Russia,
China warily watch for American intrusions in Central Asia
Ahmed Rashid
Part II of a two-part series. Read Part I.
As small Central Asian countries have struck military alliances with
the United States, their leaders have asserted their own power more aggressively. At the
same time, the presence of American soldiers threatens to dilute Russia’s and China’s
power to influence the region’s politics and economics. Since September 2001, Russia and
China have cooperated with Washington’s moves and generally affirmed its aims. But as
the fighting in Afghanistan winds down, hard-liners in both countries are expressing
resentment and apprehension about a prolonged American presence in a region they consider
their backyard.
Where elites from smaller Central Asian states revolted after their
leaders gripped power more tightly [see part one
of this series], bureaucrats in Russia are pressuring President Vladimir Putin to
resist American maneuvers that would make the United States a fixture in the region. As
six American F-18 jets arrived in Kyrgyzstan on April 20, Russia’s Duma disavowed a
promised rescheduling of Kyrgyzstan’s $133 million debt to Moscow. President Askar
Akayev was forced to strongly deny speculation that American bases could "conflict
with Russian interests" or start "limiting [Russia’s] influence in the region
or pushing Russia out altogether."
To this point, Moscow and Washington are officially partners in the
antiterrorism coalition. [For
background, see the Eurasia Insight archive]. For China, whose relations with the Bush
administration have been rough, the presence of American soldiers is more ominous.
Soldiers in Bishkek are only 200 miles from the Chinese border, and Chinese officials
vocally worry about mischief. "Beijing’s policy is against strategies of force and
the US military presence in Central Asia," President Jiang Zemin said on April 21
while visiting Tehran.
China does not fear an invasion so much as a costly, time consuming
struggle for control of the region’s natural and capital resources. American silence on
its long-range plan feeds those fears. Says a European ambassador in Kabul: "The
danger of a new Great Game in Central Asia between the US, Russia and China is very real
unless the Americans spell out their intentions."
Putin has already put down Russia’s marker. As Russia tries to boost
its own oil production and sale, the president has warned Americans that he will not
refrain from working without their cooperation. In a January 21 meeting with Turkmen
President Saparmyrat Niyazov, Putin raised the idea of creating "a Eurasian alliance
of gas producers." While Putin did not address the transport of oil, this idea
endangers American efforts to guide the construction of an enormous pipeline from the
Azerbaijani capital of Baku through the Georgian capital of Tbilisi to Ceyhan on
Turkey’s Mediterranean coast. [For more information, see
the EurasiaNet Business and Economics archive].
The pipeline, if it comes together, would carry Kazakh oil and oil from
other former Soviet states but would bypass Russia and Iran, denying those countries
shipping and construction revenue. While machinations surrounding that pipeline continue,
Chinese interests have invested as much as $6 billion in Kazakhstan’s oilfields, for
potential pipeline delivery into China.
Whatever these games cost, they could end in shame unless Central Asia
becomes a stable place to work and live. Without democratic reforms and with corruption
rampant, all Central Asian economies suffer from high unemployment, poor public health and
flimsy public education. The United Nations estimates that 70-80 percent of the
populations of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan lives below the poverty level. In parts of
Kyrgyzstan, one hears of people eating rats and dogs. Such conditions prevent people from
organizing to effectively demand reform, but they offer extremist Islamic groups such as
the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and Hizb-ut-Tahrir ripe ground for recruitment.
Fundamentalism grows in response to the same factors that drove
Turkmenistan’s Boris
Shikhmuradov and other elites into exile: suppression of secular democratic political
parties, tight state control over local media and multiple, persistent corruption
scandals. While nobody expects an Islamic revolt like the one that changed Iran in 1979,
some elites have concluded that – in the shadow of American, Chinese and Russian
intrigue – their leaders are unwilling or incompetent to reform their political systems.
"All the regimes have escalating political problems and we don’t know if it will
take one year or three years to see major changes," says a political analyst in
Washington.
As heads of state have stalled, international organizations have
stepped in with their own agendas – potentially further reducing Chinese and Russian
influence. The World Bank plans to
loan $1.5 billion in the region over the next decade; the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
has announced plans to lend $300 million this year.
They will bring political influence with their money. "Since
September 11, a lot of our shareholders discerned the importance of this region, and we
are going to take advantage of that to wield a cohesive policy," World Bank President
James Wolfensohn told reporters in Almaty on April 9. Central Asian presidents may not
hear a warning in Wolfensohn’s talk of "cohesive policy." At the same
conference where Wolfensohn spoke, Kazakhstani political advisor Ermukhamet Ertysbaev gave
his boss license to continue deferring elections. "Foreign investors don’t care
where they are investing money, be it in a dictatorship or democracy," he said.
As long as American policy in the region emphasizes troops over reform,
some fear this calculation may be right. "The Americans make statements that don’t
tie them down to anything and which are ignored by the Central Asian regimes," says
Emil Aliev, leader of Kyrgyzstan’s opposition Ar-Namys party.
Even if the United States has refrained from sternly demanding reform,
some observers say, its presence is making some leaders act so outrageous that the
opposition is growing more vocal. If that continues to happen, Washington may have to
decide whether to cast its lot with largely discredited rulers or work to promote messy
transitions to democracy. The dilemma grows murkier when one realizes that many of the new
opposition leaders have been timeservers in the regimes they now criticize and many are
also engulfed in corruption scandals.
As opposition forces coalesce, Russia and China will also have to make
long-range decisions about how and when to intervene. So far neither Russia nor the United
States is openly supporting the Turkmen opposition. Uzbek President Islam Karimov signed a treaty on March 13 that
gives Washington something of an out. While the United States pledges to "regard with
grave concern any external threat to Uzbekistan," it also obligates Karimov "to
intensify the democratic transformation of [Uzbek] society politically and
economically." Meanwhile, China and Russia are nervously watching to see if that
transformation pits them against the United States or throws the region into chaos.
Editor’s Note: Ahmed Rashid is a journalist and the author of
two books, "Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia" and "Taliban:
Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia."
EurasiaNet, May 3, 2002
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav050302.shtml |