Friday, May 27, 2011

The Best We Can: Kyrgyz Government Panel Explains Circumstances, Handling of June 2010 Osh Violence

When the independent panel of international experts you solicit to investigate and report on outbreaks of ethnic violence under your jurisdiction finally issues that report - and cites your provisional government, including specific members of the administration - as at fault for notpreventing or containing the spread of that violence, what's an (Interim) President to do?

Kyrgyzstan's Roza Otunbayeva, a longtime opposition activist turn (post)revolutionary leader, was faced with this challenge recently, when the Kyrgyzstan Inquiry Commission (KIC) she established under OSCE Special Representative to Central Asia Dr. Kimmo Kiljunen published its report on the June 2010 conflict in Southern Kyrgyzstan on May 3.

The report, which generally echoed similar reports by Human Rights Watch and the International Crisis Group, could not identify specific protagonists of the violence, but did cite multiple instances at local, municipal and national levels where inaction by the newly-formed government was conducted to such a degree as to constitute culpability.

The issue went off like a bomb in Kyrgyzstan's political circles, where (ethno-)nationalist sentiments have been on the rise, especially among the Kyrgyz majority. As Eurasianet's George Camm puts it, Kyrgyz politicians are practically "falling over themselves" to outpace each other in progressively more hyperbolic shows of indignation. In the latest maneuver, the Kyrgyz Parliament - the Jogorku Kenesh - unanimously passed a resolution banning Dr. Kiljunen from entering Kyrgyzstan, ostensibly as a punishment for spreading "scandalous and disreputable" information about the June 2010 attacks that left 470 dead and more than 400,000 displaced - the overwhelming majority being ethnic Uzbek citizens of Kyrgyzstan.

The relative invisibility of Otunbayeva - beloved by the West for her strong international credentials as a champion of human rights and political freedom - only demonstrates how sharp the knife edge of social schisms are within Kyrgyzstan. Otunbayeva became President in the irregular circumstance of the April 7 overthrow of former President Kurmanbek Bakiev, and then won approval via election to remain on as President through 2011 - she is not eligible for reelection in the next vote, set for this October.

In her stead, Otunbayeva dispatched senior officials on an international tour to refute the KIC report and issue their own criticisms of its findings, methodology and recommendations. On May 24, this panel visited Washington, DC, and after a US Congressional hearing the prior day, read remarks and gave an on-the-record Q-and-A session hosted by the National Democratic Institute, with Laura Jewett, NDI Eurasia Director, as moderator.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Clouded Transparency: Kyrgyz Government Responds to KIC Report on June 2010 Osh Violence

::This is the second post on the continuing fallout of the June 2010 violence in Southern Kyrgyzstan. ::

On May 3, the international Kyrgyzstan Inquiry Commission (KIC), which was tasked by Kyrgyz President Roza Otunbayeva to investigate and report on the ethnic violence that swent Southern Kyrgyzstan in June 2010, issued its final report. Those findings included verification of many of the worst accusations made against state authorities - that Kyrgyz police and military contributed, at least through complacency, to the escalation of the violence; the law enforcement officials tortured suspects in order to gain or influence testimony; that post-conflict prosecutions by state officials have unduly targeted ethnic minority defendants; that certain high-ranking local and national officials were directly responsible for allowing the violence to continue.

It put the Kyrgyz Government in a difficult spot - President Otunbayeva specifically asked for the report from a specially-convened panel of international experts in order to raise the findings of the commission above reproach. Now, Otunbayeva's government wanted to do just that.

The response by government officials has run from thinly-veiled dismissal of the commission's methodology to outright refusal to acknowledge the findings- a debate currently raging within the Kyrgyz parliament. (update: on May 26, Parliament actually voted 95-0 to ban the head of the commission, Dr. Kimmo Kiljunen, from Kyrgyzstan permanently for what it describes as a biased report the incites further ethnic tension).

Among the more measured reactions is a 30-page, 111-point refutation and comments issued by the government which are now being presented and defended internationally by members of the administration (complete text in English).

While these comments begin benignly, "The Kyrgyz Government consider that the KIC was able to collect significant evidence via a comprehensive and objective approach. The KIC conducted an unbiased investigation which permitted a thorough and useful analysis...", they quickly turn ugly.