President Karimov looking chipper in Khorezm. Or at least, after studio retouches. Photo by gov.uz.
Uzbekistan's President Islam Karimov is worried about what will happen after US and NATO troops are withdrawn from Afghanistan by 2014.
At least, we think he is, but the statement only appears to have been aired on Uzbek-language television and translated by BBC October 11:
Uzbek President Islom Karimov has said his country needs to prepare itself for possible security challenges as NATO plans to leave neighbouring Afghanistan in 2014.
He was speaking on his tour of the northwestern region of Xorazm on 9 October, in remarks broadcast on Uzbek TV the following day. The remarks came in a special TV broadcast detailing the president's visit to the region.
"We need to be prepared. The departure of the US troops tomorrow will bring unrest to Afghanistan. This will bring us unrest with all sorts of disasters coming close to our doorstep. We must not forget the events we went through in the 1990s and the 2000s. When we say Uzbekistan looks to the future, not just today, this means we should build a strong army, one that is second to none. We must give this a thought too," the president said, as he spoke to heads of local farms.
But the full text of his speech on the Foreign Ministry and other government websites doesn't contain any remarks about Afghanistan. Instead, the speech is filled up with those sort of fun facts that Soviet-style dictators love to dazzle poor farmers with -- "Currently, 88 percent of general schools in the region are outfitted with gyms, compared to the 63 percent back in 2003" or "96,300 young men and women in Khorezm region are currently pursuing knowledge and grasping [sic] modern vocations at the ninety-one academic lyceums and professional colleges." No doubt to keep their minds off jihad
There's also a small business boom, the president claims -- and who knows, maybe some of them might have a chance to get lucrative contracts from US businesses eager to supply the NDN (but not likely, as they would have to be government approved and probably go to the First Family's cronies in big state corporations). Who does get lucky from the US government-sponsored "Industry Days"? As you can see from this slide show on surface contracts in the CENTCOM region, the US military wants to use "locally procured goods". How is that working out? Where could we find this information?
No doubt Karimov *is* worried about what will happen in 2014, but given all the attacks on NATO by the Taliban and their allies, and the "green on blue" attacks and such, how is the US going to get out, well, gracefully? The GLOC (ground line of communications) appears to have been restored from Pakistan but of course with lots of protest from parliament (i.e. government proxies), complaints that NATO caused millions of dollars of damage to Pakistani roads, and a view that Islamabad "surrendered" by accepting apologies finally from a civilian and not a military leader, and not even taking fees (after the US complaining about "price-gouging").
Even though the US and Pakistan have a deal signed through 2015, that doesn't mean the NDN won't go away because Pakistan has showed it can shut off the spigot, and security issues obviously remain.
So one can't rule out the idea -- although the speculation has subsided -- that NATO might need to leave heavy equipment in the neighbouring stans.
There was some flurry of commentary when Uzbekistan opted out of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) that it was preparing itself mentally and legally to cooperate with NATO -- and even restoration of the US base.
Certainly that's the frank position of regional analysts like Kazakhstan's Murat Lamulin:
The forthcoming withdrawal of the Western coalition troops from Afghanistan and possible deployment of weapons and, probably, U.S. operating bases on the territory of some Central Asian countries is creating a new situation in the region. It is in this context that one should probably view Tashkent’s decision to “suspend” its membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization, announced in late June this year. The CSTO Charter prohibits the deployment of third countries’ military bases on the territories of the allied countries. Uzbekistan’s withdrawal removes legal barriers for it to host any military hardware of NATO, including weapons that NATO forces would like to leave on their way from Afghanistan.
This piece on a Russian media-sponsored site just makes common sense -- if the US faces problems as it withdraws from Afghanistan or experiences problems again with Pakistan, and if Uzbekistan is worried about defense, then it is fast, cheap and easy for the US to leave these heavy lethal vehicles in Uzbekistan -- although of course there's the obstacle that the NDN agreements provide only for non-lethal deliveries. (I wonder if there is a loophole here -- the agreements were for equipment going in -- what about equipment coming out? The agreement was signed with the stans last June to take the equipment out.)
Of course, Karimov is all about playing the great powers off against each other in classic fashion. Even though ultimately Karimov pulled out of the CSTO in late June, when he met with Putin in early June, the two leaders said NATO's withdrawal would mean they would step up their own cooperation, uznews.net reported.
The Uzbek president stressed that the withdrawal of foreign military
personnel from Afghanistan before a competent army is set up may
destabilise the country and the region as a whole.
“If this problem is not resolved, if it is not fully exposed as it truly
is, I think many things will unravel later, and we will simply miss the
moment,” Karimov said.
“This directly concerns the security of the Russian Federation itself. Cooperation with our Uzbekistani partners is extremely important for us,” the Russian president told a news conference
But as uznews.net pointed out, "On the same day when the Uzbek and Russian presidents met, Nato in Brussels stroke a deal with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan on the transit of military freight from Afghanistan, UzDaily.uz website has reported."
There's also discussion that the US might sell weapons to Uzbekistan (It seems much more likely that they'd just leave military equipment behind in Uzbekistan). Columbia University's Alexander Cooley has suggested in The New York Times that the US would sell weapons to Tashkent:
Most controversially of all, NATO and the Central Asian states are still negotiating over the potential transfer of military equipment, used by coalition forces in Afghanistan, to Central Asian governments’ security services, which have a bloody human rights record.
In January, the Obama administration lifted a ban on foreign military sales to Uzbekistan, on national security grounds, to allow for sales of counterterrorism equipment. American officials insist that such future transfers will include only nonlethal items, but the Uzbek government has long sought items like armored personnel carriers, helicopters and drones, which could be used to suppress protests.
Joshua Foust naturally finds this a "conspiracy" to even entertain this idea:
There is no basis in US law, official US policy, or anything US officials have said about their plans for the regime, that indicate even a distant interest in selling weapons to Tashkent.
So what? Laws get changed -- as we saw the law change last year barring military aid to Uzbekistan due to the Andijan massacre in 2005 and its appalling human rights record. Exigencies exist, emergencies happen, whatever. Foust notes that the Uzbeks start high and negotiate down and that Cooley is just reporting rumors from his trips to Uzbekistan.
At least Cooley travels to the region, unlike Foust, and what he reports tracks with what regional analysts are saying. I can't imagine why anyone would be so adamant about the US *not* doing this, and in such a fury to slam colleagues in the field for reporting the matter-of-fact horse-trading likely going on. What's this really about? Often these rampages of Foust's seem to be only about trying to position himself as a quotable expert to get more media attention and possibly some kind of better job than "fellow" at ASP -- in Obama II's State Department where Sen. John Kerry or some other comrade could be secretary of state.
The venerable Walter Pincus speaks up against doing business with tyrants and quotes former CENTCOM head Adm. William Fallon:
“We would envision, and this is already with the agreement of the Afghan government, that this place would be the enduring facility . . . within that country by which we would provide continuing support to that nation, and hopefully be able to use that facility for other things in the region.”
Pincus concludes: "Let’s hope those “other things” don’t include military operations to keep in power Washington’s current “allies,” such as the current rulers in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan."
And sudden Foust tut kak tut -- blasting Pincus for his "curious bit of hand-wringing" and supposed exaggeration. Foust converts Pincus' legitimate concern about helping to keep these tyrants in power -- especially given already-existing efforts that bolst them, with this: "where on earth would he get the impression that anyone in Washington wants to defend Nazarbayev or Berdimuhamedov against a coup?
But there's a difference between the US siding with Berdymukhamedov or Nararbayev or Karimov in a coup where they faced challenges from, say, insiders in the security of military sectors or oligarchs -- and the US helping these regimes fight off terrorists that might or might not be actual Islamist terrorists. The US would probably not mix in if, say, Russia-based Uzbek tycoon Alisher Usmanov decided he wanted to replace Karimov -- that would be fighting the Kremlin, too. But if some band of terrorists with the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and Afghan police or Taliban launched some raid to destabilize Karimov, sure, the existing US special forces who already advise Tashkent and have a closer relationship now with the Karimov government might intervene in a pinch -- we don't know. We can't be sure. There's nothing wrong with pointing up this scenario as one of the many bad things to come after 2014.
The US Army helped build the railway to Mazar-e-Sharif to ship supplies to NATO troops in Afghanistan. Video by American Forces Network Afghanistan.
