Afghanistan and Central Asia

The legal and cultural battle of whether or not Muslims should be able to wear a headscarf, hijab, in educational or other government facilities has been a well-publicized, contentious debate in such places as Turkey and France, both either straddling or inside the West, but this issue is also starting to boil in parts of Central Asia.  Abdumomun Mamaraimov and Saodat Asanova performed a thorough analysis of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan’s own present controversy over the wearing of the hijab by school students.

It appears that in the last few years, the Tajik and Kyrg governments have moved in the direction of disallowing the wearing of hijabs in their government-run schools.  Tajikistan’s government has formally banned the practice and Kyrgyzstan’s has done so more as a forced ‘recommendation.’  In any case, there are many citizens of the each state that feels this is a violation of their religious and individual rights.  It appears that a few, though not an incredible amount, of female students have either chosen, along with their families in most cases, to stop attending school or have been suspended or expelled.

While certain citizens are against this formal or informal ban, the government and education ministers claim it is a necessary measure against religious separation and extremism in a public sphere that the government desires to be secular.  Tajik Education Minister Abdujabor Rahmonov equates the hijab with conducting ‘propaganda for religious ideas in a secular society.’  Both the Kyrg and Tajik government are most in fear of the Islamic group Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a group that advocates the non-violent removal of the region’s secular governments with an Islamic state, but that has at times been connected to terrorist attacks.  The leaders of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan do indeed have reason to fear radical Islamists as they have caused problems in the past for each state.

But this brings us to the central part of the hijab argument.  It is obvious that most hijab wearers are just devout Muslims who mean no harm, but one cannot ignore that extremists do exist.  So is the hijab ban slowing or strengthening extremism?  Is the ban worth the loss of some religious and individual rights?  The end of the Mamaraimov and Asaova piece attempts to answer these difficult questions.  They rightly argue that the hijab cannot just be equated with Islamic extremism.  If I wear a cowboy hat it does not mean I just got back from a rodeo.  The two authors advocate a more nuanced approach to the conflict, though they don’t offer any specific recommendations, except for those who feel they are being prosecuted because of their hijab wearing to be patient.  The governments of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan need to communicate their reasoning for the ban.  Their citizens need to know their voices are heard.  At times, governments do need to make a law that punishes/restricts the many because of the wrongs of a few, but it is also the job of the government to clearly explain why such a law was passed.  Unfortunately, the accountability I am discussing probably goes beyond what can be expected from these two governments.  I also hold out hope that a compromise could be made, as in certain places in the school were the hijab is allowed or maybe just one day a week.  Either way these two societies need to do whatever they can not to alienate or disenfranchise a portion of their populace as this policy is meant to discourage, not encourage extremism.

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.

In all the violent incidents that have plagued the people of Afghanistan in its recent history, many have died, but even more have been permanently maimed and disabled. Below is a remarkable video about some of the Afghani disabled and their struggle for rights and services: Because the New York Times, who produced this video, will not allow me to embed the video for some reason, please click here to watch.

And because I would rather leave you for the weekend on a more optimistic note, here are two more light-hearted and hopeful pieces.

David Sherman is an American veterinarian who works for an international NGO in Afghanistan providing medical to its citizen’s pet and farm animals. Sherman has had some amazing experiences in the country and it has definitely affected his life perspective.

And if you thought that story was soft, then check this one out! It is a review of a Chinese cookbook, ‘Beyond the Great Wall: Recipes and Travels in Other China.’ The book spotlights Uighur, Kazak and Tajik peoples, customs, and food. Let me know if you find any worthwhile recipes.

Here are a few items you may find of interest…please find them of interest!

1. Central Asia’s Railroad - Continuing yesterday’s discussion of China’s growing influence and investments in Central Asia, well according to this Turkish Weekly report even the Yuan can’t buy everything. The report argues that prospects for building a railroad that would connect Europe and China through the Middle East and Central Asia looks ‘unrealizable’ in the near future due to economical and political challenges. Kyrgyzstan with its slow economic growth, poor investment climate, political instability, and mountainous terrain, is highlighted as being too risky for investors, even China. The report also mentions that the Chinese government may be afraid of connecting its unstable Xinjiang Province with the politically volatile CA states. Let us hope that a deal can be worked out as improving the transportation in region is vital for it to become more connected to the outer world, especially economically.

2. Afghanistan’s Opium Production - Last month the UN’s Office on Drugs and Crime released a report stating that for the first time in 3 years the Afghan Opium production had dropped. and by a not insignificant 19%. Unfortunately, the report gives most credit to the drop to the recent drought in the nation’s north and northwest regions. The UN report also cites stronger government leadership in certain areas that has discouraged farmers from planting opium through campaigns, peer pressure, and the promotion of alternative crops. One thing the report does not give credit for is the government-led eradication of fields effort. To no surprise, the analysis also came to this conclusion: “There is now a perfect overlap between zones of high risk [Taliban invested areas] and regions of high opium cultivation.” In addition, here is a policy recommendation from ISN Security Watch’s Maseh Zarif advocating shoring up regional cooperation and support (basically in Central Asia, Iran, Pakistan, and the Middle East) and rooting out internal corruption. Not new ideas, but the analysis and details are worth reviewing.

3. Update on the CA’s Water Situation - Here is a discussion from a Kyrg point of view about the growing conflict between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan over water and energy rights, specifically regarding the building of the Rogun power station. Apparently, Uzbekistan is trying to get Mother Russia on its side. The paper discusses a compromise based on the exchange of discharged water for supplies of gas and oil in the winter, but it also underlines the competing interests and challenges of dealing with water as a commodity.

4. Dictators Bad, but it could be Worse - The fall of Musharraf in Pakistan and the stroke of Kim Jong-il in North Korea are small reminders that political instability, especially in nations with nukes and extremists, can be even worse. Dictators can be brutally oppressive leaders who take away the rights and hopes of their citizens, but it is true that they do provide a certain level of stability that when gone, can be sorely missed.

5. Barack Obama in Muslim Eyes - The Jerusalem Post and Daniel Pipes take a crack at analyzing how Muslims see the US presidential candidate. Is he a fellow Muslim, a Christian, an apostate, just another US president, or something else?

6. Conference on Afghanistan Today - NYU’s Center on Law and Security will be hosting a major conference on October 17 titled ‘Afghanistan Today: Drugs, Detention, and Counterinsurgency.‘ The list of speakers is quite impressive: Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke, Steve Coll, Peter Bergen, Barnett Rubin, Scott Horton, Steve Simon, David Kilcullen, Hekmat Karzai, Joanne Mariner, Imtiaz Ali, Lt. Gen., David Barno, Shuja Nawaz, Lawrence Wright, Elizabeth Rubin, Nir Rosen, Sean Langan, Doug Wankel, Andrew Wilder, Stephen Holmes, Karen Greenberg, Ambassador Omar Samad, and others. If you are in New York stop by, and for all of us who may miss it, I will do my best to post the transcripts and major happenings.

Yesterday, I offhandedly stated my disappointment about the lack of a discussion of China’s growing influence during Friday’s presidential debate.  It was amazing to me that the United States could have a ‘Foreign Policy’ presidential debate and only mention the word China once.  The leaders, government, businesses, and citizens of Central Asia know how important China’s rise to power has and will continue to be.  As its power and economy have grown, China has increased its investments, relations, and strategic influence in the region and shows no signs of slowing up.  Even the NATO ‘controlled’ state of Afghanistan, China is making major economic and strategic inroads.  Here are some examples of China’s growing influence in the Central Asian states:

-A 960-kilometer oil pipeline from Western Kazakhstan to Western China has partially started operations and should be carrying 20 millions tons of the black gold annually in only a few years time.  For this project, Beijing ponied up $700 million and diligently met the expected time table of completion. 

-The planned Turkmenistan-Chinese gas pipeline, which will traverse Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, will stretch over 7,000-kilometers all the way to Shanghai.  This deal also included a production-sharing-agreement (PSA) allowing Beijing to develop the gas fields feeding the pipeline, making it the only nation to have a on-shore PSA with Turkmenistan.

-China won a $3.5 billion contract to develop Afghanistan’s Aynak copper field earlier this summer.  The price and challenging task of working this unstable and possibly violent area showcase Beijing’s ability to take risks that private companies and most nations are unwilling to do.  Though China will face many trials, building up the infrastructure, railways, environmental concerns, displacing villagers, and possible sabotage, in getting this project off the ground, if successful it will be solidify the state’s presence in the nation and further it as a whole in the region.  Afghanistan’s government and people also have much to be gained if the Aynak field can be successfully mined with greater job opportunities and a positive sign to show other foreign investors.   

-In Tajikistan, China’s Export-Import Bank provided a $300 million loan to help finance the construction of the Zeravshan hydropower station.  Also in Tajikistan, a Chinese mining group invested approximately $100 million in a gold-mining operation.

-China is also involved in the construction of a railway stretching from Uzbekistan to Kyrgyzstan. 

Now these are just some of the projects and investments made by China into the CA region, but one can see their influence is growing tremendously in the past ten years or so and I would imagine that this will only increase with time and a growing Chinese economy.  China also has long-term interests and investments in Iran and Pakistan and this only magnifies the importance of the Central Asian states.  China’s government and businesses have deep pockets, ask no questions about human rights, and are able to provide infrastructure and capital to CA states and leaders lacking in both. 

Back to the presidential debate, it is important to know that China has begun to have similar levels of investments and growing influence in many regions of the world, so may be we should be discussing Beijing’s role and rise a little bit more.

Yesterday, we quickly went over the planned new alignment of the CSTO, which would consist of a deployment of 10,000 more troops and a missile shield, in what the organization’s Secretary General called “a powerful military grouping of five countries in Central Asia.” Eurasia Daily today provided more details of the new force structure, its internal complications, and ramifications in light of the Georgian conflict and rising Russia/Western tensions. The group’s Sec Gen Bordyuzha stated that Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan would all participate and “anticipated that the force will consist of regular troop units, brigades, regiments, or divisions. Currently, the CSTO’s military component consists of Collective Rapid Deployment Forces, estimated to include ten battalions (4,000); it is planned that this structure will be subsumed into the new force structure.”

Now, the CSTO has many similar force structures in Central Asia and tried to create one similar to this in 2005 which never came into actual existence, so what are this deployment’s prospects and why is Russia leading this military charge at this moment? One of you made this witty and mostly on-point comment regarding yesterday’s post:

“The missile shield is obviously a counterbalance to the US shield in Eastern Europe. It’s more kindergarten foreign policy from Russian; You have a missile shield? Fine, we’ll get our own. See how you like that! Next, they’ll probably let it slip that the coordinates for the NATO bases in Poland are preprogrammed in.”

Regarding this new deployment’s talk of a missile shield, I largely agree with the above quote, but there is more to this deployment and Central Asian military grouping by Russia than just tit-for-tat against the United States and Europe. CSTO Sec Gen Bordyuzha mentioned that the new force was to help ‘control the tensions in Afghanistan’ and I, and others, believe that Russia genuinely fears the growing conflict in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and most importantly its growth or spread into Central Asia where Russia holds its gas dominance. Russia depends on stable and safe gas imports from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan and any destabilization in the region could cause havoc on its energy import-export led economy. Russia and the Central Asian states are also not strangers to the nefarious powers of Islamic terrorist attacks and groups which may increasingly spread out from Afghanistan, or come back to, the Central Asian or Russian territories.

Russia and the Central Asian state leaders do not desire a return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan, as the group is a major destabilizing force, spreading its Islamist ideology, helping narco-traffickers move throughout the region, and making pipelines and other transit routes impossible to traverse through the Afghan and also Pakistan territory. Putin and most CA state leaders showed their backing for the removal of the Taliban in 2001, by providing bases and logistical support to US/NATO forces and this continues largely today. Even with the Russian-West brewhaha over Georgia, Moscow still allows NATO forces utilized a Russian controlled corridor to transit goods, though Moscow has recently warned the Western alliance that they could close it anytime, and Medvedev just last week offered Afghan President Karzai 225 Russian police officers to help train the Afghan National Police.

Now Russia has commenced this new CSTO deployment in part to politically slap the West, but it also helps them deepen their strategic connections in the region and provide a ready-made force to combat the spread of Afghanistan’s growing instability. For the CSTO Central Asian states, Russia and this new grouping are also seen as a protective shield against the rising chaos and danger of the Talibanization of Afghanistan. Russia/Medvedev/Putin may indeed have grand strategic plans in Central Asia, and this troop deployment may be just one spoke in the wheel, but it also provides a solid support system in what all those involved consider a real threat to regional stability and integrity.

(Photo Source: Eurasia Daily - CSTO General Secretary Nikolay Bordyuzha)

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!

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)

So the 8th annual Shanghai Cooperation Organization Summit has begun.  The meeting started this morning in Dushanbe, Tajikistan (though China and Tajikistan started bilateral talks days before) and features the head of states of all six members (I wonder if President Hu Jintao will be wearing all of China’s 51 gold medals?), top officials from the four Observer States of India, Iran (Ahmadinejad), Pakistan, and Mongolia, and a lot of political baggage from the Russian-Georgian conflict.  Also on the agenda are formalizing and streamlining the admission procedures (right now it must be a consensus), energy, transportation, security issues, and the combatting of terrorism and drug trafficking in the region.  The Summit should have some success in coordinating efforts in many of these spheres and it is likely the the group’s Observer members presence and duties will become more defined, but I would not expect any major breakthroughs and that would include adding Iran, India, or Pakistan as an official member.

In the past couple days, I have scoured news resources looking for coverage of the Summit, and unfortunately, but as expected, a dearth was found in the Western media (Financial Times was the only major paper with a serious piece so far and Russia/CA expert Stephen Blank wrote another one), while in the East there were several articles.  And of course they took different views of the SCO’s intentions and goals.  Stephen Blank, who works for the US War College, argued that Russia was coming back to a group of friends after its recent dust up in Georgia and that the Summit would turn into a ‘forum for America bashing.’  On the other hand, the Russian News & Information Agency emphasized the cooperation of its groups members in a positive and non-confrontational light, stating the ‘SCO is not going to change the world.  It would be happy to cope with Central Asian problems.’

Now back to the SCO, and most importantly China’s, view of Russia’s incursion into Georgia and its recent recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states. Chinese foreign ministry spokesman stated just a day before the conference that ‘during the summit, the various countries’ leaders can within the framework of the agenda enunciate their shared positions on issues of interest to them, including South Ossetia as no exception.’  China has been very cautious, its number one foreign policy strategy, so far in its diplomatic gestures and statements regarding the conflict in the Caucasus’s, mainly advocating a ‘peaceful conclusion,’ but would things be different with Medvedev’s presence and with the cover of an SCO meeting?  Stephen Blank, in the aforementioned article, sure thinks so.  He outright predicted that the conflict would be high on the Summit’s agenda and that ‘China will endorse Russia’s actions in the Caucasus’ was a ‘foregone conclusion.’  He also believed Russia and the CA states would then give ‘unequivocal support’ for Beijing’s aggressive campaign to end instability in the Uighur dominated Xinjiang Province.  Now I personally would not expect such a loud statement by the SCO or China, they are far too cautious and have their own separatist groups to watch over, Xinjiang, Tibet, and Taiwan, but I did think that Blank was on to something, but just too strongly stated.  It seems that Medvedev and Moscow would expect a sympathetic ear and voice at the meeting also.

Well, it appears Blank, Russia, and I (but remember just a little bit) was wrong.  Before the meeting, Medevedev discussed a ‘united’ SCO group, one that would send a ’strong signal’ to the West, and that its support of Russia in this instance and further expansion would “further growth of the authority of our organisation in the world arena.”  As of this morning, Medevedev has not gotten what he wanted and Blank has not gotten what he predicted, and I, well let’s just leave me out of this.  The SCO has already put out an official statement regarding the conflict and subsequent Russian recognition of the independent states.  Here it is:

”The SCO states express grave concern in connection with the recent tensions around the South Ossetian issue and urge the sides to solve existing problems peacefully, through dialogue, and to make efforts facilitating reconciliation and talks.”

No recognition of the breakaway provinces as states.  No outright support of Russia’s stance or against the West.  Just ‘concern’ and ‘dialogue’.   Now the Summit is just beginning so we should still have a wait and see approach, but this was not what Moscow was hoping for that’s for sure.  I will keep you up to date about the rest of Summit’s events and happenings, especially regarding provocative anti-West stances, the admission of new members (Iran?), and of course any more moves regarding the Caucasus conflict.

It’s that time of year again. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization Annual Summit! The meeting will be held in Dushanbe, Tajikistan on August 28, and foreign ministers from all six of its member states have already concluded a meeting going over a few topics to be discussed at the larger summit. The group of ministers decided that no new members, not Iran, Pakistan, Mongolia, or India (all have Observer Status), will be enshrined, but that a SCO Dialogue Partners mechanism will be instituted to increase cooperation between the organization and these important neighbors. During last years meeting, the main topic of media/geopolitical debate was the appearance of Iran’s President Ahmadinejad, who brought with him Iran’s ‘right to have nuclear energy’ and his own bombastic style of speaking and railing against the US. Well, he’s back for more. Iran will lose some spotlight this year, as Russia’s actions in Georgia and China’s Olympic spectacle will take center stage once again. Both dominating members of this alliance will come with their chests bursting.

The debate of the SCO’s nature and actual power, and how these may affect US policy and influence in Central Asia, have been major topics since its existence in 2001. Is it a rival, partner, both? How well does it function? Does it provide benefits to its CA members or does it only provide a venue for China and Russia to dominate them? Well, the host of Summit, Tajik President Rahmon seems to be quite excited about the upcoming meeting and the SCO’s accomplishments so far. “The SCO has demonstrated specific results in the years of its existence, and its future is cloudless.” Rahmon went on to discuss how important its relations with Russia and China were, which is indeed obviously true. The US State Department view of the SCO is not as glowing, but not fearful either, at least not in the words of Deputy Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia Evan A. Feigenbaum. He acknowledges that the US does not have a clear idea of what the SCO is and does, but is quick to assert that it ‘is no Warsaw Pact’ and that there are many shared interests between the US and the Organization’s professed goals: border security, economic development, Afghanistan stability, and defeating radical terrorist elements. However, Feigenbaum draws a firm line when it comes to supporting the region’s smaller states’ sovereign and independent rights to look in all ‘four directions of the compass’ for economic and strategic opportunities, i.e. he wants the states to be able to look and work with the West, not just be dominated by Russia or China.

A perennial concern for the growth of the SCO as a regional and international powerhouse is the relationship, or lack thereof, between Russia and China. The two have been getting along nicely in past years, and have used the SCO to work out many differences between the two Great Powers, especially regarding border demarcations. But man, oh man, do they have some fundamental differences, as any two large nations would who share an extensive border. In fact, they both desire to use the SCO to cooperate in CA, but also to get their individual interests in the region’s resources further embedded. In many ways, its pipeline vs. pipeline and gas deal vs. gas deal between the two. But there have been very few times of crisis/conflict between the two growing powers and the SCO probably deserves some credit for this smooth management.

So how do you see the SCO changing, evolving in the recent geopolitical context? Are its motivations the same? Is its power the same? Does it help the CA states autocrats keep their hold on power? How will the recent Georgian-Russian conflict and the terrorist attacks in Xinjiang Province affect this year’s meeting and future policies of the organization? What about the Observer States? What about them? Should they allow Iran in and receive energy help but diplomatic pain? Is there any chance in Nirvana that India might become a Full Member?

On a less geopolitically fun note, The Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) will have an important summit on September 25 featuring high level officials. Here is a short article discussing the organization’s positive elements and some of its challenges in being an effective force for economic development in the region.