Matteo Fumagalli

Framing ethnic minority mobilisation in Central Asia: The cases of Uzbeks in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan

Abstract This article seeks to understand why, although widely predicted, very little ethnically motivated political mobilisation has occurred in post-Soviet Central Asia. Building on the contribution of frame analysis, the article examines the case of Uzbek communities in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Different frames have been articulated by the elites and have been used to mobilise and demobilise the community. The more successful ones (those that resonated) were less confrontational, and ultimately led the Uzbek communities towards a non-confrontational path with the authorities. The article concludes that frame analysis sheds important insights on the process of the mobilisation of ethnic minorities in Central Asia, and also contributes to the literature on ethnic mobilisation.

Ethnicity, state formation and foreign policy: Uzbekistan and ‘Uzbeks abroad’

In the aftermath of the end of the Cold War the issue of co-ethnics and their relationship with kin-states in post-communist Eurasia has dramatically come to international attention. Millions of citizens found themselves, almost overnight, in the new condition of being labelled or viewed as a ‘minority’. Many authors reflected on the issues of how cross-border ethnic links would affect state-building in both the host state and the kin state and on how this would impact on the latter’s foreign policy, namely by using ethnicity as a tool of foreign policy-making. Despite initial predictions, however, widespread inter-ethnic conflict or irredentist/secessionist claims across the post-Soviet space did not occur and the transition, in that regard, was mostly peaceful and bloodless. What role, if any at all, has ethnicity played in Uzbekistan’s foreign policy? What does this tell us about the kind of state that the Uzbek authorities have built? This paper questions a mode of conceptualising stateand nation-building in post-communist Eurasia that, with few notable exceptions, has uncritically accepted the model of nationalising states, based on the model originally developed by Rogers Brubaker with regard to inter-war Europe. The case of Uzbekistan and Uzbeks abroad challenges the applicability and also calls for reconsidering the validity of the ‘ethnic versus civic’ typology of nation-building. While ethnic elements have certainly been emphasised by the Uzbekistani elites, the Uzbek nation has primarily been defined territorially. The paper argues that the study of how Uzbekistan relates to Uzbek co-ethnics abroad best illustrates the contradictory nature of its own nation-building process. Understanding the significance that ethnic ties have in driving Uzbekistan’s foreign policy reveals what dimensions are being privileged as criteria for defining the nation. Evidence is brought from an examination of the country’s policy towards the neighbouring republics and particularly with regard to the issue of the large Uzbek communities living there. It is my contention that state-building has constituted a higher priority for the ruling elites than establishing and/or developing links with co-ethnics abroad. This meant that links between Uzbekistan and Central Asian Survey (March 2007) 26(1), 105–122

Alignments and Realignments in Central Asia: The Rationale and Implications of Uzbekistan's Rapprochement with Russia

The eviction of the USA from the military base at Khanabad-Qarshi and the signing of an alliance treaty between Uzbekistan and Russia in November 2005 marked one of the most dramatic turnarounds in international alliances in the post-cold-war era. This article shows that regime survival is a driving force behind Uzbekistans realignment. It also argues that a full account of Uzbekistans turnaround needs to take into consideration systemic factors, namely, an external environment in which Russia provided a viable strategic and economic alternative. The article concludes by suggesting how the “normative competition” in the region between Russia (and China) and the USA helps account for the timing of Uzbekistans realignment.

Informal Ethnopolitics and Local Authority Figures in Osh, Kyrgyzstan

Abstract The contribution examines local-level ethnopolitics in post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan, particularly in the southern city of Osh, in 1990 site of one of the bloodiest inter-communal conflicts of the late Soviet era. First, instruments of managing multi-ethnicity are briefly introduced, with particular attention being paid to territorial autonomy, also a pillar of Soviet ethnofederal structure. Next, the contribution focuses on Uzbek ethnopolitics in Osh as a case study which illustrates how formal and informal politics shape state–minority relations in an ethnically mixed and post-conflict setting. The contribution argues that local authority figures and patron–client relations are key to understanding how Uzbek ethnopolitics unfolds and violence is prevented from re-occurring. A combination of informal and formal institutions accounts for preserving inter-ethnic stability in post-Soviet Osh.

Introduction: Stability, sovereignty, and the resilience of politics under authoritarian rule

This special issue is the product of a two-day workshop held at the University of Edinburgh (UK) on 16 and 17 June 2006 on the evolving nature of the post-Soviet state in Uzbekistan and the diverse challenges it has faced. This issue offers a multi-disciplinary analysis of state–society relations in Uzbekistan, focusing in particular on the impact of the evolving policy choices of its elites on (and their implications for) the country’s economy, social relations, political dynamics and foreign relations. By discussing how the post-independence state has coped with post-Soviet transformation, the various contributions analyse how and why state and non-state actors have responded in the way they did, and thus contribute to recent debates over the nature of the state and state–society relations both in relation to Uzbekistan and the non-Western world more broadly. It must be clearly stated that none of the contributors to this volume assume the state to be a unitary or cohesive actor or that a clear-cut dichotomy between state and society actually reflects the realities on the ground. In fact, Stevens and Ilkhamov’s contributions show how they interpenetrate and how different power groups or networks of elites are competing for influence, resources and power. At the same time, and despite these political conflicts and cleavages, the state exerts a hegemonic influence in shaping the country’s post-Soviet trajectory. What emerges from the various contributions to this issue is that the ruling elites in Uzbekistan have embarked on a comprehensive attempt—not always successful and increasingly contested—to achieve hegemonic control over other actors, such as business groups, civil society actors, political groups or competing elites. As recent cycles of popular protest and militant unrest followed by state crackdown testify, the state in Uzbekistan is maintaining control with recourse to increased levels of coercion. Despite efforts to ensure that economic transition would not lead to the collapse of industrial and agricultural output and to a dramatic decline in living standards and to insulate the country from the spill-over of instability from neighbouring Tajikistan and Afghanistan, the Uzbekistani elite and its citizens have come to face the very challenges that the former had Central Asian Survey (March 2007) 26(1), 1–6

Taking partly free voters seriously: autocratic response to voter preferences in Armenia and Georgia

ABSTRACT Do voters matter in competitive authoritarian regimes and, if so, how? Do their preferences make any difference in the way in which the regime conceives policies and goes about policy-making? In this article we show that they do, and that incumbents take them seriously. Crucially, the way the regime responds to policy demand determines their durability in office. In this article we explain why, despite strong similarities, the political regime ruling Armenia remained stable over the years (from the mid-1990s), whereas the one in Georgia has been unseated on two occasions (2003–2004 and 2012–2013). Evidence confirms that policy-making and the voters’ perceptions thereof also play an important role in determining whether a regime collapses or survives. The incumbents collect information on voter preferences, and devise policies in response to them. Policy-making thus matters and is extremely consequential. Paradoxically, however, policy-making makes a difference in counter-intuitive ways. The article concludes that a regime which refrains from making grand promises, or blatantly contradictory or unrealistic ones, has greater chances of surviving than those that set out to transform society, like Saakashvili’s Georgia. Ultimately, such policies backfire on those who launched them.

Semi-presidentialism in Kyrgyzstan

Fumagalli describes political and constitutional developments in post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan, a country which has experienced significant political instability and constitutional change. Kyrgyzstan is currently a rare democracy in a region that has otherwise been inhospitable to political liberalization. The premier-presidential variant of semi-presidentialism (2010–present) has done more to advance democracy in the country than the president-parliamentary system in place from 1993 to 2010. Fumagalli also discusses other factors at play, including a weak political party system, clan and patronage politics, and Russian political and economic influence.

Growing inter-Asian connections: Links, rivalries, and challenges in South Korean–Central Asian relations

The geopolitical context, which emerged from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, combined with Koreas growing economic prowess, enabled greater dynamism and diversification in Seouls foreign policy-making. Growing pressure from energy-intensive economies coupled with new developments and investment in logistics and infrastructure has brought different parts of the Eurasian landmass closer together in recent years. Inter-Asian connections are especially growing. This article uses the case of deepening relations between Korea and the post-Soviet Central Asian republics as a vantage point to reflect on one such example of unfolding Asian inter-connectedness. In addition it sees Seouls engagement in the region as a fitting example of Koreas broader ambitions to assert itself as a global economic player. The article shows that Koreas policy toward Central Asia has been primarily driven by energy needs and is defined by pragmatism. It finds that the economic dimension of the relationship has greatly overshadowed other aspects such as politics and security. In its pursuit of closer ties with the region Seoul has sought to turn structural weaknesses into added value and has attempted to develop a distinctive, non-threatening profile built around the lack of a political baggage and geopolitical ambitions, and the desire to share its experience of formerly impoverished turned leading economy. In turn, Central Asias selective integration in the world economy has continued, also thanks to its ties with Korea. The Central Asian republics welcomed the opportunity to diversify their foreign relations, the sources of foreign investment and export routes. At the same time the opaque business environment, a leadership succession, which cannot be postponed for much longer, and Seouls “no-strings attached” approach expose Korea to some risks as regime stability might not last forever.

Stateness, contested nationhood, and imperilled sovereignty: the effects of (non-western) linkages and leverage on conflicts in Kyrgyzstan

ABSTRACT The case of Kyrgyzstan, mired in a durable oscillation between abrupt descents into violence and swift returns to stability, represents a useful vantage point to capture the trans-national dimension of post-Soviet conflicts. Drawing on the linkage and leverage framework, this paper investigates the role of external actors in the domestic conflicts that have occurred in the country, focusing especially on the 2010 events in and around the city of Osh. It shows that linkages with international actors have grown more dense and diverse over time, most notably with Russia and, to a lesser but growing degree, China. The paper also finds that non-western leverage has become increasingly consequential in shaping Kyrgyzstans domestic and foreign policy. This has been both conflict-inducing and -mitigating, and has varied considerably throughout the conflict cycle. Once violence broke out no outside actor showed willingness to become embroiled in the conflict, despite the local authorities’ calls for external intervention. Conflict dynamics have altered both the domestic political landscape and trans-national linkages.

Social contention, authoritarian resilience, and political change

ABSTRACT This article takes stock of recent advances in the field of comparative authoritarianism. The four books reviewed shed light on the effects of social activism, claim-making and social protests on authoritarian resilience. Taken as a whole, they intervene in the scholarly debates that examine the rise of collective, often contentious action under authoritarian rule. In so doing they account both for how states tolerate or even encourage collective action and the extent to which, in turn, protests by distinct social groups re-shape the political system. As authoritarian institutions, democratic-looking or otherwise, have received considerable attention of late, this article calls for greater attention to the economic and ideational dimensions of authoritarianism and, more generally, a broader research agenda.