Asylbek Bisenbayev: “Nobody wants to be at war, but …”

The recent incident on the Kirghiz-Uzbek border caused the new splash of attention in problems of Central Asia. The recognized expert in this sphere is the author of the book “Not together: Russia and the countries of Central Asia”, the Candidate of History, the author of more than two hundred scientific publications, the press secretary of the president of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the past Asylbek Knarovich Bisenbayev.

At our request he gave the comment concerning the reasons of border conflicts in the region:

- Do the similar incidents happen often in Central Asia? What are they caused?

- The incidents similar to firefight between the frontier guards of Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan occur constantly in Central Asia. The matter is that the borders between the republics of Central Asia changed often, any way, without observance of necessary procedures and the accounting of opinion of the population. Moreover, it was considered that the USSR is indestructible and there is no need of due registration of frontiers between the federal republics. Therefore within the last twenty years this question was a constant stumbling block in the relations between the countries of Central Asia.

There are disputable sites between Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, no less than between other states of the region. It is necessary to add that there were the disputable territories between Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan on the one hand and the People's Republic of China on the other.

Situation aggravates also that the borders not always considered the water, ground, economic, transport needs of the population. There is much a dense population in Fergana Valley, the state strip farming which disturbs the normal economic activity of the ordinary citizen. Sometimes the borders simply divide the settlements, fields and pastures which were in joint using of people within the centuries.

Even more confused circle of problems is connected with enclaves. The related families often live in adjacent territories of the different states in borders. The conflicts arose practically between all countries of the region, especially often between Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. It is necessary to add that there is a problem of not democratic regimes which have no experience of settlement of contradictions by negotiations. Authoritative regimes prefer the power methods of the problems solution – the closing of borders during crises, the regime strengthening of boundary control, customs wars etc.

For example, Uzbekistan was engaged in a mining of the borders with Tajikistan, explaining it with the need of counteraction to Islamic fighters. As a result, not fighters, but peace citizens were lost. Kyrgyzstan suffers with the absence of the strong central power, capable to solve the arising problems. All this creates a set of problems in the relations between the countries, the people and citizens.

- What are the relations of Kirgizstan and Uzbekistan as a whole recently?

- The relations between the region countries rather intense. Except a ball of boundary problems there is the whole complex of others. It is both the fight for water and ground resources which are quickly reduced. For example, the construction of hydro power which is extremely necessary for one country causes a lack of irrigating water of another. It is also the economic disintegration when all states instead of joint activity try to find independence of neighbors, including at the expense of creation of new branches of production. It is also the increase of environmental problems.

The mass unemployment, corruption, an arbitrariness of the authorities constrain the economic development of these countries. All twenty years the serious conflicts arose in Osh, Jalalabad, Andizhan and other regions. Often the border conflicts were connected with population fight for the land and water. But I would like to note that the governments of the countries perfectly understand that war can cause such shocks that all region can be under the threat. And all ruling regimes will be lost on fire of such war.

Therefore, it would be erroneous to say that the conflicts grow out of foreign policy of the ruling regimes. Nobody of the modern governors wants to be at war and isn't interested in such development of events. Even, if the rhetoric of some is very severe. Another thing is that the small conflict against the will of his participants can quickly develop into serious collision. Sometimes the wars arise against will and desire of people. Simply because there were many unresolved problems, because the authorities didn't react operatively to events, because people don't see other way out except how to take up arms. And it is quite possible.

It is a lot of examples when people in Central Asia quickly created own governing bodies for the solution of problems. As the level influence of the Islamic extremist organizations is very high in the region which are quite capable to head and lead the numerous dissatisfied.

- Does the different relation of these two countries to ODKB influence a situation? Is it fraught with new complications?

- ODKB didn't solve any problem for all the time of the existence. Therefore, the demarche of Uzbekistan is quite clear which declared the going out from this organization. As there was the following thing. For example, in 1999 the fighters were near Tashkent, but nobody rendered to the real help to the Uzbeks. Moreover, the threat of fighters break from Afghanistan was liquidated as a result of activity of the Americans and their allies. All perfectly understand it in our region. Therefore, ODKB isn't that structure which is capable to resolve the existing contradictions. Today such problems can quite be discussed by the participants of the conflict.