The event was given several names.  At first they reflected the tendency of naming political upheavals by referring to the colours sported by the protestors, but the name which survived over the years in the press was “The Tulip Revolution”, reflecting the fact that this was supposed to be the time of year when tulips started to bloom.  Here in Kyrgyzstan, however, it is known as “The People’s Revolution.”

In 2007 a competition was announced for the best decorated building in Bishkek to commemorate the Holiday of Norus, and the Day of the People’s Revolution, March 24th.  The following year the Labour Code was amended and it became an official public holiday, a non-working day for Kyrgyzstan’s population.

Things were not necessarily going well, however, as many people say the Bakiev regime simply repeating the behavior and mistakes of its predecessor.  Some opposition politicians were complaining that Bakiev had “hijacked” their revolution.

Then, in 2010, two weeks after the holiday, the White House was stormed by demonstrators once more, a sitting President fled and the government fell.  In 2005 there had been much mayhem but only four lives were lost, and the deaths were all a result of the rioting that night.  In 2010, however, some 87 people were killed during the protest action, many on the steps of the White House itself.  A new, interim government was installed and prepared for a transition from a Presidential system of democracy to a Parliamentary one.  It was not an easy path and was marked by outbursts of violence in different parts of the country.

In December, the Ministry of Labour issued, as they usually did, a list of holidays for the coming year.  Some of us were intrigued to see that the Day of the People’s Revolution, (March 24th), was still on the list but there was no mention of April 7th.  How, we wondered, would people, (especially the relatives of the victims of that day’s tragic dénouement), take to the fact that the events leading to Kurmanbek Bakiev becoming President were being commemorated, but his demise was not?

One of the deputies in the newly elected Parliament began a public debate, by asking whether the holiday should be cancelled, or moved to April 7th, or if both historical events should be commemorated and declared holidays.  The results of the debate were far from conclusive.  There were strong feelings on all sides, matched equally by an attitude of “a plague on both your houses”.

Some people took the view that although the government of Bakiev had turned out to be a disappointment, the popular uprising of 2005 should not be denied recognition as a formative and decisive moment in Kyrgyzstan’s short history.  Others took the view that, simply because the 2005 revolution had led to such a disappointment, that it should not be celebrated.  A few said that they should be both be granted recognition whilst others said that neither should be.  How is it possible to “celebrate” an event that cost 87 lives?, was one telling, poignant question.

In a conference held yesterday, however, the President, (Roza Otunbaeva), said that many people had asked her to abolish the celebration of March 24, but that there are also people who asked to keep this day as a public holiday.  She said that she believes two these dates should be marked, saying:  ”If we didn’t have the  March 24 events, then society wouldn’t have matured for democratic changes.   These changes served as impetus and now we are on the path towards mature democracy.”  The idea of marking both dates was apparently supported by the Speaker, Ahmatbek Keldibekov.

It was interesting to see the analysis of the two revolutions which Roza Otunbaeva outlined in the conference.  She said that the revolution of 24 March 2005 should be valued and considered “an important benchmark on the path towards democratization of Kyrgyzstan.”  Although there are different opinions about those events, she said, everyone “should realize that Akaev’s overthrow, who “privatized power”, was a true achievement of the people.”  Both Askar Akaev and Kurmanbek Bakiev, “didn’t realize importance of a legitimate handover of power. They privatized power and turned into dictators. But the people of Kyrgyzstan can’t tolerate dictatorship.”

Central Asia didn’t have the conditions for building a democratic state, she said, pointing out that “in Europe, the struggle for democracy lasted for centuries, during which its theory and practice were shaped, whereas regionalism, clanship, nepotism, paternalist and Communist ideas dominated here.”

She went on to outline several causes that led to the revolution: the fragmentation of forces; the absence of a political system adapted to the society and the use of  ”regionalism” and “clanship” ideas for selfish goals. The use of government resources by the previous administrations had put the brake on the development of democracy, she said, but all of these issues were now being addressed  The country had passed through several stages on the path to democracy during a difficult and complex period, she commented,  adding that “the June events were the most difficult part.”

She had come to the conclusion that March 24 should remain a public holiday in Kyrgyzstan. “We should value the revolution of 24 March 2005 and consider it an important benchmark on the path towards democratization of Kyrgyzstan. We struggled not for Bakiev’s power at that time. We struggled for democracy.  … The revolution of 2005 substantially changed the situation in the country and showed the necessity of change of the society to make it equitable and democratic.”

.

I cannot say it was ever a particularly popular holiday in the past, even if there were parades and other events organized.   The fact that it comes just a few days after Norus may have detracted a little from the celebrations, (after all, you can have too much of a good thing).  This year however, the preparations suggest that it is going to be a more significant event, starting with that conference dedicated to the events of 2005 that was held yesterday.   In the main square, small crowds had already started gathering, erecting photographs, flags, bunting and other decorations in readiness for the “festivities”.

Whatever, today is a holiday … The Day of the People’s Revolution.  It will be interesting to see what form will it take next year.

.

“If those events caught everyone by surprise,” starts Claytor in his first “postcard” from the country’s capital, “then this year it was even more unexpected.  Looking back in hindsight, I suppose that we have been better prepared and foreseen the possibility of what happened taking place – but, quite frankly, we were all caught “off-guard”, especially by the speed at which everything occurred.”

Claytor’s postcards sent back to friends, family and colleagues have proved succinct observations of events on the ground as he witnessed them unfold. With the situation changing almost from moment to moment and with a great deal of uncertainty in the air as rumour and counter-rumour circulated, he attempted to record what he experienced in the heat of the moment. Others have, undoubtedly, had different experiences and reported different impressions.

“You will have seen the news items,” Claytor continues, “about what one newspaper here is calling the “Easter Revolution”. It’s my second Revolution in five years and, there is a very strong sense of déjà vu about the events.  They say that History has a habit of repeating itself and I suppose that what has happened here in Bishkek will only go to support this view.  There are some differences between what happened in March 2005 and in April 2010, but the similarities are pretty striking. Amongst those differences are the speed of the events, the effect of the internet … and the death toll, over 80 people.”

The background to the events are well documented. President Bakiev came to power as the result of the “Tulip Revolution” in 2005.  During this there was uproar and anger the population concerning authoritarianism, corruption, “empire building” and nepotism.  It all came to a head in demonstrations in the capital when the White House, (the seat of the government) was stormed by crowds of protestors.  President Akayev fled the country and the fragmented opposition found itself thrust into a position of having to try to forge a new government to fill the vacuum.  Bakiev emerged as the compromise leader and, for a time at least, hopes for improvement were high.

Things did not, however, go smoothly.  There were continuous protests over the five years of his presidency and he often made many of the same mistakes as his predecessor.  His party won parliamentary elections and he got himself re-elected to office for another five years, but there were many criticisms about the conduct of these elections, both within the country and from abroad. In addition, a particular cause of concern amongst the population were the huge hikes in the price of energy as a result of deteriorating relations with the Russian government, four or five fold in some cases, but with little or no support for the poor, who represent most of the population.

“We knew of the planned protests,” the first postcard continues, “although the opposition played their cards close to their chests, releasing little concrete information, presumably to prevent their plans from being disrupted by the authorities.  We also knew that Bakiev and his Prime Minister were strong authoritarian characters who had acted with firmness in the face of opposition.”

There is evidence that the authorities anticipated the events because there were huge transfers of funds out of the country just a few days before the trouble erupted. A number of government meetings were cancelled in advance because of news that there were to be mass demonstrations around the country, but few people anticipated the full extent of the way that events would turn out. These were not similar demonstrations to those that are continually seen in the West. No-one fully took into account the extent of the displeasure amongst the population against the regime, and their reaction to being shot at and people in the crowd being killed.

The protests actually began some before, with demonstrations against the energy price rises.  However, they erupted on Tuesday, the 6^th of April, in Talas.  Government offices were taken by the crowd, then taken back by the authorities, then seized again, and then it spread.

“The first I heard of it was when I was in a meeting on Friday evening.  One of my colleagues had received a phone call from his partners in Moscow asking what was happening.  It was all over their news reports.  He didn’t know anything about it, and the local TV stations didn’t seem to reporting it.  During the meeting, another of my colleagues took a phone call and he told us of the deaths in Talas. I left that meeting with a sense of despondency, but even at that stage I didn’t really foresee history repeating itself in the way that it did.”

“So, the following morning things continued more or less as usual. Some people had started to take precautions and several shopkeepers started to clear their shelves in the morning. There were a lot of people on the streets, but everyone seemed to be going about their usual business. ”

With this Claytor strolled off to meet a friend for lunch. Before they had finished, however, the shutters were going up and the streets began to fill, showing signs of frantic activity. Throughout that morning there had simply been no signals of what was to happen.

“We saw how the crowds were amassed around the White House; how some of the police, having tried to control the crowd, were retreating with some of them falling and being caught and beaten by the protestors; “snipers” were seen firing from the roof of the White House; the gates of the building were rammed by vehicles. We heard the news about how Bakiev had disappeared and a new, interim, government had been set up.”

Much of the action was happening in the main Ala-Too square. As darkness drew in the crowds started to roam the streets. At first they were just boisterous, but as the night progressed they began to breaking windows, firing gunshots and looting shops and offices. Some stores managed to escape damage thanks to metal shutters installed post the 2005 revolution, but the looters were resolute and exploited any weakness. All the stores in the Narodniy chain were more or less destroyed and those that managed to escape destruction on the first night were to suffer their fate the next. Claytor watched all of this unfold from his office, which he’d already taken measures to secure. “At first it was mainly food and alcohol… it was only much later that we saw signs of fridges, televisions and the like being loaded into cars.”

By this stage it had become clear that Bakiev had fled to his home in Djalal Abad, in the South of the country.  He started giving interviews and was clear that he did not want to resign, although for many it was hard to see how he could continue as President. Some foreign governments were quick to support the temporary incumbent opposition led by motherly figure, Roza Otunbaeva, others were more cautious. A Bakiev rally in the south did not gain any momentum. He continued to maintain that he was innocent of wrong doing and he laid the blame fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the “opposition”, but before long news filtered out that he had fled the country, supposedly seeking refuge in neighbouring Kazakhstan before heading to Byelorussia.

The interim government set to work with gusto, trying to present a united front. One of the biggest problems they faced was one of “legitimacy”.  Bakiev was the lawfully elected President. Even though the international community had expressed concerns over the conduct of the election, no-one declared that they considered the results to have been invalid.  Every decision the interim government made, every document they issued, every appointment they made, every signature and every stamp was open to question and dispute.

Nevertheless life slowly resumed in the capital. It had to go on.

“Banks have re-opened for business as normal … well, some banks at least, because five, that have connections with President Bakiev’s family were taken under special administration,” the postcards continue, taking a humorous break from the gravity of the situation. “Offices returned to work … well, some offices, because some were looted. Restaurants, Cafes, Bars are welcoming diners … well, some restaurants, cafes and bars.  Some are operating shorter working hours because there are fewer clients. Schools and Universities are operating as usual … although some classes are denuded as some parents have kept their children at home. Public transport has begun operating … Buses, trams, trains, (what few there are in Kyrgyzstan) and taxis were all running normally … well, there are less busses on the street because nearly thirty were completely destroyed and almost ninety suffered serious damage in the events of April 7^th. The borders are open … well, almost all of them.  Three of our four neighbours, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan), closed their borders with Kyrgyzstan pretty sharply when the disturbances started, but now only the one with Kazakhstan remains closed, although they accepted a flight with Kurmanbek Bakiev on it.”

The big “clean-up” began and the detritus remaining after the rioting and looting was cleared away within days, although the city still bears signs of the damage incurred. Meanwhile aftershocks of the revolution have seen further violence and demonstrations. For the time-being it appears as though civil war has been avoided and the Foreign Office has removed  its warning against all but essential travel to Kyrgyzstan. The uncertainty does leave a certain risk of instability returning, but the signs at present don’t appear to guarantee this.

What is going to happen? “This is perhaps the most difficult question.  The future is open to all sorts of possibilities and no-one knows what will happen, but there are many people surmising and predicting a number of possible scenarios. Some of those scenarios are positive and full of hope for a brighter future.  Others are more pessimistic, pointing to the possibility of further strife: ethnic, regional … or other.”

The new authorities are still pursuing people involved in the previous regime.  “Only a few arrests have been made, so far, but about twenty former Ministers have been questioned by the police.  As a result of arrest warrants issued here for some prominent characters, notably Bakiev’s son, Maxim, Interpol have apparently issued “red notices” so we could see an extradition attempt. Luschenko, President of Byelorussia, has once again, made it clear that he is not going to allow the extradition of Bakiev.”

In conclusion to the events that Claytor witnessed first-hand he is stoic. “It wasn’t that bad!  It was bad.  It was unpleasant.  The deaths were tragic.  On the other hand it could have much, much worse.”

“It’s hard to say that things are truly “back to normal”, how can they be “normal” after such an event, especially so soon after the event?  After the death of a loved one, the funeral, memorial service, requiem mass, etc. are all designed to help the living come to terms with their loss and get on with the rest of their lives.  Life goes on, but people have to adjust to their new, changed circumstances.  That’s what is happening here.” Either way the reaction over the next few months are critical in determining whether the events and sacrifices of the “Easter Revolution” will prove worthwhile.

They first came to us with a proposal to advertise in their magazine Discovery Central Asia… and to be honest, at that time I wasn’t very keen, especially as the content was predominantly about Uzbekistan.   The editorial team, however, were keen to expand their coverage of the rest of Central Asia, so that magazine lived up to it’s name – and we agreed to supply some materials on Kyrgyzstan.  We still continue to contribute and work closely with the editors.

The magazine was well received and so successful that it was decided to issue special, complimentary, supplements on each country – Kyrgyzstan providing the pilot which was quickly followed by other ”supplements” devoted to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.  The supplements also spun off into separate magazines – which are available in a number of outlets, (such as through hotels, airports, shops, tour companies …) at exhibitions and through embassies.  These in turn evolved into country specific, “travel guides”.

I wrote the original for the Discovery Travel Guide to Kyrgyzstan, in English, which has now been translated into German, Japanese and Russian … and a French version is in preparation.

Their latest project is a quarterly magazine called Open Central Asia.  It is published in the UK and aims to connect and highlight the links between Europe, (mainly the UK), and Central Asia.  It promotes the cultures, politics, events and communities of both regions and to open a discussion and exchange of ideas between them; to promote both business co-operation and tourism opportunities.  Currently it is distributed in 6 countries, (the UK, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan), and among over 1000 business companies through British-Uzbek and British-Kazakh Societies, American Chamber of Commerce in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Copies of the magazines are also available at several Universities, Embassies, through Airlines and other organizations in the UK related to Central Asia.  Basically it is distributed free of charge, although for individual subscriptions there is a subscription fee to cover the cost of delivery, postage and packaging.

For their first edition, they asked me to do an interview about my experiences here in Kyrgyzstan, which I was happy to agree to do.

When the Easter Revolution occurred on April 7th, Marat happened to be in Bishkek.  As it happens, I was having lunch with Marat that day when everything “happened”.

The Silk Road Media office in Bishkek didn’t fare as well as we did during the rioting and looting.  It was in one of the government buildings and was gutted.  All of their equipment, (computers, etc.) was stolen along with a lot of stock, (books and magazines etc.), and what wasn’t taken away was damaged to the extent of being unusable.

For the next issue of Open Central Asia, they decided that they needed to include some articles about what what had happened, and they asked if I would be willing to contribute one … or perhaps do an interview.  I had no problem agreeing to this and we agreed to use these postcards as a basis for the “interview”, which was going to have to be conducted by email as we are separated by something like 8000 kilometers.

I also said that I needed to make the following clarifications:

1. The postcards are my personal observations, on the spot and at a given time … the situation was changing almost from moment to moment and, although the “rate of change” has slowed down, there is still a certain amount of uncertainty in the air.  Others had different experiences and have reported different impressions … I can’t argue with their experiences and impressions, but these comments arise from what I experienced and how I judged those experiences.
2. It wasn’t that bad!  It was bad.  It was unpleasant.  The deaths were tragic.  On the other hand it could have much, much worse.  And, let’s face it, we in the West don’t have a clear history in this respect … there’s no need to go back to the likes of the Battle of Bosworth (Henry VII had one of the weakest claims to the British throne ever), or Peterloo, just in my lifetime … I don’t remember the Notting Hill Race riots, but I do remember Wood Green, Luton … Los Angeles 1968 and 1992, Kent State University (the anniversary was yesterday, May 4th) … The Anti Nazi League/National Front clashes (Blair Peach inquiry has been in the news again recently, hasn’t it), The Anti hunting Law protests … The IRA bombing campaigns, 07/07 … and so on.  They may not have led to the overthrow of a government, but they share a common history of protest … and there were a number of deaths involved in many of them.We got away with a relatively short, but “bloody”, (costly in terms of lives lost), turmoil.  It could have been much, much worse.
3. We may well be part of a “global village but, basically, it looks like it was a predominantly internal affair … protests against a national leader and his government and “cronies” … it looks to me like Kyrgyz citizens putting their own house into order, albeit “with a little help from my friends”, (to quote the Beatles).
4. It’s hard to say that things are “back to normal” … how can they be “normal” after that sort of event?, especially so soon after the event.  After the death of a loved one, the funeral, memorial service, requiem mass, etc. are all designed to help the living come to terms with their loss and get on with the rest of their lives.  Life goes on, but people have to adjust to their new, changed circumstances.  That’s what is happening here.As examples of how things are “normalising” I can point to the fact that various donor agencies have agreed to extend, and even expand, their projects in the country and that some governments, (notably, of course, the British), have downgraded their travel warnings so that they no longer advise “against all but essential travel to Kyrgyzstan”.

The situation was widely reported in the media all around the world.  Scenes of crowd disturbances, man toting guns, death and destruction were seen on television screens and Newspaper front pages from London to Sydney and from Moscow to New York.

Many people, family, friends, business partners with whom we work and clients, both former clients and people who are planning trips later this year, wrote to express their sorrow and concern about the way that things were turning out.

Here in Bishkek, we not only had to cope with the situation as events unfolded, we also had get on with our everyday lives and plan for the future as best we could.  For those in the tour industry this was not an easy task.  We already had experience, unfortunately, to help guide us in preparing ourselves for what was likely to be a difficult year, thanks to the events five years ago which led to the fall of another President and another government.  Fortunately, on that occasion few people were killed, and those deaths that did occur were not the result of “revolutionary” fervour but of the civil unrest, rioting and looting that followed the storming of the White House, the seat of government.

On that occasion there was a lot of frantic activity undertaken to help preserve the summer tourist season.  Tourism is an important part of the Kyrgyz economy.  It may account for something like just 4% of the economy, but for many people who work in the industry it is their main, if not only source of income.

As it happens, although there were tourists who cancelled their planned trips in 2005, there were equally many who did not, who waited to see how the situation would develop and when it was clear that things were settling down, they came … and, basically, their experiences did not lead them to regret their decision.  They were greeted with traditional Central Asian hospitality and there were few, if any, major incidents involving tourists whether from Kazakhstan, Russia or Uzbekistan, from Britain, France, Germany or the United States.

So, five years later, we faced a similar situation, but one in which the world had changed … a global financial crisis had already eaten into the volume of tourists traveling abroad for their holidays …  and the question arose, “What can we do to help to protect tourism in 2010?”

It’s not just our own livelihoods that we are seeking to protect.  Of course, we want to protect our businesses, that goes without question, but just as the failure of a harvest will have effects that reach far beyond the farmers whose crops did not materialize, so the failure of the tourist season will have repercussions which will  reach far beyond the tour operators and hotels who lose customers.

To be honest, I am not sure there is much that we can do that will have that much effect … the damage has already been done … but, of course, we have to see what we can do in terms of damage limitation.

One of the things we can do and to try and persuade people planning to visit Kyrgyzstan not to cancel their trip.  We can also try to reach new audiences, especially if we now have a wider audience who have at last heard of Kyrgyzstan.

Another thing we can try to do is make sure that their visit is enjoyable and memorable, (memorable, that is, for all the right reasons).  We can try to make it easier to get to the country, offer additional value and additional services.

What we can’t do at the moment is make any promises or give any guarantees about safety and security.  To those tourists who ask if we can guarantee their safety then we have to answer honestly, no … indeed, we couldn’t do so even in other years when there hadn’t been a revolution … and neither could any other destination.  Who can tell what will happen.  We’ve had tourist staying in our hotels who have been attacked on the streets at night.

One promise we can give, however, is that we will do our best to protect our clients … for example, to cancel tours in the event that the situation deteriorates and is considered too dangerous for tourists to visit.  Let’s be honest, it is NOT in our interest to bring people into an unsafe environment.  The amount of money we earn would be far outweighed by those and the goodwill that we could lose as a result of acting irresponsibly.

The members of KATO, (The Kyrgyz Association of Tour Operators), met one week after the events erupted on the streets of Bishkek to discuss the situation and plan what to do next.  As is usual at the Association’s meetings, there was much heated discussion.  Everyone has a view and wants to express it.  Sometimes, someone feels very strongly that another person’s suggestions or comments are not helpful, or just plain wrong.  It can lead to interesting and exciting meetings, or it can descend into chaos.

On this occasion we decide to hold a press conference … to address different audiences and raise several issues that need to be considered:

• the government and people of Kyrgyzstan – to stress the importance of tourism to the country and the effect of recent events on the tourist industry – and hence, indirectly, on the country as a whole; to stress that there were things that could be done to try and limit the damage which had already been done, and why it was important to do so …
• to clients and potential clients, both in the traditional market, (Kazakhstan, Russia and Uzbekistan – which provide clients for the resorts on Lake Issyk Kul), and further afield.  To stress the in the light of the experience gained in 2005, that it might pay off to “wait and see” how the situation developed before taking an irreversible decision to cancel travel plans.

I was asked to speak at that press conference, and here is the presentation that I prepared for it:

Because I am a foreigner, British, I have been asked to talk about the situation regarding “Western” visitors to Kyrgyzstan … often referred to here as visitors from the “far abroad”,  and about the potential results of this year’s tourist season which is due to start in earnest in the very near future.

Every year I am asked what my prognosis is for the coming season.  I usually something like: “Ask me at the end of the season, “how was it?” and I will tell you, but don’t ask me at the beginning because nobody can really tell what might happen.”  All anyone can tell really say is how many enquiries and provisional bookings they have received.  I can tell you that this year we have received fewer enquiries and provisional bookings than in previous years.

But, that was last true this time last year as well, and in the end, the season wasn’t so bad.  There was a slow start as people started planning their holidays later than usual.  There were fewer cancellations.  In the end, the season was not excellent, but wasn’t a big disappointment.

So what about this year?  Will this year see a repeat of what happened last year?  Will there be signs of a trend, year on year?

That’s hard to say.

I can say that people cancel their travel for all sorts of reasons.  Sometimes their personal circumstances make it necessary, like the tourist whose mother died just before they left home to start their visit to Kyrgyzstan.

Sometimes, however, it is because events occur in the place they are visiting that make them think twice about traveling there.  Maybe, even, their own governments advise them against visiting the country.  What sort of thing makes them think twice?  Usually there is just one reason: Personal Safety.

It doesn’t matter if that relates to a health scare like SARS in 2003, Bird Flu in 2005, or Swine Flu in 2009; or to the start of a war or to a series of political disturbances.  They all have an effect on international travel.  If the tourist feels that they won’t be safe, then they will cancel their plans and make alternative plans.  They have plenty of choices.  As we say in English, they have the world at their feet.

Last time we had a Revolution in Kyrgyzstan, in March 2005, we saw tours that were planned for April and May cancelled, but many of those who were planning to travel later in the year decided to wait before they made a decision.  As time passed, even though there were some difficult times, it was clear that the situation was stabilizing and there was little, if any, threat to foreign tourists.  So they decided to come.

The government of the day took also measures to try and help encourage tourists not to cancel their planned trips, or to actually consider Kyrgyzstan as a destination if they hadn’t already made their plans.

If you asked me for my prognosis of the season to come in the last week of March 2005, then it would have been very demoralizing.  In  fact, however, by the end of the season, we knew that it had not as bad as we feared.

The same thing could happen this year, but only if it is clear that the situation in the country is stable, peaceful and without threat.

It is not just the foreign tourist that wants to feel safe – we all need to feel safe.  The ordinary people of Kyrgyzstan need to feel safe and free from threat.

As it happens, just as in 2005, the country’s tour operators are receiving cancellations, but not everyone who has planned to come to Kyrgyzstan has cancelled yet, many are waiting to see how the situation will develop in the near future, and we are still receiving enquiries.  These are from people know about Kyrgyzstan.  About: the magnificent mountain scenery; the pristine natural environment; the historical associations with the Great Silk Road and characters like Genghis Khan, Tamerlane and Babur; the traditional nomadic culture, music, crafts,  and hospitality of the Kyrgyz.  They want to come here, but they want to be sure that they can do so easily and safely.

Is it possible to enter the country easily?, to travel around the country?, to go shopping, to the market, theatre or to restaurants?  Is it safe to walk the streets without being attacked or robbed?  Are they sure that there is no threat to their health?, that they won’t get ill?  If the answer to these questions is “Yes”, then people will come.  If it is “No”, or even “it’s not certain”, then they won’t and Kyrgyzstan’s  loss, (the losses of all those who work in the industry: the tour operators, the hotels, resorts  and homestay hosts, the guides, the drivers, the porters and cooks, the cafes and restaurants, the souvenir shops and craftswomen who make the souvenirs), will be someone else’s gain.

I think the answer is “Yes”, but now we have to convince them!

I hope that I was right, and that we can, indeed, persuade them … but only time will tell … on both counts.

]]> http://ianbek.kg/?feed=rss2&p=1428 0 http://ianbek.kg/?p=1393 http://ianbek.kg/?p=1393#comments Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:53:09 +0000 http://ianbek.kg/?p=1393 “When I was a lad, I served a term, as office boy in an attorney’s firm …” sings Sir Joseph Porter, First Lord of the Admiralty, in Gilbert and Sullivan’s popular operetta, “HMS Pinafore”.   I sometimes joke that this is really “my song” because, although I wasn’t exactly a lad when I arrived here in Bishkek and started working in a attorney’s firm, (helping my friend Tony set up his own law firm, “LegExp”), and I haven’t risen to the dizzy heights of an Admiral, yet alone First Lord of the Admiralty, in Britain’s Royal Navy, I have made it to being General Director of two companies here in Kyrgyzstan, and as result made it onto the management board of the  IBC, (The International Business Council), and served four years as the President of KATO, (The Kyrgyz Association of Tour Operators).

Well, Gilbert and Sullivan have another song that seems appropriate in today’s Kyrgyzstan.  In “The Mikado”, Ko-Ko, the Lord High Executioner, sings about how he “has a little list” … “of society offenders who might be underground and who never would be missed.”  Here in Kyrgyzstan, they also have their “little lists”.

Back in 2005 the lists were of companies which were associated with the family and administration of the Akaev regime – “Akaev’s List”.  Companies which allegedly belonged to, for example, his businessmen son or son-in-law … or their proxy.  Once, Askar Akaev famously claimed that his only assets were two apartments and an old car.  The list suggested there was a lot, lot more.    At first, it was a small list of about only 20 or 30 companies, albeit some of the largest companies in the country. Soon, however, the list soon took on a life of its own and, like Topsy in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, “just growed”.  Soon it comprised over one hundred companies and later, almost two hundred.  A commission, headed by Daniyar Usenov, who was later to become Prime Minister, was established to look into the affairs of the companies on the list.  There were questions about who owned the companies, how they obtained their licenses, whether they had paid vzatky (bribes) or whether they paid their taxes.  Promises were made to take back into public ownership the companies, national assets, that had been “stolen”.

Now, in 2010, there is another list being compiled, the “Spisok Bakieva” – Bakiev’s list.  A list of companies which were associated with the family and administration of the Bakiev regime.  Companies which allegedly belonged to, for example, his businessmen son … or his proxy.  The list suggested there are an awful lot of them.   Banks, shopping centers, mass media, oil companies, telephone companies; property companies, office blocks, … and so on, even small cafes and apteka (chemists shops, or drugstores).  It’s even reported that huge stretches of land on the norther outskirts of the city belong to either the Bakiev family or to Daniyar Usenov, and demands are being voiced from the crowds of demonstrators that this should be nationalized and handed over to the people, allocated to individuals to build housing.  Strangely enough it looks as if some of the same companies are on this list as were on the previous one.  Let’s hope that this list doesn’t take on a life of its own and “just grow” like the “Akaev list” did.  Investigations are under way and business have been asked to show patience and cooperate with the authorities conducting the enquiries. There are questions about who owns the companies, how they obtained their licenses, whether they have paid vzatky (bribes) or whether they have paid their taxes and customs dues.  Once again, promises have made to take back into public ownership the companies, national assets, that had been “stolen”.

If there are distinct similarities between the last two paragraphs – then maybe there is a reason for that.   It seems as if history is repeating itself.  Let’s hope and trust that it won’t repeat itself yet one more time.

Unfortunately, in a way, it already is … the question of “corporate raiding” swept into the headlines almost as soon as the revolutionary events of April 7th were over.   A company faces a takeover by individuals, or groups, using questionable methods to apply pressure, taking advantage of the uncertain circumstances in which we find ourselves.  There are all sorts of stories doing the rounds … about how this or that company was taken over; how a multi-storey office building was bought for a fraction of its real value; how armed guards appear in the headquarters office of a large company and monitor, or control, all comings and goings; how businesses registered a change of ownership; … and so on.  Indeed it proved to be so worrying that the interim government froze all business registrations, and re-registrations and all sales of property.  This was causing serious problems for estate agents, (realtors), and financial institutions in particular and the new regulations had to be amended pretty promptly.

Some of the banks that were thought to have connections with Maxim Bakiev or other members of the former regime have been put under special administration, and limits placed on transactions … cash withdrawls and the like.    Oddly enough, it claimed that some seven million dollars worth of gold bars have been found in bank safe deposit boxes belonging to people associated with the previous regime.   A number of arrest warrants have been issued, but we’ve yet to see how, or if, they will be effected.

It’s not just the authorities that are searching for evidence of anything untoward.  Journalists have been active too.  There have been reports in the Western Press linking what looks like “dodgy deals” with a number of individuals and one Brit, (of Azerbaijani descent), has apparently been arrested on money laundering charges.  According to one press report, he was arrested in his hotel room.  It wasn’t at our hotel, but we must think about how to handle this sort of situation if it were to arise.

Statements started to be issued by members of the interim government within days denying that any of them had played any role in such activities.   It struck me as interesting that they felt it was necessary to issue such statements at all.  It shows how deep is the distrust of politicians in Kyrgyzstan goes amongst the population.  They are afraid that nothing will change and that history WILL repeat itself.

IBC wrote an open letter, (yes, another open letter!), together with some other business associations, urging the interim government to learn the lessons arising out of the events of both the 2005 revolution, and also those which followed the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, and calling for fair and objective consideration of the cases of those companies on the “Bakiev’s List”.  I got drafted into the drafting process.  Amongst other things the letter pointed out was that:

• in general, the Kyrgyz Republic has established a good foundation for a free market economy in which everyone has the right to engage independently in creating business;
• the rate of recovery of business activity, in particular, in Bishkek, shows that the country has the resources and the will of business leaders, a talented and patient working people, all of whom are ready to do what is necessary for the restoration of normal operation in business and everyday life, and
• entrepreneurs and businesses have already suffered from the actions of individuals and groups who have been identified as being associated with the previous regime and should not be subject to “double jeopardy” and, effectively, be punished twice.

All of this hasn’t affected us as such, thank goodness.  At least, not so far!  Frankly, I don’t expect it to as we are too small, even if we are one of the country’s biggest taxpayers, and we are not a “cash cow” working in areas generating lots of income, such as mobile telephone operations; trading in petroleum products and banks.

I hope I am right … I don’t want to be on this particular “little list”.

Now, earthquakes are often associated with “aftershocks” … so I suppose it should come as no surprise that Revolutions are followed by continuous protests.

During the past week we’ve seen a number of such “aftershocks”.

The sense of relief and optimism that everyone felt at the end of last week when it became known that President Bakiev had resigned and flown from Djalal Abad to neighbouring Kazakhstan, and apparently removing a source of great uncertainty and tension, was short lived.  It lasted just a couple of days, over the weekend.  I suppose:

• It was the calm before the storm;
• it was like the moment before the onslaught of a Tsunami, when an eerie silence accompanies the receeding waters, before they return with vengence to wreak havoc and chaos;
• it could be compared to those days of the “phoney war” at the end of 1939, when the armies of the allies camped out in France, preparing to face the Germans … only to be caught by surprise when the Blitzkrieg finally came.

Here, I’ll give a brief outline of some of the “aftershocks” that we’ve experienced, but I’ll post more details on my personal website, (the equivalent of a blog, but I started it before blogs came into vogue): ianbek.kg.  If you want to read a bit more detail, then please feel free to go and have look.

(Unfortunately, because of the way it works the new pages probably won’t be posted until sometime on Monday.)

Anyway, this week … well, it’s been another busy week …

It began with The Maevka incident – a group people from out of town held a protest rally to demand that land be allocated to them for building homes.  They wouldn’t listen to the representatives of the interim government and a large number went to the village of Maevka, on the outskirts of Bishkek to mark out plots of land and “sieze” them.  The police were late getting there, for whatever reason, and in the resulting fracas five more people died.

There has been some suggestion that the violence had an element of ethnic conflict, but that is not clear.  Virtually all of the official statements, (for example, from the government here in Kyrgyzstan, from Russian and Turkish leaders), deny this, but the region does have a long history of ethnic tension.

The unrest has led to appeals to the government form various sectors of Kyrgyz society, and from abroad, to ensure Safety and Security.  The government make statements that the situation is under control, but they have authorised the police to shoot at demonstrators “with the intent to kill” in the event of a repeat of such violent outbursts.  This seems a little odd when it is remembered that they came to power and claim part of their legitimacy from the fact that the previous authorities shot at demonstrators, resulting in so many deaths.

The police, themselves, have also been protesting and are threatening to go on strike if their demands aren’t met.  Although they were late getting to Maevka, they have otherwise done a reasonable task in keeping order, and have been assisted by volunteers who have formed a sort of “civil guard” to help patrol the streets at night.

Bakiev has now left Kazakhstan and arrived in Minsk, Belorussia, where he was welcomed by President Lukashenko.  There he astounded everyone by stating that he did not recognise his resignation as valid,  that he was still the legitimate elected President of Kyrgyzstan, calling the interim government bandits and gangsters, and asked world leaders not to recognise them.  A press spokesman for his one time ally, Russians, promptly told the media that they considered his resignation as effective and the interim government as the new authority in Kyrgyzstan.

Other organizations have also come out offering support, recognition and aid for the new authorities … so it looks as if his appeal has fallen on deaf ears.

The reason for renouncing his resignation was that he felt the interim government had reneged on their part of the deal which he understood to be to guarantee the safety of him and his family, but some of his family still in Kyrgyzstan are “being persecuted”,  (one of Bakiev’s brothers has disappeared … some say kidnapped and shots were reported by the person he was talking to on the phone at the time), and so he felt that the deal was off.

Despite the renunciation, he has also said that he doesn’t  “”intend to return to Kyrgyzstan as president,”"

Oddly enough, the Mufti, (an Islamic religious leader), who is said to have had close ties with Bakiev, has also disappeared.

The affairs of the Bakievs have been undergoing scrutiny in Bishkek.  Banks have been put under special administration, companies have been put on notice that an investigation is ongoing to ascertain the full extent of the “Bakiev empire” and influence.  Some of the more unpopular measures of his government, especially the increased tariffs for energy and heating have been reversed; some companies have been put on notice that they are likely to be renationalized; … and so on.

An inquiry into the events of April 7th is underway, and the interim government have said that they will seek Bakiev’s extradition following it.  Other arrest warrants and extradition requests for some members of his family and associates have apparently been issued.

Apart from the Maevka incident, which was widely reported here and in Russia, but received only limited coverage in the West as far as I can tell – presumably because there was so much else going on in the world: elections, volcanic eruptions, sports matches and the like – everything is fairly quiet here.  The streets are quiet and people seem to be enjoying the sunshine.

That is not to say that everything is hunky dory.

Fortunately the “pro Bakiev” demonstrations in the south have been more or less peaceful, even if the protestors have seized and conducted a sit-in in some government buildings.

There is still uncertainty and a certain amount of tension in the air … but, as I said last week, life is returning to normal.  There have, for example, been incidents down in the south, demonstrations in support of the “deposed president”, but they have passed.  I am told that the resident in another part of the country are “feeling empowered” … which sounds pretty euphemistic for something unpleasant, but, so far, everyday life on the streets is showing signs of “returning to normality”.

However, The American State Department have issued a travel warning which says:

“We urge US citizens to defer travel to the Kyrgyz Republic until the security situation improves, and alert US citizens travelling or residing in the Kyrgyz Republic of the potential for further instability, … There remains a persistent danger of further demonstrations, unrest, and crime. Demonstrations could occur without warning, sometimes resulting in injury or death,… “

Although this sounds pretty worrying, it was not as bad as I thought it would be.  In 2001, the Americans evacuated everyone in response to the 9/11 incident in New York, even though they didn’t evacuate Americans from neighbouring countries.  In 2005, virtually all the international consultants were evacuated by the UN.  This time, they have simply assisted in evacuating non essential personnel, (families and so on), but they haven’t insisted.  The haven’t said “Don’t travel to Kyrgyzstan”, instead “urging” people to “defer” their travel plans.  This will still put people off, consultants, businessmen, tourists, and cause problems with travel insurance, but I took it as a sign that although they think the situation is volatile, it didn’t warrant drastic action.

This is in line with the advice of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office: “we advise against all but essential travel to Kyrgyzstan“, and continues: “We advise all British nationals to avoid demonstrations and large gatherings while in Kyrgyzstan. Although the immediate situation in Kyrgyzstan has calmed down from two weeks ago, there is an ongoing risk of instability and there continue to be small incidents involving individual and groups of criminals.  We also advise all British nationals to continue to stay indoors after dark.”

The interim government have promised a new constitution and elections within six months.  Work has already started on drafting a constitution … yet another constitution, I’ve lost count of how many there have been since Independence in 1991 … which will create a parliamentary democracy and a presidency with severely restricted powers compared to what we have been used to, here.  The idea is to prevent history repeating itself by taking the reins of power out of just one pair of hands.  Dates have already been set for the referendum and the subsequent elections.

If I have any concerns about this process, it is about how the members of the interim government and other interested parties will be able to reconcile their differences and reach a compromise which will be effective.  A parliamentary democracy, it seems to me, is best suited to a community where there are definite, identifiable, ideological differences between parties … but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.  Most of the parties here, however, are regionally based, probably drawing on clan ties and affinities.

If all of these confusing twists and turns weren’t enough, then we have also had to cope with the effects of a volcanic eruption – which may seem a bit odd as we don’t have any volcanoes in Kyrgyzstan.  This particular eruption was, of course, the “Eyjafjallajoekull” eruption in Iceland which caused the closure of airports and cancellation of flights throughout Europe.  I wrote last week about how I had decided against taking a trip to the World Exhibition of Sustainable Mountain Development in Grenoble, France, at the end of April, as a result of the Easter Revolution.  As it happens, even if I hadn’t taken that decision, I almost certainly would have had problems making the journey.  Ludmila, who sent to represent the company at the exhibition, was able to fly to Moscow, where she was stranded as Paris was still closed.  She is resourceful lady, however, and managed to complete the journey traveling via Rome and Milan, arriving in Paris a later than planned and thoroughly exhausted.

Once again, the week has ended on a high note … just as it did last week.   Friday has brought a sense of relief … with several good bits of news:

One good point, totally unrelated to recent events, (or at least I preseume it is totally unrelated), is that as I was leaving the IBC meeting, I took a phone call on my mobile.  Normally I hate mobile phones, but I was really pleased to take this call.  It was from an American working in an international organization here in Bishkek, and she told me that she was going to try and get approval to support a “Guides Training Course” which KATO (the Kyrgyz Association of Tour Operators) had started running when I was President a few years ago.  We lost our main source of funding a couple of years ago and the course has been under threat ever since … we are running it later next month, but on a shoestring budget, so this was very welcome news.  Even though it is not yet a “done deal”, it meant that I returned home with a spring in my step.

Another was that Kurmanbek Bakiev had cleared up the mystery as why he had renounced his resignation as President.  Apart from clearing up a mystery, the fact that he also announced that he did not intend to return to Kyrgyzstan as President removed some of the uncertainty that his earlier statement had created.

The main highspot of the day, (of the week), however, was that Roza Otunbaeva, the leader of the Interim Government, had agreed to attend a meeting, a “Round Table”  with IBC members.  It was timetabled to start at three o’clock and to everyone’s amazement, it actually started at two minutes past three.  That must be a record, and is not in keeping with local tradition … most meetings start late as the main speaker is invariably late.  I couldn’t help feeling that this must, indeed, have been a good sign … a sign that things were due to change.  It wasn’t just “business as usual!”

The room was crowded, but not full, there were a few spare seats.  I put that down to the fact that we only got final confirmation that the meeting could go ahead last night and the invitations to participate had gone out only a few hours before, that morning.  For example, the chairman of the Kumtor Gold mine, (Kyrgyzstan’s biggest investment – which is so important that official economic statistics are often given in two forms: with and without Kumtor), was on a site visit and so unable to attend and had to someone else to represent the company.  There were, however, lots of press …

After the initial speeches of welcome … thanking her for finding the time in her crowded schedule to come and meet representatives of the business community, and that sort of thing … she made a short speech, herself.  I have heard a lot of politicians make speeches and this one was quite refreshing … it was quite homely, and I couldn’t help reflecting that it was a bit like Franklin D Roosevelt’s “fireside” chats that used to be broadcast on the radio.

She seemed to say all the right sort of things … for example, she stressed that we mustn’t “lose the upcoming tourist season” … just the right sort of thing to say to show that she knows, she cares, and to garner support from those who are working in the industry.  She also said, however, that Kyrgyzstan’s recent success in improving it’s ratings in the World Bank’s Doing Business Index was laudable, but there was still a lot of work to do because the country’s rating in the Transparency International’s Perception of Corruption index was so appallingly low.  Now, that was a refreshing comment to hear.

Then came time for contributions from the floor – from businessmen, about what concerns they had.  There were a lot of comments from the mining industry … who were delighted to hear her refer to them as “the wings of Kyrgyzstan’s development”!  She took the questions comments on board and did her best to answer them as best she could, but was not afraid to say, “I don’t know, … I’ll have to get someone on it and get back to you” …   Now, that was a refreshing comment to hear.

All in all, I came away with a greater sense of optimism.  I’m not naive, however, and I know that it is easy to “say the right thing”.  President Akaev was a good speaker and often “said the right thing”.  Believe it or not, I think that President Bakiev was also good at “saying the right thing” … it’s just that the words did not always turn into action … did not reflect the reality of what happened “on the street”.  That where the real challenge lies now.  I am sure that she, too, knows that.

So, as to my prognosis for the future … oddly enough, at the moment it is quite positive.  So much so, that when I have been asked by some people about my plans for evacuation should the situation deteriorate I have been able to say quite confidently that: “at the moment I have none.  I have been here for fifteen years already, and this is now my home.  I have ties here, and I still have a sense of optimism for the future, and so I see no reason to worry about it … as yet.  ”

I hope I am not forced to eat these words sometime in the future, but when I have been asked if I think that there will be more such incidents in the future.  Although I admit that it is possible, I don’t think it is likely.  There will be rallies, protests  demonstrations and “meetings”, as people try to press  their “demands”, I suspect that there has already been a backlash against turning to violence as a means to achieve them … especially as it cost yet more lives. Indeed, (and it feels hard saying this), one of the good things about the Maevka incident is that it did shock people, and I get the feeling that they are saying and feeling: “enough is enough” … those five deaths on Monday, following the eighty five on April 7th, might just have been “the last straw”.

All in all, once again, it’s been a long week.  I am looking forward to the weekend.

Oh, yes, and on a more personal note: The shop next door, “Prague” has reopened … so I now have a supply of Tonic and Bitter Lemon.  Yes, I am looking forward to the weekend!

It is very odd … apparently he has been joined by his family … but not his sons Maxim and Marat who, according to the press, ensconced somewhere else.  If the reports I have seen are to be believed then it seems that he has a second wife … and two small children.  Lukashenko, President of Byelorussia made a statement to the country’s parliament welcoming his colleague and “fellow president”.

It also seems as if Bakiev has renounced his letter of resignation and is claiming that he is still the legitimate President of Kyrgyzstan.  His letter of resignation was originally faxed to the interim government from Kazakhstan, and the authorities in the interim government have apparently received the original from the Head of the OSCE Center in Bishkek and the Ambassador of Kazakhstan in Kyrgyzstan.  In the statement, Bakiev wrote:

“In these tragic days for the Kyrgyz people and realizing all responsibility for the future of the Kyrgyz people, for the sake of integrity of the state, Kyrgyz statehood and in accordance with article 50 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, I resign.”

That seems pretty concrete to me.

So why would he think that this letter was of resignation was not valid?

Apparently, he said that he would give his reasons for the renunciation later … and left everyone wondering …

Knowing the tendency here that requires everything to be stamped or notarized, then the cynic in me thought: maybe he considers it wasn’t valid without the presidential stamp having been affixed to it, (and for all I know, it might have … I haven’t seen it), or if the document hadn’t been notarized, (and “legalized” if it was signed and effected whilst he was Kazakhstan).

Another alternative, it seemed to me, is that he could claim it wasn’t valid because “it was signed under duress”.  It wasn’t clear when and where he signed the document – in Djalal Abad, which is in Kyrgyzstan, or in Taras, or somewhere else in Kazakhstan.  Personally, I wasn’t sure that the “duress” argument works.  As I understood the course of events, at the time he left Kyrgyzstan, he wasn’t under immediate threat.  He had been given “short shrift” in Osh where he might normally have expected to gather support and was, by all accounts, in a demoralized state when he returned to his home village.  This might not sound good, but it didn’t sound to me like “duress”.  If it was signed when he was Kazakhstan, then he was safe and sound and could he not have easily declined to sign and send it … and try to establish a “government in exile”, as other former heads of state who have been forced from their own country have done in the past.  (Indeed, there is still a “government in exile” for Byelorussia … according to the economist it is the only one of the Eastern European governments in exile which were established in the days of the Soviet Union, that still exists.  The authors – Poland, the Baltic States … and so on – have all disbanded and empowered newly elected governments in their countries when the communist regimes in their countries collapsed.  It traces its heritage back to the short lived government of 1918, which lasted just 8 months.)

Of course, I thought, it might have been that the resignation was a condition imposed on Bakiev by those nations that were assisting his flight from Kyrgyzstan: Kazakhstan, Russia – and America?

I thought of a couple of other alternatives … perhaps he was just receiving encouragement from “someone”, possibly in order to stir up trouble … or perhaps he was smarting at the suggestion that there will be an expedition request from the interim government after an investigation into the events of April 7th are completed – although I can’t see that actually happening.

Anyway, that was all speculation on my part … it turns out that it was something else completely.  On Friday he explained that he had signed the hand-written resignation letter after leaving Kyrgyzstan.  He said that he had been “under pressure” to do so – and although he didn’t say where this pressure came from, although he did say that his sudden departure from Kyrgyzstan came a day after he had held telephone talks with Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who apparently said that he could not reproach Bakiev for using arms “but if a civil war broke out it would be my responsibility entirely.” .

The Kyrgyz parliament had yet to decide whether to accept the resignation, therefore he considered that it was not in force because and he was free to renounce it because the interim government had not fulfilled its conditions, they had reneged on a “promise” to protect his relatives.  “They guaranteed the safety of my family, but my family is being persecuted, therefore I do not recognize my resignation,” he said.

In fact, there is some question about what has happened to the rest of his family.  One of his brothers, who was in charge of the security services, has, so evaded capture by the authorities.  Another brother has apparently been kidnapped by unknown persons who claimed to be representatives of the new authorities and who had invited him to “negotiations”.

Bakiev also went on to say that, despite his renunciation of his resignation, he did not expect to return to Kyrgyzstan as president, and was not going to form a government-in-exile.

In his original statement in Minsk, Bakiev urged world leaders not to recognize the interim government, calling it an “illegitimate gang”.  The next day, however, the Kremlin in Moscow announced that the Russian Federation no longer recognised him as President, and several other countries and international organizations have already followed suit.

Back in 2005, the new government, that time headed by one Kurmanbek Bakiev, commissioned Feliks Kulov to restore order.  He was helped in his task by volunteers from various sports associations, martial arts teams and so on, who formed patrols of “civil guards”.  One night this week, apparently, there were some 10,000 volunteers ready to take to the streets to help preserve order.    They were helped in turn by the weather that quickly turned inclement.

The government say that they have the resources to maintain law and order, to ensure safety and security.  This is not exactly in line with what Danyar Usenov, the previous Prime Minister, said just before April 7th, but a bit more worrying is the fact that they have given the police the authority to fire in the case of mass disorders … to “shoot to kill”!

Although I understand the difficulty that they are facing, this seems extreme … and shows that we have reached a sad state of affairs.

I ask myself if this isn’t exactly the sort of thing that incensed the crowd on April 7th …  and the argument that they themselves are using to prosecute a case against the former president and government?  The fact that the Bakiev regime ordered the police and the army to fire on their own people, taking over eighty lives in the process.

It’s a case of mutual recrimination … if the interim government blames Bakiev and members of his entourage for the deaths, then he lays the responsibility for them fairly and squarely on their shoulders.

Fortunately, I don’t think it will come to shooting … Just as in Tajikistan, when the civil war eventually came to an end, everything seems to have been done to prevent conflict breaking out again.  The ordinary people were “tired” of war.  I think that will probably happen here in Kyrgyzstan as well.  There is a sense of shock and outrage, anger even, that people would do this so soon after the violence of April 7th. There is a backlash amongst the general population, at least here in Bishkek, against the protestors.

One of the local news agencies sent a reporter out into the street to ask people if they thought that the government would use the force of weapons on the population.  student is reported as saying: “I am against bloodshed but sometimes you have to handle arms. … nobody feels sorry for marauders”, and another said: “… it would be great if somebody will stop all of this – weapons, shooting, marauding…”.

In fact, the general opinion in that rather limited vox-pop survey was that, No, the government wouldn’t turn weapons onto their own people, … but that was tempered with comments like: “… well, who knows?”

However, feelings ran deep and there were many who were dissatisfied with this, that or the other.  People had grievances they wanted to air and demands they wanted to present.  It is not surprising that different groups will try to present their demands to the new authorities, and so rallies, demonstrations and “meetings” are to be expected.   It is unfortunate and disappointing, however, that they have grown used to turning to violence rather than debate to do so … especially, it turned out, it was to cost further lives.

The weekend following the President’s resignation was quiet and calm, but that turned out to be the proverbial “calm before the storm”.  Protests erupted almost immediately and the most serious was about allocation of land.  Protesters gathered in Bishkek and then made their way to a village on the outskirts of the city, Maevka, where a running battle ensued.

Some of the villagers were intent on defending themselves, and some started to remove pegs from the plots of land that people had marked out for themselves.  The fire department received lots of calls asking for assistance, apparently six houses had been set on fire, but the road had been blocked by protestors who refused to let them through.  They also refused to let ambulances through.  In the morning, it was reported that about 500 people were involved in the riots, seven people had been injured in the “mass unrest”, (although that was later revised to forty people who were hospitalized – 10 of whom were from the police), that there had been one fatality, (and later reports said two had died in the fires and two from gunshot wounds … making five altogether), some cars had been overturned – six were burnt out, including three police cars, about 1000 bales of hay had been burnt in the fires and the authorities had dispatched some 600 police officers to maintain order and they had blocked the roads leading to the village who arrested some 130 rioters.

Bishkek, itself, remained quiet and peaceful … apart, that is, from the expressions of shock, outrage, and even anger, that people would do this so soon after the violence of April 7th.

In the face of these events, I wrote a letter to the management board of the IBC, (International Business Council), – I happen to serve as one of the members of the board – suggesting that we address the interim government with an appeal about the need for the preservation of Safety and Security.

Back in 2005, following the Tulip Revolution, this had been one of the main themes that we had pursued.

As it happens, as they say, “great minds think alike” and the Chairman and Executive Director had already had thoughts along the same lines and they proposed a draft of an open letter on the subject to the interim government.  Our emails crossed.

Their letter was better than mine in that it was less emotional …

Anyway, here is what I wrote:

Can I suggest that in the light of yesterday’s events, and the continued uncertainty today, that we probably need to follow the Open Letter that we sent to the interim government up with a press release and/or another letter to the government and/or pressure on all and sundry to raise / pursue the importance of the issue of Safety and Security.

“Safe Streets” was one of the six pillars of the the Business Agenda which IBC promoted at the time of the 2005, Tulip Revolution.  Security is also regularly cited as one of the critical issues identified by respondents in the IBC Quarterly Investor’s Survey.

How many news reports have there been in the last few days about how this or that government, this or that international organization, welcome the stabilization of affairs in Kyrgyzstan.  One of the critical roles of government, any government, is to provide for the safety and security of its people.  It should be a priority, a top priority, issue for government.

Please note that I am not saying that the government isn’t do anything … nor am I saying that they are not doing enough … what I am saying is that this should be a priority … the country needs safety and security, business needs it, the people need it … and that we should do anything that we can to help bring the issue into the spotlight, and to help to keep it there.

Obviously, I have a vested interest in pursuing this question.  In our business, Tourism, safety and security is by far the biggest issue when it comes to deciding whether or not to cancel a holiday.  We have got over the first hurdle, (poor marketing and lack of awareness about the country), only to fall at the next fence.  The tourist already knows about Kyrgyzstan and has made a decision that they would like to come here … but the scenes on BBC, CNN and so on, cause them concern … worry them.  Will they be safe?  If there is any question about this then they will consider, and probably decide to, cancel their travel plans.  They have the world at their feet – apart from the fact a volcano might limit their flight options at the present moment.  It doesn’t matter if the threat to their person is in the form of terrorism, civil unrest or heath issues like SARS, Bird Flu or Swine Flu … if there is danger they won’t come.  What’s worse, there will be a considerable long term effect as it will also put people off even considering a trip here in the near future.

But, I am not thinking only in terms of self-interest.  The current situation will also put off potential investors, and businessmen from considering doing business here.  It won’t matter that Kyrgyzstan has risen so many places in the World Bank’s “Doing Business” rankings … with riots on the streets and governments toppling.  Investors and businessmen will, at best, delay any decision to get involved in the country … and they are more likely to decide on other potential projects.  The influence of an Icelandic volcanic eruption is unlikely to interfere with this decision as it would with a tourist who wants to change their plans.

Then there is the question of the needs of the population of Kyrgyzstan, and the question of social cohesion.  It does nobody any good if the first recourse for any dissatisfied group is to violence.  Just talking to people, ordinary people, there is frustration and despair, shock, outrage, and even anger, that something like this could happen, especially so soon after the violence of April 7th.  Eighty five deaths in one day, five more less than two weeks later, not mention the number of injured and the damage to property. Of course, there is also the fear of civil war.  No-one thinks it will happen.  No-one wants it to happen.  But, who can tell? … if any group of dissatisfied people feel that their best recourse, their first recourse, their only recourse is to take to the streets and create mayhem, then we have a recipe for anarchy.

That is nobody’s interests.

It’s not a task that I relish.  I have always tried to keep a “low profile”, but it is not always possible.  As one of the relatively few foreign investors here in Kyrgyzstan, journalists often seek me out for an interview, looking for a “sound bite” that they can use.

Now, as a teacher I undertook a number of management courses which included a Marketing element, and I am very grateful to my Union (the Association of Teachers and Lecturers) for sending me off on a short course on Public Relations, when I was serving as a Branch Official, which covered topics like “crisis management”, writing Press Releases, and so forth.  I have found both very useful in my occasional incarnation as “voice of …”, or “spokesman for …”, foreign investors and the tourist industry.

My reluctance might seem odd to people reading this.  I am, by nature, quite verbose and opinionated, so it might be thought that I would welcome the exposure – the chance to “get my point across”.

Here, on my website, I have some control over what I write … but it is possible to say all the “right things” in the interview, to think that you’ve made a good case and got your message across, only to be surprised by the report when it is actually published or broadcast.  There is a maxim that in a interview, the interviewer may control the questions, but the interviewee controls the answers.   However, when the interview is with a journalist then that control is lost, it passes to the journalist who writes the report.  The journalist, is under various constraints such as the amount of “space” available for the report, a word or time limit, which means that they have to be selective of the material they include.   Also, journalists have their own “agenda”, which may not coincide with yours.  Journalists need something “newsworthy” – and, usually, “good news” is not newsworthy.  They seem to prefer an argument, conflict, controversy, disagreement and disputes to agreement and concord.

I remember, for example, one occasion when there was a “Teachers’ Dispute” and several of the teachers’ unions decided to conduct a variety of different forms of “industrial action”.  As a trade union branch official I took part in a press conference along with representatives of the other teachers’ trade unions.  At first the journalists were very interested, but they soon lost interest when they heard the answer to one particular question.  The problem was that we all said, independently of one another, that any planned industrial action was part of a national campaign and was not targeted at schools in our branch simply because they happened to be in the constituency of the then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher.  If we had said “Yes”, then we would have been news … our case would get an airing … although I am not sure that our arguments would have been presented.

So, the only way to control the way those answers are presented is to commission or write the article yourself.  That’s why writing a Press Release is a very important skill, many a busy reporter or editor will simply quote one verbatim.

(Fortunately, there is an alternative approach which is sometimes used here, to agree with the journalist beforehand that they will agree the text of the final report with you.)

As a result, I have always been relatively suspicious of press reports.

I don’t believe everything I read, hear or see in the news.  It isn’t necessarily true simply because it is reported in the press.  Neither do I believe it because it seems to be the common view or is often repeated.  For example, although there is some doubt about the attribution, Goebbels is supposed to have said: “If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth,” … but Lenin did apparently say: “A lie told often enough becomes the truth”.

During the Tulip Revolution of March 2005, I found myself scanning the press reports with unusual attention … I was living through the incidents that they were describing and I wanted to see how fairly and accurately they reported what was happening.  I found that there were two newspapers in particular that were giving a good picture of what I felt was the true situation here on the ground.

One was British, The Daily Telegraph.  Some of my friends said that the fact I showed a preference for this newspaper, which is “conservative” by nature, was a sign that I was getting older, and moving away from my “liberal” roots.  (A function of age?  As Sir Winston Churchill put it: “If a man isn’t a liberal when he is young, then he has no heart, but if he isn’t a conservative when he is older, then he has no brain.”)  It wasn’t like that at all, however, it was just that I found the reporting to be a good reflection of what I was experiencing, how I saw the situation, here in Bishkek.  In 2010, I hoped for something similar, but was dismayed when I saw a report in that same newspaper which confidently affirmed that as well as the American airbase here in Kyrgyzstan, “both Russia and China also maintain military bases in the country.”  They don’t.  The Russians do, and they beefed up their presences by sending 150 additional paratroopers to help maintain security there, but the Chinese don’t have a base here.  I am sure that they would like one … but they don’t have one.

The second was a Russian newspaper: Kommersant, the largest independent newspaper in Russia.

This time round, in 2010, there seems to have been far more coverage.  Unfortunately, much of it seems to have sensational.  As I said, journalists need “hot news” in order to sell their newspapers.  There was one publication in particular that I found disappointing and sensationalist.  When I read its reports I felt more and more depressed.  Now, I don’t doubt that the journalist was describing which happened to him, and how he interpreted those events, in the same way as I am describing the events that I am part of, and how I interpret them.  However, I was left wondering why the emphasis was so negative … did the journalist not see any of the positive things that was also happening, or were they just not “newsworthy”.  I would have welcomed a bit of balance.

Balance is important.  Back in Britain I would read several newspapers to see what different people were saying about a story, and then try to analyze and synthesize the reports in order to make up my own mind about what really was happening.  That’s easier today, even here in Bishkek, than it used to be back then in Britain.  The internet gives access to an incredible volume of reports and opinions, and I have the opportunity, that to cable and satellite TV, to see the news as seen through the eyes of Kyrgyz, British, American, Russian, German, French, and other news channels.  Sometimes they present quite a different take on the same story.