
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |

|
|

| Islamism, Uzbekistan, and US Interests |
| By Kareem M. Kamel - Researcher (International Relations) - May 29, 2005 |

"Karimov is a ruthless tyrant. He is not interested in the welfare of the people - he is just concerned with maintaining his own power.... He has done all this with complete US support.... The attempt by the Uzbek regime and the White House to dismiss the opposition as ‘Islamic extremists’ and ‘terrorists’ is despicable." - Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan (Salih)
"We don’t care if 200, 300, or 400 people die. We have force and we will chuck you out of there anyway." - Zakir Almatov, Uzbek Interior Minister ("Unrest Spreads")
|
|
The past two weeks saw international attention
shift from the Middle East to Central Asia as
the crisis between the brutal regime of Islam
Karimov and angry protesters in the city of
Andijan unfolded. In the process, hundreds of
Uzbek protesters, mostly women and children,
were killed at the hands of regime security
forces and thousands of Uzbek refugees took to
the Kyrgyz border. The carnage—the
|
Protestors against Karimov's tyranny |
worst since the former Soviet republic won
independence in 1991—started on Friday, May
13 when government troops brutally put down
a prison uprising by alleged Islamic
militants and a demonstration by citizens
complaining of dire economic conditions
(“Unrest Continues”).
The protests began when a group of local
citizens, angered by the arrest of several
Islamist business owners, stormed the prison
where they had been held. As events rolled
on, about 10,000 protesters gathered in the
city to demand the resignation of Uzbek
President Islam Karimov and his government.
Some eyewitness accounts suggest that army
columns arriving to the scene of unrest
randomly opened fire on the crowds, firing
round after round without even slowing down
to take aim (Bukharbaeva). Other
eyewitnesses mentioned that on May 14,
soldiers loaded scores of bodies onto four
trucks after preventing friends and
relatives from collecting them. In order to
conceal their crimes, Uzbek authorities
imposed a total news blackout on the
beleaguered city of Andijan, effectively
sealing it off by trucks and armored
vehicles and expelling local and
international reporters (“Uzbek
Opposition”). An Uzbek opposition leader
says her party has compiled a list of 745
people allegedly killed by government troops
in Uzbekistan—542 in Andijan and 203 in
Pakhtabad, another city in the Fergana
Valley (“Uzbek Opposition”).
As the conflict extended to other cities, an
Islamist rebel leader by the name of
Bakhtiyor Rahimov announced that his forces
are firmly in control of Korasuv, a town in
eastern Uzbekistan with a population of
20,000 (“Muslim Rebels”). In turn, Karimov,
seeking to tap in US support for his crimes,
immediately blamed Islamic extremists for
the entire uprising, claiming that it was
organized by members of the pan-Islamic
Hizb-ut-Tahrir. While US officials have been
inexorably criticizing even the most
superfluous human rights violations in
states it considers “rogue,” their criticism
of the Uzbek regime in this crisis was
noticeably mild. In fact, it took the United
States four days to react to events on the
ground. Eventually, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice refused to put the blame on
either side, saying on Monday, May 16 that
the United States was “still trying to
understand” what happened in Andijan,
encouraging the Uzbek regime to pursue more
reforms, but suggesting that the Uzbek
regime need not “tolerate terrorists or
terrorist groups” (“Uzbek Opposition”).
Moreover, Russian President Vladimir Putin
expressed concerns that Central Asia could
be destabilized by recent fighting. Karimov,
hoping to prevent the recurrence of the
Kyrgyzstan crisis where Askar Akayev’s
government was overthrown in March by
popular protests, was keen on reassuring
Putin concerning the latest events and
enlisting him on his side.
|
In many ways, the events of the past two weeks
are a grim reminder of the tyranny and
oppression that Uzbeks have to endure under the
regime of Islam Karimov, a regime that hosts US
military bases and continues to be courted by
the West and receives almost $100 million
annually from the US government, according to
some estimates (Salih). The current crisis
represents the
|
---------------------------------
Army columns arriving to the scene of unrest randomly opened fire on the crowds.
--------------------------------- |
ultimate culmination of years of failed state
policies, tyrannical leadership, economic
desperation, and the United States’ support of
“friendly tyrants” in its quest for stability
and the control of regional resources.
Islam in Uzbekistan: The Relentless Quest
for Survival
The Uzbeks occupy Central Asia’s Islamic
heartland of Bukhara, Samarkand, and the Fergana
Valley and make up the oldest urban civilization
in the region. In fact, the Fergana Valley has
always hosted the largest concentration of
population in the region and historically
functioned as the cultural center of both
Islamic piety and Islamic rebellion (Rashid 78).
Islam first arrived in Central Asia by the
mid-seventh century. By the early eighth
century, it was the dominant religion, at least
for the elites, throughout most of the region
(Gunn 389). From the ninth century onwards,
Bukhara, in present-day Uzbekistan, had become
one of the Muslim world’s leading centers of
enlightenment, hosting famous hadith compiler
Al-Bukhari, in addition to renowned philosopher
and scientist Avicenna (Ibn Sina) and Bahauddin
Naqshaband, the 14th-century founder of one of
the most influential Sufi orders. Not only was
Bukhara a magnet for scholars of many
disciplines, but the city housed one of the
world’s most extensive libraries of Arabic,
Persian, and Greek manuscripts (Gunn 390).
|
In the Soviet period, Islam was particularly
targeted by the Communists because it was
considered “backward” and “reactionary” and,
most of all, capable of creating nationalist and
religious resistance to Communist rule (Rashid
38). As a result, Islamic mosques and schools
that had previously contributed to an Islamic
renaissance were either closed, destroyed, or
converted into
|
|
museums and factories. In fact, many Muslim
scholars and imams were executed, women were
forbidden to wear hijab, and children were
not allowed to read the Qur’an. Since the
1960s, the Communist authorities tried to
appeal to the Muslim world by loosening some
of the restrictions they had previously
imposed on the Muslim inhabitants. Even
then, however, only an “official” Islam was
allowed to thrive throughout Central Asia,
where Islamic literature was carefully
monitored and “state-approved mullahs” would
be appointed to a few local mosques. Seventy
years of Soviet repression resulted in a
situation where Uzbeks and other regional
inhabitants became unaware of the details of
Muslim belief and practice, but were still
emotionally attached to their Islamic
identity and were conscious of the richness
of their Islamic heritage. “Unofficial”
Islam, manifested in unregistered mosques,
independent mullahs, and clandestine
home-based religious schools, were able to
sustain Muslim faith during the period of
Communist persecution.
Karimov’s Era: The Reign of Injustice and
Inequality
|
In the post-Soviet period, Uzbekistan, just like
the majority of Central Asian republics, was
headed by a former high official in the Soviet
Communist Party who owed his allegiance to
Moscow. In fact, Islam Karimov, a first
secretary of the ruling Communist Party, used
his position to gain access to the presidency
before and after the 1991 independence. In order
to legitimize his rule and to discredit Marxism-
|
---------------------------------
The Fergana Valley has historically functioned
as the cultural center of both Islamic piety and
Islamic rebellion.
--------------------------------- |
Leninism and the steadily rising Islamic
discourse, Karimov imposed a new “national
ideology” that was published in a series of
texts that were heavily propagated through mass
media, state institutions, and cultural
associations and which eventually became
required reading throughout all levels of
education (March 371). The so-called “Ideology
of National Independence” revolves around themes
of state-building and national independence, in
which Karimov portrays himself as the last in a
long line of Uzbek “state-builders” and
“leader-ideologues” (March 374). In the
meantime, the Uzbek leader sought to abolish all
explicit forms of Islamic religiosity and
dissent by arresting thousands of ordinary pious
Muslims for alleged links with Wahhabis, closing
down mosques and Islamic schools, and
imprisoning or exiling religious leaders or
mullahs.
The goal of the Uzbek leadership was to transform any independent Islamic organizations into appendages of the president’s ideological department, thereby virtually monopolizing all forms of religious expression. Human rights groups have also documented thousands of cases of torture and religious persecution against even non-violent Muslim dissidents who practice their faith outside state-controlled religious institutions. A 319-page report published by Human Rights Watch (HRW) entitled Creating Enemies of the State: Religious Persecution in Uzbekistan contends that Uzbek security officials have been systematically engaged in inhumane torture methods that involve beatings, electric shock, asphyxiation, suspension from wrists or ankles, rape, and burning with cigarettes or lit newspapers (“Creating Enemies”). Ahmed Rashid vividly describes Karimov’s autocratic style:
He has run an authoritarian state … crushing dissent, banning all political parties (except for a brief period of freedom), exerting complete control of the media—even going so far as to have political opponents kidnapped by his fearsome security agencies from neighboring Central Asian states. … In presidential elections he allows one other candidate to stand against him to give the impression that voters have a choice, but these candidates have either been denied a chance to air their views or are themselves Karimov’s loyalists. A dour, uninspiring, and extremely autocratic figure … he has become increasingly isolated from the public and from political activity over the years, surrounding himself with openly corrupt sycophants. (80-81).
In addition to political repression, the economy of Uzbekistan is one of the primary reasons for discontent and popular anger. Uzbekistan is among the world’s top ten gold producers and the number five cotton producer. The Central Asian republic also possesses huge oil and gas reserves and is self-sufficient in energy. The richness of Uzbekistan’s resources has attracted Russia, China, and the United States—powers that are currently engaged in fierce competition over control of Central Asia and are interested in carving spheres of influence in the Eurasian landmass. Despite Uzbekistan’s natural wealth, its economy continues to suffer from severe economic stagnation, rising unemployment, and steadily declining living standards. In 2003, statistics suggest, the economy only grew by a meager 0.3 percent, and GDP per capita has fallen every year since 1998, reaching $350 per capita in 2003 (“The Failure”). Moreover, Uzbekistan suffers from a burgeoning lack of economic equity, as the country’s multiple exchange-rate system for foreign currency ensures that access to US dollars is possible only for a handful of government-affiliated businessmen who, in turn, also are in full control of the country’s key export sectors (“Uzbekistan’s Reform”).
|
The result of Karimov’s policies has been the
exact opposite of what he had intended: the
steady rise of Islamist movements bent upon
challenging the regime. Two Islamist movements
are worthy of mentioning in this regard: the
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and
Hizb-ut-Tahrir. The former explicitly calls for
the overthrow of Karimov’s government and the
establishment of an Islamic state. The IMU was
created in the late 1990s, and it has
|
---------------------------------
This crisis is the culmination of years of
failed state policies, tyrannical leadership,
and economic desperation.
--------------------------------- |
allegedly been responsible for a series of
sensational raids and kidnappings and the
bombing of several government buildings in
Tashkent in 1999. On the other hand,
Hizb-ut-Tahrir aims at the creation of a
pan-Islamic caliphate ruled according to
Shari`ah (Islamic Law) but proposes the
achievement of such a task through non-violence.
The group’s main tenants are “the just
distribution of resources, profits, and
property, just governance, the elimination of
corruption and the common ‘brotherhood’ of the
entire Muslim World” (Gunn 400). The movement
propagates its message by the distribution of
confrontational and highly sensational
literature that portrays current regimes as
corrupt, pro-Western, anti-Islamic entities that
need to be removed from power. However, the
movement does not explicitly demand of its
supporters the use of violence to achieve its
goals.
|
A Troubled People Abandoned
The catastrophic events that have been unfolding in Uzbekistan over the past two weeks are not only indicative of Karimov’s dictatorial style and his tyrannical leadership, but are also a test of America’s self- proclaimed goals of freedom and democracy in the Muslim World. Since 9/11, governments across the region have exploited America’s myopic preoccupation with the need to fight “terrorism” for the purposes of strengthening their grip on power and ignoring international pleas for reform. Since they have now become America’s valued partners, regional regimes see no need to reverse course.
|
|
In fact, they have reached an implicit
understanding that they have a “green light”
in persecuting their opposition and crushing
domestic rebellion in cold blood and still
be immune from prosecution or even inquiry.
The silence with which the world and, in
particular, the United States has dealt with
this crisis will undoubtedly heighten the
sense of abandonment and disillusionment
that the local population will feel towards
a superpower that relentlessly claims to
support freedom and democracy, yet
constantly sacrifices the interests of the
poor and the destitute on the altar of
strategic interest and economic gain.
|
*Kareem M. Kamel is an Egyptian analyst based in Cairo, Egypt. He has an MA in International Relations and is specialized in security studies, decision-making, nuclear politics, and Middle East politics. He is currently a PhD candidate at the American University in London, and a teaching assistant to the Political Science Department at the American University in Cairo.
Source: MuslimUzbekistan
|
|
|
|
|

 |
|
| |
|
|
        
Copyright MPAC-NG 2004-2010, All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer: Articles, cartoons and other elements on the Opinion & Analysis and other view section of this website do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of the MPAC, nor can the MPAC be held accountable for these views.
Fair Use Notice: The MPAC website may occasionally contain copyrighted material the use of which may not always have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The MPAC is making such material available in its effort to advance understanding of humanitarian, education, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as such (and all) material on this site is distributed without profit. If you wish to use any copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
|
|