23.02.2005
The Washington Post

Editorial / Counterrevolution

Friday, February 4, 2005; Page A16

PRESIDENT BUSH and other Western leaders are still celebrating the democratic revolution in Ukraine, but in other former republics of the Soviet Union an entirely different response is underway. Post-Soviet leaders who, like Ukraine's former regime, have lived by corruption, rigged elections and thuggish repression are frantically seeking to head off a repeat of the popular "orange revolution," or the earlier "rose revolution" in Georgia. In recent weeks they have banned opposition parties, thrown their most plausible democratic challengers in jail and cracked down on Western pro-democracy organizations. They have also sought help from a familiar address: the Kremlin of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

One visitor to Moscow last month was Nursultan Nazarbayev, the president of Kazakhstan. The Central Asian nation's long-suffering opposition was inspired by the events in Ukraine; representatives of three opposition parties even traveled to Kiev. Mr. Nazarbayev, who had staged his own rigged parliamentary elections just a month before Ukraine's, responded quickly. He dissolved the leading opposition party; brought tax charges against the local branch of the Soros Foundation, which promotes democratic reform; and filed a defamation lawsuit against a leading opponent, Zamanbek Nurkadilov. He was then warmly received by Mr. Putin, who granted him a border treaty that will allow the two governments to jointly exploit a gas field. "God has given us each other," the grateful Kazakh tyrant said to the Russian leader.

Next to turn up in Mr. Putin's antechamber was Askar Akayev, president of Kyrgyzstan. Ruler of his small, mountainous nation for 15 years -- one year longer than its existence as a sovereign state -- Mr. Akayev has real reason to sweat. He has parliamentary elections scheduled on Feb. 27, and his opposition is openly modeling itself after Ukraine's freedom movement, adopting the color yellow and the tulip as its emblems. Mr. Akayev tried banning his principal opponent, former foreign minister Roza Otunbayeva, from the ballot, but that only made things worse: The opposition began organizing protests in the streets of Bishkek, the capital, and a defiant parliament passed a law repealing the regulation used to block Ms. Otunbayeva's candidacy. So Mr. Akayev, who in the past has sought alliance with the United States, turned to Mr. Putin. In Moscow last week, he promised to make a recently established Russian military base in his country "a key element of security in Central Asia"; unspoken, but implied, was a corresponding downgrade of a U.S. airbase that has been used since 2001 for operations in Afghanistan.

Some Western commentators have speculated that Mr. Putin might have been chastened by his failed attempt to install a like-minded thug as Ukrainian president. On the contrary: Mr. Putin's circle appears to have concluded that its only error was not insisting on the preemption of Ukraine's democratic opposition. As would-be freedom fighters are repressed or jailed around the region (the pro-Moscow dictator in Belarus also has dispatched his most plausible challenger to prison), Mr. Putin soothes nervous autocrats with Kremlin hospitality and economic favors. President Bush, who has sworn to stand by democratic reformers facing repression, has some work to do in Eurasia -- unless, that is, he fears offending Mr. Putin.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company

washingtonpost.com

A letter to the Editor

No 'Counterrevolution' in Kyrgyzstan

Tuesday, February 15, 2005; Page A16
Regarding the Feb. 4 editorial "Counterrevolution," I would like to address inaccuracies and provide some context for the current events in Kyrgyzstan with respect to two issues: the upcoming elections and the U.S. and Russian military presence there.

First, the five Central Asian republics, formerly part of the Soviet Union but independent since 1991, deserve to be treated as distinct entities. Judging all on the basis of the behavior of and events in one does them and American readers a disservice.

Kyrgyzstan, which gained independence on Aug. 31, 1991, is only 13 years old. Recent protests by the opposition, led by former foreign minister Roza Otunbayeva, are a sign of a healthy democratic process. The elected parliament, not the president, has ruled against her application for candidacy, which she admits was late. Other former diplomats also wished to run for office, and their petitions were denied as well in conformity with the existing legislation. That legislation must be changed by the parliament, and that cannot be done before this month's elections. Planning on all sides might have avoided the problem, but learning a new political process takes time.

With respect to the Kyrgyz position on Russia, from the early days of independence Kyrgyzstan has sought close relations with both Russia and the United States.

Kyrgyzstan's decision to deploy U.S.-led anti-terrorist forces at the Gansi Air Base near Bishkek was made after consultation with, and with support from, Moscow. The United States and Kyrgyzstan maintain a relationship of cooperation, and the United States continues to be a driving force in the development of our country.

The Russian base at nearby Kant is indeed "a key element of security in Central Asia," because it provides security measures under the Collective Security Treaty of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Russia was, is and will continue to be a strategic partner for Kyrgyzstan. The success of reforms in our country will be affected by the course of similar processes in the Russian Federation.

Kyrgyzstan is struggling to ensure that democratic processes maintain a strong foothold while attempting to build, with both U.S. and Russian cooperation, a viable economy that will support a democratic populace in a threatened region. Presenting our options only in Cold War terms misleads The Post's readers.

BAKTYBEK ABDRISAEV

Ambassador
Embassy of the Kyrgyz Republic
Washington

washingtonpost.com

A letter to the Editor

Democracy in Kyrgyzstan

Tuesday, February 22, 2005; Page A14
In his Feb. 15 letter, Baktybek Abdrisaev, Kyrgyzstan's ambassador to the United States, suggests that preparations for the parliamentary elections in his country, scheduled for Sunday, are on track. Human Rights Watch's research shows that this is untrue.

Mr. Abdrisaev pointed to protests by would-be candidates unfairly excluded from running for parliament and suggested that this is a sign of a "healthy democratic process." He did not mention that police brought trumped-up charges against the organizers of those peaceful protests or that Kyrgyzstan has instituted new restrictions on public gatherings.

The ambassador wrote that "learning a new political process takes time." But some lessons of democracy and respect for fundamental human rights are obvious.

First, the government should withdraw recent restrictions on freedom of assembly. Second, President Askar Akayev should sign the parliament's bill giving former diplomats the right to run for office. Third, the government should stop harassing members of the political opposition and civil society activists.
Mr. Akayev and senior members of his government have warned that there will be no repeat of the "Ukraine scenario" in Kyrgyzstan. Their statements, accusing the independent media of subversion and attempting to equate the opposition with extremists, have poisoned the preelection environment. The question now is: Will Kyrgyzstan guarantee an electoral process on Sunday that meets people's demands for responsive government and fair elections?

ACACIA SHIELDS

Senior Researcher for Europe and Central Asia
Human Rights Watch
New York