[Ben] Uz - a poignant analysis

|

Nathan from The Registan has written a piece for my former employer, openDemocracy.net. All those who are puzzled about the events in Andijon that took place over the weekend will enjoy reading the piece, as it is hitherto one of the more complete analyses of the crisis.

I very much liked the last paragraph, reminiscent of the - at times naughty - discussion around engagement, disengagement, and Craig Murray:

Instead, the west must make crystal clear to the government in Tashkent that there are diplomatic consequences for a regime that massacres its civilians, while offering strong incentives for reform. This combination of criticism and engagement is the only way that the west can make a positive impact in Uzbekistan. There are no short cuts.

Again, Olesya's article for Thinking-East's last issue doesn't loose validity:

The question at stake is about the appropriateness and effectiveness of a "naming and shaming" policy in the context of Central Asian human rights violations.

It seems to me that availing oneself of the responsibility to prevent certain wrongful acts, as Mr. Murray suggested that the United Kingdom do, would in itself constitute an act of complicity with dictatorship for it does not in any way make the life of the oppressed easier. Instead, it aggravates the situation.

On a completely different note, make sure to check out this week's 'Carnival of Revolutions' over at SiberianLight.