Uzbekistan and the United States: what will a great regional friendship lead to?
These days, the visit of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Uzbekistan Mr. Kamilov to the United States. It is reported that in the course of the dialogues with his American counterpart John Kerry, Abdulaziz Kamilov will discuss the problems that Uzbekistan can expect after the announced withdrawal of a unified international military contingent from Afghanistan. It should be recalled that since December of last year, the official Tashkent has suspended its membership in the CSTO, after which the Uzbek authorities began to worry about the problems of withdrawing ISAF troops from Afghan territory in a special way. And really - unless the excitement manifests itself, if Uzbekistan borders Afghanistan, and therefore is a tasty morsel for pseudo-Islamic extremists who can, forgive, push down from the south, realizing that Uzbekistan has remained "no one's." This is for Uzbekistan to make at least someone’s persistent efforts and Uzbek diplomacy in the person of Mr. Kamilov.
However, before their arrival in the US, the Uzbek delegation had to face one problem that they wanted, it was, to throw an organization like HRW - Human Rights Watch. Representatives of this organization appealed to US Secretary of State John Kerry with a message that the US should be more cautious in negotiations with the envoys of Islam Karimov, because, according to HRW, in Uzbekistan there is a clear and undeniable violation of human rights. But after all, American politics is an American policy, as it knows how to separate the wheat from the chaff, even in terms of situations that violate democratic rights and freedoms.
According to representatives of the State Department, they do not share the concerns of Human Rights Watch. It turns out that official Washington today considers Uzbekistan one of the few states on whose territory manifestations of human rights difficulties are justified. So much for your time ... But how can a violation of human rights in a given country be justified? - those who are sure that Washington is trying to support democratic values exclusively anywhere in the world will erupt.
But, as it turned out, there are exceptions for the American authorities, and they are confirmed by representatives of the US foreign affairs agency themselves. So: according to American experts in foreign policy, it is possible and even necessary for the Uzbek authorities to violate human rights, as this allows the country to stand against the extremist threat. In Syria, you see, there is no extremist threat, but in Uzbekistan there is ... During the Chechen campaigns in Russia there was no threat of the spread of terrorism and extremism, but in present-day Uzbekistan there is. There was no threat in Serbia either, when Kosovo was artificially separated from it, but again in Uzbekistan ...
Here, indeed, the ways of American foreign policy logic are inscrutable ... Although, why are they inscrutable? .. This time everything is very transparent. After all, if Washington is now tightening its usual bagpipes about the infringement of democracy in Central Asia, then Islam Karimov can bang - say: since we are not strong in democratic actions, then withdraw our troops exclusively through the territories that the dog ate in democracy : Pakistan, for example, Tajikistan or China in general ...
It is precisely in order for Islam Karimov to behave with dignity as a man who broke with the CSTO, and completely imbued with unlimited American friendship, the State Department allows itself comments that do not even fit into the classic format of double standards. It remains only to applaud the ingenuity of American diplomats who came up with the formula for dividing the countries of the world into those where human rights are strictly observed, into those where these rights are violated, and even into those where it is possible to violate, because circumstances force them ... After these words and HRW right away tongue bit. There, immediately embraced the logic of the State Department. That's how it happens ...
However, let us return directly to the visit of the chief Uzbek diplomat to Washington. One of the directions of the dialogue will be the topic of military cooperation between Uzbekistan and the United States. This information is confirmed by the fact that not so long ago the Uzbek leader discussed the issue of expanding military cooperation with the United States in the Central Asian region with representatives of the American legislative corps. According to some reports, the United States and Uzbekistan already have an agreement on the supply of so-called non-lethal military equipment - that is, equipment that does not harm human health when performing certain military operations. Among the items there is an item and supplies of American drones, which he will have to use to monitor the state of the Uzbek-Afghan border. Will these drones monitor the state of affairs in northern Afghanistan exclusively, or will they be used for other purposes as well? is a question that will be answered next year.
A clear improvement in US-Uzbek relations is associated with a cooling in contacts between the United States and Kyrgyzstan. The Kyrgyz leader Almazbek Atambayev firmly set out to close the Manas Transit Center, which is still serving the needs of NATO troops. At the same time, it is noticeable that Washington is trying not to escalate the relations with Bishkek, since before it (Washington) a more loyal ally in the region, Uzbekistan, appeared. As they say, why be scattered on several fronts, if you can appease the promises of indispensable "fraternal" assistance to Uzbekistan in its possible opposition to extremism. With this move, the United States is killing several birds with one stone.
First, with the help of an unexpected turn in the democratization policy of the United States, an advance payment is made to the current leadership of Uzbekistan, setting it on a rather short leash. Like, we even forgot about the observance of human rights and freedoms for you, and you ... Be so kind - return curtsy.
Secondly, another wedge between neighboring states can be hammered into the region, because if the Uzbek army really turns out to be well-armed, not without the help of NATO “friends”, this may ultimately lead to some political forces wanting this military advantage in Central Asia to implement.
Third, a state may appear (or is already emerging) in the Central Asian region, which sees exceptional priorities in relations with the US and NATO, rather than in relations with its neighbors.
And the last two precedents (with reference to another region) already took place. In particular, such a situation manifested itself in its time in the Caucasus, when suddenly an active arming of Georgia from the outside while simultaneously encouraging the ideas of one well-known politician led to horrendous geopolitical consequences. Then it was unjustified external weapons that led to war in the region, as a result of which Georgia lost part of its territory in the process of demonstrating its “invincible power”.
To be honest, I don’t want to draw any parallels, but based on the recent clumsy US foreign policy, one can say that Washington’s outlined fraternization with Tashkent will not lead to anything good. No good, especially for Tashkent.
Everything is still very similar to the fact that the American authorities are fed up with a toy in the form of a Georgian president in the post-Soviet space, and then President Karimov himself goes into his hands. Why not play this card, which can plunge hundreds of thousands of square kilometers in the north of the Afghan borders into chaos. After all, the war by proxy with the simultaneous fusion of one of the belligerent sides of rusting military equipment (first “non-lethal” and then every) is a great business project. And how successful a business project for the United States is a war in remote territories in general and with the use of allied forces in particular - can be judged if only because at one time it was the entry into World War II that allowed the United States to finally get rid of the shadow of the Great Depression. Based on this, it can be judged that Washington is looking for ways to translate its business ideas into life and, apparently, can find them thanks to the ambitions of certain regional leaders who have not yet had time to feel the “love” of the United States on themselves.
Information