeed, but not when, under the guise of \”democracy\”, Certain corrupted powers pushes its ne-colonial interests, that is altogether different story, has nothing to do with democracy.
DEMOCRACY is welcome in Kyrgyzstan, NEO-COLONIALISM is not. That is the key message of Madumarov’s speech.
Millions of Kyrgyz workers of industrial enterprises, especially in coal, furniture and machinery production have lost their jobs and been deprived of their social rights as a result of the Western imposed PESAC program’s implementation started in 1996. The reasons of this outrageous injustice are rooted in the reorganization and dissolution of the above-mentioned and other companies within the frameworks of the PESAC de-industrialization project.
Well your neighbor Uzbekistan hasn’t implemented PESAC and it’s certainly not paradise, despite it’s abundant natural resources.
Ok, you have a right to your opinion. So what steps would you take to improve Kyrgyzstan right now? What’s your model country?
\”What’s your model country?\” Madumarov\’s model country is Kazakhstan, from what I gather.
My role model country is USA, under the guise of \”democracy\” it plunders the riches of naive third world nations. I am a bit of megalomaniac and have, probably, Ghengis-khan\’s blood running in me. I totally approve of USA\’s and World Bank\’s modus operandi, as long as, they stay off my Kyrgyzstan.
Shedd:
“First, the term “western democracy” or western-style democracy is nonsensical rhetoric, created to justify a Kremlin movement away from a liberal media controlled by corporations or individuals.”
Well apart from that let us agree that there is a practice of parliamentary democracy that did not only originated in Europe, but that today is also the dominant form of governance in what is called ‘the West’ (the EU; US+Can, Aus+NZ) despite the existence of different ‘model’ or practices withing it (‘Anglo-Saxon’, ‘Rhinelandic’, ‘French’, ‘Nordic’).
Borat:
“The idea behind Madumarov’s speech was about “Sovereign” vs “Managed” Democracy.”
Bwah, now they come up with that rethorical trick. The Kyrgyz “elite” was not that worried about its “sovereignity” when it came to pocket IFI $$$, sell out the country and turn it into a big brothel. I agree that IMF, WB, EBRD etc. + all these EU consultants helped wreck the country. Yet, who let them in? Who collaborated with them and got the ‘vzyatki’? Who put all their kiddies, nephews and former mistresses in IFI, EU projects and offices?
What I always say in such cases is, that the first colonial posts and the slave trade in Africa in the 18th century could *never have materialised without the active collaboration of local tribal chiefs*. I know that you don’t like to comparison but it is time to face reality! So if you don’t want Kyrgyzstan to end up as yet another basket case country, best is to get rid of your neo-Soviet/pseudo-partiotic “elites’ first.
Kuda:
“America has no interest in the welfare of Kyrgyz citizens instead only the welfare of its own citizens. (… ) The US don’t give a damn about Kyrgyzstan.”
Yes that is very true, my friend. But just one question: do you think Russia does? I’m asking this because over the last couple of years, I clearly noticed that the Kyrgyz are so naïve — or is it thick?– to think that ‘help’ and ‘salvation’ will now come from ‘Russia’ or ‘Putin’. Just like they expected everything to come from ‘the West’ in the early ‘90s and then could not understand why it went wrong, why expectations were not met and why there were strings and conditions attached.
I understand that at least, the Kyrgyz feel they *know* the Russians from the Soviet time and through Russian TV, language, labor migration etc. — whereas ‘the West’ is too far out of its element in that part of the world. Yet, do not mis-estimate this: Russia is back in the southern Soviet periphery as a *neo-colonial power*, in a wider shift that will unavoidably lead to a clash with ‘the West’/China and eventually WWIII (as it is written).
It has no intention whatsoever to ‘uplift’ people — former colonial subjects, in fact — who the both Muscovite establishment and indeed many ‘ordinary’ Russians consider as inferior, ‘tretii sort’, cheap, expoitable labor in the best case.
Tangri biz menen!
Well, Ataman Rakin, bravo, you have given the most straightforward answer in this blog without beating around ‘we are good guys, we promote democracy’ bush, in contrary to others.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Muscovite establishment and indeed many ‘ordinary’ Russians consider as inferior, ‘tretii sort’, cheap, expoitable labor in the best case.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That’s very true. Except, as age old adage goes, scratch any Russian, and you’ll find a Tatar. Muscovites despise Russians from province as well, so what? New imperial Russia will not be as altruistic as USSR towards developing nations of Central Asia; you are perfectly right on that. But Russia still will have better intentions for Central Asians out of self preservation, because it needs stability around its borders, in contrary to USA, with motto “the worse in Asia the better”, which has been engaged in crusade for total destruction of factories and plants in former Soviet Asia for the last fifteen years. Never mind the PESAC program. I witnessed many other US programs.
I have grander picture of Russia. Russia is a successor of Golden Horde, ruled by Ghengiz-khans descendants, and still remains an Asiatic empire. China too, has been under rule of Ghengiz-khans descendants. China and Russia have much in common. The next clash of civilizations will be between West and Russia + China and Islamic countries sympathetic towards latter bloc. I’ve no doubts after recent Litvinenko scandal. I do not see Russia siding with West, as it broke its own word to Russia not to expand NATO eastwards in early 90s.
“Russia is a successor of Golden Horde, ruled by Ghengiz-khans descendants, and still remains an Asiatic empire.”
Yes, agree with the latter part. It’s purely academic of course, but I would say that Russia, as a civilisational sphere, rests on two pillars/components: a) the Byzantine empire and b) the Golden Horde. See, a common misperception in the West is, that Russians are Westerners. They’re not. Yes, physically, they look like Europeans. And there is a lot of *physical-material* ‘westernisation’ in Moscow and other cities and what all, and certain enterpreneurs and intelliogentsia consider themselves as a part of Europe. But one has to look beyond that.
(K stati, ty sam Rossiyanin?)
“which has been engaged in crusade for total destruction of factories and plants in former Soviet Asia for the last fifteen years.”
Again, here I think that local “elites” were instrumental. The ones who are now bellowing about “sovereignity” ,
“independence” and what all for it suits them for the moment. *They* were the ones who looted the region and sold out everything. Look, I’m no friend of ‘the West’ and the IFIs but there’s one thing that I do *not* accept: and that is this first-league bollocks that “‘the Americans’ have destroyed the USSR”. It had become ‘modnii’ to say that, but it is most clear that the USSR destroyed itself.
One does not need to be a Sovietologist or a PhD. in economics to know that the Soviet system certainly brough good things too (infrastructure, literacy, health care, social security) but it was an artificial system that simply did not worked, period. Much of the Soviet economy was already largely disfunctional by the mid-‘80s.
“But Russia still will have better intentions for Central Asians out of self preservation, because it needs stability around its borders, in contrary to USA, with motto “the worse in Asia the better””
I don’t agree that Russia stands, by definition, for stability. In fact, in terms of shit-stirring in the former Soviet space, Russia – or, at least, certain groups in the Kremlin, the military, Gazprom etc. — lavishly matches what, say, certain European ex-colonial powers (not to say France – ooooinnnkkkk!!!) did in Africa: the engineering of separatist rebellions in Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia; the escalation of the war in Tajikistan+Chechnya; the ‘90s coups in the Azerbaijan and Georgia; the ‘gas blackmail’ against Ukraine; etc.
Right, this is the way it is. Russia, like the Anglo-Saxons and China, all have their interests to consolidate. They need control over raw materials, cheap labor, markets and trade routes for their survival in the global economy. This is colliding (nota bene, I don’t believe in that naïve liberal adagium that ‘trade’ and ‘communication’ foster peace and understanding but that is a different story). At the same time, at the base level, people move, are socially mobile or realise that they are kept in poverty – so there’s a lot of frustration and expecations.
I agree that WWIII is not a matter of ‘if’, but ‘when’. Humanity has come to the point where it will be confronted with itself. Initially, it will be fought by proxy (regimes, companies, armed groups, or indeed NGOs,) but will turn into a direct confrontation later. Like it or not, despite all rethoric, Central Asia — like the Middle East, Afrfica and pockets in the West, Russia and China themselves — are set for instability.
“When Gog and Magog are let loose and rush down from every slope, and the True Promise is very close, the eyes of those who disbelieved will be transfixed: “Alas for us! We were unmindful of this! No, rather we were definitely wrongdoers.” (the Holy Qur’an, Surat al-Anbiya: 96-97)”
That is a phase we will have to go through. But, pretty much like a heavy summer storm, it can, and will, also clear up things and open new perspectives. Something new, better.
“As the Dajjal (Antichrist) spreads corruption, God will send the Messiah, ‘Isa son of Maryam … every believer who feels his healing breath will disappear. ‘Isa will meet the Dajjal at the gate of Ludd [near Jerusalem] and will destroy him. . . .” (Salih Muslim)
“Again, here I think that local “elites” were instrumental.”
Ataman Rakin, who installs in the power “local elites” in the first place? Try to answer for yourself. For the same reason there is NO REAL DEMOCRACY in USA. And has never been in place. It’s just a reality show for rednecks and simpletons, and serves superficial purpose.
Genuine Democracy has existed in Ancient Greek Athenes, and even then, it coexisted with slavery.
“who installed in the power “local elites” in the first place? Try to answer for yourself. Not the people, certainly.”
Good question, bratan. I will actually answer it for the whole readership, who might also be interested. OK let’s run the gamut in greater Central Asia:
*Nazarbayev: last Kazakh SSR boss who stayed in power, re-elected in semi-Soviet style elections, buys off legimacy for now with oil- and gas-driven economic growth and ethnic stability;
*Karimov: last Uzbek SSR boss who stays in power through a neo-Stalinist police state, ‘legitimated’ by ritual Soviet-type ‘elections’;
*Niyazov: last Turkmen SSR boss, stays in power through a neo-Stalinist police state;
*Rakhmonov: was not the last Tajik SSR boss but a kolchoz head in Dangara and an MP; installed by a Moscow-backed coup that shattered a coalition government; his regime was long protected by the presence of Russian troops; ‘legitimates’ itself with dodgy ‘elections’ and by exploiting the civil war trauma among the population;
*Aliev junior in Azerbaijan: succeeded his father after pro forma elections (creating a ‘republican dynasty’); Aliev senior was a former politburo member and KGB cadre installed after the Moscow-engineerd overthrow of the democratically elected Abdulfas Elçibey; like his Kazakh counterpart, junior buys legimacy with oil-driven economic growth though here, he might drift away from those who helped bring his father into power (looks more to the West and Turkey);
*Akayev and Bakiev: the former was a Soviet academic and apparachik (though not the last Kyrgyz SSR boss), elected relatively democratically a couple of times; the latter came to power after social upheaval and coup that were meant to repeat the ‘color revolution’ scenario, yet he was not the choice of the ones who backed the ‘revolution’ (the West had clearly bet on Rosa Otunbayeva);
*Karzai in Afghanistan: installed by the US, protected by US&NATO troops.
So, what do we learn from all this boys and girls? Of the 7 cases, three leaders (Karimov, Nazarbayev and Niyazov) are former SSR — as such, they were part of the Soviet-colonial compradore elites — heads who stayed in power. It were these people, and their cronies and entourage, who actually benefitted most from independence, not the population. Why? Because through independence, they were promoted from provincial Soviet satraps to elite on an independet state with everything that this implies: control over raw materials and other assets, access to IFI credits etc.
Two others (Rakhmonov and Aliev senior, succeeded by his son) came in power through Moscow-backed coups. Yet another (Bakiev) was more an ‘accident’, so to say: he came to power in a US-backed ‘color coup’ yet is clearly oriented towards Russian while the Akayevs were eating in all meadows. As for Karzai: yes he is a direct US stooge.