The International

On 28 July 2010, the launch of the “International Independent Commission for Inquiry” was announced. The commission will investigate the violence that broke out in southern Kyrgyzstan in June. A number of officials in the Kyrgyz government and the wider international community have expressed their support for this initiative and its designated head – Mr. Kimmo Kiljunen, a Finnish parliamentarian and the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly’s Special Representative for Central Asia.

According to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly’s International Secretariat, the intent of the investigation into the clashes in southern Kyrgyzstan is to foster a national reconciliation that would hopefully reinforce stability in the former Soviet republic. According to AKI Press, the Kyrgyz national news agency, 114 people were killed in the clashes and another 1,458 have been wounded. The International Committee of the Red Cross estimates that approximately 80,000 ethnic Uzbeks living in Kyrgyzstan have been displaced by the clashes and that organization has described the condition of these internally displaced persons as a “humanitarian catastrophe”.

The clashes in southern Kyrgyzstan follow rioting in April, which broke out primarily in the national capital of Bishkek. The riots culminated in the ouster of the incumbent President Kurmanbek Bakiyev and his apparent replacement by the former Prime Minister of the country, Mrs. Roza Otunbayeva. Parliamentary elections have been set for October and a new head of state will be elected with the expiration of President Otunbayeva’s term in office on 31 December 2011.

The OSCE PA will not be the first OSCE institution to become involved in Kyrgyzstan. The OSCE Centre in Bishkek was established in 1998 and has continued to operate in the Kyrgyz national capital and elsewhere in the country, including the city of Osh where the June clashes were most concentrated. The Centre has been engaged in various aspects of Kyrgyzstan’s process of political development in that time – organizing training for journalists and law enforcement personnel, for example.

Mr. Kiljunen’s involvement in the Commission for Inquiry on behalf of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly could then be understood as a deepening in recent years of the OSCE’s role in Central Asia. Another landmark in this development or expansion of the Organization’s role east of the Caspian Sea came on 01 January 2010 with Kazakhstan assuming the OSCE Chairmanship.

The challenge of budgetary constraints

The OSCE has undergone a period of rapid transition since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. Started originally in 1975 as the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the organization’s official purpose at the time was to “break down the barriers of mistrust between East and West”. But, with the changes in the political landscape that took place over the following two decades, a series of reforms were made to institute a formal organization in 1995. This Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe was empowered by its member states to establish field operations and otherwise assist in promoting human rights and democratization in many of the post-Soviet states. Small, temporary field presences were deployed to Estonia and Latvia, for example. Later, larger field operations were established in Southeast Europe to monitor the situation in areas such as Kosovo and Vojvodina.

After the 2008 war in Georgia, the Chairmanship of the OSCE, then held by Finland, committed significant attention to engagement in the Caucasus. With one of the Euro-Atlantic community’s principal instruments for conflict prevention and resolution now becoming increasingly engaged across both the Caucasus and Central Asia, some observers are arguing that there is a possible risk that the OSCE has been mandated to spread its resources too thin.

According to the Centre for OSCE Research at the University of Hamburg, this is especially concerning due to the budgetary constraints imposed by the 56 countries that participate in the Organization. A number of countries have insisted upon a policy of zero nominal growth with regard to the financial resources available to the OSCE. This has meant that the OSCE budget has remained at roughly €180 million each year since 2004, with no increase to account for the rate of inflation.

Those pushing for a budgetary policy of zero nominal growth cite a number of areas where the OSCE could cut spending to free up resources for the expanding role the Organization has in the Caucasus and Central Asia. “We continue to believe that the size and breadth of activities of our Balkans missions remain somewhat out of proportion to the work that remains to be done there.” Mr. Kyle Scott, formerly the Chargé d’Affaires of the US delegation to the OSCE in Vienna, said on his country’s position regarding the OSCE budget.

Indeed, there has been a shift in the political situation of many countries in Southeast Europe since the CSCE was transitioned into the OSCE in 1995. Croatia and Albania have recently joined NATO. Croatia has also made considerable progress in its bid to join the European Union in 2011. With many countries in Southeast Europe increasingly being recognized as equal partners in a Euro-Atlantic community, it could be said that Mr. Scott’s recommendation of downsizing the OSCE field operations would be in line with recent developments in the region.

It must also be noted that the OSCE field operations in Southeast Europe have already been downsized since their initial deployments. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia all host full OSCE missions, while the field presences in Albania and Croatia are of a more restricted size and mandate. It is unclear whether the funding for these operations could be further cut to free up resources for operations in, for example, Kyrgyzstan while still producing tangible results in Southeast Europe.

Beyond the Inquiry

The Commission for Inquiry led by Mr. Kiljunen will not be the only instrument of OSCE involvement in Kyrgyzstan through the coming months. Similarly, budgetary constraints will not be the only challenge the OSCE will have to overcome in its attempts to assist the Kyrgyz government.

An additional aspect of OSCE assistance to Kyrgyzstan envisioned for the near future is the deployment of a “Police Task Force” consisting of international law enforcement experts. Following a period of negotiations through the month of June, culminating in a Ministerial Council in the Kazakh city of Astana, the OSCE and the Kyrgyz government reached an agreement to deploy 52 unarmed international policing experts to the southern Kyrgyz cities of Osh and Jalal-Abad by early September. The outlined objectives of this police mission include accompanying local police on patrols, training and advising Kyrgyzstan’s law enforcement personnel, and monitoring the human rights situation.

But this police mission is already encountering difficulties before its actual deployment – and these difficulties are not financial in nature. Many political figures and representatives of civil society groups in Kyrgyzstan are campaigning against the deployment. Osh Mayor Melis Myrzakmatov has publically voiced his opposition to the planned deployment. The first week of August has also seen mass protests being held in Bishkek, Osh and other cities to convey negative public opinion about the police mission. Mr. Mavlyan Askarbekov, one of the leaders of a coalition formed from 35 Kyrgyz youth groups in opposition to the planned deployment, has stated that Kyrgyzstan’s President Roza Otunbayeva exceeded her authority in agreeing to the OSCE police mission and that she should have consulted more widely with the leaders of other political parties in undertaking a decision on the matter.

Ambassador Ian Kelly, the representative of the United States of America to the OSCE Permanent Council, conveyed his government’s hopes for the police mission during the initial negotiations in Vienna. “Working with civil society, we would like to see the Police Task Force – in partnership with the local police – focus on building an atmosphere of trust and confidence in law enforcement…” But this goal might prove difficult to achieve with at least some segments of Kyrgyz civil society actively opposing, rather than supporting, the international police mission.

The planned deployment to southern Kyrgyzstan will not be a first foray into police matters by the OSCE nor will it be the beginning of the OSCE engagement in the post-Soviet republic. Since 2003, the OSCE Centre in Bishkek has cooperated with the Kyrgyz government on a police reform programme that, among other aspects, includes training for local police in community policing and human resource management. Law enforcement in the national capital has consistently been a concern for the OSCE in its involvement in Kyrgyzstan’s development following the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Domestic disenfranchisement

The outspoken disapproval of individuals like Mr. Askarbekov perhaps should not be understood as shock at the arrival of foreign experts in the country. The announced expansion of OSCE activities in Kyrgyzstan could be producing sentiments among Kyrgyz political leaders similar to those that instigated the downsizing of field operations in Southeast Europe. If NATO or EU accession is often interpreted as recognition of a country as an equal partner, then becoming a recipient of OSCE assistance could be perceived as a loss of face for a country and its officials. By requesting international policing experts to assist the local police, the concern might be that President Otunbayeva, the interim leader of the country after rioting in Bishkek in April 2010 led to former President Kurmanbek Bakiyev’s ouster, is signalling a lack of trust in Osh’s local law enforcement.

Alternatively, those protesting the deployment of the OSCE Police Task Force might not necessarily oppose the mission itself but feel that President Otunbayeva should have sought to form a broad consensus in Kyrgyz political society on the deployment. While it has been argued that international assistance is urgently required and that this urgency limits the opportunity for debate and intensive public consultation, the OSCE was not the first international body approached by President Otunbayeva. Dr. Kristalina Georgieva, the European Union Commissioner for humanitarian aid and crisis response, made a three-day visit to Kyrgyzstan in the wake of the unrest in June and said at the conclusion of her visit that the possibility of an EU police mission was discussed. Speaking to reporters, Dr. Georgieva said of a possible deployment, “Security protection is paramount now, and having a neutral party there would be helpful.”

The EU has maintained police missions in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo as well as current deployments in various other countries and territories, including Afghanistan and Georgia. The EU, much like the OSCE, has been consistently involved in policing assistance. But, given that President Otunbayeva had previously requested this particular aspect of aid from the EU, activists like those protesting in Bishkek with Mr. Askarbekov are concerned that the President had the opportunity to hold consultations on international policing assistance – be it provided by the EU, the OSCE or another organization – but chose not to do so.

As individuals and groups in Kyrgyzstan debate whether the President has abused her authority in requesting assistance from the international community, there has been discussion both inside and outside the country regarding the possible underlying causes of the June clashes.

Finding the roots of conflict

Ethnic Uzbeks make up roughly 15% of the overall population of Kyrgyzstan, but they constitute a considerable minority in the southern regions of the country. In fact, prior to the outbreak of violence, approximately half of the residents of Osh were ethnic Uzbeks. With many people – regardless of ethnicity – displaced by the conflict, it is difficult to estimate the current demographics of Osh and other areas of southern Kyrgyzstan.

An indeterminate portion of the Uzbek community in Kyrgyzstan arrived in the country as refugees fleeing Uzbekistan. In 2005, violence broke out in the southern Uzbek province of Andijan, prompting thousands to seek asylum in neighbouring Kyrgyzstan. Another aspect of the ethnic diversity found in southern Kyrgyzstan can be attributed to the topography of the region. The Ferghana Valley, an area especially fertile for agriculture in the midst of otherwise arid Central Asia, lies within southern Kyrgyzstan but also spills over into Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, creating a corridor for the movement of goods and people between the three countries.

The complex ethnic makeup of southern Kyrgyzstan has led some observers to conclude that the violence in June indicates an ongoing ethnic conflict within the state. An editorial in The Guardian published during the June clashes described the violence as “ethnic cleansing”. Other observers have disagreed with this characterization of the clashes. “I don’t believe in a narrative of long-simmering ethnic tension,” Dr. Alexander Cooley, a professor at Columbia University’s Harriman Institute, told The New York Times. Mr. Sergei Mikheyev, a Central Asia expert at the Centre for Political Technologies in Moscow, has also argued that ethnic differences could not have formed a sufficient basis for the conflict and instead blamed the recent political turmoil and lingering feelings of resentment about the former government and its provisional replacement.

On 09 August 2010, the Kyrgyz government lifted the state of emergency that had been originally declared following the initial outbreak of unrest in southern Kyrgyzstan. Whether this decision will come to reflect a return to stability in the country remains to be seen. Speaking in an interview with Radio Free Europe, Mr. Arslan Anarbayev, the interim head of the Kyrgyz Embassy in the American capital, shared his thoughts on the ongoing situation in Kyrgyzstan. “The whole situation in the south of my country reminds me of live coals: if you blow, you might just see, God forbid, another flame.”

Correction: It has come to the attention of The International that a few statements in this article were inaccurate. It was the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA) that announced the formation of the commission on 28 July, not the OSCE itself. The OSCE was created by the 1975 Helsinki Final Act, whereas the OSCE PA was established by OSCE participating States in 1990 as an institution of the OSCE. The journalist’s source was the OSCE PA’s International Secretariat, not the OSCE’s Secretariat. Lastly, the OSCE Centre in Bishkek is a field operation existing within the larger framework of the OSCE, and not specifically of the OSCE PA. References that were incorrect have been changed.