About the site
Oasis online magazine
news
Analytical journalism
Guest book
Magazine       "Oasis"
Year
No. 24 (68) December 2007
№ 23 (67) December 2007
№ 22 (66) November 2007
№ 21 (65) November 2007
№ 20 (64) October 2007
№ 19 (63) October 2007
No. 18 (62) September 2007
№ 17 (61) September 2007
No 16 (60) August 2007
15 (59) August 2007
№ 14 (58) July 2007
№ 13 (57) July 2007
№ 12 (56) June 2007
№ 11 (55) June 2007
No 10 (54) May 2007
No 9 (53) May 2007
№ 8 (52) April 2007
№ 7 (51) April 2007
No. 6 (50) March 2007
No. 5 (49) March 2007
№ 4 (48) February 2007
№ 3 (47) February 2007
№ 2 (46) January 2007
№ 1 (45) January 2007
THE AUTHORS
Subscribe
on       journal [PDF]:
Oleg Panfilov,
project Manager,
panfilov[at]cjes.ru

Dmitry Alyaev,
chief editor,
alyaev[at]cjes.ru

Roman Zyuzin,
webmaster,
webmaster [at] cjes.ru

Adil Dzhalilov,
Kazakhstan,
adild[at]list.ru

a diamond stylus,
Kyrgyzstan,
citizen2005[at]yandex.ru

Nargis Zokirova,
Tajikistan
zokirova77 [at] mail.ru

Representative Names
in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan
not disclosed

Lyudmila Burenkova,
technical editor,
lyuda [at] cjes.ru

Elena Dorokhova,
design,
inwork[at]frw.ru
Term of infinity
Anvar Abdullaev (Tashkent)
When I think about the so-called “election of President Karimov” in Uzbekistan, about the problem of disunity of the opposition and the total fear that gripped the population of the country, I remember the lines of the Austrian poet Rainer M. Rilke:

How small are our disputes with life,
How big is that against us!
When we succumbed
Elements, looking for space,
We would grow a hundred times ...

Elections, above all, imply the presence of choice, the presence of pluralism, the possibility of alternative views and decisions. It would be simply ridiculous to use the concept of “elections” in relation to a system based on the principles of leaderism, on the monopoly of one person on power, on the rejection of any opposition. This is the political theater of the absurd, where one hero and five clowns play, and the entire population is the stats of the mass scene, a kind of deaf, blind and dumb background. The worst thing is that there is no hope for anyone else within the country or outside its borders for a possible other course of this performance without any intrigues and culminations. Even the leader of the opposition party Erk, Muhammad Salih, in the caustic pamphlet “Another seven years ...” does not doubt the predictable final act of the farce, designed to imitate the appearance of a popular will.

If there was a culmination of the game, it was a meeting of the country's Central Election Commission on October 15, in which the Central Election Commission adopted a resolution “On approving the list of political parties and initiative groups of voters allowed to participate in the elections of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan”. It put an end to the hopes of other candidates from unregistered parties and movements (Erk, Birlik, Free Dehkans Party, Solar Coalition), self-nominated candidates from the human rights community (A. Aliev, A. Shoymardanov, J. Shosalimov, etc.).

The decree has put an even bold end to the forecast of journalist Sergei Ezhkov and other optimists that it is still unknown whether Islam Karimov will agree to run for office. Allegedly, the party of the liberal Democrats (UzLiDep) nominated his candidacy without his consent in order to please him. The intrigue was intensified by the fact that during the plenum of this party, Karimov was in Dushanbe, and his press service answered the calls of journalists like this: “We don’t know about the plenum or Karimov’s nomination. This is probably their initiative. ” And the president himself did not comment on the fact of his nomination either in Dushanbe or after returning to Tashkent. Some observers believed that he would speak out and put in place the sycophants of UzLiDepa, who dared to violate the Constitution and nominated a man who had led the country for 18 years already, elected president three times (1990, 1992 and 2000).

Moreover, there was a version that he would become the Chairman of the Senate and “as the father of the nation” would lead the country from this post. The Constitution was a long time ago - in 2002, a change was made that the former president would become a senator for life and would receive immunity (according to the 1992 Constitution, the former head of state would become a member of the Constitutional Court for life). In addition, a number of essential powers of the Constitution Guarantor were transferred to the Senate.

But the CEC Resolution of October 15 made it clear that Islam Karimov will go to his own elections and there will be no valid elections. It became clear exactly who will participate. All others can not. In accordance with the Resolution of the Central Election Commission, the Social Democratic Party of Uzbekistan "Adolat" (D. Tashmuhamedova), the National Democratic Party of Uzbekistan "Fidokorlar" (A. Tursunov), the Democratic Party of Uzbekistan "Milliy Tiklanish" (H. Dustmuhamedov), The People’s Democratic Party of Uzbekistan (A. Rustamov), the Movement of Entrepreneurs and Business People - the Liberal Democratic Party of Uzbekistan (I. Karimov), as well as an initiative group of voters to nominate Professor Akmal Saidov as a candidate residents of Uzbekistan.

Almost everyone notes the evidence of the results of the upcoming presidential elections in Uzbekistan in December 2007, almost all experts, observers and the participants of this process themselves, both elected and voters have no doubt that there will be no significant changes in the country until the end of the life of Islam Karimov .

The fact that the current president will again go to the polls was clear a long time ago. Firstly, in Uzbekistan since the 90s of the last century, throughout the entire period of independent existence of the country, Islam Karimov was engaged in strengthening the monocentric rigidly authoritarian regime, where the system of power in Uzbekistan is concentrated in the hands of one person. According to political scientist Adjara Kurtov, “usually in such a system, when everything is tied up to a higher figure standing on the olympus of power, what happens is called trampling down the political field, that is, no major public politicians emerge around the president. They are either eliminated by rotation, sometimes repression, or sent as ambassadors to other states. But, in any case, this political lawn mows constantly. " Such a system does not provide for any successor, and all the media are sent to create the image of "the irreplaceable father of the people."

According to one of the employees of the Information Service of the National Television of Uzbekistan, as early as mid-January 2007, on the eve of the end of his extended seven-year term, the Presidential Administration was given the task to create a number of programs where Islam Karimov should be shown as the only person for independence during the councils, is an architect and founder of statehood, a guarantor of security. It was especially noted to note his merits in the fight against "Islamic terrorism" and at the same time to use the cadres of terrorist acts that took place in Tashkent, in Bukhara. The deadline was set - until August. Just by this time, Islam Karimov began to travel frequently in the region, talking in the fields, bazaars and garrisons with selected local authorities and trained intelligence services to keep quiet "representatives of the people."

On the other hand, it is clear that not only Karimov, as a weak-minded person, is difficult to part with the authorities, but also the authoritarian system he created creates a dead end for him when he is afraid to pass it on to someone else, even his daughter, and is forced to stay on top to own death. Modern medicine works wonders and he will rule for a long time, not remembering his promise about the transition from a "strong state to a strong society." As a media industry researcher K. Bakhriev wrote in 2001 in his book Word on Freedom of Speech, “The transition to democracy through authoritarianism is impossible, as an authoritarian ruler, having full power in the country, stained himself by the persecution of his political opponents and dissenters, allowing their officials to constantly violate human rights, certainly having made a multitude of financial and legal violations, would not risk suddenly introducing democratic institutions. Then he would have to answer for his actions. ” Then the ruler during his life will have to answer and, perhaps, to observe the transformation of the system. Because dictators never left voluntarily.
DISCUSSION
LEAVE A MESSAGE:
All messages are moderated by the webmaster.
* FIO
* Email
Country
City
* Message
[fields marked with * are required]