Alexey Malashenko
{
"authors": [
"Alexey Malashenko"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [
"Eurasia in Transition"
],
"regions": [
"Asia"
],
"topics": []
}Source: Getty
Tajikistan: Civil War’s Long Echo
Tajikistan is among the most problematic countries in Central Asia. The country faces a number of challenges, including an economic crisis, regionalism, domestic political confrontation, and radical Islam.
In terms of internal and external security, Tajikistan has been among the most problematic countries in Central Asia. It is the only state in the region to have gone through a protracted civil war (1992-1997), which, according to various estimates, killed between 23,500 and 100,000 people (perhaps even more) and left the economy in ruins. The causes of this war were rooted not only in political confrontation, but also in confrontation between different regions, clans, and personalities, as well as confrontation within Islam between those who sought to build a secular state and those who wanted an Islamic state.
In his new Briefing, Alexey Malashenko writes about the current situation in Tajikistan and the country’s possible developments.
Key Conclusions:
- After signing the Agreement on Peace and National Accord with the opposition in 1997, President Rakhmon set about building an authoritarian regime in Tajikistan.
- Today, the authorities face several internal challenges: an economic crisis, regionalism, domestic political confrontation, and radical Islam.
- It will be difficult, if not impossible, to organize “Maidan Tahrir”-type mass protests of the kind that took place on Cairo’s main square and toppled Hosni Mubarak’s regime in Egypt in the spring of 2011.
- None of the external players today has an interest in radically escalating the situation in the country, much less in provoking Tajikistan’s collapse. Russia hopes to keep the country within its sphere of influence by participating in key projects there and providing military aid.
About the Author
Former Scholar in Residence, Religion, Society, and Security Program
Malashenko is a former chair of the Carnegie Moscow Center’s Religion, Society, and Security Program.
- What Will Uzbekistan’s New President Do?Commentary
- Preserving the Calm in Russia’s Muslim CommunityCommentary
Alexey Malashenko
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie China
- How to Predict China’s Economic Performance for 2025: A Sectoral ApproachCommentary
GDP growth means something fundamentally different in China than in most countries.
Michael Pettis
- How Southeast Asia Sees Xi Jinping’s Regional Push Amid U.S.-China TensionsArticle
The Trump administration’s effort to reshape the global trading system and reset overseas security commitments is creating an historic inflection point. Less clear is how far China will be able to capitalize on these dynamics.
- +1
Li Mingjiang, Le Hong Hiep, Ngeow Chow Bing, …
- Northeast Asia Is for Deterrence and Southeast Asia Is (Mostly) for Freeriding: Appreciating Divergent East Asian Approaches to Order, Uncertainty, and ContestationArticle
Most Southeast Asian states behave as if the actions of their Northeast Asian neighbors and the Philippines will be sufficient to maintain a regional status quo from which they can benefit.
Chong Ja Ian
- Germany’s Strategic Gray Zone With ChinaArticle
As the United States confronts China more directly, Merkel is exploring deeper cooperation with Xi. Economic upheaval from the coronavirus could reinforce the temptation in Berlin to keep Beijing close.
Noah Barkin
- Raja Mandala: India and China—Rebuild the TrustCommentary
Without a return to genuine bilateralism that takes into account the interests of both parties, Beijing will find that the chasm with New Delhi continues to deepen.
C. Raja Mohan