By PAULA R. NEWBERG
Los Angeles Times, Sept 19
WASHINGTON
One failed state is a tragedy, but a region rife with intolerance is an invitation to unending instability.
In striking testament to the disorders of post-Cold War diplomacy, the states of Central Asia now confront stark choices between democratic pluralism and authoritarian centralism. Terrorist incidents this past year have placed basic issues in sharp relief, underlining the fragile relationships among the states of the region and their separate, precarious paths toward sovereignty and stability. The future of universal political participation, the place of Islam in the state and the role of small countries in this vast region�all challenge the tolerance of states and the ingenuity of civil society as these nations step delicately around deeply divisive issues on the road toward democracy.
One month ago, where the borders of Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan meet, armed guerrillas raided several villages in Kyrgyzstan and took hostages. Kidnapping and hostage-taking turned into cross-border bombings and population displacements, transforming a peaceful corner of Central Asia into the newest casualty of post-Soviet politics. The place this occurred, in the shadow of the Pamir mountains, where state boundaries bisect old tribal and ethnic communities, symbolizes the permeable perimeters of contemporary Central Asia.
Composed primarily of disaffected Uzbeks belonging to Islamist parties outlawed by Uzbekistan�s President Islam Karimov, the guerrillas reportedly included Tajiks and a small contingent of Afghans and Arabs. In short order, the Kyrgyz military stepped in to surround the guerrillas, the police undertook surveillance and arrests of ethnic Uzbek citizens of Kyrgyzstan, and the government called on Russia for support.
The short-term aim of the guerrilla action was to secure safe passage to Uzbekistan, presumably to foment a popular uprising, and the release of Islamist leaders held by the Uzbekistan government. In the past year, which witnessed an attempt on Karimov�s life that he attributed to Islamist militants, Tashkent has imposed order by limiting civil-rights protections.
The virus of creeping authoritarianism has spread throughout the region: Most governments have modified democratic rhetoric to favor actions to dampen popular discord and reinforce central power. If the death knell has not yet rung for dissent, opposition politics have taken new forms. One is the rising reach of Islamist groups whose very existence seems an affront to the region�s stridently secular leaders.
In a cavalcade of mutual blaming, the Uzbek government accused Tajikistan of supporting the guerrillas; the Tajiks cast aspersions on Uzbekistan for destabilizing the region; and Kyrgyz President Askar A. Akayev held Osama bin Laden and neighboring Afghanistan�s Taliban movement accountable for sacrificing secular democracy on the altar of a prospective Islamist Central Asia. The small Kyrgyz and Tajik states co-exist uneasily with their far-larger Uzbek neighbor, but their attempts to use Russia as a counterweight have complicated regional relations. Kyrgyz authorities fear that Uzbekistan may move into their southern region, ostensibly to protect ethnic Uzbeks, but really to control a border area already penetrated by drug traffickers.
The specter of the failed Afghan state, where many Central Asians fought in the Soviet army, looms large. Many of today�s guerrillas fought in Afghanistan and Tajikistan after leaving repressive Uzbekistan in the 1990s. All the states in the region�ranging from Taliban-supporting Pakistan to Taliban-opposing Iran and Central Asia�fear uncontrollable transnational groups and the lethal mix of drugs and armaments that often fuel antistate activities.
Ultimately, it is the state that is at risk in Central Asia, as it is in the Caucasus, the Balkans and many parts of Africa, where plural populations encounter the state as either an unfulfilled promise or an obstruction to political and economic progress. The reluctantly independent states of Central Asia, which lived in relative prosperity under subsidized Soviet rule, have embraced sovereignty in vastly different ways. Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, large and resource rich, have traded on their future profits with a mix of nationalism and authoritarianism that alternately lures and provokes investors and trading partners. Tajikistan stubbornly survives its own civil war and, with regular exchanges of refugees and militants, Afghanistan�s, too. Pluralist Kyrgyzstan, unwitting host to discord and rebel actions, has embraced every Western tutorial on economic liberalization with the sad knowledge that its investment potential is inadequate for its needs and ambitions.
The result is the lure of political and economic advantages�available for some, but still eluding the grasp of many. Opportunities exist, absent the distributive equity to which civil society was accustomed, and the promise of political participation has faded as governments seek to control resources and power. Optimists look for silver linings in the long term, hoping foreign trade and investment may bring wealth to the many and political voice to all. Pessimists, mired in short-term debt and even shorter patience, fear the longer term may come too late: Governments and states will disappear into the chasm between idealism and realism.
Under these circumstances, caricature has replaced open debate. The Uzbekistan government, condemning opposition as Muslim extremism, offers little room for dissent; Islamist groups, excluded from political discourse, target the state as the ultimate enemy. Both are right, and wrong. Central Asia�s states are creatures of an international political economy in which they are tangential. Without political pluralism, their continuing peripheral status will exacerbate domestic tensions, fostering a familiar spiral of discontent. But insurgency, with or without the veil of religion, threatens the state and citizens who still want it to endure, forcing countries like Kyrgyzstan, relatively open and open-minded, to negotiate around guerrillas rather than risk validating their means and ends.
Islam is not the problem in Central Asia, but economic, social and political dislocations may make it seem like a solution. The problem is not religion in politics, so feared by the former communists who now rule every state in the region, but a dangerous brew of terrorism and ideological intransigence that so easily infects politics in the name of populism. The shadow of Afghanistan is a close and potent reminder of what it means for political society to implode.
Central Asia�s leaders have the unenviable task of crafting a balance among forces over which they do not have equal control. Just what form their states will finally take is still an open question. But relinquishing democracy to ensure stability will be a sure sign that progress will not be achieved.
Paula R. Newberg, Who Lived and Worked for Several Years in Central and South Asia, Is the Author �Politics at the Heart: the Architecture of International Assistance to Afghanistan.�
THE GLOBE continues to publish the article by Madat Akkozin, in which the author narrates in details how the JSC �International Airport Almaty� incurred losses just from the very beginning after it had been reorganised. In the last issue of THE GLOBE you may read what allowed foreigners to receive credits from Kazakhstan banks under the pledge of our assets and to invest our money.
From the editorial staff: after the fire the interest to the Almaty airport has not die away. In August the mass media published several materials devoted to the financial machinations in the airport. It is interesting that after the official mass media published critical articles, �Vremya� newspaper presented the interview of the chairman of the Board of Directors of the Almaty airport. His information was opposite. The following story is about how the Almaty airport was ravaged. This is a visual example, how a big property was transferred to �respectful� companies. The author has illuminated in details all machinations, which characterise not only the airport.
(Continued from # 71(389))
Madat AKKOZI
ALMATY, Sept 19
(Spesially for THE GLOBE)
The administration of the JSC �Airport Almaty� also put one more limited company �Almaty Catering Service Ltd.�, which was established by them, in ward. They transferred manufacturing premises of the food service establishment to the company without any payment. The limited company did not pay even for depreciation of the fixed assets. Receiving credits from the bank at more than 20% interest rate p.a., the heads of the airport shared money with the limited company to replenish its working capital without any interests. The airport was also the company�s guarantor of the payment for equipment with the total interests amount of US$ 1973676.
It was supposed to fulfil significant repair-and-construction works and to strengthen the take-off and landing strips at the airport, to improve territory of warehouses of fuel, warm parking sites, and to repair pits of the platform. Ground services should have been made compliant with the international standards. This was an official reason for invitation of a foreign investor rich in dollars.
The airport had persons responsible for constructional works, and its own maintenance-constructional department with technical and working personnel. But the new managers decided to transfer all works to an outside organisation, the JSC �Real�. This JSC did not have required equipment, basis and constructional workers. The airport purchased a set of required imported equipment for this company, having paid US$ 1874330 from the working capital. The airport paid both transport charges and customs duty to supply the equipment. The contractor used this equipment free of charge and exploited the same at other objects, when repair of the airport had been completed. The contractor used the equipment even outside the city, though its did not pay even the calculated amortisation.
�Real� attracted several organisations to fulfil the order, including the Maintenance-Constructional Department (MCD) of the airport and �Akzhol-77� Ltd. The director of the latter was the vice-president of �Real� Mr. Patsegon. Two statements on acceptance of works fulfilled by MCD were prepared. One of the documents stipulated 7.9% of overcome expenses without the increasing coefficient of 89.325 tenge for all articles. The document was signed by the deputy the executing director of the airport Gordeev and his assistants signed it on behalf of the contractor. Patsegon also signed on behalf of the contractor. The second document with the increasing coefficient and overcome expenses in the amount of 19.6% was signed by the above-mentioned persons, but this time they represented other sides. The more the volume of the fulfilled works was, the more amount was transmitted to the general contractor.
A provision regarding an object, that workers are not transported by either municipal or city transport was applied to the airport. This expense article (transportation of workers) was a separate item in the balance and statements on acceptance of the works. Thus, the airport had lost 36930.3 thousand tenge due to the illegal expense. The airport incurred the loss in the amount of 212728.3 thousand tenge due to writing off of extra bitumen and asphalt, as their cost was overestimated. In addition, �Real� gained 12978.5 thousand tenge for transportation of bitumen and asphalt. At the same time the JSC �Asphaltbeton� was not paid for the actually received asphalt. By the moment of revision the debt before this company came to 56228.8 thousand tenge.
At the same time �Real� made the airport pay for different things. Hermetic (�Denso putty) was received along with the imported equipment. The contractor used 15 tons of the putty for the taking-off and landing strip. The value of the putty was included into the statement on acceptance of the works. For the second time the airport paid for its constructional material 4790 thousand tenge. Similarly, for its own disks the airport again paid 34644 thousand tenge.
�Real� concluded contracts on works at the taking-off and landing strip with �Arman� Ltd. and JSC �Pareks�, which had never dealt with repair and construction. The value of each contract was US$ 2 million. Later fictitious statements on acceptance of the works were prepared, as the customer did not pay any attention to any machinations. The airport rather encouraged machinations to increase artificially the airport�s expenses. On the other hand, the airport also gained something. So, �Arman� transmitted 14 million tenge to �Association of the wild nature Seil�, which had been established by Dosymbekov and Kanapyanov.
Money likes to be counted. But not everybody counts it.
Dosymbekov and Kanapyanov were in an interesting situation. The consortium, which juridically made them managers of the airport disappeared. The department on management of the state property and assets of the Finance Ministry, which in its own turn transferred the airport to the disappeared triumvirate, seemed to have disappeared also. The department did not wonder what happened to the consortium and what was going at one of the most strategically important republican objects. Meanwhile Kazcommertsbank had been allotting credits under the airport�s guarantee. How could they not be intoxicated with a lot of money and complete absence of the control? The two heads did whatever they wanted.
They wished to have their own hunting site. No problem. Dosymbekov concluded a contract for leasing 21 hectares of the Uigur hunting forestry for 10 years. The payment was 2746 thousand tenge per year to compensate losses of the forest industry. 1272 thousand tenge was spent towards tour of constructional workers which were to improve the official premises. The airport undertook the responsibility to maintain 3 huntsmen and the director of the hunting forestry at its own expense, to provide the personnel with transport means, ammunition, etc.
The heads of the taking-off and landing service were more significant patrons of art. �Berkut� which was incurring losses, received financial aid in the amount of 500 thousand tenge. �Alva� received a financial aid of 1 million tenge. Both these companies had no business links with the airport. Dosymbekov presented a microwave oven to the deputy of the head of the department of avia security of CNS Yerzhan Zhunusov in honour of his new title of colonel. The microwave oven cost 36980 tenge. The latter-day colonel flew by the flight Almaty-Moscow-Kiev-Almaty free of charge (that cost 115536 tenge). The airport paid 62864 tenge for flights of the chief experts of Gosaviaregistr Ivan Sherstyuk.
Three times within a half of a year the director of the club of the Children-Youth�s School No.24 Bragina appealed to Dosymbekov to transport groups of sportsmen free of charge to international competitions to foreign countries. There was not a single rejection. Her request cost 2349.7 thousand tenge. The list of persons who flew to different foreign countries free of charge, except the above-mentioned ones, consists of 2 pages attached to the revision statement. The family (3 persons) of the former Akim of Turksib district Malinovsky flew to Tel-Aviv, which cost to the airport 184556 tenge. Almost the double amount was paid for of V. Devyatko for his flight Almaty-Frankfurt-Paris-Frankfurt-Almaty. But all records were broken by Sharap S. Belyalov, who visited Arab Emirates, London and Moscow, having punished the airport by 511800 tenge. The total amount of free flights was 3620 thousand tenge.
The acting director of �JCD Airport and ground service Almaty� Tair Idrisov offered a charter flight to Aktobe. But Kanapyanov broke everybody�s record. In the last year he visited only New York 6 times. The revision calculated him a penalty for his illegal tours in the amount of 5929.7 thousand tenge. He along with Dosymbekov spent big amounts by credit cards taken under the airport�s guarantee. Kanapyanov�s debt by credit cards was US$ 35098, Dosymbekov � US$ 6000. Their debts were more than the former Minister of Transport and Communication Yerkin Kaliev�s one, several times. (The Minister was dismissed due to his extraordinary affection to free tickets).
Dosymbekov has been dismissed. Kanapyanov is escaping. The airport is being managed by Kazcommertsbank, its main creditor. Things happened, which were to happen � the biggest airport of the country, the centre connecting the republic with the world, has bankrupted. This hardly complies with personal interests of Dosymbekov and Kanapyanov, as they have no mercenary interespleted. The court will be held. They are to give their recognised sentence. But won�t it be a trial against secondary persons?
Kazakhstan modern visual art and some aspects of the activity of the Centre of Modern Art Soros-Almaty
Our editorial staff received a letter addressed to our correspondent Aigul Myrzatai. The letter was regarding her publications about the activity of the Centre of Modern Arts Soros-Kazakhstan. The fact that an independent journalist and professional painter Dmitry Shtunderov considered Aigul not only his colleague, but also a specialist, is striking. Thus, he combined in one person a journalist, a Candidate of Philosophy (speciality 009.00.01, Lomonosov�s Moscow State University) and a music expert, whose articles are being published in Almaty, Moscow and foreign countries. So, a scandalous fact that �between an artist and the mass media there should be an intermediary, an expert on arts, who is supposed to explain the population, what the artist wished to say� (Valerya Ibraeva) was refuted by him. The editorial staff of THE GLOBE was interested in the letter by Dmitry Shtunderov and would like to acquaintance our readers with the letter along with our own comments.
All Over the Globe is published by IPA House.
© 1998 IPA House. All Rights Reserved.