|
www.wpherald.com
By Alexei Malashenko
Outside View CommentatorPublished June 13, 2005
So, what really happened in mid-May in the Uzbek town of Andizhan? It is still not known for sure how many people were killed in the riot. Nor is it known who organized it and why. A correct forecast for the future of Uzbekistan and the rest of Central Asia largely depends on whether we can answer these questions correctly.
The Uzbek authorities, Russia and the United States claim "the Islamic trail" is clearly seen in the events in Andizhan. A "green revolution" in Uzbekistan and a total regional chaos are currently most popular "horror stories."
The subject of Islamists (what is meant in this case is those who act under the banner of radical Islam, not any particular party) has not arisen by chance because the Islamists are Uzbekistan's most energetic and radical political force. After the events in Andizhan, however, they actually did not do anything or manifest themselves in some other way. This is why the question of their involvement in those events is now under discussion.
Evidently, the latest events showed that the Islamists turned out to be unprepared to lead the Uzbek resistance, though they had a chance to do this. They are unprepared to offer stiff resistance to Uzbek security services. Apart from that, if we return to the events, we will see that no one backed the riot. Why? Perhaps, people are scared of Uzbek President Islam Karimov, or the Islamists did not strive to lead the riot, or they did not have the time to do this because the authorities reacted very quickly and resolutely. Perhaps, we just overestimate the organizational possibilities of Islamic parties. It is one thing to spread leaflets, the way Hizb ut-Tahrir does in Uzbekistan, and quite another thing to take the people to the streets. There are more questions than answers here.
Anyway, the Islamists' involvement in these events cannot be ruled out. Their influence will grow with time and the possibility of their leading an organized movement of protest in the country in the future is strong enough. They are unlikely to come to power, though, and the possibility of establishing a caliphate in Uzbekistan is doubtful.
However, a political upheaval in the country may be provoked not only by the Islamists but also representatives of various clans. An important point to keep in mind is that a presidential election is due in 2007. However, there is no candidate there who could replace Karimov without tragic consequences for the country and region. Karimov is facing the problem of finding a successor who would preserve consensus inside the ruling elite and prevent a civil war.
Two clans -- from Tashkent and Samarkand -- stand at the helm of power in Uzbekistan now. The third powerful clan -- from Ferghana -- has been completely removed from power as of now. Incidentally, there is a version that it was representatives of this clan who organized the riots in Andizhan, situated in the Ferghana Valley, or they had been provoked in order to do a short work of them.
The search for a successor to Karimov is a problem not only for Uzbekistan but also for Moscow and Washington, which are, naturally, not interested in the destabilization of the region. This is why the Americans actually "swallowed" the massacre of the Andizhan rioters and are not preparing any "orange" revolution there. Just like Russia, which unambiguously backs Karimov, the United States advocates a legitimate, and what is most important -- peaceful process of the transfer of power in the republic. Currently, both Russian and U.S. diplomats are busy assessing the chances of the people who could claim leadership in Uzbekistan.
A successor to Karimov should equally suit representatives of various clans. One attractive candidate to this office is the president's daughter, Gulnara Karimova. There are people who are prepared to back her candidacy in the election. The only question is what she thinks about this. She was resolutely against this until now. Other strong politicians' coming to power may split the country. Against this background, anything may happen -- renewed activities by local Islamists, an outburst of international terrorism and the spread of chaos to the entire region.
The political situation in the region is complicated as it is. The outcome of elections in Kyrgyzstan, where the representatives of the new authorities cannot come to terms with one another, is yet unclear. The opposition in Kazakhstan is renewing its activity. So, there is no optimistic forecast for regional developments.
Anyway, neither Russia nor the United States should be obsessed with an Islamic threat, which may emanate from the region. Instead, they should look for new influential partners for the future. Old leaders and the old elite go. So, new stakes have to be made. The question is whether they would be right?
--
(Alexei Malashenko is member of the Learned Council of the Moscow Carnegie Center, professor at the Russian Foreign Ministry's Moscow State Institute of International Relations. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and may not necessarily represent the opinions of the RIA Novosti editorial board.)
--
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of World Peace Herald or United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)
Copyright © 2005 News World Communications,
Inc. All rights reserved.
|