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.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

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 »