15 - 21 November 2001
Issue No.560
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 15 - 21 November 2001 Issue No.560 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
A tangled web
With the fall of Mazar-i-Sharif, the war is now literally on the back doorstep of the Islamic Republics of Central Asia -- a development that is bound redraw the political map of the area, writes Fatemah Farag
"As if it was not enough that Central Asia is squeezed between China, Russia and the Muslim world... Now we also have an American eagle flying over it," the leader of the Kazak opposition Orleu movement Seidakhmet Kuttykadam told reporters before the fall of Mazar-i-Sharif. Already nervous of the conflict's long-term implications and the indefinite American military presence in the region, the Central Asian republics -- namely Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan which share borders with Afghanistan and beyond them both Kazakhstan and Kyrgystan -- are inexorably being drawn further into the quagmire.
Mazar-i-Sharif is a mere 35 km south of the Uzbek border and lies along the north/western border of Afghanistan. The Khanabad airbase, 150km inside Uzbekistan, now has access to the front line and has been being slated as a base from which to launch military operations.
One thousand and five hundred US military personnel are currently based in Uzbekistan, a significant addition to the regional military balance and a source of sensitivity to a country which deployed 665,000 Uzbek troops in Afghanistan during the country's Soviet occupation, lost 1,522 men, and had 4,000 return with disabilities. According to a recently returned Egyptian professional from the Uzbek capital of Tashkent, "There are Americans everywhere."
Galima Bukharbaeva, regional director of the Institute of War and Peace (IWPR) office in Uzbekistan, has estimated that 100 to 200 elite US troops moved into Uzbekistan last week alone. Local officials told IWPR that hundreds of American special forces have been arriving at the Khanabad military airport, which has been under US military control for over a month, as part of intense preparations to use the base as a springboard for special operations into Afghanistan.
There have also been reports of an aircraft with British insignia landing at Khanabad two weeks ago which sparked off rumours that the visit was intended to prepare the ground for the arrival of British special forces, including Nepalese Ghurkas, weathered specialists in covert operations in mountainous conditions.
Also noteworthy are US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's two visits to Uzbekistan this month. Although both the Uzbeks and Rumsfeld refused to divulge much information regarding their meetings; however, analysts agree that they were intended to pave the way for the use of Khanabad as a launching pad for special operations in Afghanistan.
The Uzbek government, nevertheless, continues to insist that the airport is only being used for humanitarian and search-and-rescue operations. During Rumsfeld's last visit on Sunday, the Uzbek defence minister Kadir Gulyamov, speaking at a press conference, reiterated Tashkent's official position. "I do not think that there are any negotiations about changing our existing agreement. During the meetings these issues were not raised," he told reporters.
Gulyamov was referring to the agreement reached on 13 October when both states announced that they had "decided to forge a new bond based on their long-term commitment to higher security and stability in the region." The announcement was made after a bilateral treaty was signed on 7 October and only after Uzbek President Islam Karimov had been reassured by Washington that the US did not intend to occupy anyone else's territory. At the same time, Washington has yet to specify the scope of military cooperation and the expected duration of its military presence in Uzbekistan.
According to the returning Egyptian professional, who was until recently in Tashkent, "Older Uzbeks are very wary about this flood of Americans into the country and the war, but nobody feels comfortable enough to talk about such matters openly. As for the younger generation -- all they seem to talk about are sports cars, McDonalds and Coca-Cola. It is like Egypt in the early '70s with people expecting American dollars to start dropping from the sky and solving all their problems. And the rumour is that the Uzbek government will receive $10 billion for its cooperation with the US."
Although press reports have put the figure at $8 billion the amount remains considerable for a poverty-stricken country in urgent need of economic aid. But such aid carries the concomitant danger of a lasting military presence and enduring foreign interference in internal Uzbek affairs, a point that was raised by Kyrgyz parliamentarian deputy Ishenbai Kadyrbekov at the emergency meeting of the Shanghai Organisation for Cooperation (SOC), held in Bishkek in mid-October: "A look back in history proves that once America enters a country, they stay. The immediate and strategic goals of the US and Uzbekistan are currently the same. The Uzbeks clearly appreciate this sudden windfall," he said. He went on to explain that "Anyone knows the patronage of the US or NATO promises not only a reliable defence shield, but also prosperity, good roads and modern technology. I believe the Americans will stay in Uzbekistan once their anti-terrorist mission in the region is accomplished."
Uzbekistan fought hard to gain membership in the SOC, an organisation comprising Russia, China, and the central Asian states. The note of urgency can be put down to its search for allies in its struggle to stymie the primary source of opposition -- the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) which operates out of Afghanistan. It was strange, therefore, that Uzbekistan was absent from last month's meeting, prompting suggestions that Tashkent is in the process of switching strategic partners and drifting into the Western sphere of influence.
Kyrgystan also fears that Tashkent will exploit American backing to get its way regionally, especially over territorial disputes between itself and Uzbekistan. Russia has also been expressing apprehension with regard to the current state of affairs. In the words of the deputy director of Russia's national security service, Victor Kolmogorov, at the SOC meetings, "If we are talking about letting the US use Uzbek air space and air bases for humanitarian operations, that is fine with us. As for permanent US military presence in Uzbekistan, Russia will oppose it. We have an understanding with Uzbekistan that no extra- regional power will maintain a long-term military presence in either of our countries."
Russia had mobilised troops inside Tajikistan -- the country with the longest Afghan border. For its part Tajikistan has vehemently denied reports that it has given the US permission to use its military air-bases for operations within Afghanistan. In addition, following meetings with his Iranian counterpart last month, the Tajiki President Ali Rahamnov announced that while the battle against terrorism was "necessary" the United States was using "methods that were unacceptable." And it is noteworthy that whereas Iran and Russia support the "Tajik" faction of the Northern Alliance headed by Burhaneddin Rabbani and General Mohamed Fahim, the US has been providing support to the General Rashid Dostum-led "Uzbek" faction. All of this has fuelled speculation that the region will settle into two distinct factions: a US-Uzbek alliance and a Russian-Tajik alliance with elements of Iranian backing.
The element of incipient Islamic opposition has only served to compound the situation's complexity. Internally, all Central Asian republics have been wrestling with powerful Islamist opposition. In Tajikistan the IMU and elements of the Taliban waged an eight-year civil war against the secular Soviet-backed government. In Uzbekistan the IMU, Hizb El-Tahrir and a Wahhabi sect have rallied both violent and non-violent opposition to Karimov's government. All of which makes for a potent mix and the distinct potential of active participation in the US-led coalition resulting in the revitalisation of domestic Islamist opposition and its attendant dangers. Tajikistan is obviously still ambivalent regarding the right answer. The Uzbekistan government - which believes that Juam Namandani, the IMU military leader is now a senior commander under Bin Laden - seems to have decided to throw its lot in with the US. In early October, members of the Hizb El-Tahrir Party were put on trial in the capital, on charges of being connected to Bin Laden. Local human rights activists claimed that the evidence presented by the prosecution was insufficient.
In its report on Central Asia released on 11 October, Amnesty International concluded that the region's leaders may use the fight against terrorism as a pretext for imposing more restrictions on individuals' rights and liberties. Karimov has already branded internal opposition as "followers of Bin Laden" And while only months prior to the war, the US was critisising Karimov's regime for its poor human rights record, today that same government is playing down Tashkent's repressive policies.
As for Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan they have yet to make a final commitment. The former has enforced a heightened state of alert in the south where, according to the little information available, the Kazakhs fear the weakness of the Uzbek army in the event of an American pull-out.
The situation in Turkmenistan is equally complex. Home to the Kusha, Ashgabat, Negit-dag and Serdar airbases, which served in 1979 as launching pads for the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, it is considered unlikely that its leadership would wholeheartedly back US policy in the region.
President Saparamurat Niazov, popularly known as Turkmanbashi, has insisted that the US will not be allowed to use of Turkmenistan's territory for military purposes. Turkmanbashi is known to have a "special relationship" with the Taliban -- the latter refrain from carrying out hostile operations against their neighbour and Turkmanbashi offers them the luxury of relatively open borders.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page