Russia will open a new base in Osh, Kyrgyzstan, later this year. Osh once hosted a Soviet airbase and is strategically located in the Ferghana Valley, extremely close to Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. The agreement will last for 49 years, to be renewed thereafter. All soldiers there will have diplomatic immunity, a courtesy not extended to the Americans. Also unlike the Americans, Russia is acting as security guarantor for the region, rather than a stop-over point.

And this is what Uzbekistan, and more distantly Belarus, is objecting to. According to a statementpublished by the Uzbek Foreign Ministry’s Jahon news agency, a second base in Kyrgyzstan could aggravate ethnic tensions (Osh has a significant Uzbek population) and provoke terrorism. Uzbekistan has long been trying to assert its own regional influence, and a significant increase in Russian military presence will be another obstacle to Uzbek influence over its neighbors.

According to the International Crisis Group, Tajikistan may be headed for economic collapse.
 http://www.rferl.org/content/Tajikistan_…

The country has been subsisting on remittance payments from migrant workers in Russia, but work is drying up quickly. Many are headed home. Some of the workers who have decided to stay are not making enough to send back, either from lack of work or having wages withheld. This New York Times article from February 10th details the hardships being experienced by Tajik migrant workers in Russia.

 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/world/…

Police bribes and racially motivated killings are making a bad economic situation worse.
Tajikistan is dependent on natural gas from Uzbekistan, who has been blocking the construction of hydropower plants that could provide enough electricity to meet domestic demand. The plants could also limit the amount of water that goes downstream to Uzbekistan. Tajikistan is clearly desperate, as they have agreed to allow non-military NATO supplies bound for Afghanistan, as the following Radio Free Europe article explains.
 http://www.rferl.org/Content/Tajikistan_…

Unfortunately, I doubt payments for that will be enough to keep Tajikistan from serious economic duress.

It is being reported that the US Joint Chiefs of Staff will issue a report recommending that the Obama administration lower its expectations for a democratic Afghanistan and instead concentrate on regional stability and defeating Al Qaeda and the Taliban. I have not seen the report myself, but Politico's David Cloud asserts that the report by the JCS has come to the conclusion that the Bush administration's emphasis on creating a free, open Afghan society and governance may be too difficult to obtain in a timely manner and should be looked at as a ‘vision for the future’ and not as a ‘goal.’

The report calls for ‘narrowing’ the US/NATO goals to ‘just’ defeating the Taliban and Al Qaeda, uprooting their sanctuaries in Pakistan, and ‘ensuring’ regional stability. The thought that these are ‘narrow’ goals is laughable considering how challenging they have and will continue to be. Nevertheless, this is definitely a more realist outlook than trying to obtain a democratic and liberal style governance and society in the Afghan state.

This report, which should be out in the open and on the president's desk soon, comes at a crucial time as the Obama administration is preparing to send around 12,000 more troops into the conflict.  Obama, who seems like he has realist, pragmatic leanings, may be sympathetic to this plan and will accordingly direct these incoming troops to these newly-focused goals.   It is also well-known that Obama staked much of his campaign rhetoric on changing US-Afghan War policy and putting the conflict to the forefront of American foreign policy.  We’ll have to see how Obama, Petraeus, Bob Gates all see this plan in the next few weeks.

The war in Afghanistan has been going on for nearly 8 years now, (for the people of Afghanistan, a lot longer), and though I don't see the American people wavering too much in support of the effort, there is definitely those who feel like some progress needs to be shown. Will a concentration of forces, resources, and strategy centered on the specific goals of stopping Al Qaeda and Taliban's refuge in Pakistan and a lessening of talk and efforts for state building bring some tangible results to show the American people and the world. And maybe this will allow more breathing space and time for the Afghan government to grow in strength. Can the US have its cake (regional security) and eat it too (Afghan/Pakistan democracy)?

What goals should the US emphasis in Afghanistan? Would the JCS recommendations undermine the democratic gains already made in the country and possible in the surrounding region?

(Photo Source: AP)

Just as Iraq's provinces express their newly given right to participate in an election, the Afghanistan people will have to wait a little bit longer for their turn. The Independent Election Commission of Afghanistan has decided to postpone the country's presidential election until August 20th for the expressed reason of registering more voters, setting up the voting machinery, and hopefully giving NATO/Afghan troops more time to bring ‘chaotic’ districts in control. This upcoming election will be only the 2nd time in the country's history that it will vote for a governmental head of state.

While Interior Minister Mohammad Hanif Atmar was preaching calm about the delay, opposition members of parliament, who oppose current President Karzai, have made vocal their concerns. The Afghan constitution calls for there to be presidential elections before the office's term is up on May 22 and now this is obviously not the case. It appears that Karzai will still hold the presidency during this interim period between May and August without Constitutional authority. Karzai, who has every intention of winning the upcoming election, has stated that he approves of the Election Commission's delay, but I have not heard much from him regarding the gray ruling period.

It seems that NATO/US are going along with the delay as they do not want to do anything that could threaten the further destabilization of the country and region. They could also use the time to get the new US brigades into position to protect civilian voters:

“We have always said it is important that elections should be held this year and we are pleased that the decision has now been taken,” NATO spokesman James Appathurai told Reuters.

“The date chosen will give us as NATO sufficient time to properly prepare to support the Afghan government in ensuring enough security for the elections to go forward.”

One has to be understanding that the situation in Afghanistan is far from ‘normal’ and in order to help build up a democratic state and society, time and patience will be needed on many occasions. It appears this is one of those times.

(Photo: An Afghan women voting in 2004)

Amid all the hullabaloo around Obama's decision to shut down Gitmo within one year, is Gitmo's brother, the Bagram Air Base prison in Afghanistan. The air base is home to an important prison system that holds some of ‘worst of the worst’. The US considers the 600 or so inmates prisoners of war and holds them indefinitely and with no official charges. Most of these prisoners are Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters, but some of them, suspected to be around 30, are brought there from other countries under more of a legal cloud.

Obama did not forget about this base during his executive order spree, but in fact ordered the defense department to perform a review of the situation in six months. After this report, it is likely Obama will make some changes. Closing Bagram's prison will be much more difficult to accomplish than Gitmo, and that's saying something, and would not be recommended. These prisoners are dangerous and it should be assumed that many of them will just go back and join the fight against the Afghan government and NATO forces. It is also accurate to assume that a small group of these prisoners may be a threat to US homelands.

Nevertheless, it should be expected that Obama's administration will probably narrow the definition of enemy combatant under the Bush administration and this could open up Bagram's operations to greater scrutiny.

The Bagram prison is just one of many in the country holding insurgents and other criminals, and the US military has done a decent job moving inmates to these Afghan controlled holdings. However, Obama's troop build up will inevitably lead to more combat arrests and where these ‘fresh fish’ end up will be interesting to see. Before Obama came to office the Bush administration ordered a huge multi-million dollar expansion of the prison, which is reported to have more humane facilities for the inmates, and this may stave off some of the expected congestion, but it does not answer the now front and center question of who is an enemy combatant and what to do with them?

This is an important issue and I promise to keep my eye on future developments.

(1st Photo: 451st Air Expeditionary Group changes command at Bagram: Source: Bagram Air Base official site) (2nd Photo: Barack Obama in what looks like a 1950s black and white movie)

It was just last week that I put in a blog piece that the EU's chances of diversifying their gas supplies were extremely poor. Even though the Georgia-Russian war and even more recent Ukraine-EU gas pipeline was shut off by Moscow, seemingly bringing Europe to their energy knees once again, I pretty much agreed with expert John Daly that the EU did not have the stomach or "the goods' to diversify their energy supplies through a Southern Corridor near the Caspian Sea and Central Asia already dominated by Russia. Has anything changed?

A high-level meeting of active and potential participants in the Nabucco gas transport project being held in Budapest, Hungary yesterday and today may, I repeat "may,' lead to an answer. The meeting which will be attended by officials of supplier, transit, and consumer countries (Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Austria; international financial institutions; the European Union, will explore the remaining issues holding up the giant project which would bring a fair amount of gas reserves from the Caspian Sea and possibly Kazakhstan through a corridor avoiding Russian authority (but not influence).

The goal of the Budapest meeting is to demonstrate support for the project from all players in terms of "political backing, capital investment, and supply commitments' for Caspian gas to Europe.  The pipeline system would be centered around the Nabucco line, but also be complimented by many other smaller lines, and would first be supplied by Azerbaijan with hopefully and crucially, Turkmenistan following suit.

There are many hang ups to such a deal occurring as Moscow is and will continue to put huge pressure on the the supplying states, especially Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, to avoid such a deal unless it desires to worsen its relations with the Mother Bear.  Another major stop sign for the project, and one that is very connected to Russia's strong influence in the Caspian, is that financial investors from Europe and beyond needed to get this project off the ground and convince the supplying states that it would be worthwhile, have been difficult to find.  It is hoped that in this meeting, enough will be convinced that the project is viable.  Countries like Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan would really have to stick their necks out to make this EU Southern Corridor plan come to fruition, and their leaders will need to see it as worth the costs of alienating Moscow.

"All those countries that would contribute to Nabucco would have to jeopardise their relationship with Russia," said Tanya Costello, a director at Eurasia Group in London.  "I don't think Turkmenistan has enough commitment from the EU that it's really going to happen, that you can really consider taking that risk."

Another problem is transition fees and demands as the gas has to go through several states before reaching Austria, Germany.  This prickly matter has already become a political football regarding Turkey's demand for keeping 15% of the gas that moves through its territory and in its connection to the deal's follow-through and its own ascension to the EU.  Turkey is playing power politics here and it is moves like these that may further delay/cancel the project.  Lastly, another major concern, voiced by John Daly and many others, is that the supplying states, especially Turkmenistan, just don't have enough gas to make this whole process worthwhile.  Moscow has done whatever it can to buy all of the oil and gas reserves in its "near abroad' with great success.  However, Vladimir Socor at Georgian Daily, asserts that Turkmenistan does in fact have plenty of untapped gas reserves:

A potential breakthrough occurred in Turkmenistan for Nabucco and the Southern Corridor. The recent Gaffney Cline audit of Turkmen gas deposits reported immense reserves of 4 trillion cubic meters of gas at the low estimate, 6 trillion at the best estimate, and 14 trillion cubic meters at the high estimate at the South Yoloten-Osman gas fields alone. Other Turkmen onshore and offshore fields have yet to be audited.

So this Budapest meeting may have a chance after all, but it will take an amazing amount of will for all of these parties to work together for communal interests.  Will they be able to put together a package so enticing for Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan to jump on the Nabucco pipeline for what will surely be a wild ride?  We'll see.

There is much happening in US-Afghanistan relations and policy in the last week. Former Clinton super diplomat, Richard Holbrooke, was chosen by the Obama administration to be a special envoy for Afghanistan-Pakistan, a region Obama called the ‘Central Front’ in war on terror. Just as I write, Obama's Afghan policy is literally hitting the ground with fresh American troops arriving in Afghanistan in what may be a doubling of US forces there by early this year. As Obama begins to ‘own’ this war, a controversy has sprung regarding American forces and Afghan casualties, and many journalists are actually starting to look at the war from a point of view of cautiousness and closer examination as to whether or not the US Afghan surge can succeed.

But before we get into the myriad of topics surrounding Obama's administration's Afghan-Pakistan policy, I would like to first attempt to wrap up the ongoing new US-Afghan supply route dilemma, if it in fact could ever be concluded. It finally appears that an official agreement(s) has been reached between the US military and Russian, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan governments concerning a supply route into Afghanistan. CentCom Commander for the region, General David Petraeus stated:

"There have been agreements reached, and there are transit lines now and transit agreements for commercial goods and services in particular that include several countries in the Central Asian states and also Russia."

In recent weeks, Petraeus visited Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and in the past couple days met with several members of the Pakistani government and military. "It is very important as we increase the effort in Afghanistan that we have multiple routes that go into the country," General Petraeus told reporters in Islamabad. Though it was reported awhile back that these routes may be allowed to supply the US military in Afghanistan with lethal goods, to go along with the currently transited non-lethal variety, but it is unclear if this was part of the deal.

Apparently, Petraeus and the US had to convince the CA states and Russia that these new routes, which will involve the building of infrastructure along the way, would not include any long term facilities that the US would control. In other words, No Permanent Bases. Scholar Stephen Blank analyzes the new deal and argues that its a good one for the CA states. The US has agreed to not only pay transit fees, but also buy many of the supplies from local sources and build up local infrastructure. During this economic slump, these CA states, especially Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the latter of which Blank believes may be saved from collapse by this deal, could definitely use the aid. Maybe the US military aid will provide a 'stimulus’ for the local economies.

Eurasianet writer Joshua Kucera reported on an interesting story involving former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's new foundation, which focuses on the Central Asian region.  Kucera starts out skeptical of Rumsfeld and his foundation's motivations at first, neoconservative policy pushers?, but his research seems to lead him to conclude that their goals are of a non-partisan and generous nature.

The foundation has two major for furthering CA-US relations and development in these former Soviet states; fellowships for young CA-Caucasus scholars to come study in the US and micro-finance programs.  The foundation is administered by the Central Asia Caucasus Institute at John Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in DC.  CACI's head and Rumsfeld's long time friend S. Frederick Starr, emphasized his friend's extensive interest in the former Soviet states in Central Asia and the Caucasus.  He credits Rumsfeld for visiting the region more in the last few years than nearly all other major US officials combined, of course these officials did not have a major war going in Afghanistan during their terms.

Rumsfeld has voiced that a major reason for his starting this foundation is because there were not already large enough Uzbek, Tajik, or Kazakh ethnic communities living in the US to provide support for visiting students.  He apparently wanted his foundation to bury that gap.  “We don't have, in Chicago or Detroit or Pittsburgh, Uzbeks or Tajiks or Kazakhs,” Rumsfeld said. “I think that we need to have people who understand what's going on in Central Asia … and the difficulty of that transition.”

It would be interesting to know the depths of those donating to this organization to make sure that there are indeed no political shenanigans occurring, but it looks to me like a worthwhile setting to further relations and build common bonds between the two cultures and regions.

I was lucky enough to have a piece of mine, ‘Terrorism in Central Asia‘ be published on FPA's main page. The piece deals with the rise in terrorism from and in the Central Asian states, mainly from Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, and how it is impacting the stability near the Afghan/Pakistan border. Here is an excerpt:

The border between the states of Afghanistan and Pakistan is now arguably the most active front in the war on terror. Foreign terrorists and extremists have come to the volatile border from the Middle East and Central Asia and there is real fear that these perpetrators may bring the war back to their home countries. Even more worrisome is that several of the militant groups involved in the current Afghan/Pakistan/US/NATO conflict hold broader goals of attacking American and Western interests. Central Asia, defined here as Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Uighur-dominated Xinjiang Province in western China, with Afghanistan and Pakistan as integral neighbors, also has vibrant militant groups threatening the governments of Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and before the Olympics the Chinese government was targeted for several attacks by Uighur separatists with ties all the way to Pakistan. This briefing will analyze the rise in terrorist and extremist activities near the Afghan/Pakistan border, explore the major Islamic extremist groups active in Central Asia, discuss the reasons for their presence, and provide policy recommendations for the US, local actors, and regional groups.

Al Qaeda and the Taliban's Foreign Helpers

In the last year or so there have been continual reports of a greater presence of foreign individuals and groups participating in extremist activities undermining Afghanistan, Pakistan, and regional stability. Al Qaeda and the Taliban have done an excellent job recruiting foreign jihadist to their fight against the US/NATO, Afghan, and Pakistani forces. Several disturbing trends have been recorded, including a rising use of suicide bombings and the recruitment and use of children in combat. Since 2001, there have been over 260 suicide bombings in Afghanistan alone, not to mention the hundreds that have recently occurred in Pakistan and Iraq, and unfortunately this number has only been increasing. US officials have stated that Al Qaeda and Taliban militants in the Afghan/Pak border have systematically created an underground network into Central Asia, which has brought in approximately 200 children into the violent conflict. Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have been called "feeder channels’ for the terrorist groups. Pakistani journalist and scholar Ahmed Rashid told Radio Free Europe: "We’ve seen more and more of these people coming in. We have seen more suicide bombers in Afghanistan who supposed to be Uzbek from Uzbekistan. Clearly, there's something going on here."

Hope you enjoy the article (it's about terrorism, how can you not enjoy it!). Comments, Questions, Criticism?

Though the state of Turkmenistan still has to be considered one of the world's most oppressive societies, ever since the death of President Saparmurat Niyazov, a man who seemed to rule over his people like he was trying to ensure a spot in the Dictators Hall of Fame, slight signs of progress have been made on many issues.

First off, a couple weeks ago the nation held parliamentary elections that though were far from free and fair, when combined with the new constitution appear to give the legislative branch a bit more power in formulating the countries political agenda. Progress on two interrelated issues have also moved the country out of its isolationist, ‘neutral’ shell, its outreach to neighbors and to the United States and Europe and in its new emphasis on tackling the nation's horrific drug problem.

President Berdymukhamedov has sent strong signals to his government and his people that he is willing to address the nation's drug epidemic. In a region that usually shuns talk about AIDS and drug use, many Turkmen state agencies hosted informational events titled ‘Unite for Future! Unite Against AIDS and Drugs!’ this December. This event was actually held on World AIDS Day and included printed materials displaying the risks involved with drugs and HIV. Also in December, several members of parliament voiced their concern over the growing epidemic, attempting to bring light to the tremendous social costs they incur. Berdymukhamedov, a former medical professional, visited with Antonio Maria Costa, the head of the UN Office for Drug and Crime, in Vienna to discuss ways they could tackle the problem. Of course, not is positive when it comes to Turkmen's efforts to combat drugs and drug-related illnesses as corruption still runs long and deep in the state, with many government officials profiting from the Afghan-Turkmen drug trade. There is also a lack of technical experts and medical professionals in the country, forcing many citizens to seek inadequate medical attention.

Connected to the Turkmenistan's efforts at combating the drug and AIDS epidemic is their cooperation with Afghanistan and the NATO forces there. Since Niyazov's death, Berdymukhamedov has worked hard to formulate a positive relation with the Karzai government and has made at least two diplomatic trips to the country. The drug trade, insurgency, and energy and transport projects were all high on the agenda. Turkmenistan is a vital element in the stability of Afghanistan as its border with the country is long and porous and it is hoped that they will one day have a profitable relationship when it comes to gas (TAPI pipeline) transportation.

Recently, NATO officials have been meeting with Turkmenistan counterparts to discuss furthering their strategic relationship in terms of the transportation of goods into Afghanistan territory. The talks are not the first to occur between the two as Ashgabat has been a transport corridor for flights into the region for years now. Ties appear to be getting closer though as a new deal will hopefully be stroke soon regarding greater amounts of transit for NATO goods. Berdymukhamedov also made a strategic step last spring when he attended the NATO summit in Bucharest to discuss cooperation. At this summit he reportedly garnered a personal meeting with US President Bush.

These are not the actions of a ‘neutral’ state and we must hope that this is just the beginning of a long coming out party for Turkmenistan's government and its people.