Afghanistan and Central Asia

The New York Times, which has done a more than decent job covering the people, culture, and political situation of the Uighurs in China’s Xinjiang Province, has a well-researched piece examining the impact of several mummified Xinjiang ancestors’ genetic background.

A museum in the province’s capital of Urumqi holds several well-preserved mummified humans found in the Tarim Basin. Some of these mummies are more than 4,000 years old and their genetic make-up is widely seen as an accurate way to answer the ‘who was there first’ question being fought over by the Han Chinese and Uighur Muslims. Forget, the Cold War, this is the true East vs. West battle.

Each group has their claims to regional legitimacy and both have obvious important ramifications to who rightly has claim to the region and its rule. It is for this reason that the Chinese government, fearing the genetic evidence from these mummies would verify the Uighur’s long-time presence, has been loath to let biological testing take place that they could not control. Nonetheless, foreign scholars have slipped away some tissue, which though still far from conclusive, has shown strong western roots in the region’s people. The mummies have been found to have Central Asian, Iranian, and even European traits.

However, it is near impossible to pin down exactly how long a specific group has ruled/inhabited an area, as can be sadly seen in the Caucasus and Balkan regions where each group has ancient stories and anthropological evidence to defend their claims. And even more important is what a group can do with the knowledge. The Uighurs of Xinjiang can uncover a book written by Mao proclaiming their rightful place and rule of the region and the Chinese government would find a way to discredit or ignore it.

This is truly a case where science meets politics. Only time will tell who wins….Politics.

(Source: New York Times)

It appears that the Taliban’s leader Mullah Omar may yet still have his day in the hot Afghan sun as President Karzai has publicly invited him to negotiations to end the violent conflict that has plagued the state since 2001. Karzai has promised the Taliban leader, who was ousted from power by the US in 2001, full protection from all sides. Karzai is taking a hardline on the issue, basically telling the international community, which holds a large stake in the country, to back off, at least regarding discussions with high Taliban officials. Karzai stated:

“If I say I want protection for Mullah Omar, the international community has two choices: remove me, or leave if they disagree.”

Karzai is no doubt trying to distance himself from the NATO international forces to strengthen his domestic appeal and legitimacy with his presidency up for election early next year. However, Karzai did stop by the UK late last week and reportedly briefed PM Gordon Brown on the possible negotiations. The US government has not vocally gone against the proposal, but cautioned that Omar, nor any other major Taliban figure, has never shown a ‘willingness to negotiate.’ In fact, Mullah Omar has not responded in any known way to Karzai’s rapprochement.

Negotiations with insurgents is already ongoing and will be necessary if Afghanistan and Pakistan are to find long-lasting piece, and this will include dealings with people with blood on their hands, but is effective and moral policy to hold free and fair talks with a person who led a brutal regime, which provided explicit shelter to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks? Mullah Omar still has a $10 million dollar US bounty on his head! This policy does not sound right to me. However, this conflict is one of immense challenges and duration and if making a deal with Omar or others his type, could bring peace and stability to the region, it may be worth it. But what would that peace look like? Would it require putting Omar and other Taliban leaders back in the government, but just at lesser positions? Too dangerous for me. Will it mean giving the FATA and southern Afghan provinces near total autonomy? That is not acceptable either, too much of a security risk.

What would negotiations between Karzai and Omar look like? What would be the best case scenario? What would each side have to give up? What would you do if you were the US? What would you do if you were Karzai? Mullah Omar?

I haven’t done much book reviewing on this blog besides Ahmed Rashid’s ‘Descent into Chaos‘, and that’s really not going to change, but I would like to list a group of recent publications concerning Afghanistan and Central Asia that you may find interesting and worth looking into.

Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured World - by Ashraf Ghani and Clare Lockhart, Ghani is a former Afghan government finance minister and much of the centers around Afghanistan.

Axis of Convenience: Moscow, Beijing, and the New Geopolitics - Bobo Lo, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is covered.

Organizations at War in Afghanistan and Beyond - Abdulkader H. Sinno, a study using organization theory to examine the participating conflicting groups in Afghanistan.

Petrostate: Putin, Power, and the New Russia - Marshall I. Goldman, the title says it all.

National Identity and Globalization: Youth, State, and Society in Post-Soviet Eurasia - by Douglas W. Blum, the author examines the fashioning of national identifies after the Cold War in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Russia.

The Taliban and the Crisis of Afghanistan - Edited by Robert D. Crews and Amin Tarzi, an extensive of history and examination of the US role throughout it.

After the Taliban: Nation-Building in Afghanistan - by James F. Dobbins, the former American ambassador pontificates the good and the bad of the US’s role in the country.

All of these books were published within the last two years and should not be hard to find. Any comments about any specific book would be welcomed.

Who’s an economics expert? Who knows how to solve the world’s current financial crisis? Was that Kazakhstan on the ‘Amazing Race‘? Answers: Not me, probably no one, and yes, Nick and Starr are unbeatable!

With the leaders of most of the world’s economies attending an international summit to try and combat the current economic downturn and create systems which will hopefully make future worldwide recession less likely, it is more than appropriate to discuss Central Asia’s financial predicament. Last week, I discussed measures Kazakhstan was taking in order to stabilize its economy, and how if successful it would hopefully bring this attribute to the whole region, but what about the other states? How are Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan performing economically? What are their financial prospects in the near future? What policies and actions should be taken?

First off, positive news, as the latest IMF Regional Outlook for the region sees higher rates of growth compared to the rest of the globe. The report’s director had this quite bright assessment of both the Middle Eastern and Central Asian regions:

“{They} continue to experience strong growth in 2008, outpacing global growth for the ninth year in a row. Growth is underpinned by high commodity prices, strong domestic demand, and also credibility of the authorities’ economic policies. So far, the Middle East and Central Asia region has been largely resilient to the ongoing international credit crisis and the downturn in the US and other advanced economies. However, inflation has emerged as a key issue in the region, and is well above the average of all developing and emerging market countries.”
And now before I start talking about money matters that are better left to experts, here are some nice pieces covering the current crisis:

The Economist: ‘After the Boom: Central Asia and the Credit Crisis‘

Eurasia.net: Central Asia: Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan Confront a Financial Disaster

And a couple more covering just Kazakhstan (it was on Amazing Race after all)

Eurasia.net: Kazakhstan: Astana Working Out Details on Economic Stabilization Plan

Lastly, the Asian Development Bank announced that it is providing Kazakhstan with a $700 million dollar loan to improve remnants of the old Silk Road and to promote trade with Europe.

While I hope these short reports helped us all get a better look of how the world wide economic downturn is effecting Central Asia.  This will definitely be a story worth following as it truly touches the lives of everyone involved. I’ll leave you with this ‘Amazing Race’ photo, you can see Almaty, Kazakhstan in the background if you look really hard.

With the Taliban showing no signs of retreat and with a new US administration entering office it is an appropriate time for all involved to ponder a NATO retreat from Afghanistan.

During the presidential debates and speeches, Afghanistan was discussed, but the issue of whether or not the US presence was either helping or exacerbating the conflict was not. Obama and McCain both were in agreement that the US should bring more troops to the nation, not less, in the belief that the situation needed more boots on the ground to police the nation and keep the Taliban in check. But are the current contingent of Western forces doing more to defeat the Taliban/Al Qaeda or to incite them to keep fighting on?

International Relations Professor Stephen Walt and Princeton Professor Anne-Marie Slaughter debate this issue. Here is the five minute video. To simply put their arguments, Slaughter is against leaving Afghanistan,asserting that it would give the Taliban/Al Qaeda a ‘major victory,’ while Walt is for withdrawal, arguing that our troop presence is only making the situation worse in what is looking like an ‘endless war.’ Walt persuasively demonstrates that the region of Afghanistan is not all that significant to US interests, being so far away and having such a small economy. This is no surprise as he is a leader of the IR realist school.

What Walt seems to be too quickly dismissing is the ideological nature and mission of many of the US’s enemies in the region and their proven ability to hurt US interests throughout the world. In fact, the CIA just came out with a report concluding that Al Qaeda was increasing its reach around the globe, specifically in Africa.

This debate between Slaughter and Walt is short and doesn’t not cover a multitude of issues as deeply as they deserve, but its an important start nonetheless. I have discussed this issue numerous times, but still feel the mainstream media is not covering it enough. I have also let it be known that I myself feel that the US/NATO effort in Afghanistan is worth the time, life, and treasure, but that we need to continually evaluate our strategy and build, build, build up the Afghan government, police, and military. But whatever my beliefs, it is vital that all of us have a greater understanding of the incredibly harsh conflict that we are in and who it is we are fighting for and against.

The financial crisis that began in the United States has made its presence felt around the globe and Central Asia is no exception. How is Central Asia’s greatest economic power, Kazakhstan, handling this economic crisis and how is the economic downturn effecting the stability, security, and development of the region. These were the main topics of a conference between many regional experts in Astana last month called “New Challenges and Kazakhstan’s Contribution to Stability and Security.”

Muriel Mirak-Weissbach, a scholar of the region’s economic and strategic outlook attended the conference and not only summarizes the major issues and policies discussed, but also provides a historical perspective of past economic crisis’s in Kazakhstan. Here is an excerpt of what Nurbakh Rustemov, the keynote speaker and Chairman of the hosting parliamentary committee, had to say of the economic downturn and its consequences:

“He bluntly stated that the world financial crisis was leading to a “misunderstanding” among geopolitical forces, and carried the danger of a direct threat to humanity, through hunger and poverty.(1) He called for uniting forces internationally, to overcome the financial-economic crisis, which he dubbed the “number one priority.” Rustemov mentioned the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, of which Kazakhstan is a founding member, as well as the OSCE, which Kazakhstan will chair beginning 2010, as bodies his government would like to utilize to find solutions to the crisis. Two concrete means that his country could use to impact the crisis, would be in securing energy resources, and providing grain and meat exports to alleviate food shortages.”

Rustemov is correct in stating that this economic crisis may lead to following and connected geopolitical disruptions and he’s also right in arguing that regional and multilateral groups, such as the SCO and OSCE, will be crucial in helping the world get through this mess in one stable piece. Another important aspect of his comments is the positive role Kazakhstan can play in impacting the crisis in a productive way and that is in securing energy resources and in providing food stuffs to alleviate shortages in other countries, specifically in harder hit CA states, such as Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan.

Kazakhstan’s abundance of energy supplies, combined with President Nazarbayev’s prudent planning, have left the nation in good condition despite the tough times. Nazarbayev announced last month that the government would spend $2 billion to stimulate the economy, mainly targeting banks and the construction industry, funds drawn from the nation’s oil fund. Unfortunately, not all CA or world states have an oil fund to fall back on.

What the whole of Central Asia can hope for is sturdy economic stewardship by its regional leader, Kazakhstan, and help from regional bodies, both from the East and West to weather what will most likely be a lengthy recession. During this time, it will be vital to keep the region from falling into disrepair as poverty and extremism would both be on the rise and this may lead to conflict. The US, Russia, China, and the EU all have roles to play in mitigating negative ramifications of this crisis in the region, but a strong and active Kazakhstan is crucial. As Muriel Mirak-Weissbach concludes:

“Kazakhstan has become the foremost interlocutor in Central Asia, not only for Eurasian giants Russia and China, but also for the two major economies of western Europe, Germany and France. If the current world crisis can be overcome through participation of major Eurasian nations, Kazakhstan can become the linchpin in the region for stability and security.”

In addition, the US State Department announced a nuclear safety cooperation with Kazakhstan. Read Below.

The United States and the Republic of Kazakhstan reached a new milestone in a multiyear joint project to irreversibly decommission the Soviet-era BN-350 fast breeder reactor located at the Kazakhstani port of Aktau on the Caspian Sea. The participating governments completed a sodium processing facility that will be used to dispose of coolant from the reactor core. This action demonstrates and reinforces the strength of the U.S.-Kazakhstani strategic relationship, and our joint commitment to preventing the proliferation of nuclear materials.

First off, I would like to thank all the veterans throughout the world who sacrificed for their respective homeland. Military men, women, and families have given up so much so we can live in peace and prosperity and for this we owe them our highest respect and gratitude.

And at this very moment, soldiers, both foreign and domestic, are working to stabilize a dangerous situation in Afghanistan/Pakistan. As the Pakistani army tries to dislodge the Taliban from the strategic Bajaur border area, Afghan officials concluded a conference in Kabul regarding facilitating cooperation on security threats facing the nation and the whole CA region. Leaders of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and officials from Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and Mongolia attended the conference, where they discussed ways to enhance border security and strengthen ties between law enforcement agencies throughout the Central Asia region. These two events, the Pakistani army battle for Bajaur and the multilateral conference on regional security issues are two vital components to increasing the chances of successful regional stability and progress. The nations of Pakistan and Afghanistan can not go alone in this conflict, but they need to be willing to make great sacrifices. In the same vein, international groups and nations need to not only provide lip service toward the conflict, but to truly engage themselves.

On another note, here is an update on the CA regional water agreement largely settled a few weeks ago. It appears Uzbekistan is likely to follow the prudent path and hopefully this will save the region’s people much suffering this winter.

On another other note, I started another blog discussing more general foreign policy and international relations issues called Great Power Politics.

(Photo Source: New York Times, Pakistani troops in Bajaur)

About a month ago, a 4,000 large contingent of American, Canadian, British, Danish, Australian, and Afghan soldiers made a heroic (yes, I’m watching and Saving Private Ryan right now, and these troops are just as valiant) effort in delivering a huge turbine to south Afghanistan’s Kajaki Dam. Here is an update on those efforts which would more than double the electrical output in the Helmand Province along with many others which are in the heart of NATO/Afghan government’s battle for supremacy against the Taliban.

The large turbine has yet to be installed, but its safe arrival has brightened the prospects for the everyday lives of thousands of Afghani’s, many of which live with only a couple hours of electricity a day. Though the $180 million dollar US-funded Kajaki Dam project is a great sign of hope, the events surrounding its arrival and installation portray the trying situation of the country. The Taliban are in control of much of the south and they have tried to derail the Kajaki’s production and further improvement ever since 2001. The workers, both foreign and local, need protection from Taliban elements, who do not want to see the Afghan government gain control or legitimacy in the area, as a successful energy project such as the giant new turbine would provide.

In fact this project, along with the work and targeting of aid workers, could not paint a more clear picture of one aspect of this conflict that can be well-defined. Magnus Linklater said it best:

“Whose values best represent the interests of ordinary Afghans - those of the Western aid agencies working to shore up the country’s infrastructure by building dams and opening up roads, or the violent extremists who shot Gayle Williams? {aid worker}”
The words of Helmand Province’s governor also tell the story:

“The children of Afghanistan will not forget the work done for this power station.”

As was mentioned, this project is far from complete and its future is far from assured, in fact if the turbine is successfully installed and starts to give southern Afghan’s a greater supply of energy and jobs, it will be in many ways miraculous. These soldiers and workers, both foreign and local, may not be landing on a Nazi-controlled Normandy beach, but their efforts are giving a small swath of the world’s citizens a chance at a better life.

(Map Source: New York Times)
–>

Good morning everyone. Hey, has anyone of you been writing academic reports analyzing another nation’s society and political system, while at the same time taking money from that country’s government to do so? If you said yes, you may be Johns Hopkins University’s Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, which is directed by the much respected S. Frederick Starr.

The Hopkins Institute disclosed funding for three recent reports about modern Kazakhstan, revealing that the Kazak government-funded Washington lobbying firm APCO Worldwide provided $52,300. The reports titled ‘Kazakhstan’s New Middle Class’, Parliament and Political Parties in Kazakhstan,’ and ‘Kazakhstan in its Neighborhood’ all look rather interesting and pdf’s of them can be found from the link above. The reports authors and Starr deny any wrongdoing and insist that the research and conclusions were not influenced in anyway by the Kazak government.

On the other side, Paul Goble, another CA expert at the Institute of World Politics, warns of the dangers of this type of funding:

“The sources of funding should be clearly stated. If they are not or if there is even the hint that someone is hiding something, there will be suspicions, justified or not, about whatever appears.”

He added: “We in this country have an obligation to provide a best practices model for countries like Kazakhstan whose political and intellectual elites emerged from the Soviet system and do not fully understand the importance of transparency and thus may be tempted to use funds in ways that we would and should find problematic.”

This is a bit of a sticky issue, as the Kazak government should be able to fund projects that further attention and research on their nation in the world’s most influential state, the US, but as Goble alludes to, the line between academics and politics is a thin one. I tend to believe that as long as Johns Hopkins accurately reports their funding, and there’s no reason to doubt they did, combined with continued transparency on how and why they are researching and reporting on what they are, the positives outweigh the negatives.

What do you think? When you’re done thinking, have a good weekend.

Two days ago, a French aid worker was the latest to be targeted by Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan. In this case the aid worker, who was reportedly an education specialist from an unknown NGO, was kidnapped by a small group of Taliban members, who in the process killed a young Afghan civilian. Reportedly 19 humanitarian aid workers have been killed so far this year, which surpasses the 15 victims of 2007.

Why are the Taliban targeting and killing/kidnapping foreign and local aid workers? Is it because they are foreigners who may be proselytizing Christianity or other religions? This probably has something to do with it. Though many of these aid workers are actually Afghans who share the Taliban’s Muslim faith, it is true that there are Western foreigners there from many different NGOs, making them more suspicious.

But I, and Stratfor agrees, believe that they are mainly targeted as way to embarrass/undermine the Afghan government and NATO troop presence. These workers are trying to spread education, health, infrastructure, business, and good governance in the nation, and if they are successful, along with the Afghan government, the Taliban are cooked. As in their ability to replace the government will become less likely. They need to foment instability and chaos in places where the Afghan government is present and solidify their rule where it is absent. Concerning NATO and foreign NGOs, many European nations and groups support for the ISAF and Afghan state building are becoming shaky and less long-term committal, and these aid worker attacks are not making them feel any better. The resolve of the Afghan people, Afghan government, NATO forces, NGOs, and NATO home citizens is being challenged by these Taliban attacks. We have to be ready to meet these challenges, for the alternative is a ruler who believes no one is safe, not even Muslim aid workers building schools.

(Photo Source: New York Times)