For those of you who haven't been soaking this up for 2 months, here's the rundown:
Kurmanbek BAKIEV - the incumbent, he was elected President in 2005 following the "Tulip Revolution" that saw peaceful mass protests force the former president (and soviet-era leader), Aksar AKIEV, into exile in Russia. Since taking over the presidency, Bakiev has committed all the sins for which Akiev was ousted - gross nepotism, private ownership of state industries, centralization of power, and increasing repression of opposition and media figures. His campaign posted, billboards, and TV ads have slogans like, "Bakiev: Real Presient," or "Bakiev, of course."
To be honest, most Kyrgyz I've spoken to think Bakiev is good enough, or to quote one, "he's the only candidate with presidential experience." Touche?
Almazbek ATAMBAEV - the lead opposition figure, Atambaev is a knotty puzzle. He was formerly a Prime Minister for Bakiev, but resigned in protest following the heavily-rigged 2007 parliamentary elections (in which his Social Democrat party got slaughtered by the president's Ak Jol party). He's not technically a candidate from any official party. He registered as an independent, and then a collaboration of minor parties came together and named him the candidate for their "United Peoples Movement." In the last few days, he's become Very aggressive, speaking publicly about where his "victory celebration" will be held after the voting closes - it is generally acknowledged that he has a snowball's chance in hell, making this all the more puzzling. Some think he's trying to setup a protest/coup. I've never seen more than 300 people at an Atambaev rally, so I just don't see that happening.
Jengishbek NAZARALIEV - despite looking unfortunately like a chubby Mussolini in his prolific campaign posters, Nazaraliev is actually a wealthy and well-respected doctor and beneficiary. He's built a hospital, and campaigns loudly on the premise of "100,000 questions" he has for Bakiev about his poor governance, and "8 ideas" Nazaraliev has to improve the country. He would technically be considered the 3rd most-likely candidate, making him, to keep the above analogy, an icicle in Satan's crotch.
Tamir SARIEV - He entered the race along with everyone else, passed the televised Kyrgyz language test that knocks out 2/3 of all candidates, and has generally been pretty quiet. He's a successful Kyrgyz businessman by virtue of owning the Tien-Shan Legend bottled-water company. It has been widely rumored that he's running as a way to make money. Basically, the tacit agreement is that if you don't make too much of a fuss in your campaign, and don't be too hard on the president, then nobody really looks too hard at where your campaign funding goes after the election. This is generally accepted as true for all candidates, not just Sariev. I mention it because he has been especially quiet, and very business-savvy. He did found his own political party (Ak Shumpkar) to validate his candidacy.
Toktaym UMETALIEVA - she is the chairwoman for a major NGO consortium in Bishkek, and the only woman in the race. If elected she would be the first female president of Kyrgyzstan. But that's not actually such a huge thing. While having a woman president might shake up Kyrgyz society just a touch, in all the Post-Soviet countries women are active in the workplace, involved in politics, and successful in business, simultaneous with some stereotypes, sexism, and illebral social structures. If she got elected, it just wouldn't be as earth-shattering as Obama in America, but it would be unusual. Of course, that won't happen. Her platform is basically that she wants to show that a woman can run for president (not actually be one).
Nurlan MOTUYEV - I haven't heard anything from this guy but quick one-liners about how Bakiev isn't so bad. He declined a radio debate with the president (no offered to any other candidates) because he had no policies that he disagreed with the president about. He has no posters, and as far as I can tell no campaign, though he did comment (to Radio Azattyk staff) that he thought "Bakiev is being very patient. If I were him, I would arrest any journalist who writes such things about me." When a candidate thinks the incumbent is the ideal president, I'm not sure how much of a 'candidate' he remains.
So the gist is, this is a one-horse race (Bakiev), with a loud pony (Atambaev) wandering around the track, and a few geldings watching from edges, happy to be out of the barn for a bit and enjoy the fresh hay.
It should be said that the "democratic" coup that toppled Akaev in 2005 wasn't anticipated either, but I must say that any chance for dramatic change today is exceptionally low. Still, the thunder Atambaev is putting out suggests there might be lightning somewhere, but I just don't see it. There is a sizeable opposition attitude in Kyrgyzstan, but it has nothing to do with any of these Bishkek-based politico-elites. The south of this country (Osh region) is becoming more and more swayed by Islamic hard-liners, who are taking notes from Taliban refugees. Islam in general holds more sway down south - and that's not a bad thing. Most of the mullahs and imams are very moderate, and generally encourage people to avoid politics all-together (that's not such a good thing). But Taliban and Taliban-influenced Kyrgyz and becoming more vocal. That none of the presidential candidates represents these religious opposition movements only demonstrates their lack of actual grassroots support, and the difficult situation of a "democratic" system which excludes the opinion of a considerable percentage of its citizenry. Imagine if the US electorate had to choose between Republicans and Libertarians. Or Democrats and Green Party. My point is, when a huge chunk of people don't feel like they have any political recourse or representation, eventually, cutting them out of government could cause some trouble.
But not on an election day that they don't even care about.
That's the primer. Polls opened at 8:00 am this morning, and close at 8 pm. If anything's going to happen, it will be tonight. Tomorrow the OSCE gives its report about the degree of election freedom/fraud. It should be interesting to see how much they're able to uncover.
For a more professional look, and some good perspective, check out this article posted today in the New York Times based on a recent visit by several NTY journalists to Bishkek - they actually got an interview with Bakiev, which is pretty remarkable, even if he didn't say anything interesting.
No comments:
Post a Comment