Taken Aback: International Commission on June 2010 Osh Violence Issues Stunning Report

::This is the first in a 3-part series on the continuing fallout of the June 2010 violence in Southern Kyrgyzstan. We begin with a report published on April 1, 2011 by an international commission on the June 2010 violence in Southern Kyrgyzstan, and future posts will cover the Government's official response to that report, and finally a panel discussion hosted by the National Democratic Institute in Washington, DC on May 24, 2011 including several members of the Kyrgyz administration and parliament. ::

Just two months after the political upheaval that swept former President of Kyrgyzstan Kurmanbek Bakiev out of power in April 2010, the new so-called 'Provisional Government' was faced with its own violent crisis in the Southern regions of Osh and Jalalabad. The exact account of what took place June 10-14 remains a hot topic in international circles, and is practically radioactive in a domestic environment of increasing ethno-nationalism and regional tension.

To address the ferocious and conflicting accusations that circulated in Kyrgyzstan following the violence, then-Interim President Roza Otunbayeva requested the formation of a special international commission to thoroughly investigate, document, and analyze the conflict in a manner that would be unbiased, transparent, and - she hoped - reconciliatory. She chose Dr. Kimmo Kiljunen, Special Representative to Central Asia from OECD to head the resulting "Independent International Commission of Inquiry in the Events in Southern Kyrgyzstan in June 2010" - more commonly referred to as the Kyrgyzstan Inquiry Commission, or just KIC.

Read more »

Historian Alexander Knyazev on Current Events in Kyrgyzstan, their Historical Roots, and Likely Outcomes

Reposted from Gazeta.kg, originally published on Polit.kg.
Interview by Hilarion Zvyagintsev
Translation by Google/style edit by Ryan Weber

As part of the "Sharp Corners" series which focuses on the portrayal of Kyrgyz history in school textbooks, Polit.kg interviewed prominent historian Alexander Knyazev, Ph.D [of the Kyrgyz Slavic University, Bishkek]. The conversation quickly moved past the works of Osmonov and other pseudo-historians, and ultimately dealt with the connection of the past, present, and prospects for the future state of Kyrgyzstan.

Hilarion Zvyagintsev: In your opinion, what role does the Kyrgyz ethnic group play in the history of Kyrgyzstan? Why has this subject become such a fixture in today's debates?

Alexander Knyazev:- Ethnocentricity in the interpretation and teaching of history is largely the result of compromise among the unprincipled parts of the scientific community. At the turn of the 1980s and 90s, when the idea of ethnocentrism began to dominate - how this dishonored the academic community of the [Kyrgyz] Republic will be discussed - many just began to go along [with this narrative]. This is particularly noticeable in the proclamation of the 2,200th anniversary of Kyrgyz statehood, the 3,000th anniversary of Osh, and the question of the historicity of Manas as a person. It is characterized by lack of professionalism among our scientists. No profession can exist without lapses in professional ethics, but it's wrong to change [the way we write] history in favor of short-term interests. This causes harm and does not bring any benefit, and in a multicultural society - even more so. In a context where the socio-economic situation does not allow most people to travel outside the republic, not only young people, a huge part of society formed a provincial consciousness, ideology, limited to the extent of Kyrgyzstan and the myths operating here.

Read more »