Afghanistan and Central Asia

We have discussed Turkmenistan’s ‘opening up’ diplomatically from their isolationist and totalitarian Niyazov era on a few occasions. The nation’s participation in the latest NATO Summit, EU Troika, and their warming of relations with Turkey, for instance. I am pleased to report that this ‘opening up’ seems to have some legs:

1. Current President Berdymuhamedov has introduced major amendments to the constitution, planned for September 2008. A special committee has been formed to propose constitutional reforms and the president requested the ministry of justice, ministry of internal affairs, ministry of national security, the Supreme Court, prosecutor general, and the institute of democracy and human rights to create working groups to also propose reforms. For reasons of showcasing the transparency of this process, Berdymuhamedov stated that the mass media will publish the details of proposed amendments and that local journalists will be invited to attend the constitutional reform meetings once a month. After the parliament debates the proposals, a special session of the Khalk Maslahaty (People’s Council) will be held in September in Ashgabat to adopt the amendments. Berdymuhamedov asserted; ‘The world is moving forward and any state that cannot keep pace with the global developments will inevitably be left behind.”

2. Last Wednesday, Turkmenistan and Lithuania signed a memorandum of understanding for intergovernmental cooperation with an emphasis in the energy, transportation, tourism, trade, culture and humanitarian spheres. This is another example of Turkmenistan looking toward to the West to increase its leverage in all directions and to court the resources and markets that Europe can provide. During the meeting with Lithuania’s Prime Minister Kirkilas, Berdymuhamedov stated; “European direction is one of the priority areas for the foreign policy strategy of Turkmenistan. We are taking steps to deepen our dialogue with the EU.”

3. On a much larger scale, Turkmenistan and India have signed a memorandum of understanding for cooperation in the oild an gas sectors, but this will be discussed in the next few days.

4. On a cultural bent, Berdymuhamedov gave parliament his approval to work on changing the names of the months back to their traditional forms. The nation’s previous dictator, Niyazov, infamously changed these names in 2002 to versions that honored Turk heros, chief among them, himself. The official parliament resolution should happen sometime this year, maybe as early as June. Gurbansoltan (April), Turkmenbashi (January), and Ruhnama (September) will soon be left to the trash heap of history.

It is important to not overstate these reforms and claim that Turkmenistan is headed towards democracy and an open and vigorous foreign policy, but these reforms, even as slight as some appear, matter and are positive signs none the less.

To personify just how far Berdymuhamedov and Turkmenistan have to go though, here is a report from Forum 18 about a recent government raid on a Bible class in Ashgabat. Unfortunately, religious and personal freedoms are still pedestrian in this nation showing signs of progress.

Two steps forward, three religious persecution steps back.

(Photo Source: The Guardian, Guardian.co.uk)

Since the new year, there has been a serious rise in attacks against non-slavic immigrants in Russia, mainly in the city of Moscow. Human rights groups accuse nationalist extremists, with neo-Nazi sympathies, of murdering between 41-53 immigrants, most of which are from Central Asia or the Caucacus. These types of attacks have occurred in recent years in Russia, but they are becoming more organized and severe. Many of the victims have been stabbed 20-30 times during an attack and far-right websites warn that future attacks may include the use of bombs and guns. Semyon Charny, an expert at the Moscow Bureau for Human Rights, said the situation in Moscow was ‘like a safari.’

The city of Moscow has a large Central Asian minority, about 850,000 of the city’s 10 million inhabitants, who many perform manual labor positions in which there are not enough ethnic Russians to perform. Unfortunately, many Russian citizens seem to see the immigrants as threatening and weak government oversight and policing has helped provide legitimacy to these feelings. In fact, the government has recently passed anti-immigration legislation which some have argued gave tacit approval to the attacks.

Steps have been taken to try to curb this violence by human rights groups, the Russian government, and CA and Caucacus authorities. In late February, the Russian police arrested many leaders of various far-right groups, and in at least one case one leader received a conviction for ‘agitating inter-ethnic discord,’ but the violence has continued as others have taken their place. Raimkul Attakurov, ambassador for Kyrgyzstan in Russia, wrote a letter to Russia’s human rights ombudsman calling the incidents ‘the savage attacks of fascist monsters.’ Embassies have told their citizens to keep a low profile, not to go out on their own, especially to bars, and be well-dressed. Russian government officials have also sat down to discuss the problem with local Azeri, Kyrgyz, Tajik local community leaders, but alas nothing has curbed the ethnic violence.

It seems clear that outright racism has been a factor in these attacks. Opinion polls show that many Russians are ‘uncomfortable’ with the presence of these CA/Caucacus immigrants, even if they aren’t ‘taking their jobs.’ Putin’s domestic and foreign policy has worked hard to bring back Russia’s sense of importance in the world and in regional affairs and this may be helping to create a backlash against non-slavs in Moscow and St. Petersburg.

What should the Russian government do to curb these attacks? What should the governments of the CA/Caucasus states do? I read that there had been diplomatic calls against these abuses from several states, like the above mentioned Kyrg Ambassador Attakurov, but did not find many other official protests. The CA states depend on employment and remittances from Russia so their governments obviously do not want to upset the boat, but this is becoming a serious problem. These neo-Nazi groups have a fascist agenda of violence and hatred that cannot be accepted/condoned/pacified/ignored.

1. US/NATO-Kazakhstan Cooperation: NATO’s Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia, Robert Simmons recently visited Kazakhstan to discuss the ‘Line Communication‘ project. The project involves the railway transit of non-lethal goods through the territories of Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan to Afghanistan by NATO forces. Simmons has reported that Russia and NATO exchanged letters that allow transit through Russian territory (as has been discussed on this page) and stated that he received a ‘positive response’ from the Astana’s government regarding their cooperation in the project. Simmons also stated that he was next off to Uzbekistan to cement their cooperation in the project.

In addition, the United States and Kazakhstan opened what is called ‘second-track diplomacy‘ in Wash. DC on April 9. This includes a ‘dialogue’ featuring Kazakhstan’s Institute of World Economics and Politics and the US’s Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The meeting involved members from each government as well as academic scholars.

2. President Karimov visits Astana- Uzbekistan’s president follows Kyrgyzstan’s head of state to Astana in what one analyst calls the beginning of a ‘new political axis’ in Central Asia. An exact agenda is not known, but energy issues, food prices, and Central Asian regional integration will no doubt be discussed. The Turkish Weekly doubts that much progress will be made regarding regional integration. This is in contrast to Astana-Bishkek’s recent discussions supporting a CA union. Quoting Karimov; “Seeking cheap popularity, some colleagues of mine make high-flown speeches on cooperation and come up with all sorts of slogans. Unfortunately, nothing at all is being done in practice.” Alas, he is for the most part right.

3. Lastly, here is a quick analysis of Kazakhstan’s leading role in the region, pertinent domestic issues, and its ‘free agent’ status in regards to the world’s great powers.

Have a great weekend!

(Picture Source: CIA World Factbook)

Yesterday, we discussed security progress in Afghanistan and this was led by the words of the NATO commander for the mission, Gen. Dan K. McNeill, who seemed optimistic that the Afghan military could take over security for the country by 2011. However, Gen. McNeill also stated that though ‘toe-to-toe’ battles were on the downswing, the use of IEDs and suicide bombers was on the rise by the Taliban and other insurgents.

Just as McNeill was making his assessment, the Washington Post was leaked information about an upcoming US government report describing a dramatic increase in suicide bombings in the past 25 years, with the last five years seeing the biggest spike. The report states that of the 1,840 suicide incidents in the past 25 years, more than 86% have occurred since 2001. This is an alarming trend.

Where are these attacks occurring and by whom? It comes as no surprise that Iraq and Afghanistan have been the location of a large majority of these attacks; 920 in Iraq, 260 in Afghanistan, since 2001. In just last year alone, 658 attacks occurred around the world, including 542 in US-occupied Afghanistan and Iraq. Whether one supports the US troop presence in Afghanistan and Iraq or not, this specific method of violence has to be disturbing.

This is not just a US problem. The report states that suicide bombings have occurred in dozens of states on nearly every continent. In the past 25 years, 21,350 people have been killed and 50,000 injured by its use. Mohammed Hafez, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, CA, called this the ‘globalization of suicide bombs,’ which no longer are ‘confined to conflict zones, but are happening anywhere.’ He calls these suicide perpetrators ‘martyrs without borders.’ These incidents are not just occurring in US occupied territories, evidenced by the recent ‘plane incident’ in China’s Xinjiang Province, which if successful would have been added to this list.

What is behind this rise in suicide bombings as a method for warfare/violence? Is it just used because it has proven effective in changing state policy, as scholar Robert A. Pape strongly argues, or is something deeper and more troubling behind its rise? Do we now live in a world that has to accept this type of violence, ‘it can’t be stopped if someone really wants to do it,’ or is this just a phase or in fact something that can be defeated or at least marginalized?

The American Commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. Dan K. McNeill, gave an optimistic appraisal of Afghanistan’s stability on Sunday, stating that the Afghan army and police forces should be able to secure most of the country by 2011. McNeill argued that Afghan forces have done an effective job managing security for Kabul, although he stated with NATO support, and expressed confidence that the country could handle the presidential elections set for September 2009. According to McNeill, the insurgents ‘did not have a very good year last year’ and predicts that ‘toe-to-toe’ fights will probably be less common. However, he admits that the insurgent techniques of choice, IEDs and suicide bombing (which will be discussed tomorrow), is still a concern. He also acknowledged the veracity of reports stating an increase in foreign fighters arriving into Pakistan’s tribal areas which border Afghanistan.

Also of interest, Gen. McNeill asserted that ‘the long-term stability of Afghanistan depends on the good will and help of all its neighbors, not just Pakistan. All neighbors have to be helpful, and there are quite a few neighbors around here.’ One of those neighbors McNeill is no doubt referencing is Uzbekistan, and as has been reported on this blog, there has indeed been cooperative progress made. Here is President Karimov just over a week ago: “I would like to state that Uzbekistan stands ready to discuss and sign with NATO an agreement on providing for a corridor and transit through its territory to deliver non-military cargos through the border junction Termez-Khayraton.. In Uzbekistan we distinctly realize that achievement of peace and stability in Afghanistan would be a decisive factor of security which opens up big opportunities…”

On a more somber note, Richard Weitz, who I have referenced before, attended a briefing by counterinsurgency specialists Bruce Hoffman and Seth Jones titled “America’s Counterinsurgency Conundrum: Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Quest for Stability.” Jones and Hoffman reported their findings from their experiences with the US 82nd Airborne Division in four Afghan provinces bordering Pakistan. The two specialists argue that the US military has improved its counterinsurgency methods of late, but that much more needs to be done to defeat the Taliban and bring stability to the region. Hoffman laments of the lack of resources given to the US effort by its government, arguing that way too much is being spent on Iraq. Both specialists argued for the international community to see this Islamic insurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan as an ‘integrated whole.’ In other words, one is directly connected to the other and for success to be reached progress needs to occur on both sides of the border. Lastly, Hoffman calls this battle America’s ‘most acute foreign policy challenge.’

Quickly, a diplomatic visit by Krygyzstan’s President Bakiev to Kazakhstan this past week has been called a ’success’ by the head of Krygyzstan’s Head of Presidential Administration Medet Sadyrkulov. Kazakhstan President Nazarbaev assured Bakiev that a recently anounced ban on wheat exports would not apply to his country, the two sides discussed the possibilities of Kazakhstan financing a second gas pipeline through Kyrg territory, an agreement between the two states to hold a CA joint economic forum in Kazakhstan in 2009, which would focus on better distributing regional energy and water supplies among all five CA states, and lastly they discussed formulating a common CA plan for dealing with the Europe.

On April 11, I reported on the EU Troika-Central Asian summit held in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan. The post and most media outlets focused on energy relations and human rights issues between the EU representatives and all of the CA leaders present. It was reported that during the summit there was talk of a growing relationship between the EU and specific CA states (Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) regarding energy supply and diversification, but my conclusion and others’ held out little hope of any real progress on this issue.

However, new reports suggest that EU-Turkmenistan energy cooperation may be making significant progress with an agreement to supply gas to Europe through the Nabucco and Trans-Caspian Pipelines. In interviews with the high EU representatives at the Summit, Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel, EU Special Representative for Central Asia Pierre Morel, EU External Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, ‘signs of germination’ were expressed concerning closer energy relations.

When asked whether there had been any progress in Bilateral and Multilateral meetings concerning the Nabucco and Trans-Caspian pipelines Kouchner stated; “Yes, there is certainly some hope. The president [Turkmen’s Berdymukhammedov] has decided to furnish Europe, and of course France, with gas.”

EU External Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner more bluntly and confidently stated that an official Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was agreed upon with Ashgabat; “We have already signed MoU with Kazakhstan. We are signing MoU with Turkmenistan soon; we have finalized the negotiations. We would now also be ready to enter into dialogue to see all the options with energy with Uzbekistan.”

Now, nothing has become official yet, and there is much more that needs to be accomplished and sorted out before one can say that the EU-CA (Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan) have a formal energy-supply relations that largely exclude Russian influence and territory. There is the issue of exactly how the pipeline will run geographically to its end point in Austria and beyond; Turkey would need to be on board and appeased, and the issue of using Iranian territory still seems like a non-starter. Dimitrij Rupel, Slovenian foreign minister and head of the EU external relations council asserted; “No, the EU at the moment doesn’t have any substantial engagement plans with Iran.”

Stephan Blank, an excellent scholar on CA/Russian energy relations, will be given a voice about this EU-CA energy cooperation on this site in the next few days.

Additionally, when this EU Troika-CA Summit was originally held there was much said about how the EU would promote democracy and human rights in the region and how this would affect negotiations over other matters, such as energy policy. Here is an article summing up the Human Rights Watch’s demands/recommendations for the EU in their talks with each CA state, and here’s a list HRW’s reports on CA human rights’ issues.

On April 8th, Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher testified before the House’s subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment. His testimony mainly focused on Kazakhstan’s upcoming chairmanship of the OSCE in 2010 and how the US had put pressure on its current regime to implement reforms. Here is Boucher’s written testimony, journalist Joshua Kucera’s report on the hearings in Eurasianet.org, and here is the actual testimony on Video.

Boucher admitted that the US had led efforts among OSCE members to delay Kazakhstan’s bid for the chairmanship, but that the Bush administration has now come around to support the move after Astana promised to implement several significant reforms. Boucher states;

“We are working with the Government of Kazakhstan to fulfill the commitments it made when it was selected to become Chairman in Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in 2010. The Government committed to modernizing its election, political party, and media legislation by the end of 2008. It also committed to preserve the existing mandate of the Organization’s Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and defend the Office against any future efforts to weaken it. The Madrid Commitments for the Chairmanship may become a useful catalyst for Kazakhstan to intensify political reform.”

Boucher argued that the State Department had talked firmly with President Nazarbayev and other government leaders and heard from them ‘firm commitments’ about carrying out these promises. The assistant secretary of state also stated that his department had spoken with several Kazakhstan civil society and opposition groups recently and though he admitted they were skeptical, they agreed that ‘if’ the government actually went through with these reforms it would significantly open up the system and society.

Boucher also spoke about Uzbekistan’s ‘progress’ in regards to its human rights record;

“In Uzbekistan, we have made clear to the government that the U.S. desires a broad relationship, one in which human rights and democratic development play a vital role. We continually urge the government of Uzbekistan to take concrete actions to improve the human rights situation in the country. Recently, we welcomed some positive, albeit limited, steps taken by the government, including the release of several prisoners of conscience, the resumption of visits on a trial basis to detained persons by the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the passage of new legislation combating trafficking in persons. We have urged the government to take additional measures to address serious human rights concerns.”

There is currently a bill in Congress that would cut off aid and deny visas to Uzbekistan unless the nation’s government ‘makes substantial and continuing progress’ regarding respect for human rights, a multi-party system, and free and fair elections. Boucher commented that such legislation could ‘strengthen our hand’ with Uzbekistan. The timing of this bill in interesting though, as the US has been making strategic progress with Uzbekistan over military basing and transportation rights in the state and one wonders if President Karimov may decide he’s done playing America’s democracy/human rights game, as he did right after the Andijan incident in 2005. Of course, one could argue that this bill and Kazakhstan’s pledged reforms are just window dressing and offer only false promises.

Lastly, Kucera lamented that only 2, that’s right 2, US Congress members attended the hearing and even worse reported that they seemed completely unprepared and uninterested for the day’s discussion. Joshua Foust of Registan.net’s Central Asian blog, chastises not only the Congress members who failed to show or were ill-informed, but also Boucher for his ‘white-washing’ of the issues.

Back to the Art Scene; I apologize for once again mentioning a CA Art showcase that is only presently in New York City, but New York Historical Society is hosting the “Woven Spledor From Timbuktu to Tibet: Exotic Rugs and Textiles From New York Collectors” until August 17. Here is a review of the exhibition from the New York Times.

Richard Weitz, a scholar for the Hudson Institute, makes the argument that China’s government has either exaggerated or outright fabricated a plot by Uighur separatist to attack the upcoming Olympics. The plot in question was reported by Chinese authorities on April 10, and in their words involved 45 suspects from the Uighur dominated Xinjiang Province, who allegedly planned to use firearms, explosives, and other weapons to disrupt the upcoming Olympic Games. Weitz finds this claim ‘dubious’ because he:

1. Feels that the Chinese authorities have failed to produce evidence to the public verifying their claims
2. Believes China desires the safe transport of energy resources from a land route through Central Asia and into their own Xinjiang Province in order to sidestep the volatile Middle Eastern region and the US-controlled seaways. Therefore China is using this terrorist plot as an excuse to further spread its government’s authority into the Xinjiang Province and beyond into the small Central Asian states.

Both of Weitz’s arguments are sound and the Chinese government’s actions concerning its region’s of unrest, Xinjiang and Tibet, have been unquestionably harsh and repressive in the past, but it cannot be denied that there is a real terrorist threat, from the Uighur dominated regions of China and from sources as far away as Pakistan, where some of the suspects from the March 7 plane incident were trained and hailed from. The Uighur-based East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) has been blamed by the Chinese government for over 200 attacks since 1990 and not all of these could have been fabricated. Here is the Council on Foreign Relations quick synopsis of ETIM and their capabilities and supposed terrorist actions. It is also important to know that the ETIM is also considered a terrorist group by the United States (Here is a good article from Global Terrorism Analysis that sums up reasons for this identification) and the United Nations Security Council.

It goes without saying that any accusations the Chinese government makes regarding the Tibetan and Uighur-based regions and security issues should be looked at suspiciously, but it must be acknowledged that the Chinese state has cause to be concerned about a terrorist threat, specifically regarding its hosting of the upcoming Olympics. Am I being to kind/naïve about the Chinese government’s claims? Should the US government ask for evidence to verify these claims or should it just mind its own business as the Chinese almost assuredly believe it will?

PS: Here is a more in-depth article by Weitz’s discussing Russia, China, and the US’s interests and areas for competition/cooperation in Central Asia: “Averting a New Great Game in Central Asia”

The World Bank (WB) provided a briefing regarding the state of Eastern European and Central Asian economies before their annual IMF spring meeting. The World Bank’s report reinforced most of the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) recent analysis of the current and future state of CA’s economy. For instance, the World Bank warns of a coming economic growth slowdown in the region due to downturns in the financial markets of the US and Western Europe. Like the ADB, the WB briefing also focused on rising inflation in CA states and how it was causing food and energy prices to increase beyond the means of many of the region’s poor.

The WB recommended ‘timely measures’ of social assistance and public expenditures by the region’s governments to soften the landing for the regions poor, who will be the hardest hit during the coming economic downturn. The WB’s report is not all bad news. It states that economic growth in the region has been ‘strong’ in recent years and that years of reforms have made the region’s economies ‘resilient’ to most financial shocks. However, the report acknowledges that CA state economies still must undergo structural changes to increase their resiliency and efficiency. They urge a tightening of fiscal policy, intensifying banking supervision, and improving the investment environment to help bring in more FDI.

(Source for Photo: World Bank Website)

New York City’s Winkleman Gallery is currently exhibiting seven media projects called “I Dream of the Stans: New Central Asian Video.” One of the exhibitions curators, Leeza Ahmady, stated that their aim was to ‘assemble a representative collection that highlighted the adventurous spirit of regional artists.’ The exhibition features such CA artists as Said Atabekov, Rustam Khalfin, Julia Tikhonova, and Almagul Menlibayeva. Freelance journalist Deirdre Tynan wrote a critique and informative description for Eurasia.net. Parts of the exhibitions videos and stills can be seen on the Winkleman Gallery’s website here.  In case anyone is near by, the exhibition we continue until April 26.