Russia: Friend or Foe?
It is hard to underestimate Russia’s role in helping secular Tajiks combat radical Islamic movements in Tajikistan and in providing comfort against Taleban invasion from Afghanistan. However, Russia’s latest actions (meetings in Kazakhstan/Uzbekistan and confrontations with Ukraine/ Georgia) raise a question for many Tajiks whether Russia is friend or foe in the long run.
Economic and political confrontations in the post-soviet territory may hold the answer. Ukraine has been in constant struggle with Russia over its economic/political influence where Russia had even planted its own candidate (former criminal by the way) in the past Ukrainian presidential elections. Ukraine political elite (which pursued political and economic independence from Russia and were backed by West) were victorious. However, shortly after Russia retaliated by turning off gas supplies to Europe, which was seen as “muscle flexing” to show Europe how “important” it was. Pretty much the same was going on with regards to Georgia which has been pro-west since its independence. Georgia is the only country in post-soviet territory, except Baltic countries, Russia has a visa regime with.
BBC New reports Mikhail Saakashvili (Georgian president) saying that:
[Russia suffers from] “imperial nostalgia”
and that
“political forces in Moscow actively work to undermine our economies, our sovereignty, and even our system of governance”
It is clear that among the countries that pursue independent political and economic agenda, Russia has been an obstacle rather than a support.
In light of these developments it is crucial to ask whether long-term interests of Russia are well-aligned with those of Tajikistan. The Tajik government at this point does not have enough military and political strength (however getting there one step at a time, e.g. transfer of border control to Tajik troops) to pursue a totally independent political agenda, but when the time comes this will be the main point of contention between the two countries as Russia would very much like to keep the status quo. To a degree political instability in the region benefit its interests as it provides Russia with a “role to play”. Plus CA countries have a stronger faith in Russia than in the West. But what will happen when things get better down the road and when CA countries want to pursue independent economic/social and political agendas?
on May 6th, 2006 at 4:42 am
Perhaps more pointedly, does Tajikistan really have much of a choice? Right now, not really; dealing with superpowers is old hat for Central Asian rulers. Were I Rakhmanov, I would just keep playing the same game in foreign policy (balance everyone, anger no one - especially the Russians), and concentrate on the economy.
And that seems to be exactly what is happening.
on May 8th, 2006 at 8:01 pm
I am afraid, the intra-Tajik regional divisions are too strong to make a case for a strong national identity. worse yet there are divisions within the regions, as well as between them. national unity!? we are a long way away from it. there is too much thinking about one’s own interests going on, e.g. rampant corruption, unfortunately.
on May 9th, 2006 at 6:07 pm
James-
I think the choice is always there. The issue here is what are the (political) costs for the current government? True, economically the country has been active (again if we look at the nature of these activities, the Russian parties are omni-present). However, a quick peek into the nature of the contracts (be it shareholding of alluminum plant or the construction of Hydro-power plants) will reveal that Tajiks are being ripped off. I don’t know if that is because of GoT lack of experience or otherwise, but it seems the country is getting itself further into debt (pressured by political alliance with Russia), while perhaps other alternatives (West and China) could exist.
I think GoT mixes political agenda with an economic one here. They should not necessarily be the same. I don’t see why the country could not pursue an economic agenda that is independent of political alliances.