Unintended Consequences: Revolution in Hours

[Annie]

Some thought this might be coming:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18532

No one thought it would be so quick:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3982-2005Mar26.html

Revolution, in a Couple of Hours
In Kyrgyzstan, Plans for Patient Organizing Dissolved as Protesters Unexpectedly Took Control

By Karl Vick
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, March 27, 2005; Page A15

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan, March 26 -- The plan called for yurts, and patience.

A small army of protesters weary of the stiffening, unresponsive rule of President Askar Akayev was to assemble on a great plaza outside the presidential headquarters in the capital. The plan, according to organizers of the demonstration, was for participants to listen to speeches, chant slogans and, as the sun set, begin a vigil, reclaiming their country by sleeping in yurts, the domed, supremely portable tents made of skins and sticks popular in Central Asia.



Kyrgyz troops in the southern city of Osh march during a parade celebrating the opposition's victory over the government of President Askar Akayev, who fled when protesters took power Thursday. (Myktybek Sariyev -- AP)

The camp-out would put a Kyrgyz stamp on a rebellion that opposition leaders said was inspired in part by recent uprisings in Georgia and Ukraine, two other former Soviet republics where the populace had grown unhappy with the autocrats in power. In both countries, mass demonstrations sparked by disputed elections went on for weeks, wearing down the incumbent while opponents honed plans for an orderly transfer of power.

But nothing went quite as planned in Bishkek on Thursday.

When the first few thousand protesters arrived at the plaza, the president sent thugs to break up the demonstration. Incensed, a few dozen young protesters returned and simply broke past police guarding the presidential headquarters, known as the White House. To the cheers of thousands assembled below, the youths broke a window and chucked out a portrait of Akayev, who, after nearly 15 years in power, disappeared from the scene.

It all took a couple of hours.

"Nice words, 'coup d'etat,' 'revolution,' '' said Kurmanbek Bakiyev, an opposition figure who was installed as acting president that night. "But what happened on the 24th of March was not planned by anyone beforehand, neither by people who came to the rally nor by others.

"Nobody expected and nobody prepared for this event."

I don't think these people are looking for Western democracy, so much as a return to their nomadic lifestyle.

 

[Annie]

"Russia" is hard to define. Could have put this in WOT, (Chechna), or Europe.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0503270425mar27,1,5787815.story

Creeping revolts alarm Moscow
Kyrgyzstan uprising has Russia nervous about tilt to West
Advertisement


By Alex Rodriguez
Tribune foreign correspondent

March 27, 2005

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan -- The latest democratic uprising to claim a former Soviet republic had Moscow buzzing with trepidation: How many more dominoes can fall? On Thursday, Kyrgyzstan's regime toppled. Could Kazakhstan be next? Uzbekistan? Belarus?

With Kremlin ally Askar Akayev ousted from power in Kyrgyzstan, a debate in Russia has ensued over whether the fever for democracy can take root in the rest of Central Asia or reach harsh, autocratic regimes such as Alexander Lukashenko's in Belarus.

Analysts say the Kremlin is finding itself increasingly powerless to stanch the creep of democracy into former Soviet republics it still covets. Russian President Vladimir Putin made his frustration clear Friday during a visit to Armenia.

"It's unfortunate that yet again in the post-Soviet space, political problems in a country are resolved illegally and are accompanied by pogroms and human victims," Putin said in Yerevan, Armenia's capital.

The upheaval in Kyrgyzstan was watched closely by Moscow and Washington, both of which regard the small, mountainous republic as having vital strategic value. The regions surrounding Kyrgyzstan are home to several Islamic extremist groups, some of whom have alleged ties to Al Qaeda, and the U.S. and Russia maintain military bases in the country.

Anchor of democratic stability

For the U.S., the Kyrgyz uprising could potentially provide an anchor of democratic stability in the volatile Central Asia region. But for Russians, the swift revolt that forced Akayev to flee Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan's capital, has reinforced deepening concern that recent regime changes in Russia's back yard are not anomalies but part of a pattern.

In a little less than a year and a half, three former Soviet republics--Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan--have undergone revolutions seeded by anger over rigged or flawed elections. In each case, regimes that had perfected the formula for power through suppression of civil society found themselves routed by citizens fed up with Soviet-like governance long after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Experts say the thirst for genuine civil society in the remaining former Soviet republics is powerful and enduring.

"I think there are strong chances that the opposition might succeed in countries neighboring Kyrgyzstan," said Zeyno Baran, a Central Asia affairs analyst for the Washington-based Nixon Center. "I would say the chances are highest in Kazakhstan, then followed by Tajikistan and then less in Uzbekistan, which is a much stronger state and much more repressive than the others."

Indeed, in the former Soviet republics that make up most of Central Asia, dissent is often silenced with torture, imprisonment or both. Kyrgyzstan may have inspired its neighbors much the way it had been inspired by Georgia and Ukraine, but it is less certain whether it can serve as a model for change in those countries.

"In all other Central Asian states, the regimes are much more repressive. They don't even allow the opposition to emerge," said Vyacheslav Nikonov, head of the Moscow-based Politika Foundation. "So the chances of a similar event happening elsewhere in Central Asia are very poor."

In Turkmenistan, where Saparmurad Niyazov has declared himself president for life, political opposition virtually does not exist. Niyazov's administration echoes North Korea's government in its isolation and authoritarian rule.

Tajikistan, just south of Kyrgyzstan, remains scarred by a brutal civil war that killed thousands of people between 1992 in 1997. Weary of conflict, its citizens are considered unlikely to rise up against President Emomali Rakhmonov, a strongman who reinforced his grip on power with parliamentary elections this year. Those elections were criticized by international observers as rife with fraud.

Uzbekistan's president, Islam Karimov, heads a virtual police state with a history of jailing political opponents and suppressing religious freedoms. Edil Baisalov, head of the Bishkek-based Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society, said an uprising in Uzbekistan could occur, but it likely would be spearheaded by Islamic fundamentalists who allege Karimov has jailed and tortured scores of followers.

Oil-rich Kazakhstan is an unlikely venue for change for a different reason: Though regarded as authoritarian, President Nursultan Nazarbayev has made strides modernizing and improving his country's economy.

"Many young Kazakhs are busy making money and building their career, and they would prefer to not think about politics right now," Baisalov said. "Stability is much more important."

Kyrgyzstan has been regarded as the most democratic of the Central Asian republics. For years, Akayev enjoyed a reputation as a reformer. Western-funded non-governmental organizations were permitted to operate. U.S. democracy advocacy organizations like the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute were allowed to train opposition candidates.

Given a small measure of democracy, Kyrgyz opposition leaders and thousands of impoverished citizens craved more. When they saw the uprisings that ushered out Eduard Shevardnadze in Georgia and Leonid Kuchma's handpicked successor in Ukraine last year, they convinced themselves that regime change was possible in Bishkek, analysts said.

"Kyrgyz opposition leaders were in contact with Ukrainian opposition forces," the Nixon Center's Baran said. "If it weren't for the lessons learned from Ukraine and Georgia, I don't think the Kyrgyz opposition would have been able to have the courage to do what they have done."

Russia eases stance

Russia's reaction to the Kyrgyz uprising contrasted sharply with its handling of the Orange Revolution, when Putin firmly backed Kuchma's candidate, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, despite evidence that Ukrainian authorities had conspired to rig the election in Yanukovych's favor.

Though Putin publicly criticized the unrest that led to Akayev's ouster, he also said the Kremlin would work with Kyrgyzstan's new leadership.

"Russia, for its part, will do all it can so that the current level of our relations is preserved," Putin said.

Analysts said Putin took the right tack, but his options were limited. If he sharply criticized Kyrgyzstan's new leadership, said Moscow-based political analyst Viktor Kremenyuk, he risked pushing Kyrgyzstan even further away.

"Russian leadership is without a doubt deeply vexed and irritated at the latest events and considers them to be the infringement of Russia's interests," Kremenyuk said. "But what can Russia do about it? I think the events in Ukraine showed there is practically nothing Russia can do."


Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune