Subject: Re: Shakhrimardan, Sokh and Vorukh
From: Nick Megoran (nickmegoran@infotel.kg)
Date: Mon May 31 1999 - 04:52:45 EDT
Dear Bruno,
You have raised a very important issue, and one which I think is
central when considering development in the valley.
>
> If one takes a look at the map of the Ferghana region, one immediately
> notices an odd 'archipelago' of two tiny Uzbek (Shakhrimardan and Sokh)
> and one Tajik (Vorukh) enclave within South Kyrgzstan. Those always made
> me curious, as both Uzbek enclaves house far less ethnic Uzbek that
> actually live in the Osh and Dzhalal-Abad provinces of Kyrgzystan.
Shakirmardon is surrounded by tales, the most convincing is that it
was traded for areas in the north of the Ferghana valley at the time
of the formation of the current borders in 1924. Archival research
would be needed to clarify this.
Sokh is almost entirely Tajik. The border delicately divides it from
the Kyrgyz villages in the valley the territory occupies. This would
seem a sensible division in many ways, as the Tajik population has
more economically and culturally in common with the Uzbek-Tajik
population of Rishton to the north, and it is easier to reach this
area than it is to reach Tajikistan from Sokh. I don't know how this
enclave was carved out this way, but it does not at all seem an
unwise division- unless the ethnic composition was different at the
time of division, and the politicial geography has in fact moulded the
settlement patterns. Can anyone fill me in on this?
The issue of conflict is not ethnic in this areas, it is to do with
communications and access. Up until this last year border controls
were fairly minimal. If the list users will allow me to relate a
rather amusing personal anecdote, I will describe one occaison I was
travelling in the area in 1997. Our bus came to one border, and
the guard was sitting with legs up and shirt and hat off, playing
cards, smoking and drinking- he looked at our bus and, without as much as a
second glance, and waved us through! Now borders are far more tightly
controlled. The local newspapers here have been full this year of people
complaining about ill treatment, long delays, aggression and refusals
to allow entry- even the imprisonment of people. Non-CIS foreigners have had a
harder time still, but that is neither here nor there in the question
of the valley's development.
The effect has been for many people in the local area as well as
important parliamentarians in Kyrgyzstan to call for the construction
of alternative routes and the upgrading of existing ones which remain
entirely within Kyrgyz territory. If such plans get underway, they
will divert enormous resources from other much-needed development
projects.
The one positive effect of this year's developments is that the
Osh-Isfara air route has been reopened after some years of
idleness, because at times it has been impossible to get to Osh
overland. A group of people from Batken region (the furthest from Osh)
even sent a petition to president Akaev calling for Batken to be made
an independent oblast, as it was so cut off from Osh!
This is not an ethnic issue, it is related to citizenship, and its
effects will be economic. It has contributed to inflation this year,
and led to an outpouring of nationalistic rhetoric in many newspapers,
with some calls for similar responses. The Kyrgyz government has
down-played the issue, but did pass a new law providing for the
demarcation of the borders of the republic. Whilst it is not ethnic in origin,
members of ethnic minorities (who often cross the border more frequently
than majority communities) in the Valley have experienced the crisis
differently to the titular majorities, and this has in some cases
heightened senses of insecurity.
It is not worth speculating on the reasons for the crisis this year on
this list, which is not a political discussion. Suffice it to say, the
causes are centrally located in the domestic politics of the states
involved and not in an issue arising from the border areas themselves.
The important question, as I see it, is this: as the effects of the border
crisis this year could severely hinder economic growth in the valley,
how can these be ameliorated?
The crisis has occurred at the same time as the promotion of the new 'silk
route' trade partnership of China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan. This is
puzzling, as it could mean two things. Firstly, the new trade plans
may genuinely address these issues of border communication, and lead
to a fruitful forum for communication which will create real change.
The second possible interpretation is that the much-vaunted plans are
merely superficial, and nothing will come of them. Let us hope that the
first scenario is the correct one.
Nick Megoran, Osh.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a22 : Mon May 31 1999 - 04:52:45 EDT