Uzbekistan Labelled a Failed State, Again
Uzbekistan Labelled a Failed State, Again
As a new American report says Uzbekistan is still the most unstable of the former Soviet states, NBCentralAsia observers in the country say the West may actually be understating the gravity of the situation.
In mid-June, the Foreign Policy journal and the Fund for Peace research centre in Washington published their annual ranking of “failed states” based on their findings for 2006.
Uzbekistan’s ranking has deteriorated, rising one place since last year’s report was published and is now 22 on a list of 177 countries, ranked in order of instability. By comparison, Kyrgyzstan improved - falling back from 28 to 41, while Turkmenistan got slightly worse, going from 45 to 43..
The index is based on 12 criteria for evaluating stability, based on political, economic and military considerations while also taking other threats into consideration.
At the top of the list are “failed states” where the authorities are unable to control the country, provide the necessary level of security and social protection, or represent the interests of the majority of the population.
Sudan is at number one, followed by Iraq. Uzbekistan also falls into this category where the possibility of military conflict or civil war is assessed as “extremely high”.
According to Iskandar Khudoiberganov, former head of the Tashkent Democratic Initiative Centre, “there is no doubt about the objectivity of these conclusions”.
“Uzbekistan is on the verge of a serious humanitarian crisis, and the country is becoming increasingly similar to North Korea. The silence from abroad is highly deceptive and does not reflect the reality,” he warned.
If the situation in Uzbekistan were to get out of control, it will have serious implications for the entire region, creating a difficult situation in the country’s neighbours, he said.
“Think of the events in Andijan,” he said, referring to the May 2005 violence when security forces opened fire on a large crowd of demonstrators. “The migration of thousands of people created problems for neighbouring Kyrgyzstan.”
Toshpulat Yoldashev, a political expert based in Tashkent, says Uzbekistan’s rating may underestimate the problem.
“Now nobody trusts the authorities. Uzbekistan is most probably at number ten, since there are a great many reasons for instability stored up for the near future,” he said.
As an example of the scale of discontent, Yoldashev points to the large numbers of people believed to have been convicted of crimes they did not commit, who will seek revenge on the authorities.
President Islam Karimov has officially served the maximum number of terms he is allowed to under the constitution and presidential elections are scheduled for this December. Although Karimov might still stand for election this time around, Yoldashev believes that unrest in Uzbekistan will erupt when he finally departs because the authorities have suppressed the opposition and other democratic forces for so long.
“It is impossible to move forward into the future with what he done… for the past 16 years. Everything that he has created will need to be completely dismantled, and Uzbekistan will have to be rebuilt from the ground up,” he said.
“Thus, instability is going to happen, and that will inevitably affect neighbouring countries, too.”
(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)
In mid-June, the Foreign Policy journal and the Fund for Peace research centre in Washington published their annual ranking of “failed states” based on their findings for 2006.
Uzbekistan’s ranking has deteriorated, rising one place since last year’s report was published and is now 22 on a list of 177 countries, ranked in order of instability. By comparison, Kyrgyzstan improved - falling back from 28 to 41, while Turkmenistan got slightly worse, going from 45 to 43..
The index is based on 12 criteria for evaluating stability, based on political, economic and military considerations while also taking other threats into consideration.
At the top of the list are “failed states” where the authorities are unable to control the country, provide the necessary level of security and social protection, or represent the interests of the majority of the population.
Sudan is at number one, followed by Iraq. Uzbekistan also falls into this category where the possibility of military conflict or civil war is assessed as “extremely high”.
According to Iskandar Khudoiberganov, former head of the Tashkent Democratic Initiative Centre, “there is no doubt about the objectivity of these conclusions”.
“Uzbekistan is on the verge of a serious humanitarian crisis, and the country is becoming increasingly similar to North Korea. The silence from abroad is highly deceptive and does not reflect the reality,” he warned.
If the situation in Uzbekistan were to get out of control, it will have serious implications for the entire region, creating a difficult situation in the country’s neighbours, he said.
“Think of the events in Andijan,” he said, referring to the May 2005 violence when security forces opened fire on a large crowd of demonstrators. “The migration of thousands of people created problems for neighbouring Kyrgyzstan.”
Toshpulat Yoldashev, a political expert based in Tashkent, says Uzbekistan’s rating may underestimate the problem.
“Now nobody trusts the authorities. Uzbekistan is most probably at number ten, since there are a great many reasons for instability stored up for the near future,” he said.
As an example of the scale of discontent, Yoldashev points to the large numbers of people believed to have been convicted of crimes they did not commit, who will seek revenge on the authorities.
President Islam Karimov has officially served the maximum number of terms he is allowed to under the constitution and presidential elections are scheduled for this December. Although Karimov might still stand for election this time around, Yoldashev believes that unrest in Uzbekistan will erupt when he finally departs because the authorities have suppressed the opposition and other democratic forces for so long.
“It is impossible to move forward into the future with what he done… for the past 16 years. Everything that he has created will need to be completely dismantled, and Uzbekistan will have to be rebuilt from the ground up,” he said.
“Thus, instability is going to happen, and that will inevitably affect neighbouring countries, too.”
(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)
