Clinton Visit a Boost for Uzbek Leader
Clinton Visit a Boost for Uzbek Leader
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s forthcoming visit to Uzbekistan will be a major coup for the Central Asian state’s president Islam Karimov.
Clinton’s two-day visit starting October 22 will not be her first – she was in Uzbekistan last December – but it is seen as a significant move given the sometimes difficult relationship between the two states. Relations turned frosty after Karimov rejected international calls for a proper inquiry into the shooting of hundreds of demonstrators in Andijan in 2005.
More recently, a rapprochement has taken place and Tashkent has allowed Uzbek territory to be used for a supply route for NATO forces in Afghanistan, as part of the so-called Northern Distribution Network, NDN.
Tashpulat Yoldashev, a leading Uzbek political analyst now resident in the US, told NBCentralAsia that Clinton’s meeting with Karimov was a gift to his regime, and reflected the leverage he had with Washington.
NBCentralAsia: What do you think the talks will be about?
Tashpulat Yoldashev: Tashkent has waited a long time for this formal visit by Secretary of State Clinton. There have been preliminary talks, a package of economic agreements has been prepared, business meetings have been held, yet none of the key strategic issues has been resolved.
The process was held up because the Americans were demanding improvements in the human rights situation. Tashkent wasn’t happy about that pressure, and Karimov recently considered closing down the NDN route.
Washington had to weigh the consequences of Karimov acting on a whim, which would come at a high cost to the West. Karimov is not going to be ousted from power. So a negotiated solution is being sought, at the highest level.
I think Karimov ask for American investment in the economy and also in infrastructure and military air bases. But I’m not sure the Americans will put money into refurbishing airfields that they won’t need after 2014 [when NATO combat forces are due to leave Afghanistan]. Uzbekistan wants to start fortifying its border with Afghanistan before that time – preferably with the Americans paying for it.
To be honest, who is really going to threaten Uzbekistan? Afghanistan will have its own internal strife for a long time to come, and it’s a society with different aims and objectives. But Karimov will press ahead with scaring the international community, warning that his country is at risk from Islamic extremism, and that this is impeding the growth of democracy. Washington will have no option but to put its faith in him.
NBCentralAsia: What is Karimov going to get out of these talks?
Yoldashev: I think a large package of agreements will be signed on economic cooperation, education, military assistance, and technology and funding to counter terrorism and extremism.
The West has made concessions to Tashkent on the basis of supposed progress on democracy, constitutional change and the like.
The US-Uzbek rapprochement has also been aided by the mistakes Russia has made. Moscow wants to recreated something like the Soviet Union by introducing regional structures like the Customs Union, and encouraging Central Asian states including Uzbekistan to participate. Karimov doesn’t want to do this; hence his greater fixation on Washington.
He exploits this for his own ends, telling Washington that if it does not help Uzbekistan, it will shift its attention more to the Kremlin. Tashkent has always played on these issues, and built its policies on doing so.
NBCentralAsia: What kind of assistance can Tashkent expect to get from Washington following these talks?
Yoldashev: I think Uzbekistan will get around one hundred million US dollars. The White House is full of pragmatic people who understand that they’re backing a dictator, and that doing so will stir up with public opposition. But the deteriorating US-Pakistan relationship means the supply route to Afghanistan is at risk. So the US is forced to deal with the Uzbek dictator and accede to dome of his demands.
In return, Karimov will do things like release prisoners under amnesty – there should have been an amnesty this autumn, but it didn’t happen – and the West will hail this as a positive move.
This article was produced as part of IWPR's News Briefing Central Asia output, funded by the National Endowment for Democracy.
