An article from Uznews provides contrasting explanations for the events of 12-13 May 2005 in Andijan, specifically the alleged role of the man the Uzbek authorities have apparently fingered as the instigator. The man in question is Kobul Parpiyev, who has reportedly confessed to organising the uprising with help from, inter alia, Islamic Movement of Turkestan (fmrly IMU), US intelligence, and a US diplomat in Tashkent.

To date, this is the most comprehensive pro-(Uzbek) Government explantion I have heard for the Andijan events, and fleshes out the allegations that the so-called uprising was both Islamic-inspired and aided by foreign elements. The report variously asserts:

- “… in September 2004 he [Parpiyev] established contacts with people linked to “the leaderâ€? of the Islamic Movement of Turkestan, Tahir Yuldashev, who informed Parpiyev that the US intelligence services maintained contacts with Islamic opposition in the region, in particular with Tahir Yuldashev and that “there is mutual agreement that the coalition troops in Afghanistan will refrain from launching any large-scale offensive against Islamic Movement of Turkestan fighters to preserve their fighting capabilitiesâ€?;

- “US diplomat accredited in Tashkent Michael Goldman [the then second secretary of the US embassy in Uzbekistan] has reassured Akromiylar members that the US administration guarantees that active members of the Akromiylar movement will receive high posts in a new government and other top government jobs if Uzbekistan’s constitutional system is overthrown”;

- “In addition, the Americans reassured the leaders of Akromiylar that a relevant propaganda campaign would be launched in the Western media to discredit the Uzbek authorities in the eyes of international public,â€? the report on Parpiyev’s testimony says”.

And so on. It goes without saying that caution must be urged; the thesis put forward by this report is pretty hairy stuff, and has more than a smack of the “Show Trials” of the 1930s when Stalin’s enemies were accused of being capitalist running dogs, Leftist wreckers, and Jewish saboteurs. The report is based solely on confessions, with no other supporting evidence; an all too typical state of affairs in Uzbek jurisprudence. Moreover, The report itself is undated, unsigned, and of unknown authorship.

At the same time, Uznews has provided the transcript of an interview conducted by journalists with Parpiyev in June 2005 as well as varous caveats that Parpiyev’s invovement in Andijan is murky at best. Ironically, Parpiyev accuses the Uzbek authorities of having prior knowledge of the events - precisely the accusation the Uzbek government has made against Western media!

“Maybe, they think that we do not understand anything. On the “Davrâ€? news programme I saw an interview with one mother whose son, a police officer from Tashkent, died in Andijan. She said that her son had left for Andijan on 8 May. You see they prepared in advance.

On 11 May, one SNB officer telephoned his relatives in Andijan and said: “Do not leave home for four days if you want to remain alive.â€? Military in plain clothes started to arrive in the town on 8 May. And on 12 May the attack was launched, but we only staged a protest action.”