Central Asia

Kazakhstan has found itself in the news lately, firstly, to no one’s surprise concerning energy resources, as the nation has begun building a natural gas pipeline connecting Central Asia to China and Gazprom’s recent announcement that they expect to double the price they pay for Central Asian gas (bad news for their Euro customers as Russia will not be the last entity to foot the bill). However, Kazakhstan’s leader, capital, and 2010 Chairmanship of the OSCE provide just a few other reasons for it to be in Central Asia’s spotlight.

Chairmanship of OSCE - OSCE Chairman-in-Office, Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb paid a visit to Astana last week and met with President Nazarbayev, leader of Senate, Foreign Minister Tazhin, and political party and civil society representatives. Stubb stated “Central Asia plays a key role in the OSCE, both as a region facing several challenges and as an active participant and supporter of the Organization’s plans to intensify engagement with Afghanistan.’ In reference to Kazak’s future chairmanship, Stubb stated the nation had a “unique chance to demonstrate its leadership by preparing carefully and by adopting and implementing reforms.” Now what could these reforms be, possibly democratic? Indeed, Stubb went on; “we welcome progress achieved so far, and hope to see swift continuation of reforms in fields such as media, elections and political parties.” Stubb went on to be more specific about these reforms, speaking of freedom of assembly, elections, religious freedom and religious associations, and ‘emphasized’ the ‘need for all political forces in society to have a chance to be heard.’ It would be a wonderful thing if Nazarbayev and the Kazak government could respond to these words and the 2010 chairmanship with real reform in these key sectors.

Ban Ki-Moon and Astana and Nazarbayev’s Birthday - UN General Secretary Ki-Moon spoke about Kazakhstan and its capitol and president’s birthday as well, but he left out the part about democracy. He expressed ‘admiration’ with the role the nation plays in the ‘provision of peace and stability’ in the region and gave his ‘warmest wishes’ to Astana’s 10 year jubilee and Nazarbayev’s birthday. Here is a quick history of the Kazak capitol. Nazarbayev has made quite the effort in modernizing the city in recent years and just made a speech detailing future improvements to what he calls ‘Central Asia’s first postindustrial city.’ In the speech, he discussed the development of high technological productions, service sectors, and the hope that the city will continue to become a regional business center. He concluded his speech, ‘Astana will be a city of high standards.’

One more bit of Kazak news: High level meetings have taken place recently between the leaders of Hungary and Kazakhstan as trade between the two states has considerably increased in recent years. A Hungarian diplomat stated that they consider Kazakhstan as a strategic partner.

That’s all folks, I hope I covered at least half of Kazak news.

Here are a few interesting items to keep you cool this weekend.

The Central Asia plus Japan Dialogue fourth representational level meeting took place in Tashkent on July 15. For Japan the meeting was ‘aimed to deepen the multifaceted interaction with Central Asia and Uzbekistan, provide for stability and regional security, enhance the trade and economic relations.’

The US Senate confirmed General Petraeus as the chief of Middle East and Central Asia Central Command last week. I guess this is kind of important, right? Petraeus replaces Admiral William Fallon, who stepped down a couple months ago (rumored to be because of policy differences with the Bush Administration regarding Iran policy), and will be replaced by Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno as the lead military man in Iraq.

Not sure how big this story may get, but Stephen Payne, a Houston businessman and GOP activist, is now under a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform investigation, probing whether he violated federal law by suggesting he could arrange access to top White House officials for Kyrg government officials, including President Akayev, in return for large donations to the Bush presidential library. There is a recorded video of Payne and Akayev meeting and discussing meetings with President Bush and VP Cheney in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars to the library.

I wrote a short exert about the passing of Kyrg author/ambassador Chinghiz Aitmatov, and now here’s a sad story from Eurasia.net discussing Aitmatov accomplishments and Kyrgyzstan’s lack of an ability to produce another influential writer or artist.

I am originally a California boy, but I had no idea the northern California city of Fremont had a significant Afghan population, which according to this interesting story, it does!  The piece discusses a local book club called ‘One Book, One Community‘ which recommended its readers check out ‘Three Cups of Tea,” the true story of Greg Mortenson’s travels and charity work in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Apparently, Mortenson was saved by a group of villagers in Pakistan after fallin g from K2 in the Himalyas, and decided to show his appreciation by building schools in remote parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan (now I just hope the Taliban doesn’t burn them all down). Anyways, the city of Fremont and even its mayor have taken on this mission and started donating to the cause themselves.

With what can only be called a victory for the Taliban, US forces abandoned their makeshift base in the Kunar Province, which was ambushed days ago. In this context, Today I want to bring to your attention two outstanding articles which provide a greater understanding of the Afghanistan/Pakistan border Pashtun people, culture, and security situation. Seth Jones, Thomas H. Johnson, and M. Chris Mason have written provocative pieces that both portray a security situation spiraling out of control. Though both articles mainly agree on the nature of the conflict and its dire consequences, they depart partly in their appraisal of the insurgency’s reliance on the Pashtun ethnic tribes and even more so policy recommendations.

1. Seth G. Jones. “The Rise of Afghanistan’s Insurgency: State Failure and Jihad.” International Security 32 4 (Spring 2008): 7-40.

2. Thomas H. Johnson and M. Chris Mason. “No Sign until the Burst of Fire: Understanding the Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier.” International Security 32 4 (Spring 2008): 41-77.

Seth Jones argues in The Rise of Afghanistan’s Insurgency: State Failure and Jihad that the Afghanistan insurgency was not a creature of ethnic grievances or greed. He argues that though the insurgency is largely led by border land Pashtuns, there are segments of the ethnic group that do not support the Taliban and the current Afghan government is led by a Pashtun, Karzai and has a rather balanced ethnic representation. Regarding greed, mainly the growing and selling of narcotics as a reason behind the insurgency, Jones claims that the evidence shows that the increase in the drug trade was a result of the insurgency, not a precondition to it.

Jones instead argues that the ongoing insurgency was caused by a collapse of governance and the strength of the Taliban and its supporters’s ideology. Concerning the Afghan government’s failure, Jones emphasizes its lack of ability to provide essential services and adequate security to all parts of the country, especially the rural areas near the Pakistan border. He goes into greater detail discussing how the lack of legitimate local police and army forces, along with too few NATO forces, led to communities having to either rely on the Taliban for protection or being subjugated by them. In regards to Ideology, Jones describes insurgent groups, such as the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Hizb-i Islami as being motivated by an extremist interpretation of Sunni Islam, where a Muslim’s primary obligation and loyalty are to his/her religion and that it is a ’sacred right’ and obligation to wage Jihad to protect the Muslims of any country. Jones also has harsh words, as will Johnson and Mason, for Pakistan’s government and policies in regards to the tribal areas and the Taliban, pretty much acknowledging their direct support for the insurgents.

So what does Jones suggest the US, Afghan, and Pakistan governments do to stop the insurgency? Jones believes the Afghan central government needs to extend its presence into the nation’s rural areas and provide them essential services, such as electricity. He then advocates an increase in the number and quality of police and army forces, including more NATO forces. Lastly, he asserts that the Pakistani government needs to start clamping down on insurgent leaders in its own territory and argues that the US needs to push them harder and harder until results can be concretely seen.

Thomas Johnson and Chris Mason’s No Sign until the Burst of Fire: Understanding the Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier takes an in-depth look into the Pashtun people’s history and culture and paints a very dark picture of the region’s current, ‘chaotic’ state. Johnson and Mason (for now on JM) begin by differentiating between the Pashtun people and their geographic, tribal neighbors and come to the conclusion that it is only the Pashtun tribes who ‘have ever demonstrated an interest in the type of Jihad being waged by the Taliban.’ JM go on to give a short history of the Pashtun people, emphasizing times when a foreign force tried to subjugate them under another form of rule, the British, Soviets, Pakistan Government, and now NATO forces. They provide a thorough look into the complicated culture and way of order for the Pashtuns, called Pashtunwali, a system too complex for me to summarize on these pages. The important factor JM describe about Pashtunwali is its effect on current geo-strategic situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan today. JM call the Pashtuns ‘perfect insurgents,’ and quotes a Pashtun elder talking to a British official in 1809; “We are content with discord, we are content with alarms, we are content with blood…we will never be content with a master.”

It is with this viewpoint, that Johnson and Mason call the current US/NATO strategy a ‘bankrupt approach’ and ‘precisely the wrong answer to apply to a highly developed culture in which ‘central government’ is anathema and reaction to it is insurgency.” For the US and world security the situation becomes darker, as JM provocatively explain that the Pashtun culture and people, though strongly resistant to outside social and governmental change, have been proven to be susceptible to religious extremist movements and that this has and may have tragic consequences. JM blame the US, through the CIA, Pakistan, mainly the ISI, and Saudi bankrolling in the 1980’s onward for the marriage of extremist Islam and Pashtun culture. The US/Pakistan/Saudi policy was to stop the Soviet advance in Afghanistan in any way possible and JM assert that the policy, especially Pakistan’s so-called ’social experiment’ to replace ethnic identity with religious, therefore matching the rest of the nation, ’spun it out of control.’ As one can see from the dramatic increase in suicide attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the battles between Pashtun tribes and tribal leaders, the Red Mosque incident, and the influx of foreign fighters from the Middle East and Central Asia.

The consequences of this ‘monster’ are tremendously dangerous for the US and the world, argue JM, and one must agree to a large extent. After all, the attacks on 9/11, London subways, and Madrid train bombings ‘were planned and trained for’ in the region. JM argue that the Pakistan government can no longer contain, let alone suppress, this insurgency. JM predict for the short-term the continued destabilization of southern Afghanistan, spread of the Taliban insurgency, and the further faltering of Pakistan’s democracy, and for the long-term, if left unchecked, ‘potentially devastating’ consequences for the US.

Well Mr. Johnson and Mr. Mason, what shall we do about this ‘monster’? The two scholars advocate a near complete reversal of current US, and Seth Jones’s recommendations, policy of spreading out security and governmental forces into the Pashtun territory. Instead they argue that in the short-term, we need to strengthen and rebuild the Pashtun tribal structures from the inside, take them back from religious extremism, and reduce the pressure on them from the outside. They want to ‘empower’ the tribal leaders and restore the traditional balance of power to their tribal system, in other words, forget about central government control. In the long-term, JM suggest bringing rapid improvements into the everyday lives of the Pashtun people; health care, education. Regarding Pakistan government’s role, they advocate ’strong and consistent’ military action when required, not ‘half-hearted’ measures which the Pashtun people see through. (though this seems to contradict their proposal for US/NATO forces, but it is true that Pakistan’s government does need to show some grit and muscle to the tribal areas in order to keep the country cohesive). Like Jones, JM also believe the US needs to probe a lot harder into the ISI and Pakistan’s involvement with the insurgency and make sure things are getting done.

These two articles provide a lot of mental food to chew on. Whether one agrees with their assessment of the situation, policy recommendations, or scholarly frameworks, one must admit that they bring to the forefront important cultural/ethnic aspects to this conflict which are not widely discussed by the US government, let alone the media. This is a tremendously complicated and dangerous conflict, with many possible outcomes, and to make effective policy we need to know what we’re up against.

If you would like to learn more about the Pashtun’s history with foreign entities’ attempts to subjugate them under a form of central government, google Ty L. Groh’s (Thomas H. Johnson’s pupil) ‘Ungoverned Spaces: The Challenges of Governing Tribal Societies.’

Freedom House put two new reports out in June of interest: Nations in Transit 2008 Annual Report and Supporting Freedom’s Advocates?: An Analysis of the Bush Administration FY2008 Budget Request for Democracy and Human Rights (Follow the link down the page and download the pdf under ‘Past Reports’) These reports are linked in an unfortunate way, the decreasingly open and democratic nature of Central Asia’s regime is key to both of them.

The Nations in Transit report ‘measures progress and setbacks in democratization in 29 countries and administrative areas from Central Europe to the Eurasian region of the Former Soviet Union.’ In its overall analysis of the former Soviet States, specifically in Central Asia, the report stated; ‘In distinct contrast to the trajectories of the other regions, the former Soviet Union has moved toward a more deeply anchored authoritarian, democratic accountability is an ever-scarcer commodity.’ Dierdre Tynan of Eurasianet.org gives an overview and analysis of the report’s findings here.

The Transit report grades each country from 1-7, with 1 being the most free, on 8 different categories and then assigns a overall score. The categories are: 1. Electoral Process 2. Civil Society 3. Independent Media 4. Governance 5. National Democratic Governance 6. Local Democratic Governance 7. Judicial Framework and Independence 8. Corruption. In a sadly similar formula to last year’s Freedom of the World rankings for Central Asia, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan’s scores could hardly get lower, ranking near the bottom of the world, 6.93 and 6.86 disrespectfully. Kyrgyzstan received the best score in the region, 5.93, with Freedom House calling its 2005 upheaval now a time of ‘lost promise.’ Tajikistan’s score worsened from 5.96 to 6.07, with Freedom House stating that ‘justice is bought and sold’ in the nation.

Concerning the analysis of the Bush Administration’s FY2009 Budget Request for Democracy and Human Rights, Deirdre Tynan also wrote up another overview and critique (I haven’t had time yet to read FH whole report). Tynan reports that FH is disappointed in the President’s proposed budget for two critical reasons; 1. A lack of transparency as to where exactly the money where go, for instance to help civil society, rule of law? 2. Though the budget request increased overall, funds for most Central Asian states fell. The report argues that the US government needs to put more funds in developing the civil society of the region, particularly Kazakhstan, and has harsh words for Russia’s presence in the region, calling it a ‘negative influence over its former Soviet neighbors’ and as sliding evermore ‘towards increased autocracy.’ Freedom House leaves out hope that Congress will put the money back in when they have an opportunity to appropriate funds.

I couldn’t agree more with Freedom House about greater transparency in the appropriation of these funds, we should know where and to whom they are going. And I am more than sympathetic to their promotion of greater aid to support Central Asia’s civil society, independent media, and promotion of the rule of law and free and fair elections, but there are indeed strategic elements to consider, such as energy supplies and the fact that we need to work with these authoritative leaders at time on issues such as Afghanistan’s security. To leaders like, Islam Karimov, Berdymukhamedov, and Nazarbayev this money is aimed at their removal from power and that can’t sit too well, not to mention that China and Russia both few it as an affront to their regional interests and influence.

However, in the end, these are two informative, important, and brave reports by Freedom House.

Two interconnected, disturbing trends concerning Islamic militants from Central Asia committing violent and terrorist acts in and around the Afghanistan/Pakistan border are becoming more visible by the day. The first is the report from unidentified two US senior military officials based in the Middle East that Al Qaeda has stepped up its recruitment in Central Asia in the past two years and has found success recruiting children.

CBS News reported on this late last week and stated that Al Qaeda and other militant groups in Pakistan’s tribal areas have had success bringing in new, younger members to replace their casulties. Last May, a Pakistani military official showed CBS a video of young boy, possibly 12, chopping off the head of a middle-aged tribal man who they accused of being an American spy. The video below shows militant/terrorist training of children in Iraq:

The two US military officials assert that Al Qaeda and Taliban-associated groups were recruiting in Central Asian states, mainly Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, because there was ‘too much pressure’ on them in the Afghan/Pak border by US and international forces. One official stated that there was ‘one big advantage’ to recruiting in CA, ‘there is less focus by the US.’ The officials believe that there have been hundreds of cases of successful recruiting of Central Asian boys in the past two years.

Not all the militants coming from Central Asia to the Afghan/Pakistan war front are boys or recruits. In another disturbing trend, the Pakistani government has acknowledged the increasing presence of members of Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) in their border lands. Prime Minister Gilani confirmed reports that there are hundreds of IMU militants ‘holed up’ in Pakistin’s tribal belt committing violence against US/NATO/Afghan forces and within Pakistan’s tribal groups as well. The IMU have been strongly linked to Al Qaeda and the Taliban and there have even been reports that the group has picked a fight with certain local Pashtun tribes, assassinating tribal leaders loyal to the Pakistani government. Experts believe that there may be as many as 500 IMU militants around the border.

At the moment, the Pakistani government seems to have a hands-off approach to the foreigners, hoping the local Pashtun tribes will send them packing. Unfortunately, some of these tribes, like ones led by militant leader Baitullah Mehsud, find the IMU militants as allies in their fight against the Pakistani and US/Afghani governments. Lastly, here is a great analysis comparing the IMU and a similar Islamic militant group also based out of Uzbekistan, Islamic Jihad Union. It also discusses the IMU, and for that matter the IJU’s, presence in Afghan/Pak border area and the groups recent use of suicide bombing as a major tool in their arsenal. The report acknowledges the importance of Uzbekistan’s oppressive government as a cause of IMU and IJU’s birth and existence and how the Karimov regime in turn uses their presence to further tighten his leadership and power in order to defend his nation’s national security and safety. The analysis is told from a European perspective and charts these two militant groups recent past and possible futures.

In the next few days, I will discuss more deeply the tribal politics around the Afghan/Pakistan border that have now become one of the most dangerous and important security situations for the entire globe, as the most recent Taliban attack on a US base in Kunar Province, killing 9 American soldiers, attests.

On Friday, we discussed Russian President Medvedev’s recent three nation visit to Central Asia, a visit that seemingly had one thing on its mind; gas and oil. A couple weeks ago, EU representatives made their second major stopover in a matter of months to Turkmenistan to discuss energy, specifically gas reserves for the Nabucco pipeline which would circumvent Russian territory and land space, and trade, basically getting Turkmenistan into the WTO. However, just by taking a glance at the EU’s first annual Progress Report of their 2007-2013 EU Strategy for Central Asia, one can see that the EU is interested in more than just oil/gas/trade. Human Rights issues dot the document and EU perspectives on their role in the region.

The Report stated 5 Goals for the EU-Central Asian Strategy:

1. Promotion of Human Rights and Democratization

2. Enhancement of Education

3. Increasing the Rule of Law

4. Promote Regional Integration in the areas of environment and water

5. Coordination on Border and Drug Trafficking Management

Here is an analysis of the EU-Central Asian Strategy of the its 1-year progress report by Eurasia Daily and a local one by Kazinform. The Eurasia Daily quotes the EU report’s analysis of its accomplishments, calling them ‘encouraging’ and that ‘after only one year, a new quality of cooperation has evolved between Central Asia and the EU.’ Concerning the sticky issue of human rights promotion, the report asserted that all 5 CA states were willing to commit to the human rights dialogue. The Eurasia Daily analysis of the report also acknowledges the Strategy’s critics, some who argue that the overly ideological (idealistic?) approach the group takes with the region’s authoritative states is excessive, and others who instead assert that the EU plays too much realpolitik in region, ignoring human rights and democracy issues in order to secure energy resources and strategic interests. Here are two voices who agree with latter assertion: Danish journalist and political scientist Michael Andersen and Cornelius Graubner at the Central Asian-Caucacus Institute.

Like all things in domestic and international politics, the truth is somewhere in the middle. There is no doubt in my mind that the EU’s belief and policy’s in regards to human rights and democracy promotion are genuine. Putting a liberal bent on geopolitical policies in a region without a history of such ideals is a challenging endeavor to say the least. Europe desires relief from one autocratic energy ruler, Russia, and to accomplish this they need to deal with other autocratic rulers. But unlike Russia and China, the EU blatantly advocates and concretely promotes human rights and democracy in the region to go along with its material interests. This can be exemplified by a recent visit to CA by the German Commissioner of Human Rights. The Commissioner was due to speak and listen to civil society and opposition groups in several nations. This small visit by a ‘Commissioner’ may not be as significant or visible as an oil/gas deal, such as Nabucco, but it has an affect, and hopefully this ripples and ripples throughout the region.

World Bank President and former US diplomat Robert B. Zoellick met with President Nazarbayev and the Kazak government this week to discuss several joint World Bank/Kazak projects. The two sides announced plans to jointly finance a $2.5 billion road project to help upgrade the trade routes between Asia, especially China, Russia, and all the way into Europe. This road project is part of a $7.5 billion deal to improve the 2,800 km road corridor from Kazakhstan’s border with China (Khorgos) to the border with Russia (Syrm). This project is set to start in 2009. Bob Zoellick had this to say:

“Following part of the ancient Silk Road that linked East and West, this project will establish a modern transport corridor through Kazakhstan. It will boost Kazakhstani trade, competitiveness, logistics, and infrastructure connections wit the world, while providing an artery for regional cooperation.”

There is great hope that this transportation project will find ways to incorporate all the nations of Central Asia, especially the impoverished states of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. In other words, the roads would have a trickle-down effect.

The road system in Central Asia has been an important aspect of the region’s infrastructure too long neglected and this brings attention to another key project that needs to garner not just attention, but action: the disappearing Aral Sea. The Aral Sea, once the 4th largest lake in the world, has shrunken by about 70 percent in the last 50 years largely due to mismanagement and overuse by the CA states, mainly Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. The rapid shrinking of this vital geographic regional centerpiece has had a multitude of negative effects; damaging fish production, causing high salinity, pollution, lack of fresh drinking water, and desertification that has led to violent sand storms. The World Bank has a $86 million dollar restoration project set to begin at the end of this year and a follow-up project to improve environmental and economic conditions in the Sea’s area, but there is great doubt that the Aral Sea will never regain its former size.

UN ambassadors from all 5 CA states have requested help from the international community regarding this issue and plan to introduce a draft resolution on the Sea at the 63rd Session of the next UN General Assembly. Kori Udovicki, head of UNDP’s European branch, argued that the situation ‘is probably one of the most acute…environmental crises in the world.’

Also regarding water issues/problems in the CA, officials from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan met in Bishkek from June 10-11 to discuss water sharing issues in the region. Radio Free Europe called the conference not only a ‘failure’, but that it may have actually raised tensions between the nations regarding the free flow of water throughout the region. In short, Tajik and Kyrg, when most of the water in the region flows from, desire to treat water like any other commodity, such as Uzbek, Kazak, and Turkmen’s oil and gas reserves, and receive some compensation. A difficult issue to say the least.

(Photo: Wikipedia)

A few days ago we discussed newly minted Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev’s first foreign visit to Kazakhstan, but equally if not more important to the CA region and the world at large is where he went next, China.  He met with Chinese President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao in a visit that was both strategic and symbolic as it comes in great contrast to Putin’s first overseas visit in 2000 to the West’s heart of London.  The strength or weakness of China/Russia’s relationship will have great influence in Central Asia, for the US, and for the entire world.

Strategically: During the visit the Beijing/Moscow signed a $1 billion dollar nuclear agreement for Russia to build a nuclear fuel enrichment plant in China and supply the nation with uranium. The meeting also gave the two another chance to denounce the US/EU missile defense plan in eastern Europe, Kosovo’s independence, and the West’s policy of exporting their values of human rights and democratic rule (which we have discussed many times).  In a joint statement Hu and Medvedev stated that governments should ‘oppose politicizing the issue and using double standards’ and should not use ‘human rights to interfere with other countries’ affairs.’  This is clearly a direct challenge to recent calls by Western government and civil society groups for CA authoritative leaders and governments to open up their society’s and provide their people with individual liberties.  This goes at the heart of the argument that the West’s policy of promoting democracy and human rights along with their strategic interests is being challenged by the Chinese/Russian model which asks few questions about a state’s internal make-up when doing geopolitical/economic business.

Russia and China have many aligned interests at the moment and their current relationship is rather strong, which this first visit proves.  They have performed several military exercises and called for a multi-polar world within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. They have also stayed behind each other’s view that the Iranian nuclear issue should not be taken on that aggressively by the US/West.  But the two regional great powers have divergent interests, especially in Central Asia, and these will most likely keep the duo from forming anything concrete to challenge the US/West in the world or push them entirely out of CA.  In fact, Medvedev’s first stop in Astana, Kazakhstan was most likely a sign to China that Moscow considers the region still its main sphere of influence, especially regarding energy rights.  China has made many inroads into the region, an oil pipeline with Kazakhstan and a gas agreement with Turkmenistan, and its ‘quiet expansion’ worries Russia.  China has tremendous financial reserves and has proven it is willingly to pretty much outspend anyone when it comes to energy deals.  Concerning energy deals between the two behemoths themselves, an oil pipeline from Siberia to China proper has been on hold for years, as the two sides still are arguing over oil prices.   Another contentious issue between the two nations is the dramatic inflow of Chinese migrants into Russia’s eastern lands, changing the nation’s dramatically.  Lastly, despite their many efforts to forge a tight relationship to combat the US/West, each side’s economy is affirmatively directed towards and dependent on the US, especially China’s.  The two nations bilateral trade has been rising lately, but as of last year it was still less than eight times that of Chinese/US trade.

Do you think Russia/China are forming a close geopolitically strategic relationship?  Is it directed toward anyone in particular?  How does their relationship affect their policies in Central Asia?  Is a close relationship between the two regional powers good or bad for the CA’s nations?

Here are some articles that can give you a deeper analysis and picture of Russia/China’s partnership or lack there of.

1. Rumer, Eugene B., “China, Russia and the Balance of Power in Central Asia,” Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University, 2006.

2. Yu Bin, “China-Russian Relations: Partying and Posturing for Power, Petro, and Prestige..,” Comparative Connections, 2007.

3. Garnett, Sherman, “Challenges of the Sino-Russian Strategic Partnership,” The Washington Quarterly, Autumn 2001.

4. Cohen, Ariel, Tkacik, John J., “Sino-Russian Military Maneuvers: A Threat to U.S. Interests in Eurasia,” Backgrounder, The Heritage Foundation, No. 1883, September 30, 2005.

5. Blank, Stephen, “Can Anyone Save this Marriage: Russo-Chinese Energy Relations,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace¸ May 25, 2006.

(Photo; New York Times)

With an International Donor’s Conference being held in Paris next week on Afghanistan’s behalf, increasing pressure is being put on President Karzai’s ability to run the still unstable nation’s government. The donor’s aid is expected to target the sector’s of agriculture, energy, security and education, but a number of them are demanding that the conference also be used for a critical review of the government’s performance, in particular its failure to curb rampant corruption. The New York Times has reported that several world diplomats feel that Karzai is not doing enough to heed corruption, standing down to warlords controlling the nation’s narcotics trade, and simply not providing an effective governance as many of these donor nations are losing lives and spending billions. The fact that Karzai is up for reelection this year does not seem to be helping the situation as his campaign stance, has at times contradicted the desires of foreign donors and US/NATO policy.

The Bush administration has been a strong backer of Karzai and this continues to be true as First Lady Laura Bush visited the nation for the third time and backed Karzai’s government by publicly meeting with him and voicing the conference donor’s to give the nation what it needs. As on her two previous visits to Afghanistan, Mrs. Bush emphasized her support for women’s development and educational and training projects. She flew to Bamian, one of the country’s poorest provinces, which is overseen by Afghanistan’s only female governor, Habiba Sarabi, a former minister of women’s affairs. Mrs. Bush also met with several students and teachers.

In a connected story, the US State Department is promoting the success of the US-Afghan Women’s Council, which was created in 2002. The purpose of the Council is stated;

The Council promotes public-private partnerships between U.S. and Afghan institutions and mobilizes private sector resources to help Afghan women. Specifically, the Council seeks to identify concrete actions to bring real and practical benefits to the women of Afghanistan and to enable them to participate and take leadership roles in the political and economic life of their country. To this end, the Council focuses on four areas: political leadership and legal awareness, economic empowerment, education, and health. In 2006, it added a special children’s initiative, Ayenda. The Council alternates regular meetings between Kabul and Washington, DC to discuss programs and priorities for assisting Afghan women and to review progress. Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky co-chairs the Council with the Afghan Foreign Minister and the Afghan Minister of Women’s Affairs.

The recent report acknowledges the Council’s work in education (Women’s Teacher Training Institute, American University in Kabul, Women’s Resource Centers), Media (PBS Afghanistan Unveiled), and other education and Health initiatives and programs.

Afghanistan’s future as a free, stable, and democratic government is still deeply in doubt, as Karzai’s weakness and international donor weariness signify, but progress has been made that cannot be ignored. In a nation, where women were not even allowed to go near a school and a place where very few children were also given a decent education, progress has been made. In another position, I have done extensive terrorism research in Afghanistan and constantly reported on attacks on educational and women’s targets in the nation since the Taliban were ousted in 2001. These attacks only strengthen my resolve that these programs like the Women’s Council are vitally important to not only each individual Afghan child and women, but to the nation’s future as a whole.

Here is a Friday Link Laydown of hopefully some informative and interesting items:

A. Iranian President Ahmadinejad recent visit to India is analyzed with a geopolitical mindset by MK Bhadrakumar, a former Indian diplomat. India and Iran’s postures and interests in Central Asia are discussed, as is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Bhadrakumar gives a fresh Indian perspective of Central Asia, Iran, and the SCO and is quite critical of US foreign policy.

B. Kazakhstan’s vice minister of foreign affairs Nurlan Ermekbayev just had talks with the US State Department and National Security Council in Washington DC. Deepening bilateral cooperation and enforcing global and regional security were apparently hot topics of discussion. My apologies for the tiny size of the report.

C. Yet another report about declining press freedom in the world. The World Association of Newspapers (WAN) reports in their half-year review that 28 journalists have been killed so far and that corrupt and autocratic governments putting press freedom under ’serious threat.’ Central Asia is mentioned multiple times and it’s not good news.

D. Here, and right here, are a couple articles about South Korea’s diplomatic and strategic efforts to court CA states. Prime Minister Han Seung-soo and the South Koreans mainly seek energy supplies for their nation, which must be remembered has Asia’s third largest economy.

E-Z. China and five CA states summited their first national lists of Silk Road treasures/artifacts in a joint application to World Cultural Heritage. China nominated 48 sites, Kazak 10, Kyrg 7, Tajik 8, Turkmenistan 57, and Uzbek 33.

Have a great weekend!