Russia’s regional allies could fall like dominoes following Kyrgyz uprising
By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV

AP Worldstream
Mar 26, 2005

MOSCOW _ The swift overthrow of the man who ruled Kyrgyzstan for 15
years has turned up the heat on other autocratic rulers across the
ex-Soviet landscape, threatening to topple many of Russia’s closest
allies like dominoes and chip away inexorably at the Kremlin’s
regional clout.

This week’s overthrow of the government in Kyrgyzstan was the third
uprising in Russia’s sphere of interest in less than two years. Unlike
Georgia and Ukraine, however, the tussle between the government and
the opposition had nothing to do with a wider, East-West competition
for influence in the post-Soviet region.

Instead, it centered on a heretofore weak and divided opposition
capitalizing on the deep unpopularity of an increasingly autocratic
president. Russia has depended on such leaders to promote its strategic
interests.

Already, the ripples of revolution have been felt far beyond the small,
mountainous country in Central Asia. In Belarus, on Russia’s western
edge, police clashed Friday with demonstrators calling for President
Alexander Lukashenko’s resignation.

“Today’s gathering must send a signal to the West, Russia and our own
bureaucrats that Belarus is ready for a serious change,” said Andrei
Klimov, an opposition leader. “Our aim is to start the Belarusian
revolution and force the resignation of Lukashenko, the last dictator
of Europe.”

In tightly controlled Uzbekistan, which borders Kyrgyzstan to the west,
opposition leaders from various movements issued a joint statement
expressing admiration for the rapid-fire Bishkek coup.

“We are sure that the process of democratic reforms that started in
Kyrgyzstan will highly influence all parts of Central Asia,” they said.

The domino effect would have deep ramifications for Russia.

Moscow wants desperately to form a free-trade zone that could restore
some of its Soviet-era economic power, but that requires cooperation
from Kazakhstan and Belarus. Today, those countries are in safe hands
from Moscow’s point of view, but the opposition forces might not see
such an alliance in their nations’ interest.

The fourth partner in the proposed project, Ukraine, already has
suggested it could pull out if new President Viktor Yushchenko’s
government decides it is not in the national interest.

Moscow needs oil- and gas-rich Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan
to help maintain its status as a top energy transporter, and Tajikistan
and Armenia, which both host Russian bases, as outposts for its
military in Central Asia and the Caucasus.

New, opposition-led governments in any of those nations could cut
into Russia’s strategic sway.

After losing its stake in last year’s political battle in Ukraine,
the Kremlin has taken a careful approach to Kyrgyzstan, making no
visible effort to help keep its longtime leader from losing power.

“The Kremlin has never recovered from the Ukrainian trauma and
apparently decided to stay away out of fear that an attempt to
influence events there will backfire again,” Fyodor Lukyanov, the
editor of Russia in Global Affairs magazine, told The Associated
Press. “It was simply following the events.”

Under Kyrgyzstan’s President Askar Akayev, Bishkek hosted both U.S.
and Russian military air bases just 30 kilometers (20 miles) away
one from another _ another reason why neither Moscow nor Washington
seemed to be overtly backing either side in Kyrgyzstan.

“No one needs destabilization in Kyrgyzstan. It’s a rare case when
the interests of Moscow and Washington converge,” Lukyanov said.

Gleb Pavlovsky, a leading Russian political strategist linked to
the Kremlin who took part in Ukraine’s election campaign, said that
Moscow had failed to keep ex-Soviet nations in its orbit because its
efforts were belated and badly organized.

“We were late in launching this policy, and we have received a good
beating,” he said during a television talk show.

Stanislav Belkovsky, another top Russian political analyst with
reported links to officialdom, said that Russia’s passivity in
Kyrgyzstan had shown that Russia had in fact abandoned its ambitions
to play a dominant role on the ex-Soviet space.

“The revolution in Kyrgyzstan has shown that Russia can’t and doesn’t
want to control the post-Soviet space,” Belkovsky said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned Friday against placing
excessive hopes in the Commonwealth of Independent States, a loose
alliance of 12 ex-Soviet nations which Moscow has sought to dominate.
With surprising candor, Putin said that the CIS was merely a discussion
forum that couldn’t bring forth serious economic cooperation _ what
he called a forum created for the “civilized divorce” of the former
Soviet republics, in contrast to the European Union, which was built
to foster real cooperation.

“All disappointments come from excessive expectations,” Putin said.