I do not really see how a decision to apply tougher sanctions against Uzbekistan would “signal double standards” as the statement by Mikhail Margelov suggests.

On the contrary, it is only natural for the EU to do that if they really want to prove they are principled enough when it comes to promoting democracy and respect for human rights. It would definitely be a sign of duplicity if they suddenly started nodding their heads in approval of Karimov’s handling of Andijan disturbances.

However, it would certainly be much better if the EU and the US for that matter could forget about whatever economic interests they have in Central Asia and just go ahead with what the US State Department’s Fried terms as key priorities on Bush’s “freedom agendaâ€? in Central Asia, namely human rights and democracy.

That is why I have a hard time understanding the reasons for such long deliberations on whether or not the EU and especially Americans (who have been so vigorously denying their involvement in the new Great Game in CA) should break completely with Uzbekistan and impose measures that would have some tangible impact on the situation in Uzbekistan. Simply making denouncing statements won’t do the trick this time.

It is clear now that the Uzbek government is not going to back down on its overpowering commitment to security in whatever perverse forms this may come. And the ongoing campaign of intimidation and harassment against civil society representatives and journalists serves as the proof of that.