According to AKIpress, it might be, in Osh at any rate. I don’t want to jump on any optimistic story, but some of the level heads in Osh are trying to restore order themselves. I hesitate to upgrade this ethnic tension to the kind seen in Balkans or even in the American South. I think there are other causes simmering below the surface, and other then those now seeking vengeance for these actions, I would not say that “Uzbeks hate Kyrgyz,” or vice versa. Maybe mild distrust, maybe stupid stereotypes, but there are plenty of inter-marriages and successful friendships across this division to prove that we shouldn’t make this out to be an inevitable expression of deep-seated ethnic hatred.
[Update: Different Reports available on number of refugees and extent of violence in Kyrgyzstan]
It seems that Uzbekistan has opened its borders to the refugees. Local news sources are reporting thousands, if not tens and hundreds of thousands of refugees. International news sources are silent on this matter thus far. There are reports, so far unsubstantiated, of murder, sexual violence, and maiming perpetrated by Kyrgyz on Uzbeks. Registan cannot confirm or deny, but I remain optimistically skeptical.
In Osh, Looters are to be shot on sight, Uzbek-Kyrgyz coalitions are forming for peace, and there are calls for activists to stop posting images of the dead online, especially on YouTube.
Мэр Оша: Враждующие стороны изъявили желание примириться по всему городу
В ближайшие часы в городе Ош будет наведен порядок. Об этом сообщил мэр Оша Мелисбек Мырзакматов на экстренном аппаратном совещании, где собрались все городские службы. Мэр поручил всем городским службам начать работу до следующего утра очистить город от мусора, особенно центральные улицы.
Mayor of Osh: Warring parties have expressed their desire to reconcile all over the city
In the coming hours Osh is to be set in order. The mayor reported this at a special meeting at which were gathered all the city services. The Mayor has instructed all city services to begin working through to the next morning clearing away garbage, especially in the streets downtown.
This post was written by...
Michael Hancock-Parmer – author of 158 posts on Registan.net.
Michael earned an MA in Central Eurasian Studies in 2011 and remains a student at Indiana University pursuing a dual PhD in Russian History and Central Eurasian Studies. He served 6 months in the Peace Corps in Uzbekistan in 2005. After the events in Andijan and the subsequent closure of the program, he served 2 years in southern Kazakhstan, returning to the Midwest in 2007. His general area of interest is on post-Timur Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, centered on the Syr Darya river valley.
For information on reproducing this article, see our Terms of Use
{ 21 comments }
Thanks for the coverage.
I wish what Michael wrote were true. However, so far events have been developing the Balkan way. The scale of catastrophe is underreported in Kyrgyz sources. Having surfed kyrgyz internet, I got an impression that ethnic Kyrgyzs had practically zero sympathy for those killed.
I am not aware of ethnic tensions in American south, never heard of 75,000 people fleeing slaughter there in just 2 days. Eurasianet says, actual number of refugees might be up to 200,000.
http://www.eurasianet.org/node/61291
I saw that article. It’s rather hard to believe – that’s a lot of people. Wouldn’t that be basically the entire Uzbek population of Osh?
Sorry Micheal, whether your optimistic vision plays out or not, the situation in Osh is much worse than in the American South of the 1950s.
I feel pretty qualified to say that as an anthropologist who grew-up in Arkansas and lived in Osh for 3 years. Yes, there are some intermarriages and some inter-ethinc friendships, but that as little to do with interethic hatred. Have you ever read about the Rwandan genocide? There theyy not only had huge amounts of intermarriage, but the Huttus and Tutus (sp?) were actually only castes of the same tribe.
The reality is that Kyrgyz and Uzbeks do deeply distrust each other, bordering on the verge of hate. I have heard my Kyrgyz friends talk of how Uzbeks don’t belong in Kyrgyzstan. And I’ve heard some of my many Uzbek friends talk about how the Kyrgyz are lazy thieves.
That being said, I think one of the major forces behind what happened was economics. I’ve heard many Kyrgyz talk about how the “Uzbeks have gotten wealthy in our country, yet they cheat and steal from us.” Its easy to see how that could quickly spiral out of control during a world-wide recession and the further economic difficulties that fallen on Kyrgyzstan after the latest coup.
Like you Michael, I sincerely hope that cooler heads will prevail in the south, but to say that this spasm is not deep ethnic hatred is naive or uninformed.
Sorry, that’s weak sauce, Gene. If all you have is anecdotal evidence, you’ll have to do more. I too can share stories that prove my point. I suppose I deserve it for bringing up the South, but the larger point is that I don’t think we gain anything by assuming there is such a monolithic idea as “inter-ethnic struggle” or “ethnic tension.” The tension is political, religious, economic, or social. I may not like Foucault, but he has a lot of good stuff to say about Power struggles. Ethnicity itself means nothing until we make it mean something, and since Akaev left, the Kyrgyz and Uzbeks were treated very differently, leading to a lot of harsh feelings. But it’s not an issue of blood or race, except superficially.
“The tension is political, religious, economic, or social”
At times these match up with ethnicity, and even when there is ethnic overlapping, blending, weakly defined identity, etc… it is possible for blocs to emerge that create quite the security dilemma. We could discount pogroms against Meshkhets as social and economic rather than ethnic, but would have to ignore the fact that the victims were selected based on ethnicity. Poor Uzbeks didn’t attack rich Uzbeks. At times, ethnicity matters in a life and death manner.
“Ethnicity itself means nothing until we make it mean something”
Nothing has meaning until we give it meaning. This could be used to discount absolutely everything ever.
I’m not trying to say that this is an eternal struggle between primordial groups with “ancient hatreds” and all that. Ethnicity is usually the first thing I attempt to “deconstruct.” But it would seem that in this situation ethnicity matters.
Toss Robert Kaplan in the rubbish bin, definitely. But certainly not Valery Tishkov.
Ethnicity is simply the easiest thing to separate “ours” from “theirs”.
I think Christian makes a good distinction. No one is arguing that there is some sort of primordial basis to this conflict (well, actually, I’m sure someone will argue that), but ethnicity is a real factor. Did Kyrgyz kill Uzbeks because they are Kyrgyz, and hard-wired to smite their ancient enemy? Of course not. Were Uzbeks killed for being Uzbeks? It certainly looks that way.
“…but would have to ignore the fact that the victims were selected based on ethnicity.”
But who did the selecting? It surely was not the undifferentiated Kyrgyz. We don’t know exactly who did it yet, but say that it was a criminal gang with ties to the former regime as Aleksandr Knyazev (and the provisional government) says, I think we absolutely need a more complicated characterization than just “ethnic.” (Which I know you’re not guilty of.)
“But who did the selecting?”
That’s why I mentioned “blocs” rather than an entire ethnic group. And I don’t buy this criminal gang “blame it on the hooligans/criminals” interpretation. That has happened in every single ethnic riot/pogrom since the mid-1980s. It’s a coping strategy to deal with the fact that your son, your brother, your friend, your neighbor, etc.. is capable of being a “good, law abiding (y/j)igit” and then one day beating someone’s cranium with a steel bar until their skull caves in. Criminals are certainly doing business at the moment, but so are the nice boys from the neighborhood.
Christian, I meant to say “who did the selecting at the outset?” You’re right about the composition of partiipants in throughout most of the violence, but I do find it plausible that it got underway with the help of violence specialists working on someone’s behalf. The earlier violence in the south in May and June seems an awful lot like far less extreme versions of these latest events to me.
Based on my experience (being a Kyrgyz citizen but of different ethnicity but very close to Kyrgyz) I can testify that everyone is right to some extent. The root is political, economic and social tension. The Uzbek community is really large in the South and deserves some representation in power. Akayev, the first president, had managed to cope with it bringing in a few prominent Uzbek figures. But Bakiyev’s policy actually was built on the nationalistic basis which is quite widespread. So after toppling of him the Uzbek community leader first of all supported the Interim Gov and declared for a greater role of Uzbeks in running the region. That was his mistake, Uzbeks would anyway have increased their representation if things had gone to plan (a new constitution and parliamentary elections, as well as elections of local councils and administrations). That was very well played by Bakieyv’s cronies.
As for the rise of nationalistic feelings I think that it’s actually a sublimation of the Kyrgyz inferiority complex. Commonly ethnic communities are better off in general due to mentality and more entrepreneurial spirit. The native Kyrgyz hate to accept it and it results in terrible things. During the 7 april unrest Tokmok (a regional hub with strong ethnic minorities in the North) saw not just a change of power but also ethnic pogroms (although not so large scale as the recent ones) which destroyed businesses and houses of ethnic minorities. Even during Bakieyv’s regime there was a couple of ethnic strives in Tokmok but it was suppressed. As for Osh, during my visits there two years ago it was obvious that Uzbeks dominated business in town. For sure it would irritate poor Kyrgyz and prepared grounds for the current events. There’s hatred towards ethnic minorities, it’s a fact that cannot be denied.
But the biggest irony is that the native Kyrgyz people have been deprived of the economic opportunity for prosperity and development by the very Kyrgyz leaders Akayev and especially Bakiyev. Their corruption system, embezzlement of state resources and support of crony business – it all deprived the Kyrgyz of hope and perspective and boils out in the form of violent uprisings (so called revolutions), ethnic tensions, growth of religious extremism and crime. My biggest concern is the fate of youth – who is supposed to be our future. The gangs of boys of 15-18 years old with weapons and knives marauding Osh, killing, looting, raping, puting houses on fire – whey will they end up in 5 years?
The Rwandan genocide is a good one to bring up.
The immediate discussion of the American south aside, the problem I have with the term “ethnic violence” is that it kind of suggests members of the two ethnic groups are chemical compounds that will explode when mixed. In Rwanda, this wasn’t the case. There was a well-known and fairly intense narrative of Hutu-Tutsi animosity inflamed by the civil war and propagated by Hutu extremist organizations. The genocide itself was well-organized and targeted both Tutsis and pro-peace Hutus.
The narrative is definitely there in Kyrgyzstan, and I’m fairly confident we’ll see the signs of organization that got things rolling as the situation settles down. We’re already seeing some unconfirmed signs if the gangs of well-armed athletes, organized looting, and cars without license plates that we’ve seen in many other episodes of violence in Kyrgyzstan are, as many say, hallmarks of organized criminal gangs. If things are indeed calming down, I’m confident that one of the most important factors is that organizations perpetrating violence they want to frame as ethnic do not have deep roots in the public at large.
I can’t pass up the opportunity to recommend reading Brubaker’s “Ethnicity Without Groups,” which contains a good, if brief, discussion of the distinctions between groups and organizations, and the necessity of organizations for “ethnic” violence.
I’m inclinced to agree with Christian. I think its important to remember that while enlightened, post-racial, “white” people such as ourselves are hysterically afraid of employing terms like “ethnicity” without quotation marks, qualifications, and apologies (bigoted southerns such as myself excluded) some people (ie Kyrgyz, Uzbeks, etc.) lend such socio-linguistic constructions more “ontological status” or “signifying potency” or whatever the latest post-structuralist etc. buzz word is. In my opinion the search for “root causes” is often a search for a cause that you are comfortable accepting.
But I’m not really disagreeing with Christian so much as I’m saying we need to be careful to indicate that there’s a bit mor complexity to the situation and that organizations vice groups are the critical corporate actors.
As a general proposition, “different ethnic groups fight each other because they’re different” — which you seem to, but may not be putting forth — doesn’t really explain much.
Michael,
According to a Russian resident of Osh a college dorm was attacked and girls raped and pregnant women slaughtered in the hospital.
Do you call that “mild distrust?”
Michael,
Thanks for the update. Glad to hear it from you.
Best,
-Matt
UZ-18
BBC aired an interview with a young Uzbek woman from a mixed Uzbek/Kyrgyz/Russian neighborhood who had fled Osh. She said tension had been rising for a few days in the city, but blamed people from outside the city for inciting the violence – she mentioned Kyrgyz from surrounding villages but not sure how she would have been sure of this.
In all modesty, it might be interesting for the readers of this blog to have a look at the discussion generated by a comment I posted last night on facebook (and listen to the BBC radio programme):
“These are groups of BANDITS on the rampage against Uzbeks, NOT two ’ethnic’ groups fighting. Journalists – STOP talking about ’ethnic clashes’.
99,99 percent of the Kyrgyz would never participate in this.
Listen to Madina speaking on the BBC (min 2), a courageous Uzbek woman stressing that the attackers were NOT her Kyrgyz neighbours….
A point I stress later (min 9.30)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0080grr
@Michael
Yeah, but think about who the ‘bandits’ are. It’s not so easy as you make it sound to separate ‘criminal elements’ from ‘ordinary people’ in southern Kyrgyzstan.
If young Kyrgyz were being paid, armed, brought in from the countryside, they were still willing to do as they were told and attack Uzbeks.
There’s a very tempting narrative that says ‘provocateurs – criminals and Bakiyev’s people – made this happen and everybody else suffered together.’ That narrative misses the active participation of individual Kyrgyz (led by bandits or not) in attacks on Uzbeks and misses the depths of anti-Uzbek feeling in Kyrgyzstan.
Michael Andersen,
you write ’99,99 percent of the Kyrgyz would never participate in this’.
Might be. However, inaction in such a situation is equal to supporting this bandits. How many Kyrgyz went to street to protest against ethnic slaughter??
No!
did any high official from Bishkek go to Osh to stop those bandits??
No!
So far, we hear reports, troops sent from Bishkek seem to be supporting those bandits. That’s really really sad…