Kirgizia is one of the key strategic objects for a new ‘Big Game’ in modern Central Asia. Following the declared multi-vector foreign policy this country established close relations with the West, China and Islamic world. Moreover, the political life in Kirgizia is unstable with the continuous changeover of the ruling groups. Nevertheless, after the disintegration of the USSR relations with Russia have always played in important, sometimes key role in foreign and domestic policy of the republic.
Kirgizia is one of the key strategic objects for a new ‘Big Game’ in modern Central Asia. Following the declared multi-vector foreign policy this country established close relations with the West, China and Islamic world. Moreover, the political life in Kirgizia is unstable with the continuous changeover of the ruling groups. Nevertheless, after the disintegration of the USSR relations with Russia have always played in important, sometimes key role in foreign and domestic policy of the republic.
Secession of Kirgizia from the USSR and the logic of its relations with Russia
Similar to all other Central Asia republics of the former USSR, Kirgizia didn’t show any desire to drop out of the Union during the perestroika. The independence was declared on August 31, 1991 following the failed take-over organized by SCSE. Later on, the independent Kirgizia always supported the creation of all international organizations initiated by Russia (CIS, CSTO, EurAsCE, Customs Union etc.)
Political processes in post-perestroika Kirgizia were activated by the clashes between the Kirgiz and the Uzbek in Osh region. The inability of the communist leadership to handle the situation resulted in a specific “democratic breakthrough”. Askar Akaev, coming from academic circles and in directly linked with the party nomenclature, was elected President of the country. It was the first time when Kirgizia got the image of the most “democratic” and “pro-western” republic in the region (enough to look on the indices of personal and political freedoms calculated by “Freedom House” organization to see that during two decades Kirgizia is the regional leader in relevant positions).
Thus, right from the moment of the USSR disintegration the Kirgiz policy got its main contradiction to combine pro-Russian and pro-Western orientations. Consequently the dynamics of Russian-Kirgiz relations strongly depend on relations between Russia and the West.
Development of a multi-vector policy in Kirgizia: gains and losses of independence period
Independent Kirgizia pursues an open foreign policy with a strong accent on various integration structures and international multilateral organizations. In this respect the policy of Bishkek resembles the foreign policy of Astana and drastically differs from the foreign policies of Ashkhabad and Tashkent that give priority to bilateral relations with individual states . But, Bishkek is infamous for its willingness to make commitments in the international organizations and the lack of execution efforts. For example, obligations of Kirgizia in view of accession to WTO assumed during the presidency of A.Akaev, contradicted to the obligations undertaken by the same country in the project of “common market” creation together with Russia and other EurAsEC countries.
Kirgizia for a number of grave economic problems is interested to get investments from all possible foreign partners. In 1990-ies Kirgizia was viewed as the leader of democratization in Central Asia that helped it to attract considerable financial funds from the West and different international organization in the form of loans and grants. In the 2000-ies the economic influence of Russia and China became more pronounced, but even today the American airbase in “Manas” airport is a source of hard currency for the republic.
“Steppe and Eurasian heritage” plays an important role in the political culture of the country. It explains the presence of highly competitive political system and its continuous instability. But these national features manifest themselves differently in the south and the north of the country. The north is more Russified and westernized with a small influence of Islam. That’s why the northern elites are more open to the cooperation with Russia and with the West at the same time. The south of the country experiences a heavier Islamic influence and is less Russified. So, the southern elites pursue isolationist policy, but are less oriented to the West, which in some cases simplifies the interaction the Russia. Moreover, when southerners were at power (K.Bakiyev) the growth of China economic influence was most noticeable.
Due to the constant clashes between the north and the south, the political life in Kirgizia is unstable that impacts its foreign orientation. During the disintegration of the USSR the ruling of southerners (represented by the First Secretary of the Central Committee of Kirgiz Communist Party and Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of Kirgiz SSR Absamat Masaliev) was replaced by northerners (first President of Kirgizia A.Akaev). After the ‘tulip revolution’ of 2010 Bakiyev was replaced by the acting President Rosa Otunbaeva and then the elected President Almazbek Atambaev (both from the North).
Let’s discuss the gains and losses of Kirgizia during independence. The high level of political freedom in the country is a definite achievement. Preservation and even the strengthening of national independence in a complex political and economic environment with the actual breakup between the north and the south (they are poorly linked with each other, even from a transportation viewpoint) – also can be view as an achievement.
The losses are represented by the lack of political stability that makes the country unattractive to foreign investments and creates prerequisites for the constant redistribution of property between clans. From the moment of the USSR disintegration Kirgizia suffers from economic difficulties. Contrary to the neighboring Kazakhstan possessing a lot of natural resources and oil in particular, Kirgizia has only some reserves of metals and hydraulic resources. But the employment of the latter is large “blocked” by Uzbekistan due to discords on water energy.
Kirgiz-Russian relations today
For Russia Kirgizia is first of all of military and strategic interest. Russian military base is located in Kirgiz town of Kant. US and NATO military base in Bishkek airport “Manas” is also important for Russia in view of a strategic competition in the region.
For Kirgizia Russia also has a strategic importance. It is one of the possible guarantors or safety (e.g. in the frame of CSTO and SOC). But relations with Russia are vital to keep the Kirgiz economy afloat. Large-scale export of manpower should be mentioned first. Transit trade with Russia, including smuggling is significant for economy of the republic. A large number of Chinese goods come to Russia via Kirgiz market places. Kirgizia exports some of its own products – clothing, jewelry. But the shadow economy is very powerful here (just remember a recent scandal of “Altyn” network). Cultural ties with Russia play an important role for Kirgizia as a whole and for strongly Russified and weakly Islamized north.
The role of the Russian factor in foreign and domestic policy of Kirgizia and its relation to the strategic competition Russia-West can be demonstrated by conflicts around American military base.
As already mentioned, after the “tulip revolution” the Bakiyev government came to power and it was more prone to cooperate with Russia and China than the Akaev administration was. For example, Bakiyev administration promised to close American military base “Manas” in exchange for a significant financial assistance of Russia. But later on Bakiyev started a “double game” and traded the military base (with a formally modified status) against American economic assistance and prejudiced Moscow against himself. With the worsening of social and economic situation in the country the corrupted regime of Bakiyev failed on April 7, 2010.
During the electoral campaign for the Presidential election on October 30, 2011 all candidates tried to demonstrate their pro-Russian orientation. The winning candidate A.Atambaev came to the top and promised to close American military base and to joint the Customs union and the Common Economic Space.
The Future of Kirgiz-Russian relations
In the framework of its multi-vector polity Kirgizia will continue to balance between the main global “poles of power” focused on the Central Asia. These poles will still include Russia and the West (USA+EU), but a new trend will be represented by the unprecedented growth of China’s influence, mainly on the economy. Looking at the dynamics of Chinese economic growth one can easily predict when Chinese influence will overbalance all other vectors of Kirgiz policy.
It’s obvious that the political influence of China will be opposed to the West. In particular Beijing is very negative to the military and political cooperation of Central Asia countries and NATO.
It is yet difficult to forecast how this unavoidable growth of Beijing capabilities will impact the position of Moscow and shall it be beneficial for Russia. Up to now Russia and PRC successfully coordinated their positions within SOC.
With a high degree of probability we may assume that the cultural influence of Russia (or a “soft power”) on Kirgizia (particular on its northern part) will remain on a high level. Wide use of Russian language and large migration flows will guarantee it.
