Kyrgyz Opposition Bids for US Support
Former speaker of parliament lobbies for fairer political system where parties, not the president, make the running.
Kyrgyz Opposition Bids for US Support
Former speaker of parliament lobbies for fairer political system where parties, not the president, make the running.
The prominent Kyrgyz politician Omurbek Tekebaev has used a visit to the United States to press for radical political reforms to create a fairer, more democratic system.
Tekebaev, who served as speaker of Kyrgyzstan’s parliament in 2005-06, led a group of opposition leaders who visited the United States on December 9-21, to publicise a reform plan agreed at a public meeting on November 29.
The opposition want to change the current presidential-style system, where a lot of power is concentrated in the hands of the head of state, into one where parliament would play the leading role and ministers would be accountable to it.
The group, which describes itself as “opposition and constructive forces”, includes the Ata- Meken party which Tekebaev leads, and others like Ak Shumkar, Asaba and the Social Democrats, the latter being the only party currently represented in parliament apart from the governing Ak Jol.
The opposition groups have warned that if President Kurmanbek Bakiev does not meet their demands – which include sacking the current cabinet and halting plans to privatise the energy industry as well as approving their political reform plan – they will stage mass protests starting in March.
Elina Karakulova, formerly IWPR’s chief editor in Bishkek, interviewed Tekebaev during his visit to Washington.
IWPR: Omurbek Cherkeshevich [Tekebaev], many see your visit as an attempt by the Kyrgyz opposition to gain support from the US. What are the real objectives of this visit?
Tekebaev: The aim of this visit is to present a new political concept for Kyrgyzstan. This concept is the result of a consensus between the main opposition political parties, which signed a memorandum of cooperation at the recent gathering in November.
We have presented this strategy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in DC and in Philadelphia. We will also have a presentation at Columbia University in New York. And we are also trying to meet the Kyrgyz diaspora in every city that we go, to exchange opinions and listen to suggestions.
IWPR: Is there genuine interest in this programme, and in the Kyrgyz opposition in general?
Tekebaev: The US government is interested in promoting democracy in all countries; it’s the foundation of US ideology. Central Asia is currently undergoing very difficult political processes. Basically, all these states are now ruled by authoritarian regimes, and this translates into suppression of any kind of opposition and dissent, and the curtailment of freedom of speech and political pluralism….
Our American colleagues understand the complex political situation in our countries and they are supporting our endeavours to build democracy and our struggle for human rights and freedoms, and they’re ready to do what they can to help. All the people we have met so far have shown understanding.
IWPR: What are the strongest points in the new concept that you are proposing?
Tekebaev: Right now, we are witnessing the privatisation, usurpation and monopolisation of power in Kyrgyzstan, which inevitably leads to monopolisation of the economy and total control over the media.
That is the way to total stagnation.
If the country is to make a breakthrough, we need radical changes. We are proposing changes that would establish a balance between the different branches of power and the opposition. We want to provide constitutional guarantees for the opposition to be present in the political system by liquidating the monopoly of parliament.
Under our strategy, no matter how many votes a majority party gets, it would not be able to take more than 50 seats out of the 90 in parliament. That would create a substantial opposition presence in parliament…. No one party would have the power to change the constitutional system or override a presidential veto; to do the latter it would need to cooperate with the smaller parties.
At local council level, we are proposing elections using party lists, where the winning party would appoint the head of the local administration. This basically amounts to decentralisation, an opportunity for local people to decide who they want to see as their governor.
This mechanism would demolish the current vertical monopolisation of power. At the moment, almost all local governors across the country are appointed by the ruling, presidential party, Ak Jol…. What we have now is total monopolisation of power, both vertical and horizontal; they control every single village. That is simply wrong, and we have to break this system down.
Our concept is based on the idea of “forced political competition”, which as far as I know is unprecedented. When our European colleagues hear about it, many of them are bewildered – how can democracies impose things? But they are not familiar with the reality [in Kyrgyzstan], where a monopoly of power brings a complete halt to the process of democratisation…. I would say this particular aspect of our concept is completely new.
IWPR: The concept might have advantages, but even in an ideal setting it would take several years to start working properly. Meanwhile, Kyrgyzstan faces severe energy and economic crises.
Does the opposition have any short-term strategies to address these issues that set it apart from the current leadership?
Tekebaev: Yes, we have a plan. The main underlying principle is not to lie and not to steal.
IWPR: You have said during a presentation that weak political institutions are partially responsible for the Bakiev administration’s failure to democratise. If political institutions are weak, are there any guarantees that your concept could be implemented in the first place?
Omurbek Tekebaev: Our proposed system is not founded on the premise that people are perfect, but is actually designed to channel negative human characteristics like envy, avarice and hatred into political competition.
IWPR: At its recent gathering, the opposition issued a statement warning the current leadership that if it fails to reform and act on the opposition’s demands, there will be massive new protests in March. Do you think such protests could create a repetition of March 2005 [when demonstrations drove then president Askar Akaev to leave office] and force Bakiev to resign?
Tekebaev: In Kyrgyzstan, weather and climate play a crucial role, as a Russian expert has said. Everything will depend on what the government does, on the economic situation and on the state of our energy sector.
Tekebaev, who served as speaker of Kyrgyzstan’s parliament in 2005-06, led a group of opposition leaders who visited the United States on December 9-21, to publicise a reform plan agreed at a public meeting on November 29.
The opposition want to change the current presidential-style system, where a lot of power is concentrated in the hands of the head of state, into one where parliament would play the leading role and ministers would be accountable to it.
The group, which describes itself as “opposition and constructive forces”, includes the Ata- Meken party which Tekebaev leads, and others like Ak Shumkar, Asaba and the Social Democrats, the latter being the only party currently represented in parliament apart from the governing Ak Jol.
The opposition groups have warned that if President Kurmanbek Bakiev does not meet their demands – which include sacking the current cabinet and halting plans to privatise the energy industry as well as approving their political reform plan – they will stage mass protests starting in March.
Elina Karakulova, formerly IWPR’s chief editor in Bishkek, interviewed Tekebaev during his visit to Washington.
IWPR: Omurbek Cherkeshevich [Tekebaev], many see your visit as an attempt by the Kyrgyz opposition to gain support from the US. What are the real objectives of this visit?
Tekebaev: The aim of this visit is to present a new political concept for Kyrgyzstan. This concept is the result of a consensus between the main opposition political parties, which signed a memorandum of cooperation at the recent gathering in November.
We have presented this strategy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in DC and in Philadelphia. We will also have a presentation at Columbia University in New York. And we are also trying to meet the Kyrgyz diaspora in every city that we go, to exchange opinions and listen to suggestions.
IWPR: Is there genuine interest in this programme, and in the Kyrgyz opposition in general?
Tekebaev: The US government is interested in promoting democracy in all countries; it’s the foundation of US ideology. Central Asia is currently undergoing very difficult political processes. Basically, all these states are now ruled by authoritarian regimes, and this translates into suppression of any kind of opposition and dissent, and the curtailment of freedom of speech and political pluralism….
Our American colleagues understand the complex political situation in our countries and they are supporting our endeavours to build democracy and our struggle for human rights and freedoms, and they’re ready to do what they can to help. All the people we have met so far have shown understanding.
IWPR: What are the strongest points in the new concept that you are proposing?
Tekebaev: Right now, we are witnessing the privatisation, usurpation and monopolisation of power in Kyrgyzstan, which inevitably leads to monopolisation of the economy and total control over the media.
That is the way to total stagnation.
If the country is to make a breakthrough, we need radical changes. We are proposing changes that would establish a balance between the different branches of power and the opposition. We want to provide constitutional guarantees for the opposition to be present in the political system by liquidating the monopoly of parliament.
Under our strategy, no matter how many votes a majority party gets, it would not be able to take more than 50 seats out of the 90 in parliament. That would create a substantial opposition presence in parliament…. No one party would have the power to change the constitutional system or override a presidential veto; to do the latter it would need to cooperate with the smaller parties.
At local council level, we are proposing elections using party lists, where the winning party would appoint the head of the local administration. This basically amounts to decentralisation, an opportunity for local people to decide who they want to see as their governor.
This mechanism would demolish the current vertical monopolisation of power. At the moment, almost all local governors across the country are appointed by the ruling, presidential party, Ak Jol…. What we have now is total monopolisation of power, both vertical and horizontal; they control every single village. That is simply wrong, and we have to break this system down.
Our concept is based on the idea of “forced political competition”, which as far as I know is unprecedented. When our European colleagues hear about it, many of them are bewildered – how can democracies impose things? But they are not familiar with the reality [in Kyrgyzstan], where a monopoly of power brings a complete halt to the process of democratisation…. I would say this particular aspect of our concept is completely new.
IWPR: The concept might have advantages, but even in an ideal setting it would take several years to start working properly. Meanwhile, Kyrgyzstan faces severe energy and economic crises.
Does the opposition have any short-term strategies to address these issues that set it apart from the current leadership?
Tekebaev: Yes, we have a plan. The main underlying principle is not to lie and not to steal.
IWPR: You have said during a presentation that weak political institutions are partially responsible for the Bakiev administration’s failure to democratise. If political institutions are weak, are there any guarantees that your concept could be implemented in the first place?
Omurbek Tekebaev: Our proposed system is not founded on the premise that people are perfect, but is actually designed to channel negative human characteristics like envy, avarice and hatred into political competition.
IWPR: At its recent gathering, the opposition issued a statement warning the current leadership that if it fails to reform and act on the opposition’s demands, there will be massive new protests in March. Do you think such protests could create a repetition of March 2005 [when demonstrations drove then president Askar Akaev to leave office] and force Bakiev to resign?
Tekebaev: In Kyrgyzstan, weather and climate play a crucial role, as a Russian expert has said. Everything will depend on what the government does, on the economic situation and on the state of our energy sector.
