Uzbekistan's Silent Election Campaign
Uzbekistan's Silent Election Campaign
No one is expecting an earthshattering outcome from this month’s parliamentary election in Uzbekistan given that the opposition will not be taking part, but it looks as though the pro-government parties taking part are not even pretending to campaign.
Campaigning for the December 27 ballot officially got under way on November 21. The election to the lower house of parliament will see 517 candidates competing for 150 seats, under a form of proportional representation that is being used for the first time.
The Ecological Movement of Uzbekistan has 15 seats earmarked for it by law, while the remaining 135 will be divided between the Adolat (Justice) Social Democratic Party, the Milliy Tiklanish (National Revival) Democratic Party, the People’s Democratic Party, and the Liberal Democratic Party.
All four parties were set up by President Islam Karimov’s administration, and are represented in the current parliament. The real opposition – the Erk and Birlik parties and the Birdamlik movement – cannot operate legally in Uzbekistan.
With the ballot only a couple of weeks away, it looks as though the officially-sanctioned parties are not even trying.
“Compared with the last [parliamentary] election held in 2004, this campaign is being described as silent and dull,” said an observer in Tashkent.
Speeches by candidates are being shown on state television and the political parties’ own newspapers are highlighting their platforms, but that is about all there is.
Even compared with the 2004 polls, there are no election posters or other campaign material on view in the streets.
“Announcements about the election date are posted up in inconspicuous places,” said one possible voter in Tashkent. “But they are somewhat low-key, as if they were disguised…. You’d hardly spot them unless you were looking for them specifically.”
Nor are candidates bothering to hold the usual meetings with voters.
“I haven’t heard about candidate meetings in my mahalla [neighbourhood],” said one local journalist. “Nor are there any reports of such meetings taking place in other regions.”
Five years ago, the Liberal Democratic Party tried to run a lively campaign, bringing in famous sportsmen to drum up support and promising market reforms and support for farmers.
“There’s a sense that this time round, the authorities have decided to run the election campaign with minimum outlay and excitement,” said a local observer.
An official involved in organising the election said the government had given parties a freer hand so it was up to them to decide how to campaign.
“We are holding a free and democratic election,” said the an official, who requested anonymity. “So the state should not interfere unnecessarily, and the parties which President Karimov has granted more say in building civil society and participating in politics should themselves become active. The same applies to citizens, too”.
Other commentators say that the different political parties have expressed only limited policy aims of their own, and never allow these to grow into criticism of government.
The largest faction in the current parliament, the Liberal Democratic Party, professes itself a supporter of farmers, yet, as an observer in Jizak in central Uzbekistan pointed out, “It did not react when farmers’ rights were abused last year, when the authorities pursued forced collectivization of farms. How can members of this party speak to the voters after that?”
Another party, Milliy Tiklanish, talks about introducing public scrutiny over decision-making by government. The same observer expressed grave doubts that this could ever happen in Uzbekistan’s current political environment.
“None of the parties is talking about real problems that affect the majority of the population,” said an observer in Samarkand. “Their programmes are peppered with quotations and ideas from President Karimov.”
Tashpulat Yoldashev, an Uzbek political analyst based abroad, thinks the anaemic election campaign is deliberate, as the authorities want to avoid attracting attention to Uzbekistan’s economic problems.
In any case, he said, the pro-government parties are so alike that there is little point advertising them.
Muhammadyusuf Teshabayev, a candidate from the Liberal Democratic Party, disagrees, insisting, “All four political parties have their own identity; they are all different. Every party has its own vision and position on various political and economic issues; that alone is evidence of a clash of interests”.
Teshabayev argued that the “specific nature of Uzbekistan’s political system” meant that differences of opinion were aired by “alternative forms” rather than in open debate.
“Given the characteristics of the Uzbek political system, these processes take place in other forms in our country,” says the candidate.
(NBCentralAsia is an IWPR-funded project to create a multilingual news analysis and comment service for Central Asia, drawing on the expertise of a broad range of political observers across the region. The project ran from August 2006 to September 2007, covering all five regional states. With new funding, the service has resumed, covering Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.)
Campaigning for the December 27 ballot officially got under way on November 21. The election to the lower house of parliament will see 517 candidates competing for 150 seats, under a form of proportional representation that is being used for the first time.
The Ecological Movement of Uzbekistan has 15 seats earmarked for it by law, while the remaining 135 will be divided between the Adolat (Justice) Social Democratic Party, the Milliy Tiklanish (National Revival) Democratic Party, the People’s Democratic Party, and the Liberal Democratic Party.
All four parties were set up by President Islam Karimov’s administration, and are represented in the current parliament. The real opposition – the Erk and Birlik parties and the Birdamlik movement – cannot operate legally in Uzbekistan.
With the ballot only a couple of weeks away, it looks as though the officially-sanctioned parties are not even trying.
“Compared with the last [parliamentary] election held in 2004, this campaign is being described as silent and dull,” said an observer in Tashkent.
Speeches by candidates are being shown on state television and the political parties’ own newspapers are highlighting their platforms, but that is about all there is.
Even compared with the 2004 polls, there are no election posters or other campaign material on view in the streets.
“Announcements about the election date are posted up in inconspicuous places,” said one possible voter in Tashkent. “But they are somewhat low-key, as if they were disguised…. You’d hardly spot them unless you were looking for them specifically.”
Nor are candidates bothering to hold the usual meetings with voters.
“I haven’t heard about candidate meetings in my mahalla [neighbourhood],” said one local journalist. “Nor are there any reports of such meetings taking place in other regions.”
Five years ago, the Liberal Democratic Party tried to run a lively campaign, bringing in famous sportsmen to drum up support and promising market reforms and support for farmers.
“There’s a sense that this time round, the authorities have decided to run the election campaign with minimum outlay and excitement,” said a local observer.
An official involved in organising the election said the government had given parties a freer hand so it was up to them to decide how to campaign.
“We are holding a free and democratic election,” said the an official, who requested anonymity. “So the state should not interfere unnecessarily, and the parties which President Karimov has granted more say in building civil society and participating in politics should themselves become active. The same applies to citizens, too”.
Other commentators say that the different political parties have expressed only limited policy aims of their own, and never allow these to grow into criticism of government.
The largest faction in the current parliament, the Liberal Democratic Party, professes itself a supporter of farmers, yet, as an observer in Jizak in central Uzbekistan pointed out, “It did not react when farmers’ rights were abused last year, when the authorities pursued forced collectivization of farms. How can members of this party speak to the voters after that?”
Another party, Milliy Tiklanish, talks about introducing public scrutiny over decision-making by government. The same observer expressed grave doubts that this could ever happen in Uzbekistan’s current political environment.
“None of the parties is talking about real problems that affect the majority of the population,” said an observer in Samarkand. “Their programmes are peppered with quotations and ideas from President Karimov.”
Tashpulat Yoldashev, an Uzbek political analyst based abroad, thinks the anaemic election campaign is deliberate, as the authorities want to avoid attracting attention to Uzbekistan’s economic problems.
In any case, he said, the pro-government parties are so alike that there is little point advertising them.
Muhammadyusuf Teshabayev, a candidate from the Liberal Democratic Party, disagrees, insisting, “All four political parties have their own identity; they are all different. Every party has its own vision and position on various political and economic issues; that alone is evidence of a clash of interests”.
Teshabayev argued that the “specific nature of Uzbekistan’s political system” meant that differences of opinion were aired by “alternative forms” rather than in open debate.
“Given the characteristics of the Uzbek political system, these processes take place in other forms in our country,” says the candidate.
(NBCentralAsia is an IWPR-funded project to create a multilingual news analysis and comment service for Central Asia, drawing on the expertise of a broad range of political observers across the region. The project ran from August 2006 to September 2007, covering all five regional states. With new funding, the service has resumed, covering Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.)
