Commentary
Tokayev’s predecessor, Nursultan Nazarbayev, outlined arrangements for a power transition too soon and in too much detail, ultimately losing control over the process. Tokayev is determined not to meet the same fate.
Temur Umarov
{
"authors": [
"Kelima V. Yakupova"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [
"Eurasia in Transition"
],
"regions": [
"Central Asia",
"Kyrgyz Republic"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Economy",
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Kyrgyzstan's New Window of Opportunity
Lasting change eluded Kyrgyzstan in 2005 when Bakiyev came to power. Now that his regime has collapsed, the new leaders will have to work hard to earn back the trust of the Kyrgyz people.
By Kelima V. Yakupova
Published on May 3, 2010
Source: Common Ground News Service
Kyrgyzstan, a majority-Muslim, central Asian republic, has endured two coup d’états in the last five years. The first, the Tulip Revolution in March 2005, led to the downfall of the country’s first post-Soviet president, Askar Akayev, whose 15 years in power ended amidst charges of corruption, nepotism and cronyism, and brought Bakiyev to power.
During the past several years, Bakiyev took the regime in an increasingly authoritarian direction, and on 7 April Scarlet Revolution protesters in Bishkek and several other cities rose up to drive yet another head of state from power.
Though lasting change eluded Kyrgyzstan in 2005, the Kyrgyz people now have an opportunity to ensure that history does not repeat itself.
The head of the interim government, Otunbayeva, has been active in Kyrgyz politics since 1981, serving as the USSR’s emissary to UNESCO and ambassador to Malaysia, the United Kingdom and the United States. In keeping with their promises to restore democracy in Kyrgyzstan, the three major opposition parties have reached a consensus to build a parliamentary state without the domination of any one individual. With Bakiyev out, and support from the major international powers, they have a unique opportunity to lead the country to economic recovery and representative government.
But the provisional government and its elected successor will have to work hard to earn back the trust of the Kyrgyz people.
Thanks in part to the Internet, which has made it easier for young Kyrgyz to form civil associations and keep one another informed, the Kyrgyz people have become more aware of government corruption. They watched as Bakiyev appointed members of his family to significant political positions and enjoyed the lion’s share of US government largesse in exchange for the use of the air base at Manas, a vital resupply point in the war in Afghanistan.
Several times in the past two months, thousands have taken to the streets of major Kyrgyz cities to demand the release of political prisoners and an end to the government’s harassment of the media: more than 60 journalists have been attacked since 2006, and at least two murdered. After electricity fees increased by 200 per cent, and heat by 400 per cent over the winter, protesters demanded reductions in utility costs and called for Bakiyev’s son, Maksim – accused of embezzling at least $35 million from a Russian loan – to leave the country.
Political activism does not come naturally to the Kyrgyz. Even after gaining their independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, they had a lingering fear of repression, little independent media, limited political speech and, above all, a lack of faith that citizen participation could bring about significant reforms.
However, recent events have encouraged dissatisfied citizens that public dissent is necessary and could be effective in the current climate. The Kyrgyz people must continue to press the provisional government to appoint public officials transparently and restart key institutions, including the constitutional court.
To address the country’s most pressing challenges, the new government will have to develop a commitment to protect freedom of speech and an independent media, as well as a long-term plan to jumpstart the economy, alleviate poverty and create new employment opportunities, which would provide a constructive opportunity for frustrated and unemployed youth.
Kyrgyzstan’s Scarlet Revolution has not yet put an end to the country’s cycle of turmoil. But thanks to the actions of Otunbayeva and her colleagues in the new government, and the many citizens who have taken to the streets to demand a say in how it makes its decisions, the people of Kyrgyzstan have reason to believe that this time change is actually in the works.
Kelima Yakupova is a Kyrgyz national and Junior Fellow of the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
About the Author
Kelima V. Yakupova
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 Endowment for International Peace
- Where Are President Tokayev’s Political Reforms Leading Kazakhstan?
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk
- Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?Commentary
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europe from Scratch: Visions for a New European OrderReport
As the EU confronts profound challenges, several leaders have called for fundamental reform to the union’s model—but only modest, superficial changes have resulted. What if Europe really could be reimagined from zero today: What should such a redesigned European order look like?
Richard Youngs, ed.
- What Should We Take From Andrey Melnichenko’s Essay in the Economist?Commentary
Andrey Melnichenko’s essay offers no answer to the fundamental question of how, under any kind of negotiated settlement, Europe can protect itself from the Russian ressentiment that is inevitable in all scenarios except for an outright victory for Putin.
Leonid Bershidsky
