Regional and Country Focus
Loss of Uzbekistan: Implications for the U.S.
The May 2005 massacres in Andijan, Uzbekistan, unraveled the post-September 11th U.S.-Uzbek partnership. The U.S. urged an international inquiry into the Andijan
massacres, causing Karimov displeasure, who promptly cut ties with the U.S. and demanded that the U.S. troops stationed in Karsi air base in Khanabad leave within 180 days. This paper will assess the implications of the loss of Uzbekistan for the U.S. It will first look at the significance of the Uzbek partnership for the U.S.; then, it will identify benefits and downsides of the loss of Uzbekistan, followed by U.S. policy options in Central Asia and recommendations.
Full report
What Happened to Economic Growth in Ukraine after the Orange Revolution?
After a record growth rate of 12.1% in 2004, the Ukrainian economy slowed down to 5.4% in the first quarter of 2005 and is not expected to grow faster for the rest of the year. Such a downturn of the growth performance is a bad start for the new Ukrainian
government, especially in view of the forthcoming parliamentary elections in the spring
of 2006. Many observers, both domestic and foreign, blame the government for the weak
growth performance of the economy: a lack of strategy and unity within the government,
low transparency and populism in government decisions resulted in a range of policies
that worsened the business environment and stifled investment in the economy.
This paper will discuss the causes of the economic slowdown in Ukraine in 2005.
The paper starts with an overview of growth performance in 2004 and in the first quarter
of 2005. This is followed by a discussion of the reasons behind the slow growth and
investment collapse; in particular, tax changes, price controls and reprivatization. The
paper concludes with an outline of the prospects for investment climate in the nearest
future and recommendations for the government on how to improve those prospects. Full report
National Identity in Kyrgyzstan: the Case of Clan Politic
The definition of Kyrgyzstan’s national identity remains a complex matter. The Kyrgyz national identity is represented by its history, culture, regionalism, tribalism, ideology, language and ethnicity.2 A closer look at each of these factors reveals arrays of more complex, and sometimes, questionable and contradictory sub-factors that make it all the more difficult to draw a definitive conclusion to the question of Kyrgyz national identity. While the exact definition of Kyrgyzstan’s national identity remains debatable, some of the country’s unique characteristics help understand the country’s current political and socio-economic problems. One of its unique features is the continued strength of clans and their roles in various aspects of the political and socio-economic dynamics of the country. Although other features of the Kyrgyz national identity are important to understanding the country, notions of regionalism, tribalism and clanism are bases of some of the serious political and socio-economic problems. In the post-revolution environment, these divisions bode disaster for the country lurching between crisis and turmoil as criminal elements and special interests take advantage of divisions. This paper seeks to answer the following questions: What is Kyrgyz national identity? Why does it matter? What is the connection between Kyrgyzstan’s weak national ideology and divisions along clans and regions? Why do clans matter in Kyrgyzstan? What kind of influence do they have on the political process and economic development? And finally, what means could be employed to weaken the clans and diminish their influence on political and economic dynamics? Full report
