PROSPECTS FOR DEMOCRACY IN CENTRAL ASIA

Preface

Is a democratic world a world of peace, stability, and security? Not necessarily. Are people happier in a democratic society than in a less democratic or non-democratic one? Possibly – at least in the West, where for probably most of us democracy equals individual freedom, one of the most precious human rights, as long as we are not hungry or stricken by great poverty. One suggestion for an explication of the notion of democracy, given the Western political discourse, could be a statement to the effect that the very foundation on which this notion rests is freedom of the individual and that democratic rule or administration is an act of power balancing for the maintenance of individual freedom.
Democracy is often referred to in static terms, as if it were first and foremost some state-of-affairs conceived of as a result that could be measured by degrees from total lack of democracy to complete democracy. Yet, we know all too well that the conditions that we expect to find in democratic structures relate to spheres in the lives of humans and societies so comprehensive and complex that the conception of democracy as a thing – or any simplistic concretization of the defining attributes of what it is to be democratic – very soon appears utterly futile.
An alternative approach to democracy is to view it in terms of processes and activities governed by certain sets of rules. In other words, democracy would be a means of conduct rather than any state-of-affairs materializing from that conduct – a process manifested through various layers or levels of activity distinguished by different degrees of human participation and political span.
As for political span, from the point of view of both bureaucratic and geographical range, the level at which democracy has most often been considered and evaluated is without doubt the state level. This was also the point of departure for an international conference on Prospects for Democracy in Central Asia held on 1–3 June 2003 in Istanbul. The conference, from which most of the ensuing chapters emanate, was organized and convened by the Department of Central Asian Studies at Stockholm University with the aim of initiating dialogues between scholars from different parts of the world with different research specialities and interests.

***
A little more than a decade has passed since the dissolution of the Eastern Bloc. The republics on the south-eastern fringes of the former USSR were far from ready to act as autonomous polities. This situation was aggravated by the circumstance that Soviet disintegration not only affected the former member republics but also left an even larger part of Eurasia in urgent need of local-state reorganization and regional reconfiguration. This had far-reaching political and economic implications for the Asian continent at large and, evidently also, for the international community.
All of the ex-Soviet Central Asian republics started their independent state- and nation-building at one and the same time, and many of the conditions were similar. On the other hand, as sovereign states each one of these republics has its own fabric of political organization, and for the researcher it becomes necessary to determine how much democracy the fabric of each particular state entails. In the first part of the book (Part I: Political Pluralism and Civic Space), the chapter by Stephen Blank (USA), who delivered the keynote speech of the conference, sets a global and – to say the least – pessimistic framework for the prospects of democratization in Central Asian states. The other chapters in this section of the book discuss state control in specific republics, either from a general point of view or with reference to specific settings. Each of the three southernmost republics of former Soviet Central Asia – Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan – has its own chapter written by Pınar Akçalı (Turkey), Michael Hall (USA, Tajikistan), and Torgny Hinnemo (Sweden), respectively. Although obstacles to democracy are still paramount, processes in the direction of political pluralism – more or less oppositional and violent – are discernible in at least two of these republics. Tajikistan has experienced a period of multiparty politics, commented on in this volume by Muhiddin Kabiri, Deputy Chairman of the Tajik Islamic Revival Party and active participant in this movement. In the Kyrgyz Republic at the time of the writing of this preface, we have been witnessing political protests and actions which in just a few weeks' time after the February and March 2005 parliamentary elections developed into upheaval and anarchy seemingly beyond anybody's control – a development that may or may not turn into a true people's 'Tulip' revolution. Once again the spotlights are directed towards the densely populated and ethnically complex Ferghana Valley, where political unrest may easily fuel antagonism not only between people and power élites but also between various social and ethnic interest groups. The ethnic complexity of Central Asia as a whole is an issue in need of more comprehensive study. The last two chapters of this section, one by Valeriy S. Khan (Uzbekistan) and the other by Birgit N. Schlyter (Sweden), deal with ethnic minority settings in the light of Central Asian state rule.
The Istanbul conference made two digressions from the level of individual states, one proceeding to issues concerning the Central Asian region as a whole (Part II: Interstate Issues) and the other to community levels (Part III: Trends of Thought in the Public Discourse). The concern in the former case is to what extent these states can act as polities with a foreign policy of their own, through which they could become neighbors and members of a union, or political region. The latter case regarding community, or 'grass-roots' levels, is concerned with the degree to which, and the means by which, people participate actively in the protection of their individual freedoms. While the individual state appears as an intermediate level bearing as much on individuals as on societies, the other two settings differ from that and from each other in that the matter of concern at the regional level is the relationship between societies rather than between people, whereas in the case of grass-roots levels it is the other way around, and inter-individual relations are in the forefront.



From the point of view of international politics, a tendency still exists to regard the former Soviet Central Asian republics not as co-actors but rather as recipients of opportunities and aid, and the higher the level (region and/or state), the more external parties and forces are considered to be crucial to the democratization of Central Asian societies. A case in point is, for example, the fact that speakers who had been invited to deliver papers on security in the Central Asian region either from a general international perspective or from the viewpoint of a specific foreign country interpreted their tasks in the first place as a matter of deciding what contributions these external parties could offer in the maintenance and consolidation of security in Central Asia at the state and regional levels. The American military role in Central Asia is highlighted by Ariel Cohen (USA), who writes: 'The USA is seeking to prevent a country, a group of countries, or a transnational movement or organization from establishing hegemonic control in the Central Asian region' (p. ..). With reference to 'a more pluralistic balance of power in Central Asia' after the War on Terror, Michael Fredholm (Sweden) concludes: 'While Russia remains the key guarantor of security, China has through the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization] as well as through her economic clout acquired a certain level of regional influence. With the new American presence in the region since late 2001, the geopolitical situation is beginning to resemble that of the nineteenth century' (p. …). The question of how Central Asian security or lack of such security could affect the international community in general and the political agendas of the respective countries in particular was, on the other hand, left in second position.
In contrast, at local community levels, the readiness to consider society-inherent potentials is more obvious. What the conference also gave testimony of in this connection, however, was that the transfer from regional and state bureaucracy levels to community and lower levels appears both to necessitate scholarly reconsideration and – due to difficulties encountered in the process of reconsideration or even rejections of it – to evoke interdisciplinary controversies. Since one of the major ideas behind this conference was to convene as diverse a group of scholars as possible with respect to both research fields and geographical affiliation, the sessions not surprisingly generated a great deal of vigorous, if not ardent or even antagonistic, debate.
Against this background it is all the more interesting to note that, regardless of disciplinary affiliations and in spite of personal preferences, contributors and discussants were united by certain recurring thoughts and reflections hinting at underlying issues of general concern – though at times leading to disagreement. These thoughts and reflections have been summarized under the following two headings:

1. The cultural essence of the concept of democracy. One theme subjected to recurring comments during the Istanbul conference was whether the notion of democracy is a consequence of Western civilization or whether it should rather be defined on a universal basis regardless of culture and civilization. On this point, opinions are divided among the co-authors of the conference volume. Stephen Blank calls democratization a 'Westernizing' acitivity and points to female emancipation as an attribute of democracy and 'one of the most salient points of difference between Western and Islamic civilization' (p….). By contrast, Dinora Azimova (Uzbekistan), Nurten Kılıç–Schubel (Turkey, USA), and Morgan Liu (USA), all of whom participated in the third conference section on trends of thought in the public discourse, argue that the striving for what is today conceived of as democratic values is as likely to be initiated without additional external impetus in a non-Western society as in a Western one and that early examples of quests for democratic orders or methods can be attested to in sociopolitical contexts outside the West. Kılıç–Schubel, for example, analyzes works by the 17th-century Chaghatay poet Turdi along these lines. Azimova distinguishes between political and cultural forms of democracy, the latter of which are claimed to be 'important signs of societal predisposition to democratic order' (p. …). She offers examples of democratic features characterizing Asian societies and admonishes: 'By denying democracy in Asia and by maintaining the view that democracy is obligatorily Western, politicians are playing a dangerous game.' Liu makes a point of contrasting democracy with authoritarianism. For Westerners it lies close at hand to regard these as incompatible concepts. However, as Liu's interviews with ethnic Uzbeks in Kyrgyzstan indicate, democratic values may be held in as much esteem by a person believing in the benevolence of a strong leader as by a person opposed to authoritarian rule. For those Central Asian settings covered by his fieldwork, Liu concludes that the trust in strong authorities among Central Asians could be due, not necessarily to religious, viz. Islamic, culture, but rather or at least as much to pre-Soviet ancient societal traditions. This is a point that needs further discussion. Religion definitely plays an important and partly new role in present-day Central Asia; see the chapters by Bayram Balcı (Turkey) and Mustafa Şen (Turkey). At the same time, in the study of the cultural predisposition of Central Asians, one must not forget to take into account all aspects of their partly Eastern– nomadic and partly West Asian–urban cultural legacy. Comments by 'grass roots' quoted in Akçalı's chapter on Kyrgyzstan lend further support to this statement.

2. The importance of economic welfare and security for the democratization of Central Asia. The second theme instigating comments and the exchange of views throughout the three sessions of the Istanbul conference was the belief that economic welfare and security are factors sine qua non for a strengthening of state democracy and civil society in Central Asia. The fact that economic welfare is crucial to democratization is pointed out in the very first chapter by Stephen Blank, who states that 'the prospect and reality of broad-based sustainable growth must be visible to society at large for it to sustain its own belief in building democracy …' (p. …) and continues by saying that: 'Only where the state cannot simply lay hold of that wealth for its own purpose is there any hope for the development of a sense of national interest supervised or fostered by more representative institutions' (p. …). At the regional level, economy and security are intertwined by their dependency on coordination and fair deals between parties sharing natural resources and jointly administrating the exploitation of these. The chapter by Timur Dadabaev (Uzbekistan, Japan) reminds us of the fact that agreements on the use of water resources provided mainly by the Amu Darya and Syr Darya river basins remain one of the most crucial testing grounds for the success or failure of regional politics in Central Asia. The intricacies of both regional and international politics in connection with water resources also become evident in the chapter written by Anar Ahmadov (Azerbaijan) on the effects of prolonged negotiations concerning the division of the Caspian surface water and seabed. Yet another aspect of economic security is demonstrated by Gunilla Björklund (Sweden) in her chapter on the environmental crisis of the Aral Sea Basin. Security issues in the context of trans-regional relations can also be discussed primarily in economic terms, as is done in the chapter by Igor Torbakov on the strategic importance of Turkey in the post-Soviet Eurasian space.

As is usual for an anthology of this type, the authors are themselves responsible for all statements made in their respective chapters. Many of the papers presented at the June 2003 Conference in Istanbul were extensively revised and updated in the editing process leading to publication. Therefore, some references are from as late as December 2004. For some areas touched on at the conference, written contributions could not be obtained in time. To remedy this, scholars who had not been present at the conference were invited to submit articles on these particular fields.

Recent parliamentary elections in three of the Central Asian states, and in particular the developments in Kyrgyzstan triggered by the election campaigns in this republic, make this volume even more interesting and valuable than could have been hoped for at the time of the conference.

***

To choose democracy as the topic for a conference on Central Asia may still be regarded as a great challenge. As most of us realize, we are still witnessing merely the first phase of a long and cumbersome political process that may eventually lead to greater welfare and democracy in Central Asia. Daring though it may seem, it is deemed important to keep the discussion going. The 2003 Istanbul Conference on Prospects for Democracy in Central Asia is part of a series of seminars and conferences organized by the Department of Central Asian Studies at Stockholm University for discussions on sociocultural and political issues relating to present-day Central Asia. A conference discussing issues in current Scandinavian research on Central Asia was held in 1996, from which the volume Return to the Silk Routes was published (edited by Mirja Juntunen and Birgit N. Schlyter, London 1999). Three years later, an international conference on 'Central Asia in a New Security Context' was convened in Stockholm by the present editor and researchers from the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, from which conference proceedings were published under the title of Central Asian Security: The New International Context (edited by Roy Allison and Lena Jonson, London 2001).
A great number of colleagues and institutes must be given credit for invaluable support during the organization of the conference and the production of the conference volume. These include Merrick Tabor, Lecturer in Political Science and coordinator of programs for the exchange of students between Stockholm University and universities in Kyrgyzstan, Bo Petersson, Senior Lecturer of Political Science at Lund University, Sweden, Elisabeth Özdalga, Professor of Sociology at the Middle Eastern Technical University, Ankara, and former Director of the Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul, Vernon Schubel, Professor of Religious Studies at Kenyon College, Gambier, Ohio, Kerstin Lindahl-Kiessling, Professor em. at Uppsala Univesity, former Vice-President of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and founding member of the Swedish Aral Society, Marianne Laanatza, Senior Lecturer and researcher on the Middle East and North Africa at Uppsala University, and Mustafa Aydın, Associate Professor in Political Science at Ankara University. All of them shared with us their knowledge and skills as chairmen and discussants. From the Department of Central Asian Studies at Stockholm University, Michael Fredholm, defense analyst and lecturer in Central Asian History, together with Johan Fresk and Patrick Hällzon, project assistants, have been of tremendous help throughout the editing process. They have read and commented on most of the chapters and have also put much effort into proofreading and provided technical assistance. Laotse Sacker and Ooi Kee Beng from the research group Asian Cultures and Modernity at this department have been engaged in the English-language editing of articles written by non-native authors. Mirja Juntunen was given the responsibility of editing the final manuscript in accordance with the standard format of books appearing in the Transaction series from the Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul.


Stockholm, April 2005
Birgit N. Schlyter
The Editor