The former Soviet republic of Kyrgyzstan (fka the Kirghiz SSR, or Kirghizia) is going through an mass upheaval the press is dubbing variously the “Tulip Revolution” or “Lemon Revolution” (following the example of the recent crisis in Ukraine which was dubbed the “Orange Revolution”). From CNN – http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/24/kyrgyzstan/index.html:
What’s this really about? Are the people just discontented that Astar Akayev has been president (and effective dictator) ever since independence in 1991? Or does it go deeper? What do the rebels really want? According to the main Wikipedia article on Kyrgyzstan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrgyz_Republic#Economy), things aren’t really so bad there, considering:
(I’m just glad there’s no oil. ) Despite all that, some Kyrgyz are discontented with Akayev’s rule. There’s no pleasing some people . . .
Can this be resolved peacefully? If not, can it be resolved without any other countries getting involved?
What’s the likeliest outcome?
How does it affect international politics? Kyrgyzstan is bordered by Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan – and China. Specifically, Xinjiang, aka Uyghuristan, aka Chines Turkestan – a Chinese “Autonomous Territory” whose Uyghur people are historically Turkic, like the Kyrgyz, and who, like the Tibetans, have been somewhat restive under Chinese rule. (But 40% of the population of Xinjiang is now Han-Chinese.) More trouble in the offing? And how will the Kyrgyz example affect the other Central Asian states of the former USSR, all of which (I think) are still effectively dictatorships?
BG:1. What’s this really about? Are the people just discontented that Astar Akayev has been president (and effective dictator) ever since independence in 1991?
I think that’s bound to be a large part of it. According to your original link,
But there’s probably more to it too. The article goes on to say:
Sounds like a typical Central-Asian-nation “rock and a hard place” dilemma, with on the one hand a “stable” post-Soviet government plagued by corruption and some repression, and on the other hand a resistance movement fueled by democracy supporters as well as local warlords and Islamic radicals.
By the way, I would like to commend the OP for successfully typing “Kyrgyzstan” so many times in a single post. That’s hard work.
The ironic thing is that Akayev is probably the least odious of the Central Asian dictators. For one thing, he’s the only one of them who wasn’t the local communist party boss when the soviet union collapsed. He started off well enough, as the most democratic, pluralist leader in the region. He’s been in power since 1991, and it’s really only in the last 5 years that he’s been turning more and more authoritarian (as his constitutionally final second term comes to an end).
Personally I would have much rather seen an uprising against the truly vile soi-disant “Turkmenbashi” (Saparmurat Niyazov), but as an old CPSU hand he doubtless would never have let things get out of hand the way Akayev did.
I have to ask: why is this getting so little play in the Western media? I look at the main page of CNN, and it’s all Schiavo, all the time. OK, it’s not a huge country, but it’s part of what used to be your main enemy, and i dare say the implications matter slightly more for the world at large than the fate of what used to be Terri Schiavo.
Even the SDMB ain’t much better. Two posts on this so far? Pathetic…
Seems to be relatively bloodless so far, but given the volatile ethnic/clan mixture in parts of the country and the amount of pent-up oppposition fury, I hope it can stay that way, especially in Fergana; previous riots there in 1990 turned quite bloody.
Background on Kyrgyzstan:
I’m not at all surprised it happened in Kyrgyzstan first rather than in Turkmenistan; Akaev being not as evil as Turkmenbashi, he hasn’t stifled dissent to the same degree, so people feel somewhat freer to protest. If I were an Uzbek government ofifical right now, though, I’d pretty much be quaking in my boots.
(Sorry I’m late; I can’t post from my new job. They all think I’m a huge geek now, anyway, for gloating about predicting this 2 weeks ago when I heard about the first demonstrations in Osh.)
Agreed. And the Kyrgyzstan revolution has been front page news in the Washington Post for the past few days. Not that Post readership approaches CNN viewership in numbers.
Of course, Terri Schiavo’s plight has been on the Post’s front page every damn day as well. Easier to skip though in a newspaper.
Thirded. Heck, my theory is that if the U.S. has a military base there, every U.S. citizen ought to be able to at least place it on the correct continent.
The real reason? Nobody knows anything about the place here, so nobody cares, so nobody publishes any information about it. It’s circular.
Definitely. It is largely unspoiled because there is little there worth spoiling.
Akaev’s plan in the early 90’s was to transform Kyrgyzstan into the “Switzerland of Central Asia.” His early market reforms were far more forward-thinking than the repressive measures of his apparatchik colleagues in neighboring countries. This is probably due to the fact that Kyrgyzstan is considerably poorer with respect to natural resources. Turkmenbashi can maintain his wacky cult of personality since Turkmenistan is essentially a gas republic. Karimov of Uzbekistan can press-gang every college student in the country to pick cotton for free to fund his government. Russia simply pours enough money into Kazakhstan to make some of its problems go away.
Kyrgyzstan is less strategically relevant, more geographically isolated, and simply poorer than its neighbors. It needs reform the good old fashioned way, and I am happy to say that it seems to be headed in that direction. As Eva said earlier, Karimov is probably more than a little concerned right now. The Fergana valley has been a bloody mess for the past fifteen years or so, and with such rapid progress in Kyrgyzstan, perhaps it is only a matter of time before there is more civic violence.
Heck, I didn’t even know we had a base there until this revolution hit the news (though I was aware, generally, that we had some bases in Central Asia).
Neither did I. I assumed we probably had some presence in Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, or Uzbekistan due to Afghanistan (man, what is with these Central Asian names? and where is that Onion article?) but not Kyrgyzstan.
Update: It’s not quite over yet. The new parliament – elected 2/27 and 3/14 in elections practically everybody considers fraudulent – and the old parliament each is claiming to be Kyrgyzstan’s legitimate parliament. http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=617385
) Despite all that, some Kyrgyz are discontented with Akayev’s rule. There’s no pleasing some people . . .