The former Soviet Republic of Kyrgyzstan was the scene of the “Tulip Revolution” five years ago. Now there’s upheaval again: Riots all over the country, the president fled from the capital, Bishkek, Foreign Minister Roza Otunbayeva heading up a purported new government. A matter of some international interest because the U.S. has an Air Force base in Bishkek and it is of strategic importance in the Afghanistan war. But I can’t seem to find anything about which side, if any, the U.S. is supporting. Which side should the U.S. be supporting? Any opinions?
I don’t know who the US should be supporting but I’ll just say that as it stands, it’s quite premature to speak of events in Kyrgyzstan as a civil war. It’s more like a coup, really.
Whichever side will let us keep our bases there. They play an important role in staging our efforts in Afghanistan.
True. And, if I’m not mistaken, how the previous government came to power.
at the time there was a slightly different situation, as the opposition challenged a stolen election, which made their claims to power much more legitimate. This time around, there were no elections to rally around.
What’s more, I understand there’s a Kyrgyz tourist who can’t leave the JFK Airport terminal until this is settled . . . and he didn’t even know “Cats” has closed . . .
This article says the US backed the ousted dictator to get that military base while the Russians have backed the coup leaders.
It’s amazing how America has been able to spread its military tendrils around Russia, China, and Iran to the extent that it has.
The Red Cross will be sending him some vowels.
Is there much chance of Bakiev coming back to power now? Would sticking by him at this point achieve much other than alienating the new government (which is so far sticking with the current agreement on the Manas base; not sure how it’ll play out when that expires, but seems like opposing them may be a sure fire way to guarantee that it won’t be renewed)?
Some thoughts on what the international community should be doing at the Roberts Report:
Is there an option of not taking sides on the table? If so, I’d pick that one.
nope, not much hope of that.
we have bases there, crucial to the war effort in dominating the ME.
here is some recent news.
‘Moscow and Washington fear instability in the region’
Eurasia Group analyst Ana Jelenkovic told Channel 4 News it was in the interests of Russia and the United States, both of whom have military bases in Kyrgyzstan, for the situation in the area to stabilise.
“Certainly, Russia is looking to ensure that this does not destabilise any of the countries in the region,” she said.
"Moscow definitely fears instability in the region. Prolonging the lawlessness in Kyrgyzstan could, in Moscow’s view, eventually provide safe harbour for Islamic militants.
"If Russia does feel compelled to act, it will be for apparently humanitarian reasons. If the violence continues, then a failure to act would expose Moscow to international criticism. But Russia has been very cautious - it does not want to intervene hastily.
"If the violence continues, then the likelihood of Russian intervention increases - as long as it looks like it can be contained and it looks like it is humanitarian.
As far as US interests in the region were concerned, Ana Jelenkovic explained that "The US also does not want to see upheaval in the area. Its base at Manas forms a crucial part of its transportation arrangements for Afghanistan.
"Broadly speaking, the US also has an interest in stability in the region, given that it borders Afghanistan, with the possibility of the upheavals spilling over into the Afghan conflict.
“The US base is symbolic of the United States’ relationship with the region. Being told to vacate that base would not put it in a good long-term relationship with the Kyrgyz government.”
Just to clear up one point of apparent confusion, Kyrgyzstan does not border Afghanistan.
Kyrgyz toll ‘could touch 2,000’
Al Jazeera’s Robin Forestier-Walker reports from Osh on the violence and grief in Kyrgyzstan’s south
Roza Otunbayeva, Kyrgyzstan’s interim leader, says the death toll from ethnic clashes in the country’s south could reach 2000, manifold higher than the official figure of 200.
Her comments on Friday came shortly before she visited Osh, the southern city wracked by clashes between ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbeks over the last few days.
“I would multiply by 10 times the official figures,” she told the Russian daily Kommersan
article continues.
mostly borders China, Afghanistan, Iran, etc.
main problem for them is the (sic) US’ transit base’ just happens to be right on their border/s a few minutes US missiles flying time away from them,
why should they not feel uneasy?
.
Despite Russia’s and China’s pressure on the Kyrgyzstan Govt to close the USA base, and the Kyrgyzstan Govt actually voting to close it, the US refused, just upped the ante, increased the rent…
the base remains, a constant ‘threat’ to ‘them’
Russia, China, Iran, in fact, the whole ME?
Guess their main question is, does the US want their bases in every country in the world, including Theirs?
insist on them?
would that bring 'world peace"?
Kyrgyzstan borders Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and China…
They seem to just be noting that ‘the region’ borders Afghanistan. But for ‘the uphevals [to spill] over into the Afghan conflict’ from Kyrgyzstan, it’s gonna have to push its way through Uzbekistan or Tajikistan first…
I don’t know the details of what’s been going on with the status of the Manas base, but right when things started I remember Otunbaeva saying that they hadn’t made any decisions regarding the base. Since then the only rumblings I’ve heard about the base have been mostly arguments over fuel prices (fuel prices in general being one of the issues that led to the overthrow of Bakiev’s govt, so this more a symptom of that I guess) - and I think there may have been some talk of Manas being used as a bargaining chip to pressure the UK (I think?) into handing over Bakiev’s son.
Pretty sure some people within the new govt may have expressed a desire to have Manas shut down, but was there really any explicit action/statement on behalf of the government itself to have the base shut down, which the US then refused??
seems pretty straightforward to me.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/world/asia/24base.html?_r=2
In Reversal, Kyrgyzstan Won’t Close A U.S. Base
By MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ and CLIFFORD J. LEVY
Published: June 23, 2009
MOSCOW — Kyrgyzstan has essentially reversed a decision to close an American air base that is central to the NATO mission in nearby Afghanistan, after the United States acceded to sharply higher rent and to minor restrictions on the site, Kyrgyz and American officials said Tuesday.
The turnabout is a victory for the Obama administration as it seeks to step up operations to quell the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. The Kyrgyz government had ordered the base closed in February, apparently under pressure from the Kremlin, which has resented the deep American military presence in an area of the world that it has long considered its zone of influence.
article continues
The really ugly aspect of this is that it appears to involve ethnic cleansing, or at least pogroms, against Kyrgyzstan’s Uzbek minority. From The Nation:
This could get even worse . . . 
As a generally apathetic consumer of the world news, I have to say: shit like this just breaks my heart. 
It’s like the Hutu and the Tutsi in Rwanda, or the Serbs and the Croats in Bosnia: To an outsider they look just the same, physically and culturally; but they see each other as The Other.
Do not think i can agree here sir, not entirely. seen Docos, mostly on www.rt.com, about how they different groups there grew up together as friends, only enemies recently.
the main question being why they are now suddenly enemies…
main thought seems to suggest there are three layers of angst.
1/ political, america supported the previous govt, one that had a family generations long rule, nearly a dictatorship, but one pro america.
mainly to establish and maintain the Manas US base.
against Russia and China.
feed and supply the War in the ME.
( one who’s main rulers son is now seeking Political asylum in the UK, ( London )
with $millions missapropriated…
when the rules state that any political asylum seeker should seek in the nearest EU country, not one far away like London.
how many other dubious asylum seekers are in London? from dubious rulers we created???
the list is long… varied and illustrious…
2/ serious bad influence from the drug dealers, being that Kyrgyzstan is the main thoroughfare for heroin from Afghanistan to the West
( initial reports stated that the cause of the up-rest was too well panned and executed to be anything less than of dubious intent)
meaning, not just usual ethnic civil uprest
The ethnic cleansing being way down on the list of causative factors for this current pain there…
best and more important, why not ask, just what did we do to currently support and cause their downfall, ??>
cold war, detabalise country after country who did not totally yield to us? etc etc
Countries in who we needed to establish war bases to better dominate and bleed the ME???
ordinary ppl die, seems it matter not a whit…