U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

95–207 2015

INSTABILITY IN KYRGYZSTAN: THE 

INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND 

COOPERATION IN EUROPE: 

U.S. HELSINKI COMMISSION 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JULY 27, 2010 

Printed for the use of the 

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe 

( 

Available via http://www.csce.gov 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(II) 

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS 

SENATE HOUSE 

BENJAMIN CARDIN, Maryland, 

Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER DODD, Connecticut 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

ROGER WICKER, Mississippi 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

ALCEE HASTINGS, Florida, 

Co-Chairman 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts 

LOUISE MCINTOSH SLAUGHTER, 

New York 

MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

JOSEPH PITTS, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT ADERHOLT, Alabama 

DARRELL ISSA, California 

EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS 

MICHAEL POSNER, Department of State 

ALEXANDER VERSHBOW, Department of Commerce 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(III) 

INSTABILITY IN KYRGYZSTAN: THE 

INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE 

JULY 27, 2010 

MEMBERS 

Page 

Hon. Alcee Hastings, Co-Chairman, Commission on Security 

and Cooperation in Europe ..................................................... 1 

Hon. Joseph R. Pitts, Commissioner, Commission on Security 

and Cooperation in Europe ..................................................... 2 

WITNESSES 

Robert O. Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and 

Central Asia, U.S. Department of State ................................ 3 

Arslan Anarbaev, Charge ́ D’Affaires, Embassy of the Kyrgyz 

Republic .................................................................................... 12 

Martha Olcott, Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for 

International Peace ................................................................. 15 

Bakyt Beshimov, Visiting Scholar, Massachusetts Institute 

of Technology ........................................................................... 16 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

INSTABILITY IN KYRGYZSTAN: 

THE INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE 

JULY 27, 2010 

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE, 

Washington, DC. 

The hearing was held from 2:30 to 3:39 p.m. EST, 210 Cannon 

Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon. Alcee Hastings, Co-Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, presiding. 

Members present: Hon. Alcee Hastings, Co-Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe and Hon. Joseph R. 

Pitts, Commissioner, Commission on Security and Cooperation in 

Europe. 

Witnesses present: Robert O. Blake, Assistant Secretary of State 

for South and Central Asia, U.S. Department of State, Arslan 

Anarbaev, Charge ́ D’Affaires, Embassy of the Kyrgyz Republic, 

Martha Olcott, Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Bakyt Beshimov, Visiting Scholar, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 

HON. ALCEE HASTINGS, CO-CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON 

SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Pitts, thank you very much for being here. I’d 

like to open our hearing. Welcome to the hearing on Kyrgyzstan. 

The country has been much in the headlines since the bloody uprising that brought down a president in April. In June, ethnic clashes 

in the south drew sad headlines all over the world. Apart from analyzing the causes of these events, this hearing is proposed to examine the prospects for better news in the future for Kyrgyzstan. 

I’ve been to Kyrgyzstan several times and, considering how much 

promise the country held in the ’90s, its arc since then has been 

marked by disappointment. In Central Asia, Kyrgyzstan had the 

most highly developed civil society and seemed headed for democratic development. 

But corrupt authoritarian rule, sadly typical of many states 

around the world and some of the post-Soviet states, led to clashes 

between the authorities and a civil society willing to defend its 

freedoms and prerogatives. The ’05 Tulip Revolution that led to the 

ouster of former President Akayev brought no relief. The tenure of 

his successor, President Bakiyev, was marked by centralization of 

power and even worse corruption, flagrant human rights violations 

and the criminalization of politics. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

When demonstrations finally rose up against the regime in April 

of 2010, they were met by gunfire. Dozens died, ushering in a 

bloody beginning to a new chapter in Kyrgyzstan’s post-Soviet history. The interim government which came to power after President 

Bakiyev’s flight knew firsthand the defects of top-down presidential 

rule. They decided to create a parliamentary system with checks 

and balances and announced plans to hold a referendum on constitutional changes along these lines. 

However, on June 10, there was an outbreak of savage violence 

in several southern cities between Kyrgyz and Uzbeks. In the worst 

interethnic bloodshed in decades. There are witnesses here who 

may give us a better idea as to how many people were killed or 

sometimes butchered, even, in the most horrific manner. And about 

100,000 people fled to Uzbekistan, while 400,000 in all were displaced. 

Nevertheless, the referendum went ahead on June 27, passing by 

wide margins, according to official tallies. As a result, Kyrgyzstan 

is going from a presidential to a parliamentary republic. The head 

of the interim caretaker government, Roza Otunbayeva, who was 

ambassador to Washington in the early ’90s, is now the president 

for a transitional period, until 2012. 

Mr. Secretary, I might add, she came to one of our OSCE Parliamentary Assembly meetings before these matters reached their 

head and was appealing tremendously to us to try and take action. 

It was interesting to know how much energy she put in it. And it 

gives me hope that the OSCE may be able to play a substantial 

role. 

Today, thankfully, the situation seemingly is more stable, but 

where we go from here is uncertain. Kyrgyzstan is the only country 

in the region to shift the balance of power to its parliament and 

how the experiment will fare is difficult to predict. But we, at least, 

are well-acquainted with the problems that centralized and corrupt 

presidential rule has produced. Equally unclear is how well the 

country will manage to reconcile its citizens of diverse nationalities, 

which will be critical if long-term stability is to be achieved. 

Our witnesses are superbly qualified to help elucidate the situation for us. But before turning to them, I would invite my fellow 

present panelists and my cosponsor of this resolution with reference to Kyrgyzstan—Congressman Pitts, to have any remarks he 

might wish to make. 

HON. JOSEPH R. PITTS, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON 

SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Mr. PITTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your attentiveness, your leadership in regard to this matter and others, as 

far as the rule of law and promotion of democracy and freedoms all 

around the world. Thank you for holding this important hearing on 

Kyrgyzstan. As you all know, Kyrgyzstan’s interim government recently deposed the autocratic government of President Bakiyev. 

The interim government drafted a new constitution, shifting the 

balance of power in the nation from a centralized executive authority to its parliament. And this transition would make Kyrgyzstan 

the only country in the region to do so. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

On June 27, Kyrgyzstan’s authorities succeeded in creating the 

necessary environment for the conduct of a peaceful constitutional 

referendum. And I’m optimistic that the caretaker government will 

build on this foundation to ensure that parliamentary elections, 

planned for October, are conducted in full accordance with international standards. 

These important steps—and I recently introduced a resolution 

with Chairman Hastings and Congressman Smith supporting the 

government reforms, while calling on the OSCE to continue its assistance in the region. It is my hope that the new constitutional 

order will provide greater freedom, democracy and human rights in 

Kyrgyzstan. However, I am very concerned about the ethnic tensions and the violence that has occurred in the southern portion of 

the country. 

The outbreak of violence forced thousands of people to flee their 

homes. Several hundred or thousands were killed. Tragic ethnic 

hostility has threatened the livelihoods and safety of thousands of 

people. And the interim government has yet to fully extend its authority in the south and build the capacity that is needed to address the underlying social, political and economic tensions in that 

region. 

The government must bring to justice those who took part in the 

recent violence and ensure that its military and police do not commit abuses. It must be steadfast in prosecuting those who committed these crimes. And the Kyrgyzstan government must offer 

equal protection under the law for all of its citizens. The OSCE has 

agreed to provide a policy advisory group to Kyrgyzstan, with the 

purpose of building trust among the people in the south. 

And it is my profound hope they are successful and prudent in 

their actions. I look forward to hearing our witnesses today. Again, 

thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership and for scheduling 

this hearing. I thank all of those who’ve come for being here and 

I yield back. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Congressman. We’ll start 

now with Assistant Secretary Robert O. Blake, who is the assistant 

secretary for South and Central Asian affairs. 

And ladies and gentlemen, to allow any of you that have an interest in the full biographies—it’s not that he does not have a full 

one. Without me reading it into the record, it will be submitted. 

And at our desk outside are the biographies of the secretary, as 

well as the other fine witnesses we have here today. Mr. Secretary, 

the floor is yours. 

ROBERT O. BLAKE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR 

SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. BLAKE. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Pitts, thank you very 

much for your invitation here today. And thank you very much for 

your leadership in organizing this hearing today. 

Last week, I had the opportunity to visit Bishkek and visit Osh 

in Southern Kyrgyzstan on July 18 to 19, so I’m very pleased to 

be here today to give you the administration’s fresh perspective on 

events in Kyrgyzstan. 

Again, I want to thank you and the committee members for your 

interest and for your continued engagement on U.S. policy in CenVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:58 Jul 25, 2015 Jkt 095207 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A207.XXX A207

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

tral Asia. The Helsinki Commission has demonstrated exemplary 

leadership and bipartisan cooperation in helping us to forge a 

strong and sustained partnership between the United States and 

the five countries of Central Asia. 

Mr. Chairman, Central Asia is a region of significant importance 

to U.S. national interests. Recognizing the uniqueness of each of 

the five Central Asian nations and their sovereignty and independence, U.S. policy supports the development of fully sovereign, stable, democratic nations, integrated into the world economy and cooperating with one another, with the United States and our partners to advance regional security and stability. 

We are not in any competition with any country over influence 

in Central Asia. We seek to maintain mature bilateral relations 

with each country based on our foreign policy goals and each country’s specific characteristics and dynamics. With regard to 

Kyrgyzstan, our primary foreign policy interest is to facilitate its 

development as a stable, democratic state that respects the rights 

of its citizens. 

Kyrgyzstan is also a significant contributor to security in Afghanistan, by hosting the Manas Transit Center, through which nearly 

all U.S. troops enter and leave the theater. Maintaining the Manas 

Transit Center is an important national security priority for the 

United States, but that center can only be maintained if 

Kyrgyzstan itself is stable and a reliable partner and we ourselves 

are totally transparent in the functioning of that center. The center 

is an important part of our partnership, but our focus has been and 

remains developing our overall political, economic and security relationship. 

Mr. Chairman, as you know and as you said, in April of this 

year, a popular uprising overthrew President Bakiyev and brought 

to power a provisional government headed by Roza Otunbayeva, an 

experienced diplomat and consensus-builder. As you both noted, 

clashes between ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbeks in Southern Kyrgyzstan 

from June 10 to June 14 tested the provisional government. The violence killed an estimated 350 people and displaced about 400,000, 

with approximately 100,000 of those going to neighboring Uzbekistan. The security situation has since generally stabilized, although tensions still remain in the south. 

Humanitarian organizations are currently transitioning from 

emergency relief to recovery, reconstruction and reconciliation. Of 

the 100,000 ethnic Uzbeks who fled to neighboring Uzbekistan, virtually all returned to Kyrgyzstan within two weeks. On June 27, 

the citizens of the Kyrgyz Republic overwhelmingly voted to adopt 

a new constitution in a national referendum and affirmed Roza 

Otunbayeva as president for the transitional period, until December of 2011. And she was inaugurated on July 3. 

While we are encouraged that there has not been a recurrence 

of violence since June, President Otunbayeva and the provisional 

government face daunting challenges. Fear and tension remain, especially among ethnic Uzbeks in the south. 

In Uzbekistan’s displaced persons’ camps, although there were no 

reports of force to promote returns, reports of psychological pressure, monetary incentives, threats of loss of citizenship, coercion 

and/or encouragement to participate in the June 27 referendum 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

and concerns about family members who remained in Kyrgyzstan 

all may have factored into the rapid repatriation of those who were 

displaced. 

Most of the estimated 75,000 persons who remain displaced in 

Kyrgyzstan and those who returned from Uzbekistan currently reside with host families. Others are squatting in abandoned buildings or camping on the sites of their destroyed homes. An estimated 1,850 homes were burned or otherwise destroyed in Osh and 

Jalalabad. An undetermined number of homes are reported to be 

damaged and will need repair before they can be inhabited again. 

Mr. Chairman, many ethnic Uzbek businesses in the south remain closed and some Uzbeks are unable to return to work while 

remaining with host families and in community shelters. Some, 

confronting the destruction of fields and crops, anticipate food insecurity in the fall and winter. 

Reports that the Kyrgyz government intends to expropriate property in destroyed Uzbek neighborhoods as part of an urban-renewal 

effort—replacing traditional houses organized into ethnic neighborhoods with modern apartments for ethnically mixed communities— 

are feeding fears of disenfranchisement and possible renewed violence. 

The United States supports a number of steps that we believe 

should be taken to promote reconciliation. Right now, our principal 

focus is on providing humanitarian assistance to all those who 

were displaced by the violence. We need to make sure that the people have the ability to return to their homes, to have shelter for 

the winter, to help schools reopen and to meet near-term needs. 

As always in such humanitarian emergencies around the world, 

the United States has been one of the leading donors, committing 

up to $48 million thus far to help the people of Kyrgyzstan. This 

aid is in addition to normal foreign aid levels, which will continue 

as planned. We’ve also been working with Kyrgyzstan’s neighbors 

and the international community to support a high-level international donors’ conference, which took place today in Bishkek. 

As a second step going forward, we believe that security must be 

boosted to prevent future violence. The United States welcomes the 

decision by the OSCE during the recent informal meeting in 

Kazakhstan to agree to a police advisory group that will be deployed to Kyrgyzstan to support the efforts of the authorities to reduce interethnic tensions, restore public order and increase police 

capacities. 

The OSCE and Kyrgyzstan concluded that the group would comprise 52 police officers, with a possibility of sending an additional 

50 officers at a later stage. The group would be in Kyrgyzstan for 

four months, with a possibility to extend as needed. We hope the 

government of Kyrgyzstan and the OSCE can work together to ensure that this force is deployed as soon as possible. 

A third step to ensure reconciliation is that the local Kyrgyzstan 

law enforcement and judicial institutions must be reliable and 

credible and have the confidence of the local people. The security 

services in Kyrgyzstan must fulfill their responsibilities in a professional and accountable manner so that they can win the confidence 

of all of Kyrgyzstan’s communities. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

In Osh, I heard many disturbing reports of arrests of human 

rights activists, arrests of Uzbek community leaders and reports of 

torture and other abuses while in custody. I also heard complaints 

that the mayor of Osh does not act in a balanced manner and that 

he is pursuing a nationalist agenda. I shared these concerns with 

government officials and urged that they be addressed on an urgent basis. The United States is prepared to work with the government of Kyrgyzstan to deal with the challenges of strengthening 

the professionalization and accountability of the police. 

A fourth and very important step for achieving reconciliation is 

that there needs to be a serious investigation launched into the 

causes of the violence in June, both to help understand how to prevent fresh outbreaks of violence, but also to ensure accountability 

for those who were responsible. A number of factors likely contributed to the violence, but what is important is to have a systematic 

and credible inquiry into what those factors were. 

The United States welcomes President Otunbayeva’s decision to 

establish a national commission of investigation, as well as her decision to ask Finnish parliamentarian and vice president of the 

OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, Kimmo Kiljunen, to constitute an 

international investigation with the support of the U.N., the OSCE 

and Nobel Prize winner Martti Ahtisaari that will complement the 

national investigation in Kyrgyzstan. 

Finally, one of our top priorities is to help Kyrgyzstan establish 

democracy. Part of the U.S. assistance package to Kyrgyzstan includes funding to support free and fair parliamentary elections in 

October. 

The U.S. will provide assistance for central election committee 

capacity-building, local election officials’ training, civil society support, elections outreach, journalist training, media monitoring and 

coverage, voter-list review, public information campaigns, election 

observation by domestic and international observers, parallel vote 

tabulation, dispute-resolution training and assistance and voter 

education. We are also providing long-term support to strengthen 

democratic governance, reconciliation, civil society, independent 

media and human rights. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, the United States has a strong commitment to Kyrgyzstan. We and the international community want 

to work with the provisional government and with the people of 

Kyrgyzstan to help the nation establish democracy, provide assistance to all those who were affected by the recent violence and encourage reconciliation to assist the country’s stabilization. 

While we recognize that the situation remains very fragile and 

that there are real risks, we remain hopeful that with the goodwill 

and sustained efforts of all, including in the United States and the 

international community, the people of Kyrgyzstan can chart out 

for themselves a more hopeful, democratic and stable future. 

Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your leadership 

today in hosting this hearing and I’d be glad to take any questions 

that you have. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I’d like to 

begin questioning with my colleague, Congressman Pitts. 

Mr. PITTS. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, 

Mr. Secretary, for your statement. A couple of questions: Relatives 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

of both the previous Kyrgyz presidents were notorious for getting 

rich off of our base in Manas. How can we help President 

Otunbayeva to prevent the same thing from happening again? 

Mr. BLAKE. Thank you very much, Congressman, for that question. We are in the process now of renegotiating those contracts at 

the transit center in Manas. The Department of Defense has competitively rebid the Manas fuel contract. And we want to ensure 

that whatever contract is finally agreed on will be done in a very 

transparent and reliable manner. 

And one of the things that we’ve done is that we’ve posted on our 

embassy’s website in Bishkek information about our assistance but 

also about these fuel contracts so that there can be maximum 

transparency and so that we can, again, encourage the same from 

our friends in the government. 

Mr. PITTS. Parliamentary elections are scheduled for October. It 

is critical that these elections be, and be seen as, free and fair. 

What can the OSCE and the United States government do to help 

ensure that they are free and fair? 

Mr. BLAKE. Let me say, there are a number of things that I think 

we and the OSCE can do. First of all, with respect to the OSCE, 

the OSCE, as I said, is going to plan to deploy a police advisory 

group. We are hoping that that can be done by early September. 

And then there’s an option to deploy more if they feel that those 

would be necessary. 

I think that will help a lot to encourage, first, a more accountable 

police force, particularly in the south where it’s going to be needed, 

and that will help voter turnout out there. The OSCE is also 

beefing up its own presence in Bishkek, where I think they have 

already played a very, very helpful role. And our embassy and the 

EU and others are working very closely with the OSCE, so we welcome that. 

In terms of the elections themselves, of the $48 million that the 

United States is providing now, about 5 million of that will be for 

democracy. And a significant portion of that money will be to support free and fair elections in October. I ran through in my statement some of the things that we’re going to be doing to help ensure 

that. 

But in that regard, we’ll be working very closely with the OSCE 

and also with the U.N. and with the European Union, all of whom 

also plan to take very important and aggressive roles in this. 

Mr. PITTS. Now, various groups, including some government officials, have been protesting about the police advisory group sent in 

by OSCE. Will the police advisors be involved in training those police in the southern part of the country? Will they be involved in 

anticorruption training? What will be the extent of some of the 

training? 

Mr. BLAKE. Congressman Pitts, their mission is advising and 

monitoring. So they will basically be partnering with the police 

down in the south primarily, in Osh and Jalalabad, to go out on 

their patrols with them and, again, to mentor them as they go 

about their business. And hopefully, again, to provide some visible 

international presence down there, which we hope will, again, provide some confidence for the local communities but also help to prevent future violence. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

Mr. PITTS. Could these police face security problems of their 

own? 

Mr. BLAKE. They could. I mean, of course, they will be with the 

local police who themselves will be armed. So I think that, by itself, 

will ensure a measure of security for them. 

Mr. PITTS. Finally, how have the neighbors of Kyrgyzstan responded to the events since April? Is anything similar possible in 

other Central Asian countries? What’s your take on progress? 

Mr. BLAKE. Well, let me take those in order. I think first, with 

respect to Uzbekistan, Uzbekistan behaved with great restraint 

and also, we think, very admirably. They were very quick to accept 

the 100,000 or so refugees that came streaming across from Osh 

and Jalalabad. They worked very cooperatively with the UNHCR, 

the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, which hasn’t been in 

Uzbekistan since 2005. So they allowed UNHCR in, worked very 

cooperatively with them to establish camps for all of those who 

were displaced. 

About a month ago I had a chance to visit those camps. And I 

must say, I was very impressed with what they had done in a very 

short time to accommodate those refugees. As I said in my statement that most of those went back in about two weeks. But when 

we met with members of the provisional government and President 

Otunbayeva last week, they were all very complimentary of the ongoing good communication that they have with the government of 

Uzbekistan. 

Mr. PITTS. What about the Kazakhstani chairmanship? How 

have they responded? 

Mr. BLAKE. Again, in their capacity as the OSCE chairman-inoffice, I think also Kazakhstan has played an important role. You 

know, again, they also were quick to help to respond to the April 

crisis and to help mobilize the OSCE as quickly as possible. 

They have also been supportive of the police advisory group. It 

was during the ministerial that they hosted in Almaty that the 

ministerial approved that police advisory group. And I think their 

behind-the-scenes efforts to get that done were important. 

But we’re going to need to continue to see Kazakhstan’s leadership on this because I think, as you say, there are still many, many 

challenges to be faced here. We may need to deploy more of that 

police advisory group in which case that would have to be a decision that would be approved by the permanent council of the 

OSCE. Again, we’ll need Kazakhstan’s support for that. 

And I think we’ll need their support for keeping their own borders open. One of the things I heard when I was in Osh is that 

they want to be sure that as the agricultural harvests come in, that 

they will be able to export both to Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, 

both of which are important markets for them. 

Mr. PITTS. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Congressman. Mr. Secretary, I have several questions, but I’m fearful about votes. And 

I’m going to truncate my requests and submit to you for you to follow up several written questions. I want to have an opportunity to, 

at the very least, have Congressman Pitts and I hear the other important witnesses here as well. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

But I would ask about other actors. It is easy for you and for us 

here as policymakers to point to various countries and NGOs and 

subsets of groups. But during your entire testimony, I didn’t hear 

the United Nations mentioned. And I did hear a reference, a positive one, to the European Union. 

I also did not hear—and believe—that India has a role to play. 

We, of course, have a base there, as does Russia. And we have tried 

to describe our efforts with Russia as some kind of pragmatic undertaking. And yet we know that this is a post-Soviet country and 

that Russia has played, for lack of a better expression—and I’m always careful when I speak about Russia but I can’t help but believe, knowing what I do in Central Asia, that a portion of the role 

that they have played, by some, has been manipulative. And toward that end, it gives us a difficult picture and I’m just curious 

who is trying to coordinate the efforts. 

If I could turn to another part of the world: Everyone in this 

room suffered in their hearts with the earthquake in Haiti. And the 

world responded in many respects by offering assistance. But as we 

speak today, there is a concomitant hearing going on that I can’t 

participate in that I can assure you is going to identify that on the 

ground, those coordinated efforts are lacking and that the people 

are not receiving the benefits from the world’s outpouring. 

I daresay you could go through this United States Congress and 

get past the Helsinki Commission and the foreign affairs committee 

and couldn’t find a hundred members that could point to 

Kyrgyzstan on the map. It seems so far away from us and yet so 

near and yet so critical with reference to Afghanistan. And yet, 

clearly, an interest area that is vital to us all. 

I would underscore what Congressman Pitts pointed out to you 

as a key role that should be played by the Kazakh chair-in-office. 

It’s not as if Kyrgyzstan is not in their backdoor. And I also called 

for and would urge you in your capacity in Central Asia with my 

limited experience in the area, the one thing that I found is a lack 

of regional cooperation coming about largely because people haven’t 

asked them. 

We haven’t asked—us I’m talking about, not you—but we haven’t 

asked President Karimov what his real thoughts are with reference 

to how we handle this matter. The same would be for Nazarbayev 

or we hear from his chair-in-office, the foreign secretary—or foreign 

minister/secretary Saudabayev. 

But this is a difficult problem. And here we have—I’m talking 

the United States now—an opportunity to really assist—no matter 

how it came about, whether people agree with the referendum, disagree with the referendum—the referendum at least speaks to 

where we come from in terms of our values with reference to a democracy. 

And for a post-Soviet country to, whatever the motive, pass a 

measure that will allow for the development of a parliament that 

would control and not an autocracy, I think is complimentary. 

Never mind the motives. I get past that and get to what we ought 

to be doing to try to undergird what has happened at this point, 

recognizing all of the dangers. 

Mr. BLAKE. Well, that’s a terrific question. There are several 

questions in there. Let me try to answer them. First of all, with 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

respect to the U.N. role. If I didn’t mention the U.N., that was an 

oversight because the U.N., I think, has been playing quite a helpful coordination role. They’ve activated what they call their cluster 

system. 

And when I was in Bishkek, I had several meetings where we 

met with the U.N., the U.N. resident representative, the head of 

the OSCE, the head of the EU there and many of the key donors. 

And they meet on at least a weekly basis and are very closely coordinated. The Kazakh ambassador is part of that, as is the Russian ambassador and the Kazakh chairman-in-office special ambassador also comes in very frequently. 

So I think there’s very good coordination now in the international 

community on this matter. And we intend to keep that up and, if 

anything, enhance it now because we’ve just had this very important donor’s meeting today, which quite a large amount of money 

was pledged. 

You’re recalling from your Haiti experience again. So I think 

we’ll need to make sure that we remain very tightly knitted up and 

that we’re not duplicating each other’s efforts. And we intend to do 

that. 

With respect to the Russian role, let me just say that, again, I 

think that we have all been very pleased with the good coordination that we’ve had with the Russians at many different levels, 

starting with the president and President Medvedev, but also in 

Bishkek, here in Washington, in Moscow—in many, many different 

areas. 

And again, we’ve really made an effort to try to work with the 

Russians and I think the Russians have been very supportive. They 

have supported this decision to send a police advisory group. They 

have supported beefing up the OSCE presence. So again, I think 

the Russians have played, on the whole, a very constructive role. 

And we welcome that and we’re going to continue to work closely 

with them. 

One of the areas that we have talked about working is the 

United States perhaps helping to establish a more accountable and 

effective police force. And so that’s something the United States is 

going to work on and we’ve sort of taken that on as something that 

we’re looking at how we might be able to help in that respect. I 

think the Russians are going to do something slightly different, 

perhaps helping with some of the border security issues because 

they’ve got a lot of expertise in that area. 

And there’s, I think, particular concern about the southern border with Tajikistan and the possibility that some militants from Afghanistan might try to come up through that border to try to exploit the situation in Kyrgyzstan. So again, I think Russian cooperation on that would be very welcome and would help the 

Kyrgyz a lot. 

With respect to democracy, I just couldn’t agree with you more, 

Mr. Chairman. I think we have a unique opportunity now to establish a parliamentary democracy in this country and to really bring 

the rule of law and something quite special and unique in this part 

of the world. And that’s why we’re putting considerable taxpayers’ 

money into this because we think this is really a significant opporVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:58 Jul 25, 2015 Jkt 095207 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A207.XXX A207

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

tunity. And again, we’re working very closely with the U.N., with 

the EU and with other donors to make sure that happens. 

Lastly, just let me say with respect to the U.N.—that the U.N., 

I think, is going to play an important role in this investigation that 

I talked about. There’s both the domestic investigation that will go 

on and then there’ll be an international investigation that will complement it, led by Mr. Kiljunen. And he has decided to draw upon 

the very considerable resources of the U.N. High Commissioner for 

Human Rights. So again, I think there’ll be an important U.N. role 

there and they bring a lot of expertise to bear, as you know, on 

these issues. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Right. All of these things come around. I was just 

told by the staff director that Jan Kubis is the special envoy, who 

used to be the secretary general of the Organization for Security 

and Cooperation in Europe. And of course, Kimmo Kiljunen has 

played a significant role. Mr. Pitts and I know him. I know Kubis 

extremely well. But that’s another thing that I would urge the 

State Department to not ignore. 

I appreciate your compliments to the Helsinki Commission. The 

staff here does an extraordinary job on staying on top of things 

around the sphere of the Helsinki groups. And please don’t ignore 

us as a source of assistance as you move around. 

I had the good fortune of working very actively on the same desk 

that you hold now through several of the crises. And I think that 

then-assistant secretaries will tell you that from time to time, I 

may have had a helpful hand. And I don’t mean that with any suggestion that I hold any keys, but sometimes, it’s good to hear other 

voices—I can’t help but say to you that I think had I been listened 

to, we would be in a different position with Uzbekistan today. I try. 

And I’ll try again—and again and again—on behalf of our great 

country. 

Toward that end, Mr. Secretary, I thank you. Mr. Pitts, do you 

have any additional questions? I thank you so very much— 

Mr. BLAKE. Could I just make one comment about the Helsinki 

Commission because again, I really want to thank you for your engagement—your personal engagement, Mr. Chairman. It really 

does make a difference. And believe me, we take very seriously 

your advice. And the fact that you are interested and are very 

knowledgeable makes a big impact on these five countries that 

we’re dealing with. 

You may know, Mr. Chairman, that we just had our annual bilateral consultations with Turkmenistan about a month ago. And 

I was very happy to have one of your staff, Janice Helwig, along 

with us as a member of our delegation. So I hope we can do that 

in the future because that was very helpful. And it sort of underscores, I think, the bipartisan support for many of the themes that 

you stress every day in what you do. And I really appreciate that 

so I just wanted to say that. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you so very much, Mr. Secretary. It is 

deeply appreciated. All right, if our next panel would come forward—Mr. Anarbaev, Dr. Olcott and Dr. Beshimov—I would appreciate it. 

Okay, if we can just hear from Mr. Anarbaev first, then. Mr. 

Anarbaev is the charge ́ d’affaires of the Embassy of the Kyrgyz ReVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:58 Jul 25, 2015 Jkt 095207 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A207.XXX A207

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

public, and we’re deeply interested in what you have to say, sir, 

please. 

ARSLAN ANARBAEV, CHARGE ́ D’AFFAIRES, EMBASSY OF THE 

KYRGYZ REPUBLIC 

Mr. ANARBAEV. So Mr. Chair, let me first advise you in a very 

brief way about the current political and social situation in the 

country, and give a short description of my government’s proactive 

measures to keep my country in peace and stability. 

So the current situation is getting more and more stable but still 

remains fragile and shaky due to some objective potential destabilizing factors. We still have concerns about interethnic tension 

and distrust as well as persisting feelings of revenge and anger in 

consciousness of those who’ve suffered heavily from bloody events. 

According to the updated information we just received today coming from the ministry of public health, as of today, death loss 

reached 355; non-identified dead bodies, 184; and about 50 people 

are still missing. The total number of wounded people stands for 

about 1,080. About 2,000 residential houses were burnt and destroyed. 

Anyway, so far, Kyrgyz government has practical control over the 

territory of the whole country. Mr. Chair, I’d like to highlight some 

points indicating where we are today and what our government is 

going to do for the next three months until we elect a new parliament next October the 10th. 

As you well know, we successfully held the referendum on new 

constitution, which is actually a good start for further steps in creation of all legitimate institutions. At this stage, we have a legitimate president of Kyrgyzstan for the transitional period as well as 

the so-called technical government that would act as executive 

power until we formulate the legitimate parliament. 

Just recently, we succeeded in approving creation of national and 

international investigation commissions on tragic events in my 

country. Both investigation teams are of great importance in terms 

of building up bases for reconciliation between the two ethnic communities. And they are also important for us to answer the main 

question: why it happened in my country, and what should be 

proactively done not to have yet another terrible, bloody tragedy 

and dangerous destabilization in Kyrgyzstan and in the region as 

a whole. 

We also succeeded in inviting OSCE special advisor police mission to assist national law enforcement bodies in conflict zones. 

This is really important for my country with respect to capacitybuilding of national law enforcement bodies and building up bases 

for reconciliation between the two ethnic communities and thus to 

secure stability and peace in my country. 

State of emergencies and curfews are still enforced in conflict 

zones, serving as impediments for would-be destabilization. Kyrgyz 

government has adopted a national program on stabilization of social, political and economical situation. According to each, a number of top-priority tasks and objectives has been identified for their 

practical implementation in the following three months. 

Today, as you might know, in Bishkek, we successfully held the 

first international high-level donor meeting to address a support 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
13 

package for Kyrgyzstan. In August, there would be yet another 

similar event in Almaty. 

My president, Roza Otubaeva, in her statement at the said highlevel donor meeting in Bishkek, highlighted the following top priorities for short and medium-term domestic sustainable development. 

First, political reforms and social development. Within this track, 

we will shortly develop and adopt national program called ‘‘back to 

democracy,’’ which will lay a good base for restoration of genuine 

democratic values in Kyrgyzstan. 

Second, conducting parliamentary elections in an open, fair and 

peaceful manner. We are committed to be effectively prepared for 

holding upcoming parliamentary elections, followed by 

legitimization of all governmental agencies and state bodies. 

Three, fight against corruption. Four, restoration of the fundamental democratic principle, the rule of law. And fifth, maintenance of competitive economy in my country. 

And finally, one of the top priorities in implementing the plan of 

proactive measures is ongoing national and international humanitarian aid activities to the local population in conflict zones with 

the focus on providing food, medical assistance and construction 

materials so that people can obtain their new residential houses before winter season comes. So we are encouraged by international 

support to restore and maintain social and economic sustainable 

development in my country. 

So it’s worth noting the role of OSCE in maintenance of stability 

in Kyrgyzstan. We do appreciate the role of OSCE in maintenance 

of stability in Kyrgyzstan. OSCE along with international community plays a crucial role in building up bases for interethnic reconciliation and further reinforcement of democracy, observance of 

human rights and the rule of law in Kyrgyzstan. With this in mind, 

we count on just recently approved OSCE decision on deployment 

of special advisory police mission in conflict zones in the south of 

Kyrgyzstan. 

We also count on international investigation commission on 

events in Osh and Jallal-Abad oblasts under the auspices of OSCE 

to investigate and identify the real causes of the said tragic events 

with appropriate recommendations for new Kyrgyz authorities for 

its further activities in terms of maintenance of national and regional security. 

As well-known OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and 

Human Rights was and remains one of the main international bodies that provides reliable and internationally approved recommendations for preparations and holding free and peaceful election campaigns in OSCE countries. Hopefully, our close cooperation 

with ODIHR as well as IFES and others will bring good results in 

our joint preparatory work for upcoming parliamentary elections in 

my country to be held next October this year. 

So I would like to make some short comments on the upcoming 

parliamentary elections. Kyrgyzstan attaches great importance to 

upcoming parliamentary elections keeping in mind that democratically elected parliament will serve as starting point for building up 

a new system of good governance in the Kyrgyz Republic. 

One of the most important issues relating to preparatory and 

conducting elections is to secure personal and public security in the 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 

country. This is a crucial precondition to successfully hold these 

really important political events. To this end, we keep on attracting 

international assistance that might be as follows: 

First, broad and timely information support for multinational 

population at large with focus on displaying vigilance to would-be 

provocations and any intentional attempts to defeat elections at 

various levels. For this, we might realize some joint projects. For 

example, it seems to be reasonable if we could manage to channel 

program translation in the form of appropriate spot advertising 

and infomercials, as well as billboards and flyers in the streets. 

Second, personal precautions for all participants for national 

election campaign. Here, we need some assistance in support of 

would-be voluntary people’s patrol in conflict zones, big cities and 

communities. 

And third, with respect to would-be additional consultative and 

technical assistance in maintaining stability and peace in conflict 

zones, I would suggest to invite a group of experts from the Office 

of OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities to come and 

make on the ground some assessment of our urgent needs and develop a good program and recommendations for Kyrgyz government 

on proactive measures for reconciliation between the two ethnic 

communities. 

Mr. Chairman, you may ask me a question: why Kyrgyzstan has 

chosen a parliamentary form of governance? This is still a very controversial matter, I should say. For Kyrgyzstan, it was actually an 

audacious step in the direction of absolutely new form of governance, full of many unpredictable implications. But we did not have 

a choice and I will try to explain you why we stand for a parliamentary republic. 

For the last 19 years of the history of my country, as a newly 

independent country after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we did 

not succeed in achieving the main goal to build up a well-balanced 

system of good governance based on democratic institutions, justice, public accountability and transparency of governmental and 

state agencies. 

Instead, we unfortunately have had bad experience with our two 

previous presidents who actually concentrated all powers in their 

own hands and gave birth to nepotism, high levels of corruption, 

poverty and unemployment. So I share the common conviction that 

a 19-year experience of our not-successive presidential form of governance has become a main reason to change our constitution. 

In conclusion, I would like once again to extend my high appreciation for the U.S. government for its generous help and support 

for my country. We are encouraged by ongoing well-coordinated 

international efforts to stabilize the current fragile situation in 

Kyrgyzstan by means of capacity-building of law enforcement bodies and other governmental agencies as well as the civil society sector. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Your Excellency, thank you for your wonderful 

presentation. Congressman Pitts and I as well as other members 

of the commission may very well submit to you questions in writing. But today, we are operating with votes coming up in just a few 

minutes. So we are going to ask our other witnesses to come forVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:58 Jul 25, 2015 Jkt 095207 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A207.XXX A207

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
15 

ward so that he and I might hear from them. And that way, you 

won’t have to answer all of the hard questions that we were going 

to ask you right now. But seriously, thank you and I thank the 

Kyrgyzstan government for your presentation, Mr. Charge. 

Mr. ANARBAEV. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you. With that in mind, if we could hear 

from Dr. Olcott and Mr. Beshimov now. And I urge you all—you 

do have written statements—to the extent that you can, if you 

would summarize them, it would help us. Mr. Pitts and I are going 

to stay through the second bell. We expect it to go off real soon. 

But after that, we have to make our way to vote. So let’s begin 

with you, Dr. Olcott, and ask you to abbreviate as best you can. 

MARTHA OLCOTT, SENIOR ASSOCIATE, CARNEGIE 

ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE 

Ms. OLCOTT. I’ll try to be very, very fast so that Dr. Beshimov 

has some time. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak 

today. And I’d just like to make some brief comments from my testimony. 

The question before us is whether developments in Kyrgyzstan 

were the product of a pent-up thirst for democracy on the part of 

the population or are they a sign of state failure? I suggest in my 

remarks that the reality lies between the two, which really creates 

a dilemma and a challenge for U.S. policymakers in order to find 

ways to try to rectify the situations without leading to state failure 

itself. 

Let me just highlight a few points having to do with the violence 

in the south, the weakness of the interim government and what the 

international community might be able to do to speak to this. 

Why the violence in the south? I think the interim government 

has been flawed in several important ways. It lacked and it continues to lack strong support from many of the prominent political 

families in the southern part of the country where Bakiyev had 

been strong and has lacked a figure that can command respect 

from the country’s disparate and relatively disorganized security 

forces. 

The events in mid-May when there was seizure of government 

buildings highlighted these problems. But unfortunately, the interim government was only able to paper over these tensions and 

competition between the Kyrgyz and Uzbek groups and within 

Kyrgyz groups rather than addresses them and failed to create a 

strong figure in the security—or, a strong response and modify the 

security structure or begin the reform of a security structure. 

The end result is well-known. And as we have heard today, in 

the aftermath of the ethnic violence, especially local groups in local 

government in Southern Kyrgyzstan have chosen to make the 

Uzbeks scapegoats for a lot of this violence, so I won’t stay on this. 

While the violence has ended, I think that the leadership, as I 

have mentioned, continues to target the Uzbeks in the south. And 

unfortunately, the national leadership has de facto consented to the 

continued situation in the south, this continuation of finding blame 

among the Uzbeks through their silence on these questions. I’ll 

come back to that at the very last minute. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
16 

Let me just pause on the referendum in the constitution briefly. 

The referendum, I think, has not solved the problems of governance 

in Kyrgyzstan. They’ve simply pushed them forward in time. The 

parliamentary government—the notion that this parliamentary 

system will succeed in providing checks and balances, I think, is 

somewhat naı ̈ve. It could well turn into a division of the spoils 

among Kyrgyzstan’s leading political figures. That really will require scrutiny on the part of the acting president and those who 

come to power. 

The competition over seats in the parliament because they will 

form the government is really going to create a real challenge for 

ODIHR. It will be critical that these elections be conducted in the 

most transparent fashion possible because of how much is at stake 

in terms of the election process itself. Whoever wins will get to try, 

at least, to form the government. 

So to me, it’s not a question of training, as Secretary Blake said. 

It’s also a question of holding the government responsible for maintaining transparent elections and to think about using conditionality of some further assistance if the government doesn’t meet the 

standards that ODIHR holds before them. 

I think, finally, I think that the challenges before the current 

leadership are really considerable. Bakiyev was ousted because the 

population was led to believe that their lives were bad because 

their leaders were corrupt. There is nothing in the future scenario 

that implies that their lives are going to improve anytime soon. The donors’ conference that was held today has promised $600 

million of assistance this year, which even if it comes forward, is 

still less than the budget deficit that the Kyrgyz government faces 

for this coming year. The problems that they’re going to face are 

really severe. 

I think that it’s impossible to expect the government now to 

begin telling the people that they have to do belt-tightening and expect hard times before the election. But I think that it’s really incumbent upon this committee, the OSCE, the U.S., more generally, 

to make sure that a reality check is held for the Kyrgyz government and that the population begin to not only learn to live better 

together in a single state inter-ethnically but that they realize that 

it’s going to be a slow recovery period; that they won’t even get to 

where they were before. 

I do think—to highlight the question of a Kazakh chairmanship), 

I think that it does give us opportunities to do more—to do even 

more with the OSCE than it’s done. And I think that especially the 

bilateral Kazakh-Kyrgyz economic commission is really important 

to serve as a way to stretch and better target the assistance money 

that’ll be coming forward. Thank you very much. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Dr. Beshimov, if you will go forward. Joe, if you 

have to go, I’ll stay another five minutes but then I’ll have to go. 

BAKYT BESHIMOV, VISITING SCHOLAR, MASSACHUSETTS 

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 

Mr. BESHIMOV. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would 

like to thank the entire Helsinki Commission and you, personally, 

for positive support of a Kyrgyzstan which today has a new chance 

and a history of the Soviet Union to succeed in democratization. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
17 

Therefore, the content of my speech is motivated with a strong 

desire to set up a prudent attitude to this situation to get rid of 

complacency and really do not miss where you need a chance to set 

up the democratic institutions. Therefore, I will focus my attention 

to very important points. The written text of my speech has been 

distributed therefore I will just mention a few. 

First of all, I would like to argue that it is essential for us all 

not to overestimate the referendum of June 23rd as a step forwards 

stability for it may not be. 

The referendum of June 23rd was a self-legitimizing initiative of 

the Interim government. It took place only a week after the ethnic 

clashes, when between 100,000 to 400,000 citizens of Kyrgyzstan— 

mostly ethnic Uzbeks—had been displaced. Instead of postponing 

the referendum to focus squarely on addressing the magnitude of 

the tragedy, the interim government used the tragedy to pressure 

citizens to approve of the referendum. Members of the interim government frequently stated, if you are for peace, vote for the referendum. 

This brazen manipulation occurred when most citizens, at least 

in the south of Kyrgyzstan, not only couldn’t vote but simply 

couldn’t make an informed decision. We know that even OSCE, 

fearing for safety, decided not to send a large observer mission, 

limiting to only 36 observers. 

Being intimately familiar with politics in Kyrgyzstan, I can assure you that in the future, some political forces in Kyrgyzstan will 

use all these conditions under which the referendum took place to 

question the validity of its results and the legitimacy of the current 

government. 

Yesterday, almost half of the influential parties who are running 

for election—they announced their disagreement with the shift to 

the parliamentarian system and they announced that they’ll urge 

the people of Kyrgyzstan to return again to a presidential system. 

And knowing this, how can anyone not only recognize the results 

of the referendum but also see it as a step toward stability? 

Of course, it’s most important for the international community 

and very respected and esteemed international organizations as the 

OSCE to support the Kyrgyz government after the referendum. It 

was the willingness to set up a positive attitude for the interim 

government. But it’s important to take into account what happened 

in our previous history. 

In June 2005, the international community rushed to congratulate President Bakiyev, who won the presidential elections in the 

aftermath of March 2005 coup that violently overthrew the previous president. Unsurprisingly, Bakiyev then used his international support to strengthen his power through fabricated parliamentarian and presidential elections in 2007 and 2009, effectively 

denigrating the country to a de facto autocracy. 

Still before, Kyrgyzstan’s first president, Askar Akaev, for years 

enjoyed the support, and almost adulation, of the international 

community, which he masterly manipulated to aggrandize his 

power and sow the seeds of pervasive instability in Kyrgyzstan. 

I would like to underline what the interim government has had 

hence on these ethnic clashes in the south because in the battle for 

power after the coup in April, they involved the ethnic Uzbek comVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:58 Jul 25, 2015 Jkt 095207 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A207.XXX A207

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
18 

munity in political struggle. And this politicization brought 

Kyrgyzstan to this tragedy. Therefore, it is important to ask kindly 

the responsibility of the provisional government and help them to 

be accountable before their citizens. 

What happened in June in the south, is a sign that despite two 

regime changes in the past five years, the nature of a ruling class 

in Kyrgyzstan remains largely unchanged: its interests, its survival 

and its enrichment remain far above the interests of its people. We 

all know that, that never leads to democracy or stability. 

It’s important for me to say about the role of external powers in 

Kyrgyzstan. Leaders of both the United States and Russia suggest 

that they are pursuing a ‘‘pragmatic partnership’’ in their relations 

over Kyrgyzstan and Central Asia as a whole. However, the reality 

on the ground suggests that Russia is using this pragmatic partnership as a smokescreen to continue and intensify its strategy of 

reestablishing Central Asia precisely as its zone of privileged interests. 

The people of Kyrgyzstan would hope that while the U.S. pursues 

a partnership with Russia and Russia manipulates it, Kyrgyzstan 

would not terminally lose its sovereignty nor suffer intractable instability for years to come. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Doctor, I most regrettably have to proceed to cast 

a vote at this time. You did provide us with your written testimony. I do have a couple of questions and I would—I’ll submit 

them to you—to you and Dr. Olcott. My deep apologies. And I’m 

fond of saying—and the staff gets tired of me hearing it—it’s hard 

to apologize for working. I’ll talk to you. Thank you. The hearing 

is closed. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
This is an official publication of the 

Commission on Security and 

Cooperation in Europe. 

★ ★ ★ 

This publication is intended to document 

developments and trends in participating 

States of the Organization for Security 

and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). 

★ ★ ★ 

All Commission publications may be freely 

reproduced, in any form, with appropriate 

credit. The Commission encourages 

the widest possible dissemination 

of its publications. 

★ ★ ★ 

http://www.csce.gov @HelsinkiComm 

The Commission’s Web site provides 

access to the latest press releases 

and reports, as well as hearings and 

briefings. Using the Commission’s electronic 

subscription service, readers are able 

to receive press releases, articles, 

and other materials by topic or countries 

of particular interest. 

Please subscribe today. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING