Afghanistan and Central Asia

First off the post below was one done a few weeks ago, but we had to put it back up for so it could be linked to the Brookings Institute newsletter, my apologies for any confusion. Today, will be a glorified link-dump, focusing on Iran in Central Asia, among other topics.

A. Iran

In light of Iran’s most recent effort to join the SCO during the last Summit at the end of August, I thought I should go over a couple stories I’ve had linking the regional power to Central Asia. While, we are on the SCO, here is an article by Adrian Pabst tackling the great power issues surrounding Central Asia. It gives a curt geopolitical analysis of how the interests of Russia, China, and Iran have converged in Central Asia, mainly in their want to oust the US presence. The article was written before the Georgian/Russian conflict, but its analysis of growing Iran/Russian relations is solid and looks better by the day. One can’t discuss a regional power neighbor to the CA states and not mention energy dealings. Iran has also been making a push for CA, mainly Turkmenistan, oil and gas reserves and supply routes. An Iranian state gas industry manager stated that they were ‘full scale ready for transiting, exchanging, and buying Turkmenistan’s’ supplies, claiming that Tehran was the ‘most secure, most economical’ transit route. Just days ago, Iran’s ambassador to Turkmenistan spoke out about the ‘necessity of waging a campaign against extremism and Salafism.’ Going further, he stated; ‘The expansion of Salafism in Central Asia is surely a security threat to Iran, and we are coordinating with the Central Asian countries to impede its expansion.’ This quote could have come from the US ambassador to Afghanistan. Lastly, Iran and Uzbekistan announced that trade between the two nations had increased to $650 million and was hopefully to reach $1 billion in the near future.

Now quickly…

India in Central Asia

I’m not gonna discuss too much here as I plan on doing an update on India-CA relations next week, but here are two pieces, ‘New Delhi looks to Asia for Energy‘ and ‘India Looks to Central Asia for Energy‘, (geez those are similar titles) to give you a little background if you are interested.

SCO Summit

On Monday, or Tuesday at the latest, I will summarize, analyze, and (patronize?) the recently concluded SCO summit in Dushanbe.  But here is the official summary by the organization itself to wet your SCO whistle.

FPA Blogs

Karin Esposito at Religion and Politics just did a great piece on radicalism and religious/women liberties in Tajikistan.

Joel Davis at US Role in World discussed a surge in troops in Afghanistan, which includes an important article by Barnett R. Rubin.

While I hope I provided some interesting stories and things to think about, if not, I’ll try harder on Monday.

In honor of Dushanbe’s hosting of tomorrow’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization 2008 summit, we should discuss the current state of the nation, its struggles and prospects. To help me do this I will use another one of Johannes Linn’s, executive director of the Brookings Institution’s Wolfensohn Center for Development, pieces he wrote while visiting the region a month ago. Tajikistan is obviously a state with much geographic importance, bordering China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, being a hub for the transport of extremists into Afghanistan and a hub for getting narcotics out of the nation, and as a former Soviet state it takes on new significance in the light of the Georgia-Russia conflict (you may have heard, former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney stated the word ‘Soviets’ instead of Russia, not once, but twice when speaking to reporters at the Democratic Convention, a slip up or a coming Cold War II, you decide!). Tajikistan also has grown diplomatically in recent years and finds itself in a greater amount of international and regional groupings, garnering greater international aid and assistance.

Let us first go over what Linn sees as Tajik’s main problems or possible upcoming crises:

1. Economic Crisis - Linn blames poor economic management by President Rakhmon’s government, regional factors such as disputes over energy transfers, and international trends (rising food prices and global warming) for the recent troubles facing the nation and its citizens economic picture. This of course was made visible during the past horrific winter, which in many ways brought the nation to a standstill.

2. Political Instability - Though less visible, says Linn, the deteriorating economic situation and quality of public services are causing the nation’s citizenry to question Rakhmon and his political elites ability to govern effectively. Though he rightly believes, that an uprising or ‘color’ revolution, as was the case in Kyrgyzstan, is far from happening, a more likely outcome would be an internal battle between political elites for control of the state, which we have discussed here. Either way, instability would ensue, creating a myriad of problems to this already poor nation.

3. International Perception - Linn worries that these above potential crises could damage Tajik’s image further with international and regional donors and scare off foreign investors, two sectors which could provide vital resources for the state

It is not all bad news in Tajikistan, however. Linn highlights the government’s following of a new IMF plan to deal with their macroeconomic structural problems, the fact that international aid groups are sticking around around to help with the possible upcoming crises, and the new presence of Russia and China’s as aid donors, ready to engage with the traditional/Western donors. Still, the Rakhmon and international and regional donors and groups have much work to do to solve this nation’s myriad problems. Linn spot on argues that Rakhmon’s government needs to open itself up more to market-driven economic measures and restructuring, show more effective management in times of crisis, and create conditions for a more transparent and therefore accountable government. External donors, including Russia and China, need to stay committed to solve the nation’s problems, and regional groupings need to get together to start effectively dealing with the water and electric energy issues facing the region as a whole. (Linn has written two more pieces in this series dealing with the region’s dire water and energy situation, I will discuss them at a later date, The Upcoming Water-Energy-Food Crisis Risks in Central Asia: Update on an International Response and Central Asia’s Energy Challenge: Overcoming the Natural Resource Curse.) Tajikistan has other issues, drug trafficking, Afghan-Pakistan regional instability, and the dance it must perform when dealing with the great powers from its west, east, north, but these economic and energy issues need to be dealt with as soon as possible if this nation is going to progress in any meaningful way.

Tajik’s Ambassador to UK

For the first time in its history, Tajikistan now has an ambassador in the United Kingdom. Here is an interview with Erkin Kasymov. It is interesting to see how safely he must field questions regarding the Russia-Georgian conflict and about China and Uzbekistan’s treatment of Muslims. Hopefully this diplomatic seat can help bring the nation benefits in many of key areas just discussed.

(Photo Source: The Brookings Institution)

It seems like every other post I was link dropping Johannes Linn’s Brooking Institution pieces on Central Asian’s energy, water, and food challenges, but today is the day, my friends, when I actually discuss them!

1. Central Asia’s Energy Challenge - In Linn’s ‘Central Asia’s Energy Challenge; Overcoming the Natural Resource Curse‘ he reports back from an Almaty conference on ‘Institution Building and Economic Development in Central Asia’ and proceeds to break down what the Central Asian leaders need to accomplish and focus on in order to get the most out of their natural resources for their nation, its citizens too, not just themselves.

Important decisions CA leaders have to make:

a. whether to extract the energy resource as quickly as possible or to save it underground in case prices get even higher.

b. whether to run the energy sector as  a state monopoly or to provide open access to national and international private investors

c. whether to spend or save the national earnings from the resources

d. finally, who to bestow the honor of selling the resources to?

One of Linn’s most salient points is that all of these decisions provide opportunities for special interests to abuse.  In other words, many people want to receive these energy resource rewards, and without a transparent government, institutions, and processes certain interests may take advantage to the detriment of society as a whole.  For this has happened to a majority of states ‘cursed’ with energy riches.  So how does Linn propose the leaders and government’s of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan with their oil and gas supplies, and Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, with their hopefully future electricity and water supplies, institutionalize a productive, efficient, and fair way of profiting from their land?  He states four rather general prescriptions that lack actual specifics, but thankfully follows them up with two solid recommendations; 1. effective use of a national resource fund 2. membership in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, which aims to assist countries with managing natural resource in a transparent and accountable manner.

First his general recommendations;

1. Think long-term, don’t rush

2. Effectively manage the path of extraction, ‘go where the greatest capacity is and where risks of mismanagement are least’

3. Manage the overall fiscal balance along with the non-energy fiscal balance, do not let things get out of whack in other words

4. Most important, introduce transparency and accountability in decision making and implementation

After reading these, I wondered how we are to expect autocrats such as Berdimuhammedow, Nazarbayev, and Karimov to just implement transparency in their greatest controlled asset!  But Linn provides two more specific recommendations to avoid or contain the ‘curse’ and rightly acknowledges that Nazarbayev’s Kazakhstan has done a more than solid job managing his nation’s energy supplies.  The instrument of a national resource fund can help a country save for the tougher times of lower prices and curtail wasteful spending and corruption, as Kazakhstan has shown by putting in over $21 billion into their fund and diversifying their economy, building up their infrastructure, and paying off debt.  Linn’s second sound proposal is for all these states to become members of the the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) which publishes annual reports about how well each nation under its watch manages their natural resources, in other words it keeps an eye on graft, poor use, and mismanagement.  Kyrgyzstan is already a member of EITI along with Kazakhstan, but Tajikisan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan are not.  It is the hope that transparency begets responsible government and action that in turn provide the each of nation’s citizenry with the resources they deserve.

2. Water-Food Crisis in CA -  This is a companion piece to Linn’s earlier work on the impending water crisis in Central Asia after last year’s drought and particularly harsh winter, updating on the international response.  In this piece, Linn is reporting back from another conference in Almaty, this one including international and bilateral agencies reviewing the region’s water-food situation and planning a response.  Linn was overall pleased with the response, even calling it ’swift’, by the UNDP, international financial institutions, and bilateral donor agencies in order to help the region’s states to prepare for coming droughts and tough winters.  Though we have just discussed Tajikistan’s water issues, Linn provides a review of the whole region’s situation and cites World Bank statistics and predictions regarding the region’s past and future levels of precipitation, temperature, snow cover, river flows, reservoir levels, and vegetation.  Though there were many ‘normal’ signs of in these sectors, the World Bank report and Almaty conference warned of ’serious economic and social consequences’ for a majority of regions if efforts were not made to solve the region’s water and food situations.  I do not have time to go over all the recommendations, but Linn seemed hopeful that the international community would help the readiness of the region’s governments to respond with effective policies and interventions, instead of just squabble with each other as in the past, to minimize future hardships when, not if, they come to pass.  This is great news that the leaders of CA and of the international community are getting together at a time of relative calm in order to help prepare for a moment of strain and pressure, but until those moments arise one can never really know how much progress was made.

I’ll leave you with some good news, it appears the World Bank and Kazak gov-led Aral Sea project is making some progress, as the northern part of the former great lake has seen its water grow by 30% in the last five years.  We can only hope that this is just a start.

The Aral Sea in 2004 on the right, and today on the left.

(Photo Source: GoogleEarth/PA)

Here in the US, we do not have many discussions about whether our nation is at war in Afghanistan.  It is basically seen as a fact.  After all, we were attacked on our homeland by terrorists from the nation who were backed by its Taliban government at the time.  Only recently, have their been discussions as to whether we could succeed in this conflict, and even those are rather muted.  According to this excellent and provocative Der Speigel article, it is shown that in Germany, questions about the their nation’s role and presence in NATO’s ISAF mission in Afghanistan are the rule and opposition to the mission the majority opinion.

With Afghanistan becoming increasingly more unstable and the Taliban gaining stronger and more numerous footholds in which to launch attacks against the Afghan government and NATO forces, this is a time when a strong will is needed.  Not only a strong will, but a belief that what your mission is is right and that you can accomplish it.  The Germans, who have been placed in the relatively calm Kunduz Province and have avoided major combat missions, have seen the Taliban and the conflict come to them in recent months.  They lost a soldier to a roadside bomb and a German checkpoint mistakenly killed three civilians.  Still there are signs that German citizens oppose their presence in Afghanistan and even their military leaders in the nation have failed to call the conflict a war.  This is a telling comment by the German defense minister and the American leader of NATO troops at a recent press conference:

“Are we at war here?” a reporter asked the defense minister in Kabul the next day, to which an exasperated Jung replied: “We are fighting terrorism, but we are not at war.” Only seconds later, his host corrected him in front of live cameras. War? “Yes, we are waging a war,” said David McKiernan, the American four-star general commanding the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan (ISAF).”

The country and its soldiers have in many ways used a myriad of terms instead of calling the conflict war; they have used “networked security,” a “civilian-military approach,” “stabilization” and “reconstruction assistance.”  According to Speigel, 2/3 of German citizens are opposed to the Bundeswehr’s Afghan mission, and ‘politicians in Berlin read opinion polls more often than reports on the military situation.’  An even more disturbing statement in the article read, “An astonishing commonality unites opponents and supporters {of the Afghan war}. Both are dangerously uninterested in the conflict.”  The problem with this is that if one reads the second half of the Speigel article, one cannot help but see that the Taliban, led by Mullah Salam in Kunduz, are in fact bringing a war to NATO and its German contingency, whether they like it or not.  Attacks, especially of the suicide bomber variety, have increased dramatically along with complex missions against what were thought as safe NATO bases near Kabul and in the north.

The US and several NATO allies have recently been escalating its military reach, performing military mission in Pakistan’s FATA for instance, and are clearly trying to push back the Talibans recent gains.  Will this work?  Is this a long-term strategy?  The US knows that the military is not the only solution to this conflict, but that it has a major and necessary role to defeat this insurgency.  I just don’t see how the Germans, a proud and strong nation and people, could still be sitting on the fence, or even behind, when in front of them is battle worth fighting and an enemy worth defeating.  I’m not trying to say that the Germans and other NATO nations not involved in direct combat in the past few years have not contributed much to stablizing and creating a democratic Afghanistan, they have, but more needs to be done.

(Photo: Der Speigel: A Bundeswehr patrol in Kunduz. At the end of August, a German soldier died and, not long later, soldiers at a German roadblock opened fire on a car, killing three civilians.)

Today I will provide several links to three or so stories which have been developing for days and sometimes weeks now in the region.  Some aspects have to do with items and themes we have covered, ’soft power’ in Afghanistan, another is an issue or event that I have barely mentioned.  Though I want discuss it today, I plan on doing a Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit analytical summary later this week, so you have something to look forward to!

1. Afghanistan insurgency/NATO presence - The report of over 90 civilians, including tens of children, killed by a US airstrike in the village of Azizabad has been perculating and gathering steam for two or three days now, with each side, the villagers, Taliban spokesman, and US military, having different accounts.   The US military insists ‘only’ about 5-7 civilians were killed and over 30 militants in the strike.  In any case, the US military was opening up a follow-up investigation and Gen. McKiernan, leader of all NATO forces, stated “The people of Afghanistan have our commitment to get to the truth.”  This case show’s the dangerous of fighting an insurgency embedded in the local populace and the ramifications of doing so with air power.  We will see what develops in the next few days.

2. Dexter Filkins has written a long article titled ‘Talibanistan’ for the New York Times Magazine.  I have not had time to read through the whole thing, but it show’s the Taliban’s advancements in the Afghanistan and describes how they would lead the region again if they continued to garner more authority and support.  I will hopefully discuss this in greater length this week.

3. A few days ago the US military admitted that they performed a helicopter-led raid into Pakistan to target major insurgent leaders.  Here is a press conference by the US State Department discussing the US reasoning and some information about the attack.  And just hours ago, the US launched several missiles from a predator drone inside of Pakistan’s North Waziristan, aimed at prominent Taliban leaders.  These efforts of course come on the heels of a secret meeting between the Pakistan Army Chief and senior US/NATO military officials aboard an aircraft carrier and provide an immediate challenge for the newly elected Prime Minister Asif Ali Zardari.  About Zardari, here is an editorial welcoming him and here is one labeling him ‘mad and bad.’  In any case, he’ll have some busy first days at the office.

4. With VP Dick Cheney calling Russia’s actions in Georgia ‘troublesome and unhelpful actions’ and warning that if Moscow has its ways with S. Ossetia and Abkhazia; “We know that if one country is allowed to unilaterally redraw the borders of another, it will happen and it will happen again,” there is new heat between the these old cold war foes and Central Asia may find itself squeezed between the two (with a solid pinch from China).  For a perspective on what that would be like, James Traub wrote an interesting article about how the ramping up of rhetoric, animosity, and actual geopolitical gains and loses might have on all of us.  He discusses that Russia truly may have entered a 19th century world where on its borders it only sees ‘enemies or vassals.’  If this is true, and of course nothing is ever that simple, than the Central Asian states are stuck between two very sharp and unfriendly choices when it comes to relations with Mother Russia.

Tidbits: Martha Brill Olcott and Johannes Linn wrote a concise piece analyzing Central Asia’s current difficulties.   And in what is being billed as a visible sign of Kazakhstan’s economic prosperity, the first British private school, Haileybury Almaty, has opened in the nation’s capital.

Hope you find these of interest.  Comments and questions are always welcome and will be posted on the site.

So with one billion dollars in aid combined with a diplomatic visit by Vice President Dick Cheney, featuring many strong rebukes to Russia and a statement arguing for the nation’s inclusion in NATO, the US appears to have anted up or at least called Moscow’s hand in the Georgia-Russia conflict. Here are couple Cheney quotes while in Tbilisi: first referring to Russia’s invasion, calling it “an illegitimate, unilateral attempt to change your country’s borders by force that has been universally condemned by the free world”, and going on “Russia’s actions have cast grave doubt on Russia’s intentions and on its reliability as an international partner, not just in Georgia but across this region and indeed throughout the international system.” What do these strong statements and strong actions, the billion in aid, in defense of Georgia and their territorial integrity and democratic government mean for other former Soviet states, especially in Central Asia?

I want to examine that question in two sectors, both strategic, but different animals none the less: 1. After being shown as holding a weak hand in this conflict deep Russia’s ’sphere of influence’ the US appears to showing diplomatic and material gumption and providing breathing space for Georgia’s government to regain legitimacy and stability. Could the states of Central Asia expect similar treatment if Moscow deepened to an unacceptable degree their already latent involvement in these nations? Now I am not saying Russia will invade any of the CA states, that plain and simple will not be happening any time soon, but Moscow could continue to deepen their relations and influence with states like Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan in ways that threaten their ability to have normal relations with the US/West/and even China. So does this move by the Bush administration provide some sense of security or Moscow push back for these CA states? I think to a relative degree it does. The Russian presence in these CA states is so omnipresent, not no move by the US/West/China, could push them completely out, and these CA states would not want that in any case, but this Cheney visit is sending a powerful symbol that the US sees interests in the Caucasus and beyond and will make moves to protect them and keep Russia from any form of domination. This US strategic move helps the CA leaders know that they have some breathing space when dealing with Russia and China for that matter, and the next section will showcase this.

2. Energy Supplies and the Georgia Conflict - Soon after Russia was seen as successful invading and defeating the Georgian army there was great fear that Moscow would secure the removal of President Saakashvili and then the BTC pipeline, giving it a de facto veto over its supplies to Europe. Future pipelines that like BTC would circumvent Russian territory on their way to Europe, such as Nabucco or the Trans-Caspian, were also in danger. Does Cheney’s visit, US aide and assurance, and the fact that Russia has been left rather isolated internationally since the invasion, specifically referring to its lack of support from China and the CA states during the SCO meeting, though there are contradictory accounts, portend not as drastic a future for oil/gas supplies from Central Asia and the Caucasus and Central Asia to Europe? Well, yes and no. Even with US aide and diplomatic support, Russia is still only miles from the BTC pipeline making EU investors and customers nervous to say the least. And only a day or so after the SCO summit, Putin was in Uzbekistan securing a new pipeline that would directly challenge the planned Nabucco line and also Putin stated that military cooperation between the two states was to be widened. (After the SCO summit, China didn’t miss out on any deal making in the region either, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan) However, before VP Cheney stopped in Tbilisi he paid a visit to its neighbor Azerbaijan. This stopover was no doubt an attempt to shore up Azerbaijan as an ally of the West and as a energy transit nation for the BTC, and hopefully other future projects. The Russians know what Cheney is all about, US interests and oil/gas power and contacts. John Hannah, a US national security advisor, stated “The overriding priority, especially in Baku, Tbilisi and Kiev, will be the same: a clear and simple message that the United States has a deep and abiding interest in the well-being and security of this part of the world.” Well it is true that the Russian disturbance in Georgia has caused EU oil/gas investors to quiver and show reluctance in backing future deals, the US is not going down without a fight, though this is definitely an uphill battle. To provide a real counterweight to Moscow’s monopoly on oil/gas from the CA region, the EU must organize a more coherent and ambitious effort in Central Asia. The West needs to show the CA states that they will provide the money, materials, security, and the breathing space needed, otherwise they will move further into Gazprom’s and Russia’s hands.

These are complicated issues and no doubt I have left holes all over the place, so please fill me and my readers in!

For the past year and half the US media has been dominated by the 2008 presidential election. This is in many ways a good thing as we need to know who these candidates are and what they stand for and against, but the coverage has become so saturated that we are starting to miss coverage of actual news, like what is happening in Afghanistan. Lately, all we really hear about the nation is from either Obama or McCain’s mouth. I want to connect this point to my post yesterday discussing winning the public relations battle with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

A. First things first, this editorial by Joanna Nathan, a senior adviser in Kabul for the International Crisis Group, highlights the importance of the subject of yesterday’s post, US-sponsored public radio throughout the world. Nathan’s ‘Selling the Taliban’ discusses how the Taliban have used the media, mainly the internet, to spread their message, garner support, hide atrocities committed, intimidate local Afghans, and discourage the international community. They are successfully winning the PR battle in this conflict and Nathan rightly demands that the Afghan government and international community stand up to make sure their side of the story is told and to highlight wrongdoings by the Taliban to deligitimize their authority and presence. I would also like to see the nascent Afghan civil society take a part in standing up against poor treatment and intimidation by the Taliban, but of course they need to feel safe enough to do this.

B. ‘But Sir, could you provide us with an example of how NATO and the Afghan government can accomplish this? Why, sure.’ The story of the delivery of a large turbine to the Kajaki Dam deep in Taliban territory by British troops, but also with help from Americans, Chinese, French, Canadians, and Dutch, is an event and action that should be broadcasted all over the Afghan nation and world. These soldiers braved Taliban attacks to bring electricity to the Afghan people. This effort should be promoted to the far reaches of the nation; ‘The Taliban want to keep you poor and wanting, and your government wants to provide services to make your life better.’ Obviously, this is a simplification, but not by too far a degree. This is a concrete improvement in the lives of thousands of Afghans and NATO and the Afghan government need to make sure the population is aware of productive and beneficial deeds of this sort to disenfranchise the Taliban and pull away its supporters.

C. The release of thousands of prisoners and the following instability of the key city of Kandahar is just such a prime example of a situation that the Taliban can exploit with their public relations tools. The well-orchestrated attack releasing 900 prisoners, 350 of whom were members of the Taliban, portrayed the strength of the insurgency and the weakness of the Afghan government and limited ability of the NATO foreign forces. The New York Times ran this report in late August showcasing these points and how the people of Kandahar are viewing the dramatic situation in their hometown. They appear to have real fear of the Taliban and of a major battle being fought right in front of them. This is one example of a battle that the Afghan government and NATO forces need to win, both strategically and in the hearts and minds.

D. Bob Zoellick, President of the World Bank, in an article about the keys to rebuilding Afghanistan highlights the gains the nation has made recently in lowering the infant mortality rate, creating schools for 6 million Afghan children, and in providing almost 500,000 citizens with microfinance loans. These positive developments and signs need to be expressed outwardly. Zoellick of course also acknowledges the many struggles that the nation faces, especially the instability and failure to control and defeat the insurgency. I will not go over all of his recommendations, but he rightly focuses on agriculture reform, creating an anti-corruption body, and the choking of the Afghan narcotics trade.

I’m not trying to sugarcoat the situation in Afghanistan or suggest that the US/NATO/Afghan government should use false or superficial propaganda, but there are positive things happening in the country and the Taliban is waging a public relations war that we must beat them at to win this long-term battle. The Afghan people need to receive concrete security and services if they are to chose the Afghan government over the Taliban, but we should not underestimate the power of perception (and deception).

PS: (Am I writing a letter?) Here is an interesting report on an unusual meeting between powerful members of NATO and the US military in Afghanistan (Mullen, Petraeus, McKiernan) and Pakistan’s Army Chief of Staff Gen. Kayani on a US aircraft carrier in the Indian Ocean. The subject of the meeting was unavailable, but it no doubt concerned the insurgency raging in both nations around the Afghan/Pak border. It also appears that it was not a confrontational affair, with one aide stating ‘It was one of those meetings to help clear up the situation, get an understanding of the issues, and look for a way forward.’ We’ll see if any concrete action comes out of it. Of course the recent incident of US troops launching an attack in Pakistan territory may complicate the matter. (Make sure to check out FPA’ s Bilal Qureshi’s excellent Pakistan blog)

In the past few weeks we have discussed Russian relations and influence in Central Asia in the prism of the recent Georgia-Russian conflict, and for good reason, as the war sent vibrations across the geopolitical landscape, and was especially relevant to former Soviet Republics such as our CA states.  However, before the early August invasions I had come across a few CA-Russian connected stories, that we must never the less view in a new light.

The first story is a report published just days ago, but about a process that has been ongoing for years.  The Heritage Foundation’s Helle Dale and Oliver Horn discussed the retreat of the US-sponsored Voice of America radio programs throughout the Caucasus, Eastern Europe and Central Asia in past years.  On this site, I commonly use Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, an affiliate US-sponsored radio program, sources and advocate its positive ’soft power’ impact, so this report intrigued and disturbed me.  Dale and Horn assert that poor funding, a concentration of funding going to the Middle East and Asia, outsourcing of broadcasts to semi-private entities with ‘dubious’ track records, and Russian supported outright hostility and intimidation have caused the Voice of America and its local partners to close shop in Central Asia.  The report also mentions that Radio Free Europe was a ‘vulnerable’ target for the Kremlin-led crackdown.  Real quick the goal or mandate for these US-sponsored radio programs are to ‘explain US foreign policy, present responsible discussions and opinion on US policy, and offer a balanced and comprehensive projection of significant American thought and institutions.’

What to do?  Congress can step in and has to raise and keep funding.  Just last month, the Senate Appropriations Committee explicitly funded Voice of America programming in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.  Dale and Horn smartly recommend establishing a doctrine to help explain the purpose and coordinate the specific role of each foreign radio program, reforming the nascent Broadcasting Board of Governors, and increasing and ensuring that regions outside the Middle East receive stable funding.  We all know here how important the Central Asian region is to US foreign policy and the power that the Voice of America can have in places of the world in need of accurate and different viewpoints.  How do you view its influence in the CA and the world?  Does Russia have good reason to attempt to shut it down or is US stepping on others toes just to promote our own interests?

The next few Russian-CA items are military/security based: According to the Russian newspaper Commersant and Russian Air Force Commander-in-Chief Alex Zelin, Russia plans on establishing their own anti-missile system in the Caucasus and Central Asian regions. Zelin stated; ‘Previous cooperation on missile defense systems has proven that the joint regional anti-missile system established by members of the Commonwealth of Independent States should be expanded.’  The joint missile defense system currently includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Ukraine.  Will this plan come to fruition or is it just bluster in response to US-missile defenses in Poland and Czech Republic?

CSTO Secretary General Nikolai Bordyuzha announced that the organization will set up a joint task force in Central Asia to ‘become a restraining military and political factor in the region, taking an uneasy situation in Afghanistan into account.  The CSTO already has several military groupings in the region, and along with Russia’s several military bases stationed there, and similar endeavors of the SCO, it appears Russia is attempting to solidify its position in the region as concretely as possible.

Lastly in regards to Russian-led security outfits; Russian President Medvedev has outlined a new security organization to deal with issues such as terrorism and illegal migration spaning from Europe to Asia.  Moscow has reportedly invited all NATO and EU nations, all its ex-Soviet states, the SCO, and China to a large conference to discuss the enterprise for next year.  The aims and plausability of such an expansive security grouping is far-fetched, but the proposal raises several interesting questions of Russia’s current stance in the region and world and its desires as well.

Finally, over a month or two ago, we discussed the rise in violent crime against immigrants, those mainly with darker skin from Central Asia, in Russia.  Well it appears the situation has not gotten better, but that some good news might be on the horizon.  A big issue was whether the Russian state would crackdown on these racist criminals and in this there is one sign of hope.  In late July, a skinhead group was arrested and brought to trial for the murder of 20 migrants.  These perpetrators blatantly attacked their victims in public and used video to catalog their crimes.  The Russian government must show its people and the world that this type of behavior to minorities is unacceptable.

In the midst of the SCO’s annual summit and the US Republican Party Presidential Convention both the New York Times and the International Herald Tribune found space on their front pages to discuss Tajikistan’s water woes.  Now we have discussed Tajikistan much recently, mainly because of its hosting of the SCO summit, and we have also in the past talked about its at times, especially this last summer, dire water and energy situation, but I feel it important to take note when a major media outlets cover the story.

The Times does a solid job recounting the short and tumultous recent history of the state, the Soviet past, civil war, and harsh 2007-2008 winter, and the state’s obstacles in supplying its people and the region with water and energy, costs, lack of foreign investors, geographical roadblocks such as earthquakes and terrain, regional disagreements, and poor management.  The article also does a curt, but still somewhat hard-hitting discussion of Tajik Rahmon government failures to provide services, especially energy related, to its people.  In an interview, an American NGO official called ‘chronic mismanagement’ by the government the main culprit behind the energy failures of the last winter.  David L. Stern, the author of the article, also reports that several unnamed diplomats and experts believe Tajik is threatening to become a ‘failed state.’  On the other hand, the article is mainly about the nation’s energy/water present and future arrangements and in discussing the Rogun dam proposal, the current use of the Nurek dam (Still the world’s tallest), and the problems with both, it was an informative article for many who most likely have never read much about the country.  For a more in-depth look into the Tajik and Central Asia’s energy challenge, once again check out Johannes F. Linn’s two pieces, which I keep linking too, but not discussing, maybe tomorrow?  (The Upcoming Water-Energy-Food Crisis Risks in Central Asia: Update on an International Response and Central Asia’s Energy Challenge: Overcoming the Natural Resource Curse)

It would be a travesty if I didn’t show you the excellent photo album accompanying the Times article.  It showcases Tajik’s dams, geography, and its people beautifully:  Dang it!  I tried to embed it in, but was unable.  Please follow link.

PS: Tajikistan and Russia signed a joint statement for expanding military and technical cooperation in order to ensure national and regional security during their the SCO summit.

(Photo Source: New York Times)