Politics and Society
Translator’s Note: Translated from Jamil’s post (RUS).
On March 14, 2011, Mukhiddin Khojimuradov suggested to his compatriots Khairulla and Sunatullo Yuldashevs from Chinaz region of Tashkent oblast that they move to Kazakhstan’s city of Turkestan, where they could earn decent money. When the four young men reached the place, the only job they were offered was at the car washing station; their employer refused to pay for their labor, reports the Initiative group of independent rights activists of Uzbekistan (IGIRAU). They never signed contracts and their passports had been taken away; they had effectively become slaves, who were constantly beaten and forced to work each day from 7am to 10pm.
These photos are by a fellow citizen journalist inside Turkmenistan. It might be hard for outsiders to understand how courageous this person is, even if the content is “uncontroversial”.
I would also like to draw the viewer’s attention away from the banners and at the context around them. If you look closely, you can see indications of the material impoverishment of my country.
The photograph above is from Ashgabat. It shows all eight of the official candidates. However, there are no posters or advertisements allowed that would show these men individually. By contrast, there are huge posters of Berdimuhamedov just about everywhere.
Berdimuhammedov riding an Ahal-Teke breed. Photograph found on a Turkmen social network.
Editor’s note: Is Turkmenistan’s upcoming presidential election really just a totalitarian ploy for false legitimacy, or is it something much more… pitiful? neweurasia’s Annasoltan gives her thoughts.
Speaking as a Turkmen, this upcoming presidential election makes no sense. Really, it doesn’t. I’ve been trying to think: maybe Berdimuhammedov wants to project an image of “modernization” to both international and domestic audiences? The Registan’s Joshua Foust has written:
The only real question [is]: By what margin will tyrant Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov rig the vote? [...] Inexplicably, Berdimuhamedov seems determined to proceed with the trappings of a normal election no one will acknowledge as such. At this point, the only question is what percentage of the vote he will choose to accept. Other Central Asian dictators have not shied away from impossible margins, such as Nursultan Nazarbayev in Kazakhstan (95 percent) and Islom Karimov in Uzbekistan (88 percent). Will Berdimuhamedov meet or beat his 89 percent from 2007? Will he go higher, to lend the appearance of inevitability to his oppressive regime? Or will he go lower, to try to create the false sense of political dynamism?
Foust’s a sharp thinker, and earlier in January, I also had the same logic as him, but now I’m not so certain. That’s because — and it’s hard to describe why — there’s something crazy about this election.
A voting ballot for the upcoming election. Photograph by Adalat Seeker for neweurasia (CC-usage).
Editor’s note: Turkmenistan’s upcoming presidential poll is truly a strange creature. neweurasia’s Annasoltan reviews how it has evolved in the last few months, including the role of government-organized NGOs (GONGOs). “For a sham election,” she writes, “trying to keep track of [it] has proven really annoying.”
For a sham election, trying to keep track of Turkmenistan’s upcoming presidential poll has proven really annoying. For one, in early January of this year, our country’s “Arkadag” (Protector), Berdimuhamedov, declared his intention to establish a multi-party system. One wonders what exactly he has in mind.
Editor’s note: What was happening in Kyrgyzstan about a year ago from now? neweurasia’s Marat Sartpaev takes a look back. “Well, today we’ve passed through our first-ever peaceful transfer of power at the presidential level,” he writes. “Yes, it’s just the same old elite I suppose, but hey, at least this time there weren’t snipers on the roof.”
We’re now a month into 2012, so I thought might be a good time to review what was going on this time of year in 2011. And, uh, yeah, it wasn’t pretty. There were of course the consequences of the June 2010 events, which had “rolled over” into the new year un-investigated. However, the first and serious challenge was of a different breed — an alleged terrorist group eliminated near Bishkek on January 5, 201. An anti-terror operation resulted in the killing of the suspects and three special task force officers.
At first, the operation seemed like a success, and the public hotly debated the place of Islam in society. However, many questions later arose as to the identity of the alleged terrorists. Local human rights activists identified several people among those eliminated and captured as those who had distributed humanitarian assistance in southern Kyrgyzstan in the summer of 2010. Toktayim Umetaliyeva led the investigation, which was approved of the then-presidential administration chief. When asked why the government would declare humanitarian aid distributors “terrorists”, she indicated anti-terror funds promised by the United States.
“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thy own eye?”
Matthew 7:3
Karimov knocks out Rahmon?
Official Uzbek media keep downgrading Tajikistan’s Emomali Rahmon regime by reprinting online critical articles written by journalists who are, in fact, perfect “Uzbek state enemies.”
Nowadays, apart from finding disadvantages and ‘assisting’ in postponing the construction of the Roghun project in Tajikistan, Uzbek media representatives decided to impose themselves as ready-to-analyze independent online sources on the search for as much information as possible that tells of the Rahmon’s regime’s failures and lies.
One of them, Tashkentskaya Pravda (Tashkent Truth) allowed itself to publish an article from Paruskg.info website, which refers to Wikileaks information, entitled, “Apple Does Not Fall Far From The Tree.”
Shamsullo Gulov, author of the ‘kompromat’ starts with calling Wikileaks a “famous web site” that gives opinions of U.S. State Department employees regarding Rahmon’s family seizing control over main industrial and financial facilities in the counrty. Later on, the author says that the information provided by Wikileaks are “concrete facts.”
Well, first of all, the fact of using Wikileaks as a source of information is something out of reality for Uzbek media since Wikileaks itself, based on American diplomatic cables, called Karimov an “authoritarian leader” and linked his regime with the Uzbek mafia. Read the full story »
Musta Kemal striking an Ataturk pose in Turkey's Cankaya Library.
I’m knee-deep in exam season at the moment, studying my level один Russian and writing essays, so I haven’t had the chance to look closely at the Kazakh parliamentary elections. From what I’m hearing, preliminary results are giving Nur Otan party 80.7% of the vote, while two other parties — the business-oriented Ak Zhol and the People’s Communist Party — earned slightly more than 7% each, clearing the threshold to enter parliament. Unsurprisingly, Western press has been mostly negative, but what my inner cynic just finds hilarious is this remark from Miklos Haraszti, head of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights’ observation mission: “This election took place in a tightly controlled environment, with serious restrictions on citizens’ electoral rights.” Well, OSCE, I guess all you can really say is: whoops.
However, putting my hypocrisy radar aside for a moment, they’re right. Although I am not so quick to condemn Kazakhstan — as there is usually more than meets the eye to this country, both in good and bad ways — nevertheless, this election definitely was shoddy. My colleague from Ghent University, Dr. Bruno De Cordier has brought to my attention an article in the Washington Times with this telling remark:
“‘Even the government doesn’t hide that they have no intention of copying Western democracies,’ said Lilit Gevorgyan, an analyst and IHS Global Insight in London. ‘I think what they are trying to do is to show that they are responding to social discontent.’”
The article also quotes a taxi driver who refers to most of the so-called opposition parties as “pupils” of the main party. As some of you know, I am currently working on an MPhil at the University of Leuven concerning the phenomenon of managed democracy in Russia and Kazakhstan, so these kind of tidbits are right up my alley.
Building on my theme of the possibilities and problems for an “Eurasian Spring”, neweruasia‘s Schwartz and I have co-written a three-part article series entitled, “Life After the Taghut”, for the new online magazine Fair Observer. Therein we explore scenarios for regime evolution, change, or breakdown after Uzbekistan’s strongman president, Islam Karimov, inevitably dies (and yes, the publication of the series is intended to coincide with his 74th birthday). In the first and second parts, we use both recent and older historical examples of other despotic regimes as tentative models and attempt to anticipate a bit about the choices that could be faced by a post-Karimov regime. In the final (and still upcoming) part, we explore how a certain social, economic, ideological and historical “logic” in Uzbekistan could cause a post-Karimov regime to place their country on a direct path to Islamicization, and what that would even mean.
Regarding the title, those of you familiar with political Islam shall understand the reference to طاغوت (taghut), an Arabic Islamic term meaning “to cross the limits, overstep boundaries” or “to rebel” vis-à-vis divine authority. Traditionally a term connoting idolatry, it is mentioned in the politically significant Qur’anic verse 4:76 (which Schwartz and I quote in the final part of the series). During the medieval period, it has was used by Muslims to describe the rampaging Mongol khans and their vassals. Today, in contemporary Islamic political theory, it has come to be used to describe dictatorships, i.e., as violating the will of God.
You can read the piece here: http://www.fairobserver.com/article/life-after-taghut
“The play ‘s the thing wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king.” — Hamlet, Act II, Scene II.
Even fake elections can give strongman dictators a headache when ordinary people actually expect them to mean something. It’s widely expected that Turkmenistan’s elections would be just a pro forma confirmation for another five years of Berdimuhammedov, and the likelihood that he may be declared “president for life” in the near future is high. Yet, holding even moderately contested elections would give Berdimuhamedov some clear benefits, appearing “democratic” and demonstrating that he is in fact “the best for the job”. As it currently stands, though, it seems more likely that he wants to crush any hope for alternative by co-opting the very notion of democratic plurality.
But that’s actually the problem. Even though Turkmenistan is a single-party state, ironically, in a country such as Turkmenistan that has a record of rigged elections and a former president-for-life, too many votes for the incumbent president could cast a dark shadow over the legitimacy of the elections and not vice versa. The headache for our “Arkadag” (“Protector”) is that his “opponents” need to be strong candidates who could pose a danger to his rule. What’s key is not how to defeat his counterparts, but how to make the elections look real. When there is a ballot box but there are no viable candidates, it can become a nightmare for the man who wants to be seen as the modern leader of what he calls “the era of great changes” and in many ways different from his predecessor Saparmurat Niyazov.
Unfortunately, Berdimuhammedov likes the theatrical. You may remember his appearance as a singing star playing guitar on Turkmen TV? Or during a conference of the Galkynysh National Revival Movement, he gave a speech highly praising the achievements of that movement, only to then declare its termination in the very same breath without any reason? I wonder how much longer before my people are tired of drama.
On January 3rd, 2012, young activists of Birdamlik Peoples Movement of Uzbekistan protested in front of the Uzbek Embassy in Washington, DC.
“The kids of our family, some of whose parents are not here with them in the U.S. and who became vistims of the Uzbek regime’s prosecution for being my relatives, are the ones trying to bring international attention to this problem,” Bakhodir Choriyev, leader of Birdamlik who currently resides in the United States, told neweurasia.
As a result, some kids are either without one parent or both parents — their relatives are deprived from their right to move freely and come to the U.S. where they have residence permits (the so-called Green Cards).
“This is the first protest in the series but not the last,” says Choriev. “We will continue our protests and call our Uzbek citizens, who are abroad, to occupy Uzbek embassies in countries of their residence! By doing this we can inform the world and publicity in developed democratic countries about horrible dictatorship regime in Uzbekistan, about President Karimov’s intolerance towards freedom of speech and political rights of the people of Uzbekistan!”
Read the full story »
RSS Feeds
Podcasts
Recent Comments