Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan Remain Worst of the Worst
Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan2 Comments
Released on June 3 2009, the “Worst of the Worst. The World’s Most Repressive Societies 2009″ report by Freedom House lists two Central Asian states - Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan - as worst of the worst.
The report is based on “Freedom in the World” Freedom House’s Annual Global Survey of political rights and civil liberties.
What does this mean? The worst out of how many countries? Why again Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan and why not Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan? Let’s try to find answers to these questions.
THE WORST OUT OF HOW MANY COUNTRIES?
The reports are excerpted from Freedom in the World 2009, which surveys the state of freedom in 193 countries and 16 select territories. The ratings and accompanying essays are based on events from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008. The 17 countries and 4 territories profiled in this report are drawn from the total of 42 countries and 9 territories that are considered to be Not Free and whose citizens endure systematic and pervasive human rights violations.
Included in this report are eight countries judged to have the worst human rights records: Burma, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Also included are two territories, Chechnya and Tibet, whose inhabitants suffer intense repression. These states and territories received the Freedom House survey’s lowest ratings: 7 for political rights and 7 for civil liberties (based on a 1 to 7 scale, with 1 representing the most free and 7 the least free). Within these entities, state control over daily life is pervasive and wide-ranging, independent organizations and political opposition are banned or suppressed, and fear of retribution for independent thought and action is part of daily life.
The report also includes nine additional countries near the bottom of Freedom House’s list of the most repressive: Belarus, Chad, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Zimbabwe. The two territories of South Ossetia and Western Sahara are also included in this group. These countries and territories—all of which received ratings 7 for political rights and 6 for civil liberties—offer very limited scope for private discussion while severely suppressing opposition political activity, impeding independent organizing, and censoring or punishing criticism of the state.
WHY NOT KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN and TAJIKISTAN?
Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan have 7 and 7 ratings both for political rights and civil liberties. Here are the ratings for other Central Asian -STAN’s:
KAZAKHSTAN - 6 and 5
KYRGYZSTAN - 5 and 4
TAJIKISTAN - 6 and 5
And if KAZ and TAJ, as UZB and TRM are also considered as Not Free, KYR is a leading democracy among all five Central Asian states.
RSS Feeds
Podcasts
I am currently in Turkmenistan and have been to Uzbekistan. Both countries to lack civil liberties and freedoms, but Turkmenistan is definitely behind the rest of Central Asia from what I have seen here. Internet access is almost impossible to find and is illegal for foreigners to use outside of internet cafes. You are required to show your passport to get access, as in China, and it several sites are blocked. These freedoms were more readily available in Uzbekistan.
For more of our Central Asia experiences, please go to Abandon the Cube.
Reply
Mike,
you are right that mentioned freedom are more readily available in Uzbekistan than in Turkmenistan. But why we should compare our country with another dictatorship one? Why we can’t go for competition with democracies and stable economies? The answer is: we don’t want to do it and enjoy comparisons like this - we enjoy retelling everybody that we are better than Turkmenistan and, let’s say, Somalia or Sudan. Can’t say the same about at least Kazakhstan or Kyrgyzstan though.
Reply