The leaders of the Central Asian state of Uzbekistan have few palatable options that will enable them both to calm unrest fueled by economics and radical Islam and retain political control, experts said.
Social discontent and anti-government protests have been spreading below the media radar for the past two years, while entrenched government corruption, economic mismanagement and a one-track response of force to suppress political and economic opposition are beyond correction, they added.
It's a problem, too, for both Moscow and Washington, which have backed the Uzbek regime.
"This government is in a dead-end of its own making," said David Lewis, an analyst for Central Asia working in Bishkek for the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, an independent conflict prevention organization.
"It is really hard to see an optimistic outcome here," he said, adding that even a last-ditch attempt to implement economic freedoms that have been stymied for years could spin out of control, undermining the leadership's hold on power as it did in the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.
"My money would be on a widening of the protests to different parts of the country. And when you get a large amount of people on the streets, the default option of the government is going to be repression. They do not have many other mechanisms in their repertoire," Lewis said.
Anti-government sentiment, rooted in economics and social justice concerns but focused by a politically-engaged, contemporary strand of the Islamic faith, presents a challenge not just to President Islam Karimov but also to the US and Russia, both present in the country.
The US got the nod both from Karimov and Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2001 to open an air base in Uzbekistan for operations to remove the fundamentalist Islamic Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.
And Washington, keen to keep the military foothold in the turbulent Central Asian region that it acquired then, has backed the hardline Karimov regime and in large measure turned a blind eye to documented, sweeping and extreme abuses of human rights in the former Soviet republic.
"The United States is going to face some very difficult choices," Lewis said. "So far, US statements have been very cautious. But when people start seeing on television the crackdowns by security forces trained by the United States, the pressure to break with Karimov will be high."
Moscow, also unstinting in its support of Karimov and fearful of a spread of Islamic militancy on its borders along with a surge of refugees from Central Asia into Russia, will also be compelled to reassess its Uzbekistan policy as the unrest there gains in strength.
"In Uzbekistan's part of the Ferghana Valley, there is a concentration of extreme poverty, even hunger, and a strong Islamic tradition which has recently turned aggressive," said Alexei Malashenko, an analyst with the Carnegie Moscow Center.
Economic decline, unemployment, deep corruption, a general feeling of powerlessness to affect change and the strengthening of underground religious movements after the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union are all objective factors that have combined to strengthen radical Islam, he said.
"Karimov ... provoked these people," Malashenko said. "He arrested not only the Islamist leaders, but their wives. No one likes this. Karimov is guilty."
Experts agreed that Karimov and the "kleptocracy" that surrounds him in the government missed opportunities to develop his country's economy that were presented in the past few years, notably by the US when it opened the air base, and that it was now too late to recover them.
"Whichever scenario you put in front of you it doesn't look good for Karimov," Lewis said.
Speaking at the Asia-Pacific Forward Forum in Taipei, former Singaporean minister for foreign affairs George Yeo (楊榮文) proposed a “Chinese commonwealth” as a potential framework for political integration between Taiwan and China. Yeo said the “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait is unsustainable and that Taiwan should not be “a piece on the chessboard” in a geopolitical game between China and the US. Yeo’s remark is nothing but an ill-intentioned political maneuver that is made by all pro-China politicians in Singapore. Since when does a Southeast Asian nation have the right to stick its nose in where it is not wanted
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has released a plan to economically integrate China’s Fujian Province with Taiwan’s Kinmen County, outlining a cross-strait development project based on six major themes and 21 measures. This official document by the CCP is directed toward Taiwan’s three outlying island counties: Penghu County, Lienchiang County (Matsu) and Kinmen County. The plan sets out to construct a cohabiting sphere between Kinmen and the nearby Chinese city of Xiamen, as well as between Matsu and Fuzhou. It also aims to bring together Minnanese cultural areas including Taiwan’s Penghu and China’s cities of Quanzhou and Zhangzhou for further integrated
During a recent visit to Taiwan, I encountered repeated questions about “America skepticism” among the body politic. The basic premise of the “America skepticism” theory is that Taiwan people should view the United States as an unreliable, self-interested actor who is using Taiwan for its own purposes. According to this theory, America will abandon Taiwan when its interests are advanced by doing so. At one level, such skepticism is a sign of a healthy, well-functioning democratic society that protects the right for vigorous political debate. Indeed, around the world, the people of Taiwan are far from alone in debating America’s reliability
As China’s economy was meant to drive global economic growth this year, its dramatic slowdown is sounding alarm bells across the world, with economists and experts criticizing Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for his unwillingness or inability to respond to the nation’s myriad mounting crises. The Wall Street Journal reported that investors have been calling on Beijing to take bolder steps to boost output — especially by promoting consumer spending — but Xi has deep-rooted philosophical objections to Western-style consumption-driven growth, seeing it as wasteful and at odds with his goal of making China a world-leading industrial and technological powerhouse, and