Old Monk
The Old Monk is a special section of the Forum website maintained by the Forum's International Convenor, Wilfred D' Costa; occasionally maintained by other members of the IC. It features articles, essays and opinions on global issues affecting common people.
Tuesday, 10 November 2010
The ADB holds her 2010 Annual Meeting in Uzbekistan
by Pieter Jansen
It is about 20 years ago that the USSR fell apart. President Karimov ruled before the collapse of the ‘Soviet Imperium’ and after it, and now he still rules. The sculpture of Stalin has been replaced by a sculpture of Timur Lenk. President Karimov initiated it to make this conqueror the icon for a redressed nationalism. What does it mean at face value to see the Lenin Square change in to ‘Square for the Liberty’ and probably ‘Beijing Square’ later on? The same Uzbek clans managed it over the ‘times a changing’ to control the cotton, uranium and gold production.
The rivers of the country, feeding the Aral lake with water are now soaked up by the mono cultivation of cotton. Vegetable gardens and orchards from villagers were removed for cotton. For most villagers in the countryside there was nothing more left to do than working in the white deserts. For the seasonable harvest villagers, including school classes, are forced into the fields. ‘who is not planting cotton, will be planted into prison’, Who is not picking cotton, will be picked up himself, was a proverb in Soviet times, that nowadays still counts for many.
Uzbek clan politics partly consist of an opportune exchange between different masters to serve and to take certain advantages from ‘power trade’. Uzbek leadership, during Brezhnev time, used exaggerated figures to transfer substantial amounts of wealth from central Soviet funds into Uzbekistan. Rashidov, Ukraine Party leader at the time kept the extra money paid for the nonexistent cotton and Rashidov won a position on the Politburo and favour with Brezhnev.
In the period after 9/11 Uzbekistan offered its torture rooms for the US war against terror, using the Bush administration rethorics to reckon a bill with their own internal political opponents. Former ambassador Graig Murray of the UK got pictures on his desk of political opponents being boiled. You can read about it in his book ‘Murder in Samarkand’. On 13 May 2005 a massacre took place, when natural security forces fired into a crowd of people in Andijan. People had gathered for a demonstration against the arrest of 23 succesful businessmen, alleged for being a member of the radical Islamist network Hizb ut-Tahrir.
Even before Andijan, already in April 2004, Human Rights Watch reported that The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development had correctly decided to limit its investment in Uzbekistan over the lack of progress in human rights. ‘It decided to limit investment to the private sector and stay involved in public sector projects only to the extent that they directly affect the well-being of the general population, or involve neighbouring countries.’
Human Rights Watch at the time called on other international financial institutions, to do their share to promote the EBRD's demands for human rights reform.
The ADB for Uzbekistan has set a market liberalisation and private sector development agenda for 2010. According to the Bank ‘the economy shifts from central planning to a market-based system, progress in macroeconomic, structural, and institutional reforms has been significant, especially for policies that support private sector development over the last years.’ Despite this, the World Bank (IFC) is ranking Uzbekistan 138 on the ‘Ease of Doing business chart’.
Former embassador Murray in a speech at the Chatham house in 2004 (http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2004/11/speech_to_royal.html) gave some insight in the experiences of foreign companies during his time in the administration. One British company one morning found that its 60 per cent share I a joint enterprise with an Uzbek state entity, had been reduced to 30 per cent by a court case, they had not been told was happening. Jahn International, a Danish investor, had approximately $1 million simply removed from its bank account as ‘excess profits.’
Even if the country is climbing on the ranking for ‘doing business at ease’, it must be seen if market liberalisation and private sector development can result in better living circumstances for the majority of people picking the cotton. It is very questionable as well if it automatically will lead to more freedom for political opponents, and if it will result in less foot nails pulled out. The development towards a national state and market economy, goes accompanied with some colatteral damage, in most cases anyway.
Amnesty in 2009 is reporting over 2008 that ‘widespread torture or other ill-treatment of detainees and prisoners, including human rights defenders and government critics, continued to be reported. The authorities failed to investigate such allegations effectively. The authorities persisted in their refusal to allow an independent, international investigation into mass killings in Andizhan in 2005.’ Since Andijan, leaving hundreds of people dead, the United Nations, the OSCE and Western countries ask for an independent investigation. Uzbekistan instead improved ties with China, India and Russia, all of which supported the governments response in Andijan against Islamic separatists.
Maybe the bank leaves it to NGOs to raise the issue of human rights during the AGM in Tashkent. The bank itself avoids political interference. But in that case the Bank is warned. It should prevent to occur what happened at the AGM of the World Bank in Singapore a few years ago. The World Bank and IMF officials underscored that Singapore, as the host, had agreed to abide by the organisations' promises of access to NGO representatives. Despite this some NGOs were blacklisted by the host country and were refused entrance.
The ADB holds her 2010 Annual Meeting in Uzbekistan
by Pieter Jansen
It is about 20 years ago that the USSR fell apart. President Karimov ruled before the collapse of the ‘Soviet Imperium’ and after it, and now he still rules. The sculpture of Stalin has been replaced by a sculpture of Timur Lenk. President Karimov initiated it to make this conqueror the icon for a redressed nationalism. What does it mean at face value to see the Lenin Square change in to ‘Square for the Liberty’ and probably ‘Beijing Square’ later on? The same Uzbek clans managed it over the ‘times a changing’ to control the cotton, uranium and gold production. The rivers of the country, feeding the Aral lake with water are now soaked up by the mono cultivation of cotton. Vegetable gardens and orchards from villagers were removed for cotton. For most villagers in the countryside there was nothing more left to do than working in the white deserts. For the seasonable harvest villagers, including school classes, are forced into the fields. ‘who is not planting cotton, will be planted into prison’, Who is not picking cotton, will be picked up himself, was a proverb in Soviet times, that nowadays still counts for many.
Uzbek clan politics partly consist of an opportune exchange between different masters to serve and to take certain advantages from ‘power trade’. Uzbek leadership, during Brezhnev time, used exaggerated figures to transfer substantial amounts of wealth from central Soviet funds into Uzbekistan. Rashidov, Ukraine Party leader at the time kept the extra money paid for the nonexistent cotton and Rashidov won a position on the Politburo and favour with Brezhnev.
In the period after 9/11 Uzbekistan offered its torture rooms for the US war against terror, using the Bush administration rethorics to reckon a bill with their own internal political opponents. Former ambassador Graig Murray of the UK got pictures on his desk of political opponents being boiled. You can read about it in his book ‘Murder in Samarkand’. On 13 May 2005 a massacre took place, when natural security forces fired into a crowd of people in Andijan. People had gathered for a demonstration against the arrest of 23 succesful businessmen, alleged for being a member of the radical Islamist network Hizb ut-Tahrir.
Even before Andijan, already in April 2004, Human Rights Watch reported that The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development had correctly decided to limit its investment in Uzbekistan over the lack of progress in human rights. ‘It decided to limit investment to the private sector and stay involved in public sector projects only to the extent that they directly affect the well-being of the general population, or involve neighbouring countries.’
Human Rights Watch at the time called on other international financial institutions, to do their share to promote the EBRD's demands for human rights reform.
The ADB for Uzbekistan has set a market liberalisation and private sector development agenda for 2010. According to the Bank ‘the economy shifts from central planning to a market-based system, progress in macroeconomic, structural, and institutional reforms has been significant, especially for policies that support private sector development over the last years.’ Despite this, the World Bank (IFC) is ranking Uzbekistan 138 on the ‘Ease of Doing business chart’.
Former embassador Murray in a speech at the Chatham house in 2004 (http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2004/11/speech_to_royal.html) gave some insight in the experiences of foreign companies during his time in the administration. One British company one morning found that its 60 per cent share I a joint enterprise with an Uzbek state entity, had been reduced to 30 per cent by a court case, they had not been told was happening. Jahn International, a Danish investor, had approximately $1 million simply removed from its bank account as ‘excess profits.’
Even if the country is climbing on the ranking for ‘doing business at ease’, it must be seen if market liberalisation and private sector development can result in better living circumstances for the majority of people picking the cotton. It is very questionable as well if it automatically will lead to more freedom for political opponents, and if it will result in less foot nails pulled out. The development towards a national state and market economy, goes accompanied with some colatteral damage, in most cases anyway.
Amnesty in 2009 is reporting over 2008 that ‘widespread torture or other ill-treatment of detainees and prisoners, including human rights defenders and government critics, continued to be reported. The authorities failed to investigate such allegations effectively. The authorities persisted in their refusal to allow an independent, international investigation into mass killings in Andizhan in 2005.’ Since Andijan, leaving hundreds of people dead, the United Nations, the OSCE and Western countries ask for an independent investigation. Uzbekistan instead improved ties with China, India and Russia, all of which supported the governments response in Andijan against Islamic separatists.
Maybe the bank leaves it to NGOs to raise the issue of human rights during the AGM in Tashkent. The bank itself avoids political interference. But in that case the Bank is warned. It should prevent to occur what happened at the AGM of the World Bank in Singapore a few years ago. The World Bank and IMF officials underscored that Singapore, as the host, had agreed to abide by the organisations' promises of access to NGO representatives. Despite this some NGOs were blacklisted by the host country and were refused entrance.
The Old Monk is a special section of the Forum website maintained by the Forum's International Convenor, Wilfred D' Costa. It features articles, essays and opinions on global issues affecting common people.
GUESS WHAT WILLY'S HOLDING
About Willy
Contact Willy
RECENT POSTS
| Comments |
© 2008 NGO Forum on ADB. | Content may be used freely if source is acknowledged.