Uzbek Campaigner Slams Karimov Invite to Brussels

Friday, 21 January, 2011

The link has been copied

News Briefing Central Asia

Uzbek president Islam Karimov’s impending visit to Brussels has astonished and disappointed rights groups.

While the precise terms of Karimov’s January 24 trip to Europe are unclear, European Union sources say he may have a meeting with European Commission president José Manual Barroso.

It will be the Uzbek leader’s first trip to Europe since the EU dropped the last of its sanctions imposed after the Andijan violence of May 2005 in which hundreds of people were shot down by government security forces.

The Human Rights in Central Asia Association, which is based in France, issued a statement on January 15 expressing concern about Karimov’s visit and the secrecy surrounding it.

NBCentralAsia asked the association’s head, Nadezhda Ataeva, to comment on the purpose and likely outcome of Karimov’s visit.

NBCentralAsia: What does this visit mean to Uzbekistan and the European Union?

Ataeva: If human rights issues are not discussed during , Karimov’s trip, it will mean the EU has abandoned democratic principles in exchange for economic advantage. And that will mean that individuals complicit in the Andijan massacre, in torture, in fabricating criminal charges and in other crimes against humanity once again escape accountability.

NBCentralAsia Why has the EU invited Karimov?

Ataeva: As far as I know, Karimov has been invited by the Council of the European Union to sign an energy deal. He will be accompanied by a large government delegation.

All the signs are that plans for this meeting have been in train for a long time, and that every effort has been made to conceal the date of this dictator’s arrival in Brussels from the public.

This visit became possible after Karimov allowed over 100,000 refugees to enter Uzbekistan in June 2010, after they fled ethnic conflict in the south of Kyrgyzstan. However, the Uzbek and Kyrgyz authorities agreed that all these people should be sent back, whatever their state of health, ahead of a referendum in which Kyrgyzstan wanted to secure the maximum possible turnout.

Further actions taken by Karimov also show that he is not the peacemaker that some are portraying him as. Following the unrest in southern Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan began building a seven-metre wall along the border, making it extremely difficult to cross, especially for ethnic Uzbeks.

Another key point is the ethnic Uzbeks of southern Kyrgyzstan sought support from Tashkent, but the whole issue is now off-limits for discussion in Uzbekistan.

Nor is it likely that EU officials will raise this subject with Karimov.

One of the reasons he was so keen to get rid of the refugees was that he did not want the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to reopen its office in Uzbekistan; it left the country in 2004.

Uzbek human rights groups are even less welcome. The Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan has been unable to win official registration since 1992, while Mothers Against the Death Penalty and Torture has been trying to get registered since 2001 without success. This despite both organisations being recognised both in EU members and the United States.

NBCentralAsia: European officials have in the past said it’s better to have a dialogue with dictatorial regimes like Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan than nothing at all. Does that mean the EU is hoping that this kind of cooperation will bring improvements to the situation in Uzbekistan?

Ataeva: What kind of cooperation is that? Dialogue with a dictator means making concessions. For example, the current EU-Uzbekistan dialogue process on human rights includes the issue of political prisoners. Our association has calculated that whereas 22 civil society activists were in jail in 2006, the number has now risen to 38.

Former member of parliament Murod Joraev has been imprisoned since 1995; and writer Mamadali Mahmudov and the Bekjon brothers since 1999.

If that’s the outcome of dialogue with the EU, how can there be any confidence in Karimov?

The EU frequently cites the release of [rights activists] Mutabar Tajibaeva, Umida Niazova and Gulbahor Turaeva as positive outcomes of its dialogue with Uzbekistan. It fails to mention the suffering they went through. Mutabar Tajibaeva suffered irreparable damage to her health while in prison – how is that to be compensated? Gulbahor Turaeva is under surveillance in Uzbekistan and cannot find work. Many other rights activists are similarly prevented from getting work once they are released; they have no means of subsistence, and no way of staying healthy. Their children face discrimination because their parents criticised Karimov’s rule.

While EU diplomats undoubtedly played a role in securing the release of these human rights defenders, we need to bear in mind that the number of political prisoners is rising rather than falling, before we start using numbers to measure the success of this dialogue

The regime sees releasing political prisoners as profitable trade-off. For Karimov, human rights are the small change of his bargains with the EU.

NBCentralAsia: How likely is it that the West has abandoned up all hope of securing a fair investigation into Andijan or of improving the human rights situation, and simply given in to Karimov?

Ataeva: As long as the EU and the US raise questions about human rights observance and provide political asylum to victims of the regime, it will be unfair to say the West has given up on Uzbekistan. The Andijan massacre, the mass arrests, and the torture remain sensitive issues for the regime, and they hamper dialogue.

Dropping the sanctions was unjustified, and EU governments and the US are now paying less attention to reports of human rights violations. After our association issued its statement on Karimov’s visit, some members of the European parliament asked to be taken off our emailing list. But we view this phlegmatically, and we will keep on doing our job.

NBCentralAsia: Analysts are talking about a general thaw in relations between Uzbekistan and the West, with concessions on both sides, and energy interests high on the agenda. Do you agree with this view?

Ataeva: EU states and the US have many reasons for having a presence in Uzbekistan. EU diplomats say they want to promote democratic values so they are keen on dialogue with the government.

In addition, there is nearby Afghanistan, the source of most of the world’s heroin, and with the Taleban still a major presence. That explains why the EU and US are keen to work with the Uzbek regime.

But that doesn’t mean human rights issues can be put to one side. The handful of human rights activists left in the country gather and disseminate reliable information at considerable risk to themselves. Via colleagues abroad, they are trying to get western governments and those international institutions concerned with human rights to put pressure on Uzbekistan, a country that passes decent laws and ratifies international conventions but fails to implement them.

NBCentralAsia: Is Karimov’s visit a result of this thaw?

Ataeva: His trip looks more like a test to see what reaction comes from the public in the West and from Uzbek political émigrés, which main part are the victims of tortures.

The organisers of his visit will be well aware that Belgian national legislation allows the prosecution of individuals accused of crimes against humanity even if these were committed abroad, and regardless of the nationality of the alleged perpetrators.

That explains why the timing of the trip was kept secret.

It’s a risky step for Karimov to visit Brussels, although he’s used to acting with impunity.

This article was produced as part of IWPR’s News Briefing Central Asia output, funded by the National Endowment for Democracy.