Yes, the recap is not covering all points. Yet that does not diminishes the relevance of some of the points that are represented.

For the record, Khamidov also pointed to the social capital that Islamic faith-based groups (not always the same as ‘Islamist’) have, especially reg. to smoothing ethnic tensions.

“Uzbekistan would come under Sha’aria after Karimov leaves power, so long as Karimov cannot appoint his own successor.”

Yes, this is quite improbable.

In fact, the ‘Karimov-or-the-Shariah’ mantra (I do not say Abramson prones that yet it exists) has been the prime alibi through which the rogue regime in Tashkent has been legitimizing itself since the mid-90s.

Once the karimovites and their cronies are driven out, it is most likely that Islam will be more ‘visible’ and socially active in Uzbekistan, at least in some parts and among certain coats of society; but that is not necessarily ‘extremism’ or ‘Shariah rule’.

Or is it?

For the record, Khamidov said he is a secularist.

For example:

* Khamidov stated that there was a reduced threat from Islamic extremists in the region due to three primary factors: (1) effective repression by Central Asian governments; (2) emigration of young men (”the usual suspects” ) to work in Russia; (3) internal squabbles among extremist groups.

Khamidov is no defender of Karimov. He noted that his sister is married to a member of a Jamoyat, and charged he was wrongly accused of terrorism by Uzbekistan and had his American visa delayed as a result of the mixup.

*Abramson, on the other hand, appeared not to see a problem because he is not a secularist and apparently unlike Khamidov does not object to Islamism per se. He concluded his talk by stating that he believed that Uzbekistan would come under Sha’aria after Karimov leaves power, so long as Karimov cannot appoint his own successor. Abramson and Eurasia might not think this outcome to be “significant,” however most non-Islamists would find the imposition of Islamic law in a secular, modernizing, post-Soviet state to be a significant development. (It’s not going to happen, IMHO, because most Central Asians are closer in attitude to Khamidov than Abramson).

While Soros-OSI is to be congratulated for holding the forum and making the discussion available on the internet, Eurasianet’s summary is neither accurate, nor complete. In fairness to Eursianet readers, they might do well to post a complete transcript of this “significant” discussion.