Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow Society arrow STRATEGIC CHESS MOVES ACROSS EURASIA
Aug 10 2005
STRATEGIC CHESS MOVES ACROSS EURASIA | Print |  E-mail
Society + Culture
By kgajendra singh   
Article Index
STRATEGIC CHESS MOVES ACROSS EURASIA
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7

 
After the May Andijan rioting some commentators viewed it as an important test for the Bush administration - whether the anti-terrorism efforts or promotion of democracy took priority. "We all knew basically that if we really wanted to keep access to the base, the way to do it was to shut up about democracy and turn a blind eye to the refugees," said a senior official, on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive diplomacy. "We could have saved the base if we had wanted."
 
This is as usual a false claim, which only true info-challenged Americans might believe. Because ,in reality , top US officials did whatever they could to make Tashkent regime change its mind on the US troops' presence, including a well known attempt to block UN action calling for an official investigation into the massacre. Closeness between European nations and the US, a product of years of cooperation, is however often taken for granted for US benefit. Therefore, Europeans did not blink an eyelid when they saw the US block the UN effort to call Uzbek leaders to question on atrocities in Andijan. So much for the tall talk on human rights by USA and its European allies.
 
It is unlikely that US will give the promised $22 million in aid to Uzbekistan as in its view it has not complied with the provisions on political and economic reforms included in a 2002 strategic partnership agreement with Washington. Last year, USA withheld almost $11 million.

View of an insider –Former British Envoy to Tashkent;

Former British Ambassador to Tashkent, Craig Murray, who was relieved of his charge for openly protesting against US and British coddling of Karimov, said that Washington was only trying to cover its retreat behind a smokescreen of belated concern for human-rights abuse in Uzbekistan. It suddenly discovered “one of their most intensively courted allies – in shock horror - to be an evil dictator. (Remember Saddam?) But the reality is much more complex.”

It might be noted that Tashkent received in 2002 alone $120 m in US aid for the army and $82 m for the security services. Prior to the decision, there was no indication at all that the US was going to review its military links with Uzbekistan - in fact US General Richard Myers had specifically stated that they would continue. Britain gave no indication of stopping cooperation either. Nor “that we will stop the practice whereby the Uzbek security services share with the CIA and MI6 the so-called intelligence extracted from Karimov's torture chambers. So much for the pretence of moral repugnance. ”

Craig also disclosed that Germany had leased a base at Termez in southern Uzbekistan, with Joschka Fischer, the German foreign minister a frequent visitor and admirer of Karimov “Karimov has never intended to move Uzbekistan towards democracy or the free market. His very limited experimentation with attracting western investment in the mid-1990s convinced him that western-style capitalism was incompatible with containing all economic clout in the hands of his family and immediate cronies. Since then he has turned to Russian and Chinese state companies for investment.”

At the end of last year, Karimov finally came off the fence and opted for Russia's Gazprom rather than US firms to develop Uzbekistan's massive gas fields thus “ questioning the viability of the hydrocarbons pipeline over Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea, the holy grail of US policy in central Asia since before the Afghan war.”

The US franchised revolutions in former Soviet republics made up Karimov’s mind .An angry Eduard Shevardnadze visited him after being ousted and warned him against Soros and other NGOs. Karimov immediately kicked out the Open Society Institute and put crippling restrictions on other NGOs, setting his face against US promoted democracy. This helped increasing a warm relationship with Vladimir Putin.

Karimov was, on the face of it, an unlikely man for Putin to embrace. After independence he had encouraged anti-Russian nationalist sentiment, and 80% of ethnic Russians - more than 2 million people - fled Uzbekistan. However, Putin and Karimov share many things.

“Uzbekistan has half the population of central Asia, a dominant geo-strategic position and the region's largest and best-equipped armed forces. But to the north, Kazakhstan, under President Nazarbayev, has far outstripped Karimov in economic performance, and not only because of greater hydrocarbon resources. He has kept a balance between Russia and the west, and the economy is relatively open, with much more western investment.”

But Bush in his penchant for rhetoric to promote democracy called for fair elections in Kazakhstan and upset President Nazarbayev. In a recent letter to him, Bush urged him to allow fair elections later this year when the latter seeks a third term. "The latest events in the region have stressed the importance of a balanced economic growth, responsible governance and democratic development. I urge you to make sure that economic reforms are backed up with bold democratic reforms," said an edited version of the Bush letter.  Like US ally late Haidar Aliev of Azerbaujan , both Karimov and Nazarbayev have ambitions that their daughters succeed them .Has it not happened in USA , where Bush senior helped his son with little real federal level political experience and passed on his own his advisers like Dick Cheney , Colin Powell and others.

Recently Ms Rice said in Cairo that for 60 years US had promoted stability over democracy but would now promote democracy. But US ally President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, who has ruled for 25 years with emergency powers and has not allowed any other Presidential contender, is again gearing to get himself re-elected in a similar fashion without a whimper from Washington. Ever since Pakistan’s independence, US have been happier dealing with military rulers in Pakistan. Except for those persuaded by ‘manufactured consent’ in USA who re-elected George W. Bush , rhetoric or spin by US leadership and its corporate controlled media , makes little impact elsewhere and only brings down US credibility

James O' Halloran, editor of the annual publication "Jane's Land Based Air Defense" said the K2 closure could have significant impact. "The [K-2] airfield itself is a forward operating base [in the southern part of Uzbekistan] which, logistically, gives the U.S. a very good jumping off point into Afghanistan when it needs to move troops and logistics in that area," O'Halloran said. But he added that Tashkent's decision did not come as a surprise.

"I believe that the U.S. has expected to lose the K-2 base for some time now as political pressure has been applied through various sources to hold back the U.S. expansion, shall we say, into the former Soviet empire," he said. "A lot of people are saying that [the United States is] expanding a little too quickly now. They're over-stretching things. And I do believe it is politics which has forced the expected closure of K-2."



 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: