Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:26:22 -1000
From: viviane <vlerner@interpac.net>
Reply-To: viviane <vlerner@interpac.net>
Subject: Meet Our New Saddam
http://www.counterpunch.org/kassim01172004.html
January 17 / 18, 2004
Meet Our New Saddam
Introducing Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan
By SADIK H. KASSIM
Introducing Islam Karimov, one of Washington's most recent allies in the War
on Terror. The neo-Stalinist autocrat presides over Uzbekistan, a vast
mineral and oil rich country strategically located in central Asia. A
country where dissidents are boiled alive (1); where having an Islamically
sanctioned beard can get you arrested (2); where torture is widespread. In
short, a country where human rights abuses are occurring on "a massive
scale," (3) financed in part by the American taxpayer.
Slightly larger than the state of California and home to the fabled Silk
Road cities of Samarqand and Bukhara, Uzbekistan today is a prime theater in
the "War on Terror". After the September 11 attacks, Uzbekistan granted
American troops permission to use its Khanbad military base located just
north of Afghanistan.
The establishment of Khanbad, along with other bases in neighboring
Kyrgyzstan, enabled the American government to achieve three major strategic
goals. In addition to providing a center from which the American military
could pursue the Taliban in Afghanistan, the bases more importantly,
improved "American access to Kazakh and Turkmen oil and gas," and extended
"US influence to a region hitherto dominated by Russia and of constant
concern to China (4)." The bases in essence paved the way for America to
gain a foothold in a globally strategic region thereby putting it in a
better position to compete with Russia and China for the great oil treasures
of the Caspian Sea.
In addition to being the world's largest lake, the Caspian sea is believed
to hold vast oil reserves comparable to those of the Middle East. Yet,
unlike the Middle East, transport of the extracted black gold from the
landlocked lake to the open sea is a major hurdle. Therefore, the primary
issue guiding the politics of the region revolve around not ownership of
oil, rather control of the proposed pipelines by which the oil is
transported5. It is within this context that Uzbekistan has emerged as "the
key strategic state in the area (5)."
Uzbekistan's cooperation with Washington has not gone unrewarded. In March
2002, Messrs Bush and Karimov formally met for 45 minutes in the White
House. The meeting produced a five point strategic partnership between the
two countries. Among other things, in exchange for continued use of Khanbad,
the agreement granted Uzbekistan $500 million in aid and credit guarantees
(6), $25 million for military assistance, $18 million for "border security
assistance", and $1 million in policing assistance (7). These concessions
were made to one of America's "foremost partners in the fight against
terrorism (8)" despite the State Department's own declaration that,
"Uzbekistan is an authoritarian state with a very poor human rights record
(9)."
According to the Human Rights Watch (HRW) 2003 World Report3, the Karimov
led government violates, on a systematic level, basic rights "to freedom of
religion, expression, association and assembly." HRW notes that Karimov has
used the pretext of the "War on Terror", to pursue a campaign whose aim is
to squelch opposition. Specifically, the government has arrested and
tortured thousands of independent Muslims, including minors. HRW and other
human rights organizations estimate that there are between 7,000 and 10,000
prisoners held on religious and political charges. Most recently, forensic
evidence has been revealed suggesting that Karimov's government boiled to
death two Muslim prisoners after they refused to stop praying.
The only major critique of Karimov's government by a western government
official has come from Britain's Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray
(10). "Uzbekistan is not a functioning democracy, nor does it appear to be
moving in the direction of democracy," said Murray at the opening of the
Freedom House human rights center in Tashkent, Uzbekistan in October 2002.
Murray continued by exclaiming that, "The major political parties are
banned; parliament is not subject to democratic election; and checks and
balances on the authority of the electorate are lacking." Murray concluded
by noting that, "no government has the right to use the war against
terrorism as an excuse for the persecution of those with a deep personal
commitment to the Islamic religion, and who pursue their views by peaceful
means."
Murray's speech did not sit well with either the American or the Uzbek
governments, the latter calling on Murray to apologize for his remarks.
Murray did not relent and continued his critiques. In May 2003 he decried,
"the intense repression here [in Uzbekistan] combined with the inequality of
wealth and absence of reform." While in August 2003 he restated that there
was, "no freedom of speech, mass media, movement and so forth." Furthermore,
he called on the Uzbek interior and national security ministries to publicly
criticize themselves for using torture.
Murray's blunt manner "was causing alarm in London and Washington, where he
was regarded as too undiplomaticsome influential figures in the diplomatic
service felt he had gone too far10." For his troubles, Murray was subject to
a spurious internal British Foreign Office investigation for alleged
misconduct. The pressures got to Murray, who eventually returned to London
in October of this year for "medical reasons".
According to James McGrory, a British development consultant based in
Tashkent, "The common belief is that Mr. Murray is being sacrificed to the
AmericansThey certainly loathed him...the US Embassy makes no effort to
conceal its dislike of the way he repeatedly and unequivocally slams (the
country's) human rights record."
Clare Short, former International Development Secretary who resigned from
the Blair cabinet over the war in Iraq, is a purported supporter of Murray's
critiques. Of Murray, Short said the following (11), "He is an individual
who was taking a stand on human rights issues where there is terrible,
terrible repressionif he has been smeared and belittled for standing up for
fundamental human rights--this is not just a few honorable political
dissidents but really horrible repression--that would be outrageous."
The case of Uzbekistan and Craig Murray prove that once again political
expediency takes priority over human rights issues in a globally strategic
region. The final word belongs to the St. Louis Post Dispatch, the only
major American periodical to significantly condemn American policy in
Uzbekistan. In an editorial dated November 8, 2003, it was noted that, "If
U.S. policy is to have any credibility in the Muslim world--indeed in the
world at large--it must be based not on convenience, but on principle. It
will be recalled that in the 1980s, the United States made a similar deal of
convenience with another Central Asian tyrant. His name was Saddam Hussein."
Sadik Kassim is a graduate student. He may be reached at
shkassim81@yahoo.com.
Notes:
1. Fielding, F. and Nick Meo. "Mystery Grows Over Recall of 'ill'
Ambassador." Sunday Times 12 October 2003, 4.
2. Barry, E. "Fighting Terror/ UZBEKISTAN; Religious Fervor Sparks a Fearful
Leader's Crackdown." The Boston Globe 2 November 2001, third ed.: sec. A:
32.
3. Human Rights Watch World Report 2003. Uzbekistan. 2003.
4. "Not Just an Airbase: The US Must Tread Carefully in Central Asia." The
Financial Times [London] 25 August 2003, first ed.: pg. 16.
5. Glenny, M. "To Hell and Baku: The Vast Scale and Bloody Price of the Rush
for Oil in the Caspian has Been Little Noticed. Now a Powerful New Study
Reveals All." The Observer 2 November 2003.: Observer Review Pages, 16.
6. "Dealing With the Devil." St. Louis Post-Dispatch [St. Louis] 8 November
2003, Editorial.
7. Amnesty International. A Catalogue of Failures: G8 Arms Exports and Human
Rights Violations. 2003.
8. United States Government, "Uzbekistan Military Assistance" and
"Uzbekistan Exchanges and Law Enforcement Assistance"--US Government,
undated, 2002.
9. "UZBEKISTAN: Leader to Meet Bush." The New York Times [New York] 12 March
2002, final ed.: sec. A pg. 10.
10. Beeston R., and James Kilner. "Outspoken Envoy to Uzbekistan Comes
Home." The Times 1 October 2003, pg. 18.
11. Bright, M. "Short Backs Envoy Who Criticized US: Repression in
Uzbekistan is 'Terrible' ". The Observer 19 October 2003, pg. 12.
=========
*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.***
#################################################################
" Social and economic well-being will become a reality only through the
zeal, courage, the non-compromising determination of intelligent
minorities, and not through the mass." Emma Goldman
To SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE to the emmasdance list send email to
<majordomo@cs.pdx.edu>
with the message subscribe/unsubscribe emmasdance. [No subject is
needed.]
"If I can not dance, I want no part in your revolution." Emma Goldman
#################################################################