Our Comments
14.04.10

KIRGHIZIA: HOW TO AVOID CIVIL WAR

One of instability factor in Kirghiz economic development became an entry of this country in WTO under terms which couldn’t provide economic growth through traditional for this republic industries, primarily agriculture and recreation. In this regard the question about rescheduling terms of this country residence in WTO or even secession from this organization is becoming rather urgent. Nevertheless this issue demands accurate calculations within strategic plan of national economic revival and development.

Events of current year fortify forecasts made in the report of Post-Crisis World Institute “Post-USSR: Assessing Government Anti-Crisis Actions”, which came out in March, 2009.  International expert community a year ago stipulated three scenarios of situation developments in post-Soviet states. It was seen a conservative scenario for Russia of holding the situation within preset frameworks and “political situation freezing”. Ukraine was defined as a zone of anti-crisis policy failure.  As it was pointed out in the exploration this country had chances of success only under the condition of ruling elite relief and changes in economic policy.  Kazakhstan scenario involved use of economic crisis factor for starting authoritarian type modernization and for “from above” reform carrying by a strong national regime. 

Such countries as Georgia, Kirghizia, and Moldova were defined as “weak links” in the early of 2008. Global expertise demonstrated that time that economic crisis in Kirghizia is accompanied with power weakness. This mix is highly explosive. Crisis in this Central Asian republic was worsen with such factors as low efficiency of governmental anti-crisis arrangements, weak state management, corruption, dependence of many households incomes on salaries earned by relatives in foreign countries. It was expected a comeback of a big number guest workers, who were employed in Kazakhstan and Russia. It became a reality later. Primary resources for Kyrgyzstan to surmount the crisis were named external borrowings and financial aid of RF.

Plumping majority of respondents named Asia including Middle East as a flash point of both regional and global conflicts within the recent exploration of the Foundation “Post-Crisis World Institute” – “Models of Post-Crisis Development: Global War or New Consensus", in which took part 247 leading experts from 53 countries. This region in accordance with opinion of survey participants bears maximal concentration of potentially conflict problems and conflict collisions.

Overwhelming majority of experts supposes that ere long after the current crisis a new crisis will follow to be much more destructive and deep. It will be stipulated by diseases of existing today system of interrelations. The detonator of the coming crisis in accordance with opinion of expert majority will be lack of governmental regulation, inability of modern national state to cope with present economic processes. Correspondingly experts answered the question regarding three lessons of the crisis practically with a single heart: government, government, government.

At the same time a recipe of national governmental attendance in the economy has a generic character: for every separate state should be elaborated its own complex of strategies or its own pattern of further development.

In accordance with global expertise predictions we are entering perennial crisis cycle of governments and increment of geopolitical contradictions in the world. If the economic crisis caused a political crisis in Greece, it has led to mutiny in Kyrgyzstan. The country stands at the edge of state disintegration and a civil war. Consequences of downfall of Kirghizia won’t be local ones. Alike that the crisis of Greece became a performance test for European Union build, downfall of Kirgiz government could generate vigorous international instability flashpoint, which will affect not only neighbor  states.  “Afghanization” of Kirghizia will have tragic consequences for the whole Central-Asian region.

It’s impossible to save Kirghizia with one-time loans. It is necessary today a coordinated large-scale program of international aid like Marshall Plan. The Post-Crisis World Institute appeals to governments of all interested states with a proposal to develop common economic aid plan. Russia, Kazakhstan, USA and China could compose a pool of strategic donors for Kirghizia.

Primary task for Kirghizia is developing of internal market for expense of national industry extension in cooperation with the nearest neighbors.  Expenditure of international aid should be aimed at of hundred thousand domestic job creations.

Akayev and Bakiyev opened Kirghizia for foreign commodities and virtually closed in for investments.  National production collapsed as a result.  New policy is needed for economic revival: barrier for access of foreign commodities and opening the country for foreign investments.

In accordance with Post-Crisis World Institute experts opinion the first step aimed at revival of national production in Kirghizia should become joining of Kirghizia to Custom Union of Russia, Belorussia and Kazakhstan. The second step is a land reform, which should stipulate nationalization and establishing of governmental fund of agricultural lands. Every Kirghiz citizen who can and wants to work should be vested with land parcel and pasture. Land reform should presuppose micro lending program as well as a state program of agricultural machinery leasing.  Only wide-scale land reform and farming development at copyholds (with successive buy-out right) in coming year or two is able to lead the country away from social collapse.

Under circumstances of sharpening global competition development of national production is becoming a factor of a country survival. Development of national production means independence for Kirghizia.

Post-Crisis World Institute