Blogs > Liberty and Power > Uzbekistan: Two Links Worth Reading

May 21, 2005 11:44 pm

Uzbekistan: Two Links Worth Reading

Go here to read Josie Appleton on the current situation in Uzbekistan. She describes President Islam Karimov as “an ex-Communist Party chief who just stayed where he was after the USSR collapsed, attempting to keep control through a Soviet-style apparatus that included a ruthless secret service.” She seeks to explain how the U.S. through its pursuit of the so-called War on Terror has created its own enemies in central Asia. She concludes thus:

“It would be better if both Americans and Europeans kept their noses out of the already shaky state of Uzbekistan, and left the people of that region to decide their fate in peace.”

Then go here to read John Laughland’s explanation of U.S. policy towards that country:

“People who reason that the US supports President Karimov, and will therefore turn a blind eye to his alleged excesses, do not understand the thrust of current American policy, which is to try to support and control all sides in any political equation. As in neighbouring Kyrgyzstan under former President Akayev, Uzbekistan is home to scores of western-backed NGOs that agitate politically for the opposition. For instance, Freedom House - a notorious CIA front and the main architect of the orange revolution in Ukraine - has an office in Tashkent.

“Ostensible US support for a president like Islam Karimov, moreover, gives the Americans the very proximity to a regime that they need in order to buy off turncoats within the power structure when the time comes for regime change; to believe that the current unrest in Uzbekistan will lead to anything other than the consolidation of American power in this strategically crucial region near China's border is to fail to understand how much US foreign policy under the neocons owes to the theory of permanent revolution.”

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Brian Radzinsky - 5/22/2005

"...which is to try to support and control all sides in any political equation"

That is probably the most important thing anyone should understand when looking at ANY situation where the US could even be potentially involved. The US, despite its more bold moralpolitik hornblowing, still operates largely on the assumption that its ONLY duty is to impose an external order that can easily be manipulated when it feels appropriate to do so.

We're the only international actor whose primary interest is controlling everyone else's primary interests.

David Timothy Beito - 5/22/2005

Good blog. According to these sources, U.S. aid to Uzbekistan is nearly one billion dollars since 1992 but Bush has not said a single thing about recent events.;fcategory_desc=Human%20and%20Civil%20Rights

Bush's lack of concern about the Uzbek carnage (compared with his readiness to pounce on Ukraine, Cuba, and Iran) is perhaps the most obvious evidence of this administration's double standard of the "war on terrorism"