Tweet
CENTRAL ASIA: REPLAYING THE GREAT GAME
By Igor Torbakov
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
The Jamestown Foundation
Oct 13 2005
There is a direct parallel between the current Russian-American
rivalry in Central Asia and the military-diplomatic duel that the
Russian and British empires were waging in the Eurasian heartland in
the 19th century, the analysts say. Both Moscow and Washington deny
they are intensely competing in the strategically important region,
but the two sides' deeds are more eloquent than words.
Uzbekistan, Central Asia's pivotal state, appears to be in the center
of the two great powers' geopolitical tug-of-war. During U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's October 10-13 tour of Central
Asia, Tashkent was demonstratively excluded from her itinerary.
Symptomatically, a few days prior to Rice's visit to the region,
Uzbekistan joined the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Community (EEC),
thus having made another regional grouping - Central Asian Cooperation
Organization (CACO) redundant (See EDM, October 11).
Tashkent's move, the regional experts argue, has intensified
Moscow-sponsored integration process in the post-Soviet lands and given
Russia additional economic and political clout in what it regards as
its natural zone of influence.
Washington intended to punish the authoritarian Uzbek President Islam
Karimov for backtracking on democratic reform, ruthless suppression
of the May 14 riots in Andijan and, last but not least, eviction of
American troops from the Karshi-Khanabad base. Rice, who visited
Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan but bypassed
Tashkent, gave Karimov, in the words of U.S. Assistant Secretary of
State for Europe and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried, a "very clear
message." Now, Fried added, "We have to see how he responds."
In fact, the Uzbek strongman responded even before receiving the signal
from Washington, as he clearly anticipated what this message might
be. On September 19-24, Russia and Uzbekistan conducted joint military
maneuvers in Uzbek territory. The war games, billed as "anti-terrorist
exercises," appear to be a sign of growing Russian-Uzbek military
ties. Their goal, according to Uzbek military sources, was to
train Russian and Uzbek forces together to quickly put down an armed
rebellion in Uzbekistan similar to the Andijan uprising but larger in
scale. And last week, while in St. Petersburg, Karimov called Russia
the "center of gravitation" for the post-Soviet states and invited
his hospitable host, Russian President Vladimir Putin, to upgrade
the relationship between their countries from the level of strategic
partnership to that of full-blown alliance. Not surprisingly, most
Russian analysts approved the Uzbek leader's "correct geopolitical
move," with some commentators adding- in a seeming allusion to his
previous skillful maneuvering between Moscow and Washington - that
this time Karimov had made his "final strategic choice."
There are several issues vital for the political elites of the Central
Asian states on which Russia and the United States appear to have
different perspectives. The paramount one is securing and perpetuating
the rule of the local powers that be. There is a general consensus
within Russia's policymaking and analytic community that it was
primarily U.S. pressure and the fear of a possible "color" revolution
that pushed Karimov back into Moscow's fold. The majority of Russian
experts share a view that the post-Soviet leaders of Central Asian
states are particularly wary of Washington's democratization drive and
of what they perceive as America's plan to install pro-Western regimes
in the region. Bush administration policies, one regional expert
contends, scared Central Asia's autocratic rulers and forced them to
"seek protection under the Russian security umbrella." Remarkably,
speaking on October 12 in the Federation Council, the Russian
parliament's upper chamber, at the special hearings on Russia's
policies vis-a-vis the CIS countries, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
energetically advocated further strengthening Russian-Uzbek ties,
adding that any economic or political sanctions against Uzbekistan
are useless.
The second issue is the outside powers' military bases in Central
Asia. While happy to get lavish payments from the Pentagon for American
use of the local military facilities, the region's rulers are uncertain
about Washington's true strategic intentions. They also know the
U.S. forces will be reluctant to get involved in any local political
conflicts and will not support the local regimes militarily if the
latter are challenged in any kind of mass uprising or "revolution."
By contrast, Russia, while seeking to beef up its military presence
in the region, is keen to give the Central Asian regimes the
guarantees of its readiness to provide military assistance in the
time of dire need. Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)
Secretary-General Nikolai Bordyuzha announced on October 11 that a
"large group of forces" would be created in Central Asia, similar to
the Russia-Belarusian and Russian-Armenian integrated army groups.
(The CSTO comprises Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan, and Russia.) Bordyuzha said that the Central Asian army
group would be composed "not from battalions, but from regiments and
divisions and, in the event of a serious military conflict, it will
defend CSTO members from all sides."
Most Russian experts see Secretary Rice's Central Asian tour as
an attempt at countering the growing Russian influence in the
strategically located and energy-rich region, although Fried and
other U.S. officials specifically stressed that Washington did not
view Central Asia as a battleground of the Russian-American Great
Game. But the leading Moscow analysts are not convinced. For them,
Russia and the United States are locked in the classic geopolitical
"struggle for the leadership position in Central Asia." Local security
specialists seem to agree: "Some time ago we were talking about the
Cold War," commented Col. Gen. Abdygul Chotbayev, the former commander
of Kyrgyzstan's National Guard. "It ended, having been transformed
into a geopolitical rivalry between the two world powers - the United
States and Russia -- over spheres of influence in Central Asia."
(Rossiiskaya gazeta, October 13, 12; Vremya novostei, Gazeta, October
12; RIA-Novosti, Kommersant, October 11; RFE/RL, October 11, 5;
Washington Times, October 9)
By Igor Torbakov
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
The Jamestown Foundation
Oct 13 2005
There is a direct parallel between the current Russian-American
rivalry in Central Asia and the military-diplomatic duel that the
Russian and British empires were waging in the Eurasian heartland in
the 19th century, the analysts say. Both Moscow and Washington deny
they are intensely competing in the strategically important region,
but the two sides' deeds are more eloquent than words.
Uzbekistan, Central Asia's pivotal state, appears to be in the center
of the two great powers' geopolitical tug-of-war. During U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's October 10-13 tour of Central
Asia, Tashkent was demonstratively excluded from her itinerary.
Symptomatically, a few days prior to Rice's visit to the region,
Uzbekistan joined the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Community (EEC),
thus having made another regional grouping - Central Asian Cooperation
Organization (CACO) redundant (See EDM, October 11).
Tashkent's move, the regional experts argue, has intensified
Moscow-sponsored integration process in the post-Soviet lands and given
Russia additional economic and political clout in what it regards as
its natural zone of influence.
Washington intended to punish the authoritarian Uzbek President Islam
Karimov for backtracking on democratic reform, ruthless suppression
of the May 14 riots in Andijan and, last but not least, eviction of
American troops from the Karshi-Khanabad base. Rice, who visited
Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan but bypassed
Tashkent, gave Karimov, in the words of U.S. Assistant Secretary of
State for Europe and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried, a "very clear
message." Now, Fried added, "We have to see how he responds."
In fact, the Uzbek strongman responded even before receiving the signal
from Washington, as he clearly anticipated what this message might
be. On September 19-24, Russia and Uzbekistan conducted joint military
maneuvers in Uzbek territory. The war games, billed as "anti-terrorist
exercises," appear to be a sign of growing Russian-Uzbek military
ties. Their goal, according to Uzbek military sources, was to
train Russian and Uzbek forces together to quickly put down an armed
rebellion in Uzbekistan similar to the Andijan uprising but larger in
scale. And last week, while in St. Petersburg, Karimov called Russia
the "center of gravitation" for the post-Soviet states and invited
his hospitable host, Russian President Vladimir Putin, to upgrade
the relationship between their countries from the level of strategic
partnership to that of full-blown alliance. Not surprisingly, most
Russian analysts approved the Uzbek leader's "correct geopolitical
move," with some commentators adding- in a seeming allusion to his
previous skillful maneuvering between Moscow and Washington - that
this time Karimov had made his "final strategic choice."
There are several issues vital for the political elites of the Central
Asian states on which Russia and the United States appear to have
different perspectives. The paramount one is securing and perpetuating
the rule of the local powers that be. There is a general consensus
within Russia's policymaking and analytic community that it was
primarily U.S. pressure and the fear of a possible "color" revolution
that pushed Karimov back into Moscow's fold. The majority of Russian
experts share a view that the post-Soviet leaders of Central Asian
states are particularly wary of Washington's democratization drive and
of what they perceive as America's plan to install pro-Western regimes
in the region. Bush administration policies, one regional expert
contends, scared Central Asia's autocratic rulers and forced them to
"seek protection under the Russian security umbrella." Remarkably,
speaking on October 12 in the Federation Council, the Russian
parliament's upper chamber, at the special hearings on Russia's
policies vis-a-vis the CIS countries, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
energetically advocated further strengthening Russian-Uzbek ties,
adding that any economic or political sanctions against Uzbekistan
are useless.
The second issue is the outside powers' military bases in Central
Asia. While happy to get lavish payments from the Pentagon for American
use of the local military facilities, the region's rulers are uncertain
about Washington's true strategic intentions. They also know the
U.S. forces will be reluctant to get involved in any local political
conflicts and will not support the local regimes militarily if the
latter are challenged in any kind of mass uprising or "revolution."
By contrast, Russia, while seeking to beef up its military presence
in the region, is keen to give the Central Asian regimes the
guarantees of its readiness to provide military assistance in the
time of dire need. Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)
Secretary-General Nikolai Bordyuzha announced on October 11 that a
"large group of forces" would be created in Central Asia, similar to
the Russia-Belarusian and Russian-Armenian integrated army groups.
(The CSTO comprises Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan, and Russia.) Bordyuzha said that the Central Asian army
group would be composed "not from battalions, but from regiments and
divisions and, in the event of a serious military conflict, it will
defend CSTO members from all sides."
Most Russian experts see Secretary Rice's Central Asian tour as
an attempt at countering the growing Russian influence in the
strategically located and energy-rich region, although Fried and
other U.S. officials specifically stressed that Washington did not
view Central Asia as a battleground of the Russian-American Great
Game. But the leading Moscow analysts are not convinced. For them,
Russia and the United States are locked in the classic geopolitical
"struggle for the leadership position in Central Asia." Local security
specialists seem to agree: "Some time ago we were talking about the
Cold War," commented Col. Gen. Abdygul Chotbayev, the former commander
of Kyrgyzstan's National Guard. "It ended, having been transformed
into a geopolitical rivalry between the two world powers - the United
States and Russia -- over spheres of influence in Central Asia."
(Rossiiskaya gazeta, October 13, 12; Vremya novostei, Gazeta, October
12; RIA-Novosti, Kommersant, October 11; RFE/RL, October 11, 5;
Washington Times, October 9)