© 2008 Eric Margolis

Archives > May 24, 2005

UZBEKISTAN’S TYRANT

VERDUN FRANCE – Revolt against Uzbekistan’s brutal communist regime erupted last week. Troops and secret police slaughtered hundreds of protestors, French sources say as many as 750 were gunned down in that important, but little-known nation.

On my first extensive trip across Central Asia in the 1980’s, I was struck by how closely its then Soviet Republics resembled the US-dominated states of the Mideast. I began calling the region, `Moscow’s Mideast,’ and its despotic communist rulers, `red sultans.’

This was a sound analogy. In both regions, corrupt, oligarchic elites, kept in power by their armies and ferocious secret police, exploited natural resources for their own benefit, and that of Moscow, crushed human rights, kept the Islamic faith under the control of their KGB’s, and denied all political activity to non-communists. The biggest difference: the Mideast states supplied the US with cheap oil; Central Asia supplied the USSR with cheap cotton.

Kazakhstan was the most advanced Central Asian state, and Uzbekistan, with about 22 million people, the most repressive. Its grim Stalinist-style capital, Tashkent, was the nerve center for Soviet control of the vast region and the 1980’s war in neighboring Afghanistan. Discovery of huge oil deposits in the western Caspian Basin made post-Soviet Uzbekistan of prime strategic interest to the US.

Rebellion against Uzbekistan’s red sultan, Islam Karimov, has simmered for over a decade, particularly in the strategic Ferghana Valley. Various nationalist and Islamic groups sought to overthrow the communist regime and establish democracies. The largest group, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan(IMU) based itself in Afghanistan and received arms and training from Taliban in the struggle to liberate the nation from communism.

The 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan scattered the IMU and killed its popular leader, Jumma Numangani. But now, the IMU and other Islamic/nationalist groups, heartened by anti-communist revolts in Kyrgystan, Georgia, and Ukraine, have launched a new jihad against the Karimov despotism. The regime reacted by widespread killing, massive arrests and torture, including boiling and burning suspects alive, and jailing over 10,000 political prisoners. The courageous former British Ambassador to Tashkent openly denounced the Karimov regime for wide scale human rights violations – and was fired by the Blair government for his honesty.

Uzbekistan is the acid test for President Bush and Blair’s claims to be determined to spread what they call `democracy’ throughout the benighted Muslim World. The Karimov regime has played a major role on the Anglo-US fight against Islamic independence groups – misnamed `the war on terrorism.’

Uzbekistan has provided the US with a major air base from which to battle Islamic militants in the region. Just as important, a compliant Uzbek regime is essential for US plans to dominate the entire Central Asian oil-producing region and the pipeline routes to export the black gold to the west.

The US has now set up permanent military bases in Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakstan, Krgystan, Tajikistan and Afghanistan- call them `Petrolistans’ - designed to safeguard the new US oil `imperial lifeline.’

The vile Karimov regime has curried favor and support in Washington by claiming to be a key ally in the war against Islam. The US, to its deep shame, has sent hundreds of Muslim suspects to be tortured in Uzbekistan. Such collaboration with one of the world’s ugliest regimes must cease. But the Bush Administration has only gently rebuked Uzbekistan but does not want to see one of its pet regimes fall.

What needs to be done is for all western powers, including Canada, to declare Karimov’s regime an outlaw and move to overthrow it without delay. The best way to encourage real democracy in the Muslim World is to join in ousting the sinister despotisms that afflict it almost everywhere, from Morocco to Uzbekistan. No one will believe Bush’s democratic orations until the US helps bring an orange revolution, as it did in Ukraine, to the oppressed Uzbek people.

We in the west have become so obsessed with security and oil that we have utterly forgotten about political justice and human rights. Until these vital rights are addressed, there will be no stability in Central Asia nor, for that matter, the Mideast.
30 MARGOLIS
Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2005

Posted by Eric Margolis on May 24, 2005 01:44 PM
Comments:

How about that? After criticizing President Bush for overthrowing a murderous regime in oil-rich Iraq, you now implore him to overthrow the regime in oil-rich Uzbekistan “without delay.” That’s quite a change of heart. If the President followed your advice, how would he convince your loyal readers that it’s not just another oil grab? It may not matter of course - the democratic tidal wave unleashed by the elections in Afghanistan and Iraq may topple the Uzbek government without our help.

Perhaps President Bush should have used your own words during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq: Eric Margolis, you “have utterly forgotten about political justice and human rights” in Iraq.

Posted by jkwilson at May 24, 2005 07:07 PM

I think you miss a little bit of the point, there is an ocupation army in Iraq and Afg. so the “democratic tidal wave” is more of a show. Don’t get me wrong, I whish it was real and there was peace…

Posted by WhoFan at May 25, 2005 04:12 PM

There are troops in Iraq, therefore “the democratic tidal wave is more of a show”? I don’t see how the latter follows from the former.

After the invasion of Iraq, I thought I saw elections in the Ukraine, Afghanistan, Iraq, the West Bank, and Saudi Arabia, along with pro-democracy regime changes in Georgia and Kyrgyzstan, the pull-out of occupying Syrian forces from Lebanon, and a pledge to actually have opposition candidates in the next Egyptian election.

Which “little bit of the point” am I missing?

Posted by jkwilson at May 25, 2005 04:50 PM

Jkwilson.
Relating the elections in Afghanistan to what is happening Uzbekistan is totally off the mark.The Uzbek government supported the Norhthern Alliance in Afghanistan for years prior to the invasion. Karimov was very happy with the ousting of the Taliban. In turn many of those protesting in Uzbekistan are in sympathy with the Taliban. While I don’t think we should invade Uzbekistan, Mr. Margolis is right on the money to point the obvious hypocricy regarding US foriegn policy. How can the US invade countries like Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of spreading democracy while on the other hand writing big fat checks to the brutally oppressive government in Uzbekistan? The answer is that those who co-operate with the US are allies while those who don’t are enemies. Human rights has never been the issue.

Posted by James Wallace at May 26, 2005 05:58 AM

If you think we should not invade Uzbekistan, then you agree with me, and disagree with Eric Margolis, who now wants to force regime change there. Yet I don’t see you holding our esteemed columnist’s feet to the fire.

The “hypocrisy” of “writing big fat checks?” If by that you mean Uzbekistan was given compensation for a U.S. airbase in its territory, I’m sure you’re right. Uzbekistan’s proximity to Afghanistan made it the best place to put an airbase, from which we could launch attacks against the even more murderous Taliban. The only alternative to paying Uzbekistan for the rights would be to invade Uzbekistan and put an airbase there by force - which, come to think of it, would dovetail nicely with Eric Margolis’ desire for regime change.

I guess I don’t understand your logic. You disagree with Eric Margolis, and you think the U.S. did the right thing by not invading Uzbekistan, but it was hypocritical not to do so?

Posted by jkwilson at May 26, 2005 11:58 AM

Hi Mr Eric!

haha..I just read your book…’War at the top of the world’. (seems like an eternity ago eh?). One thing I’d like to clarify with you is the fact that the Tibetan military resistance to Chinese colonialisation WAS CERTAINLY NOT inspired by the CIA as you suggest in your book…this is a chinese communist lie that is constanted parroted by them even by their propagandists today. Surely you must know this…if not you must read Gompo Tashi Andrugstang “Four Rivers, Six Ranges”…this resitance movement was entirly indigenously inspired and not a great game construct (as such).

ALSO:

I think maybe you are a little hard on India and Hinduism…perhaps you are pro Islam…the ‘full on’ Islamic warriors ceratinly appeal to many westeners. However surely, when travelling through these places you must be aware of and experience the religion which is fundimental to these eastern cultures…these realities, the very reality that people experience! (despite infiltration of ‘westworld’ reality/values). Perhaps yuo remain detached as a correspondant…rather like ‘ex pats’ do…or at least present this version of reality for your writers…for the punters so to speak. This is something that I refuse to do.

I think that you know as regards the Dalai Lama/Tibet anyway.

OM

Something that he doesn’t know….

http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/ritual_abuse/111339/latest/5

This is actually the truth.

You have to become an anarchist!…the western reality despite its seeming attractions is ‘a beautiful’ sharade hiding unspeakable horrors.

Their karma is fucked Mr Eric.

Allah Akbar

I hope that Uzbek break free from Karimov, oh, how about this news….

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1492277,00.html

Seems as though the old school commys have a lot to discuss!

I don’t think that the Uzbeks should need outside military forces to achieve freedom. An Islamic state in Uzbek is no doubt a worry to china…because the same thing might well happen in East Turkmenistan.

Allah Akbar.

Posted by King Amdo at May 26, 2005 01:01 PM

Mr Eric sir!…are you there sir?…may I touch your special white skin sir?…you have nothing to fear sir, I am a Tibetan saint…you cannot catch any disease from me!

Posted by King Amdo at May 27, 2005 07:41 AM

Jk Wilson,
I will make it simple for you. I don’t think the west should invade Uzbekistan but I also think that the west should stop supporting Uzbekistan. I disagree with your posistion that the elections in Afghanistan and Iraq were the cause of political uprisings in Uzbekistan. They had nothing to with each other

Posted by James Wallace at May 29, 2005 05:39 AM

James,

The elections and uprisings “had nothing to with each other”?

Wow. So you dissagree with Mr. Margolis on essentially every major point he made. He said the protesters,

“heartened by anti-communist revolts in Kyrgystan, Georgia, and Ukraine, have launched a new jihad against the Karimov despotism.”

And each one of those revolts occurred after the invasion of Iraq.

http://deneb.bu.edu/geocities/mideastmap.gif

So I guess in your world that’s just an amazing coincidence?

Yipes.

Posted by jkwilson at May 30, 2005 11:51 AM

It’s obvious why Russia is so keen to support communist puppet governments in Central Asia. If Islamists grabbed the central Asia ‘stans, they’d be less than 60 miles from the Trans-Siberian Railroad - the sole major link between the Russian heartland and its far eastern territories. Russia would be in danger of being split in two…

Posted by George Carty at June 5, 2005 08:33 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?