The revolutions rolling through Russia's backyard shifted thousands of miles last week from the borders of the European Union to the Chinese frontier as Kyrgyzstan fell to the daffodil-clutching opponents of the former communist apparatchik and Leningrad physicist Askar Akayev, whose early promise degenerated into nepotism, sleaze, rigged elections and the jailing of rivals.
The daffodils of Bishkek suggested a springtime of hope in the dictatorial "stans" of central Asia. But the Kyrgyz capital was so suffused with menace and volatility that its uprising could quickly turn ugly and violent, setting it apart from the Ukrainian and Georgian revolutions of the past 18 months.
They were characterized by determined and determinedly peaceful civil resistance to the shenanigans of the incumbents. Bishkek could yet turn bloody in the fight for the spoils.
There is no clear or agreed leader of the anti-Akayev movement. The conflict is partly clan-based and between regions, not solely between democrats and despots.
Organized crime is said to be engaged in fomenting trouble.
But with luck the momentum of people power will usher in a period of fairer and cleaner government that will ring alarm bells in the neighboring post-Soviet dictatorships.
As were Viktor Yushchenko in Ukraine and Mikhail Saakashvili in Georgia, the revolutionary leaders are former officials of the regimes they are overthrowing.
International mediation may be necessary if things are not to spiral out of control and turn bloody. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) volunteered itself for that important role.
After the rigged elections four weeks ago which triggered the revolt, the Americans warned Akayev not to try to entrench himself in power by fiddling the constitution before his second term expired in October. The signs were that he was doing just that, or preparing a dynastic succession by engineering parliament seats for a son and daughter.
Now, with Akayev and his family fleeing the country, the result will be hailed as another gain in the global march of freedom which the White House has proclaimed as its second-term mission -- another "outpost of tyranny" falling.
And in Russia, where such dramas are invariably seen as a zero sum game in an imperial contest for regional clout, the White House's gain will certainly be taken as the Kremlin's loss.
In Kyrgyzstan the Kremlin has not committed the blunders and experienced the humiliation it did in Ukraine. None the less, the turn of events in Bishkek demonstrates Vladmir Putin's weakness.
He has managed to manoeuvre himself into the unenviable position of being identified as a not very effective supporter and protecter of unsavory regimes throughout the post-Soviet space.
Even where incumbents have survived at the ballot box, as recently happened in Moldova, they have done so by standing on an anti-Russian platform.
Putin came to power with a promise to restore Russian greatness and prestige, particularly in the "near abroad" that Moscow used to rule.
Instead, he has presided over the greatest erosion of Russian influence in the region.
This week he appointed a new official to spearhead a "counter- revolutionary" campaign aimed at shoring up Russia's clout around its vast rim.
Meanwhile the Kremlin is blaming the Kyrgyz tumult on the OSCE, which declared the parliamentary elections deeply flawed. All but six of the 75 seats fell to the Akayev camp. Moscow applauded. The Kyrgyz revolted.
Putin has a problem of his own making -- everywhere he looks in the post-Soviet world, democracy's gains are perceived as Russia's losses.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry