KIRGHIZIA: "TULIP REVOLUTION"
HAS DEVOURED ITS CHILDREN. Part I
Yet another "color" revolution has ingloriously ceased to exist.
When Viktor Yanukovych headed the Ukraine, the "Orange revolution" has
relegated to the oblivion. Now the Kirghiz "Tulip revolution"
followed it. The main difference, though, was the way it happened.
While in the Ukraine everything was settled down in a peaceful
way, Kirghiz events were completely opposite to that. Five years ago
"color" oppositionists have let the genie out of the bottle. Today this
very genie is whipping themselves — literally.
Impotence of the authorities
Yet another "color" revolution has ingloriously ceased to exist. When
Viktor Yanukovych headed the Ukraine, the "Orange revolution" has relegated
to the oblivion. Now the Kirghiz "Tulip revolution" followed it. The
main difference, though, was the way it happened. While in the
Ukraine everything was settled down in a peaceful way, Kirghiz events
were completely opposite to that. Five years ago "color" oppositionists
have let the genie out of the bottle. Today this very genie
is whipping themselves — literally.
On the 6th of April mass protest actions have started in the
north of the country — the next day it spread to the rest
of Kirghizia, including Bishkek (capital of the country). On the
7th of April regime of Kurmanbek Bakiyev has lost control over the
key objects of the city, including the parliament building, Prosecutor’s
General Office, Ministry of the Interior. Military and police units that
were sent to fight the oppositionists back were powerless
to do anything against the thousand-people-strong crowds. By the
end of the day rebels have captured the national television
of Kirghizia and made a public address to the nation, having
declared the creation of their own government — Roza Otunbayeva was
proclaimed to be its chair.
On the 8th of April it was clear that Bakiyev regime fell:
police went over to the side of rebels and the ex-president flew
to the southern city of Osh. This victory has come to the
opposition at a very high price: not less than 48 people were
killed and more than 400 were injured.
How comes that the "Tulip revolution" that celebrated its fifth anniversary few
days ago has so suddenly faded away? Let’s appeal to what happened
in Kirghizia after the new leadership came to power in order
to answer this question.
It — being personified by Kurmanbek Bakiev and Prime Minister Felix
Kulov — gained the power five years ago. Mind that the situation was
unfolding due to a similar scenario then: during the three-day-long
pogroms in the end of March, 2005 opposition made the then President
Askar Akayev to resign from his post.
March parliamentary elections became the pretext for the protest marches.
Opposition accused Askar Akayev of forgery and started the uprising that
began in the southern regions of the country and spread over the rest
of the country.
These events became the third (after Georgian and Ukrainian) "color" revolution
that led to the forceful overthrowing of the acting elected
government. At that, it was the opposition that instigated everyone
to dub the Kirghiz coup d’état the "color", or, being precise, the "Tulip"
revolution — after the similar events in Georgia and the
Ukraine.
Kurmanbek Bakiyev, protégé of the southern Kirghiz clans, played the key
role in the overthrow of Askar Akayev and after it. The main
reason for their discontent with Akayev’s regime was the situation that
in fact it was the "northern" clan that was in power, while the
"southern" clan was on the shelf. However, "northerner" Felix Kulov had
quite an authority among the rebels — during his anti-governmental
activity he was the political prisoner of Akayev’s prisons several
times. But quite soon the "southerners" who came to power have pushed
Kulov to the roadside of the politics.
The way Akayev was revenged upon the AWAKS
Just like the way it happened with Georgia and the Ukraine, outer
powers have played significant role in the events — and first
of all it was the West that decided to seize the opportunity
to use the discords between the northern and southern politicians. After
the quite successful "color" revolutions in Georgia and the Ukraine —
where the pro-Western government were embodied by respectively Mikhail
Saakashvili and Viktor Yushchenko — the West (the USA, first of all)
attempted to bring yet another CIS regime that would be loyal
to them to the power.
First of all, it were Americans who were interested
in overthrowing Askar Akayev. The then Kirghiz President was known
to be a pro-Russian politician. Afterwards, the he was
openly stating that he was overthrown because of his refusal
to the American offer to deploy the airborne of the early
warning and control system (AWAKS) at the territory of his country.
Americans were trying to do it under the pretext that they were
allegedly to help conducting the "Enduring freedom" operation
in Afghanistan. Askar Akayev, however, has refused to do that.
He was completely aware of the fact that such equipment would
be useless in the fight against Talibs and that Americans needed
AWAKS to be placed in Kirghizia in order to track the
flights at the Russian and Chinese territories. Curious detail: opposition
started its demarches in two weeks after his refusal.
Besides that, there are numerous evidences of the direct and active
participation of the U. S. embassy in Bishkek employees along
with the American non-governmental organizations (hereinafter — NGO),
including Soros Foundation and International Democratic Institute.
Demarche of the local opposition went in straight accordance with the
well-tried "Georgian-Ukrainian scenario" which is also an indirect
evidence of American participation in these events.
In particular, opposition used the "black PR" technologies. However,
we shouldn’t overestimate the American role in what has happened.
Yes, they were interested in overthrowing refractory Askar Akayev. But
they’ve just provided the "moral and material" support. It were the
criminal structures that were used as the proxies.
Role of the Mafioso communities
Regime of Askar Akayev has practically shattered the criminal world,
represented by the southern criminal groups. Oppositionists — having
used the money they’ve obtained from the West — have negotiated with the
Mafioso "brigades". So the law-enforcement agencies were unable
to stand the union of the organized criminals and oppositionists
(supported by the West) that hit the streets. In fact, Akayev’s
regime was overwhelmed by this very "criminal infantry". And the fact that
the leaders of the opposition have allowed it to loot Bishkek
for three days was the some sort of a tribute to criminals who
helped Bakiyev to strong-arm Akayev. Besides that, criminal elements were
largely livened after Bakiyev’s coming to power. As a gratitude
to their invaluable service, Bakiyev let them into the various economic
spheres that previously were controlled by Akayev’s protégés.
Disappointment of the West
Although the goal of overthrowing the pro-Russian Akayev was fulfilled,
Americans were unable to secure their success. It was much harder
to advance any further. Bakiyev has never become Kirghiz Saakashvili
or Yushchenko. In fact, he wasn’t a pro-Western politician
at all.
He was staked upon but he hadn’t lived the American expectation
to a full measure. As it usually happens in Asia,
everything went not the way Americans wanted it to. Bakiyev didn’t become
the American "poodle". Having obtained the reins of power, he started
to build the Medieval-Khan-like system. At first, he has been
"customizing" it for himself and during last two years, for his son
as well.
Yes, Americans have acquired the military bases in Kirghizia, but their
future is rather unclear. Kurmanbek Bakiyev was always guided
by principle of the momentary benefit and befriended those who was
giving the money. When Russia allotted the funds — it was
a strategic partner for him. When China promised some money —
it also became a friend of his, while until the recent time
he was running around Americans, who were paying him the rent for the
military bases. However, they were also uncertain that Bakiyev wouldn’t review
his decision, had he got some benefits from Moscow or Beijing.
Let’s recall the last year when Bakiyev was assuring Russia that he would
remove the U. S. aviation from Manas. We may also mind such
inappropriate familiarity for the "true democracy" protégé
as a foreign-policy and economic flirting with China.
Though, for the time being Washington was trying not to exert extra
pressure on Bishkek. Americans continued their games around Maxim Bakiyev,
son of the current President. Western politicians almost accepted the fact
that Bakiyev-elder decided to build a family dynasty in the
country and started to work up his successor. By the present
time entire network of pro-Western (and pro-American as well) persons
coiled around Maxim Bakiyev.
"Achievements" of the color revolutionaries
The very first months of Bakiyev’s and Kulov’s governance have
displayed the fact that it was not a revolution at all.
"Revolution" implies the indigenous progressive changes, complete restructuring
of the society, political and economic spheres of the country. While
the things that happened after overthrowing Askar Akayev were a clear
display of regress.
While until spring of 2005 "northern" clan of Askar Akayev ruled
in the country, now it was replaced with the "southern" clan
of Kurmanbek Bakiyev. That was one of the main changes.
We couldn’t have spoken of any democratization of the country
at that.
As the years after the "Tulip" revolution went by, Bakiyev’s regime
was becoming more and more brutal. All this toughening was conducted under the
pretext of overcoming the "post-revolutionary chaos" and for the sake
of capturing the cash flows and their sources.
As a main result of that — the most profitable sectors
of economics have switched its masters, the resources were redistributed.
Earlier it was Akayev’s family that was in charge. It was
no accident that he was overthrown under the slogan "Off with the
family power!" But what did the Akayev’s family represent? In fact,
besides him, it was his wife and, to a lesser degree, his son,
who ruled the country. His daughter has come to the country a mere
month before her father was overthrown so she just didn’t have the time
to take a proper part in governing the country.
When Akayev was overthrown it was considerably larger Bakiyev’s family
that came to power — it included himself, five of his
brothers, two sons and — as the ill "opposition" tongues had
it — two more unofficial families. The rest of the situation was
reconstructed due to these changes. Even if we would have
removed the exterior, we’d have found out that there were no considerable
global changes indicating the revolutionary character of the uprising
at all. Revolution is to imply much more rooted and deep
changes.
Given all that, at some aspects the political component of the state
became even more hardball and authoritative than it was before. While
during Akayev’s rule there was just a single political prisoner —
Felix Kulov — by the moment of uprising there was more than
a dozen of them. Also nobody suppressed the media that much,
as Bakiyev did. We’d denote that as far back as in February
the authorities have started to limit the freedom of speech for quite
a number of opposition media sources, and first of all that was
applied to the Russian-speaking Internet portals.
By the way, during his interview to the
East-West review
web-site, Andrey Grozin, head of the Middle Asia sector in the
CIS Institute, said that "Unlike Uzbekistan or, moreover, Turkmenistan,
there is no evident anti-Russian policy here. For example,
no one is attacking the Russian language, on the contrary
to the numerous former USSR republics. This may have happened due
to the fact that Kurmanbek Bakiyev’s wife is Russian, too.
On the other hand, Kirghiz have no negative attitude towards
Russians. One of the reasons may be that there are few Russians
in Kirghizia by the moment. Those who wished and were able to,
have left the country as far back as in the middle of the
90s. Numerous members of the Russian community hold the significant posts
in the local business".
Regarding the suspension of the few Russian Internet-portals activity,
this was connected to the fact that they were posting unmasking materials
about Mr. Gurevich, man from Maxim Bakiyev’s surrounding.
Though, this was probably done within the framework of fighting the
opposition media, rather than for the sake of suppressing the Russian
community. However, considering the current difficult situation in the
country, we may assume that there are no particular prospects for
Russians there. All the more, in Kirghizia there’s a trend
of favoring the representatives of the "titular ethnic group"
in both political and business spheres — stated the expert.
By Sergey Balmasov
To be continued
|
