The Kyrgyzstan Inquiry Commission (KIC) completed its research into the tragic events that have taken place in the southern Kyrgyz town of Osh in June of 2010. The bloody events have left over 400 persons (officially) dead, thousands of homes belonging to “one ethnic group” burnt to ashes or looted and hundreds of service-based institutions destroyed. The KIC included several international (hence independence and impartiality) politicians and researchers under the leadership of the Finnish politician Kimmo Kiljunen. The KIC researched into these events—traveled to Southern Kyrgyzstan, interviewed both ethnic groups and officials, and carried out other activities—and has released its report early May. Reading the report one is left with an impression that the then interim government, which includes many faces in the current government, assisted the assaults on the largest ethnic minority’s living quarters in Southern Kyrgyzstan. The report suggests that the interim government offered no serious resistance to the illegal acquisition of arms by one ethnic group to be later used against another; assisted mobs to assault mahallas with APCs breaking through barricades and advancing to make way for looters, criminals and thugs to strip houses of property, kill its inhabitants by beating to death or burning alive. The report pictures one group as a hostile assaulter and the other—helpless defendants that did not make any political demands that could provoke hostility.

Such a description of the situation obviously reveals the current government’s not only fault and shortcoming in dealing with but also complicity in the atrocities, which the KIC says can be labeled as “a crime against humanity.” The incumbent government logically opposes such a description. This brief article will therefore analyze various parties’ responses to the KIC findings.

Kyrgyz Prime Minister Almazbek Atambayev was one of the officials to unequivocally say “not everything is true” in the report. In an interview with local mass media outlets, he maintains third parties—the former president’s supporters, drug barons and criminal groups—were involved in staging the clashes, whereas the KIC report found “no third party involvement.” It is noteworthy that the interim government-appointed police chief, who served in Osh during the disturbances, also said there were no third parties in the conflict.

In a separate 40-page commentary to the report, the government of Kyrgyzstan pinpointed to many alleged shortcomings the KIC report had. For instance, people of Kyrgyz ethnicity were, too, killed, mutilated and wounded. However, figures suggest the discrepancy—75% of those suffered are ethnic Uzbeks—is far too big to say “both parties suffered equally,” as the government put it. Besides, the government claims, the value and efficiency of the KIC report is significantly decreased given the presence of “serious gaps” such as the historical tensions in relations between the two groups in question. The government also accused the KIC of being “biased.”

A former presidential candidate and human rights advocate, Toktoayim Umetaliyeva, is unhappy with whatever is related to the June events. She was critical of the national commission because it was “surficial and biased”. (The national commission investigated into the events and it, too, put blame on certain ministers: Defense Minister Ismail Isakov, for instance, for incapacity to prevent the clashes.) She is critical of the KIC report as well. According to her, giving the Uzbek language the status of a regional language is unfeasible because it is “a disappearing language,” although the report recommends doing so for alleviating grievances Uzbeks experience due to lack of political representation. Such a recommendation, in Umetaliyeva’s words, contributes “to the separatist sentiments.”

The aforementioned ex-minister of defense and currently an MP, Ismail Isakov, is too critical of everyone dealing with the event. He was going to lodge a suit against the head of the national inquiry commission which reported on his shortcomings (hence, apparently, complicity) to prevent abduction of weapons and APC from military units, which were later used in Uzbek mahallas. MP Isakov sees a link between “The Lamenting Jackal” book and the KIC report, because both publications “put blame squarely on the shoulders of the Kyrgyz and the government.”

While the Kyrgyz government was logically building defense against accusations and was trying to tip off the report, the international community was supportive of the KIC investigation and report. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay welcomed the publication of the “first of its kind in Central Asia” report. Ms Pillay said the report underlines the importance of just court trials and bringing those guilty to account, which is not the case up to date. The Commissioner commends the Kyrgyz president’s initiative to invite an international inquiry commission.

On this side of the Atlantic Ocean, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly was also supportive of the report. OSCE PA President Petros Efthymiou made a press statement that was totally the opposite of what the Kyrgyz government advanced in regards with the report.

“I strongly support the work of the Independent Commission headed by Kimmo Kiljunen,” President Efthymiou said. “Nothing can undo the suffering or bring back the lives lost, but we are fortunate that Mr. Kiljunen and his team have worked so diligently and objectively to shed light on the historic and painful events of last June. This report should bring new clarity to what lies behind those tragic events, and I hope that the authorities and people of Kyrgyzstan will be able to use this report to make needed progress.”

Now that all interested and involved parties were able to express their support/criticism towards the report, it is only “those suffering Uzbeks,” according to the report, and “those separatist Uzbeks,” according to local officials, are left without having their opinions voiced. Could this be another indication that the KIC is right in its findings?