It’s a good idea to ask people for their opinion – it says that you value them and their advice, you don’t have to agree them but it is always reassuring if they happen agree with what you already thought, and it is always possible that they will say something new that you haven’t thought about or give you food for thought and set your mind off at a tangent.

I often ask my staff for theirs, but I do warn them not to be offended if, for some reason, I choose not to take it.

On the other hand, I find it a difficult and onerous task when I asked for my opinion.

Difficult? Yes, because, it requires having thought through the issues and coming to a conclusion, whilst recognizing that there may well be things that one doesn’t know, or where one is mistaken.

Despite the fact that I am someone who “knows his own mind and isn’t afraid to voice it”, I am not a great fan of vox pop.  It seems to me that there are too many people, (myself included!), who are far too eager to give vent to opinions even when they don’t know what they are talking about.  It’s not that I think their opinions are worthless … after all, “everyone is entitled to their own opinion, no matter how bigoted or misguided they might happen to be” … and for, all I know, they could be correct.

Part of the trouble is that I constantly meet people who vociferously pontificate about things of which they don’t really to have any knowledge, but they still think that and act as if they should not only be heard and listened to but also consider that everyone should agree with them and do what they say – as if they were “the fount of all knowledge”.

I often say that the difference between them and me is that “I know that there are things that I don’t know”.  I may also vociferously pontificate, but I try to acknowledge that what I am saying is only my opinion, based on background and experience, and on my understanding of the situation.  It is quite possible that I am wrong, mistaken or may come to change my opinion over the course of time as either the situation changes or I learn things and my understanding becomes clearer.

I don’t expect everyone to agree with me … of course it is nice when they do, but I appreciate that they may see the situation differently from the way that I do … the important thing is that we listen to each other and consider what the other person has to say.

So, if I think that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but do they have the right to give voice to it.  This is a question of “Freedom of Speech” and I think the answer is “Yes, but within limits”.  In a way, this is true whenever we exercise our rights.  Rights and Freedoms carry with them responsibilities and duties.

A message which is “sent” is not always the same message that is “received”.  The old parlour game of “Chinese whispers” used to demonstrate this much to the amusement, delight and enjoyment of the participants.

That’s one reason that I said I found the situation onerous.

Anyway, this week I was asked to give an interview for a news programme on the subject of the development of the economy.

As usual in this sort of situation, my first thought was: “Why me? … what do I know about the subject? … what can I say? … and why do they think that what I have to say is important?”

Of course, I am pleased to have been asked, and that the journalist thinks that my opinion is valuable.  I don’t feel, however, that I can claim to be an expert – after all, my formal education in economics is limited to a short “A.B.C.” course at night school, many years ago.  Having said that, especially after I had read the questions, I felt that the important thing was to contribute to the debate and so I responded like this:

The first question asked about the present state of the economy – if the situation for doing business was one of development, stagnation or even regress – and what risks it involved.

To be honest, that struck me as a bit simplistic in that the situation is complex … there are signs of all three: development, (construction and infrastructure projects are continuing and the reconstruction of the South has many opportunities and much potential for the budding entrepreneur to step in and create further development), stagnation (many foreign investors have put their plans on hold waiting to see how things will develop and it is unlikely that we will see any serious Foreign Direct Investment until into next year – after the results of the election are clear) and regression (in tourism we are facing a difficult year with cancellations, and the problems with cross border traffic means that trade with Kyrgyzstan’s foreign partners is hampered if not actually disabled). The second part seemed open-ended and negative – trust a journalist to ask about “risks” and not opportunities.  Anyway, this was the answer that I wrote:

The current situation is mainly one of uncertainty … uncertainty about the legitimacy of authority (government), the borders, investors seeking to protect their investment (or potential investment) by adopting a “wait and see” approach, a downturn in trading activity (and hence tax revenues) at a time of increasing government expenditure, ( some of which is “one-off” but possibly massive – for example spending on the reconstruction of the South – whereas other aspects are ongoing – such as pay increases for police and the military.

In our industry, tourism, for example, it is difficult to say what will happen this year but many tour firms, hotels and service providers, (guides, drivers, homestays, transport companies and so on) have received cancellations and are finding it difficult to survive. As happened in 2005, the first cancellations which came after the initial revolution were from those who were due to travel within a month or two … but this year, more followed after Maevka, and then again after the events in the South in June.   As a result, we will be lucky if we have half the business this year than we had last year.

The referendum played an important role in helping to ease the situation … now we await the elections, both the campaign and the voting itself, and also how the politicians deal with results.  The rest of the world will be watching very carefully to see how things develop and if Kyrgyzstan can move from this state of uncertainty into one where it safe to travel, invest and do business.

The second question centered on the apparent rising trend for interference by government bodies in the conduct of business, especially the burning issues of the day: corporate raids and nationalization.  Why was this occurring and and what dangers did it present to businesses.

Although it is a good question, once again, I was unhappy to see the negative emphasis on “high profile” cases which, although important in themselves and for the implications that they contain for businesses in general, seem to me to be far from the norm and on the potential on “dangers”.  This is what I wrote in reply:

I know what I read and see in the media about such pressures but, fortunately, our company has not been subject to them  …  and I hope and trust this will continue to be so.

The reasons as to why there are such pressures on Private enterprises are probably features of history …  and psychology.  History, because people see what has happened and want to correct the “mistakes” of the past, and in itself that is good.  Unfortunately, I also sense a tendency to seek revenge and a sense of jealousy.

The next question asked why there always seemed to be problems the effectiveness of the government’s management of the economy, what were the underlying causes for this and who were their opponents.

It seemed to me that this assumed that there was, indeed, a problem … and to be frank, there probably is.    Once again, I think that there are lots of reasons for this … and I had trouble trying to decide where to begin and what to include.  Part of the problem is that it is easy to criticize – easier than to be be constructive, or to take responsibility, make decision and then carry them through to implementation.  In the end, this is what I settled on:

I see a couple of major issues here.  First of all, Kyrgyzstan is a small country – and there is a limited pool of available “talent”, people with suitable qualifications, knowledge, skills and experience, to fulfill the essential posts at all levels of government and administration, and limited infrastructure for them to obtain and develop these qualities.  By that I do not mean that there aren’t talented people available, there are!

The second factor is psychological … there is an Impatience after twenty years of independence when there has been little progress, indeed some would say that there has been a deterioration, in achieving a better standard for the ordinary citizen of Kyrgyzstan  … the people have aspirations which are not being fulfilled and this leads to frustration which needs to be directed somewhere … and the government are an easy and obvious target.

Indeed, the government is, almost, in a “no-win” situation.  Unless they are successful in being able to make advances in the economic situation in the country, then they will be subject of criticism – and it is much easier to be critical than it is to be constructive.

The subject of the next question was about support for Small and Medium sized Enterprises, (SMEs), and whether it was necessary to support them, and more generally whether SMEs could lead to improvements in the economy of the country.

This question surprised me … it almost seemed to be a “no brainer”.  I know that there are a number of controversies about the nature of the Kyrgyz economy: the lack of, and need for, a strong manufacturing industry as opposed to being simply a trading nation, the transit economy that Kyrgyzstan has become facilitating trade between it’s larger neighbours, especially China and Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and, more distantly, Russia.  I know that during the Soviet period there was a thriving manufacturing and engineering industry in the country but, in my role as an “armchair economist”, I am not convinced that the absence of financial and logical support received from the center, (Moscow), the current quality and level of infrastructure and available level of technology, the distance from the markets for the goods and services produced, does anything but hinder the development of large scale industry.  Hence I replied:

Yes!  SMEs play an important role in the Kyrgyz economy … and I think this will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.  Large investment projects are good but a large proportion of people in the country live and work in rural regions and are unlikely to be directly employed in such projects.  So, it is necessary to find possibilities for them to help themselves prosper and develop … and the best way for them to be able to do so is to foster the development of small and medium sized enterprises which can flourish and grow.  One way to do this is to find ways to support and develop microfinance systems … the availability of even a small amount of credit can make a big difference to the success, or otherwise, of an enterprise and another is to try and maintain tax measures that will not hinder their growth, such as the Simplified system of taxation and the Patent system.

I was then asked if I agreed with the measures that have proposed for the development of the country’s economy and what else was needed …

To me, this “begged the question”: “What measures, in particular?”.  I know that this wasn’t very helpful, but my response was simply:

I am reminded of the Hawthorne effect – almost any measures will be helpful, provided that they do not actually hinder and hamper development.

Attention then returned to the issue of cooperation and partnership between the government and business.

I have lost count how many times I have been asked for an opinion on the different roles of government and the private sector, and the relationship between the two.  As a former Trade Union official, it might not be surprising that I was reminded of the fact that in Britain we used to talk about the “Tripartite” system – Government, Business and Organized labour, (the Unions).  Personally, however,I think this  misses at least one other important party: the non-governmental, voluntary sector - charities and the like.  In the UK, a large section of the educational sector is provided by the churches; a large amount of medical research and care is performed by charities such as “Cancer Research”; the RSPCA, (Royal Society for the Protection of Animals), play an important role in certain aspects of society … and so on.  In Kyrgyzstan, the Donor community, (the World Bank, the United Nations, European Bank, Asian Development Bank … and so on), also play a vital role.  Despite that, I took my lead from the question and limited myself to a simple “two party” system:

Yes!  As the English poet said: “No man is an island” … in these days of globalization it should be evident that we are all interdependent upon one another.  The most important word in the question, it seems to me, is “partnership”.  Let each, the government and the Private Sector fulfill its own role … but at the same time work together in a spirit of cooperation and understanding for the mutual benefit of all.  This, however, requires a major psychological shift.  At the moment the two sides seem to see each other as rivals rather than partners.  When they do meet, both sides come to the table with aims and objectives that they want the other side to fulfill, but seem less willing to consider what they can contribute to the process.

The final question asked for priorities: what three measures should the government undertake in order to facilitate the development of business in the short term.

This was by far the most difficult of the questions to address and, in contrast to my answer to question five … that almost any measure which didn’t actually hinder development was welcome … I chose not to propose specific measures.  I wasn’t exactly “dodging the question”, but it seems to me that it is the wrong question in that any measure will only be really effective if it is properly implemented.  It seems to me, for example, that there are already many very good laws and regulations on the statute books, but the main problem seems to be that they are not properly implemented.  The problem is much more deeply seated than this … and goes back to the very approach adopted towards business and other aspects of society … by all parties.  My original draft referred to making corruption unacceptable; the need for an element of altruism; the recognition that perception is sometimes as important as, (or, sometimes, even more important than), reality … and similar concerns.  In the end, this is what I settled on.

Where to start? You ask for three measures … but I would rather raise three issues which I think the government needs to address.  Before a decision can be made on individual measures, it is necessary to determine in which direction we want to travel … what is our goal …  what sort of society we hope to achieve … because this will help to determine what measures are appropriate and which are likely to be most effective.

The first issue is, obviously, to provide for safety and security.  This is, perhaps, the main duty of any government.  In order for the economy and business to flourish and develop, it is essential that everyone feels confident that their physical, financial, social, psychological and spiritual wellbeing is not under threat.

The second issue, it seems to me, is to provide for a fair and equitable society where people feel valued and are sure that they will be treated, and that laws and regulations, will be applied in an open, just, transparent and predictable manner, with mutual respect, whether in relation to their dealings with each other or with the authorities, (for example in inspections, court cases and so on).

The third area I would address is more nebulous, social and psychological, a question of philosophy, attitudes and ethics. This is both a long term and a more difficult issue to tackle but, in my opinion, it is a vital issue.  After all, these factors affect and govern all that we do, our dealings and relationships with one another.  They need to be addressed at all levels of society: in schools and Institutes of Higher Education; in the courts and apparatus of government, (local and national); in the media; in our dealings with each other.

In fact, I note that these issues are already being addressed by both governmental authorities and by members of society as a whole.

As I tried to say above, “I don’t claim to have all the answers” or “a monopoly on wisdom”.  My aim in answering these questions was to make a contribution to the debate and |I hope that someone, somewhere, found what I had to say interesting, useful and helpful.  My aim in writing this is to give some idea about how I came to those answers.

As I said, it’s nice to be asked for an opinion.

It’s not difficult to write something about the attractions of Kyrgyzstan … but I knew that I was going to hampered by the word limit being imposed on me.   It would have been easy to write something dry and formal like:

The Celestial Mountains Tour Company was formed in 1997 by three British investors, …

Although this is typical of the approach towards such articles here, somehow it didn’t seem quite right … and, anyway, I have written that sort of thing so many times in the past that I am getting tired of it, myself.  It still had to be said – after all it was supposed to be a “PR piece” about the company … but I wanted to find a more interesting way of saying it – and, going beyond that, something about the attractions the country has to offer.

I sat down and thought about it.  “Mulled it over” in my mind.  I got up and walked around … how could I put it?  Then I remembered the number of times I have been asked questions like How did an Englishman get to be running a tour company in Kyrgyzstan?”, and – more directly - “Why, on earth, Kyrgyzstan?”  It’s easy to answer this second question … just fire back a “Why not?”  But, seriously it’s a good question.  Why Kyrgyzstan?

The more my mind worked on it, the more I thought that this might be the answer …

In the end, this is what I wrote:

It is difficult to tell what was the deciding factor when three British investors decided to open a tour company, a hotel and a small guesthouse in the Kyrgyz Republic in 1997.

Was it the Mountains?  This is one of the country’s main attractions, to be sure.  With three peaks at over 7000m, and the majority of the landscape classified as mountainous areas, Kyrgyzstan offers a big contrast to the small island nation which protrudes out into the Northern Atlantic.

Could it the abundance of wildlife, fauna and flora, the range of which includes a number of rare and endangered species?  After all, the English are well known for their love of animals.

Perhaps it was the people with their nomadic traditions, handicrafts and hospitable nature.

Or maybe it was the links with the past, with historical characters like Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, and Babur, or the connections with the extensive network of trading routes known as the Great Silk Road, which pass through the territory of the small Central Asian Republic.

Whatever the reason, (and it may have been a combination of all of these), they saw the great potential that the country has to offer to travellers of all sorts: The young student, backpacking, trekking, perhaps following in the footsteps of the like of Marco Polo; the active tourist seeking adventure – whether it be mountaineering, trekking, horseriding, white water rafting, skiing and so forth; or just relaxing on the shores of the world’s second largest mountain lake – Lake Issyk Kul; or catering for travellers along the Great Silk Road.

The tour company caters mainly, but not exclusively, for Western tourists – after all it was established by Englishmen.  Most of the business is based on customizing itineraries to individual requests – based on exploring the many attractions and possibilities that this small country can offer.  The services offered include: arranging transport, accommodation, guide/interpreter services, meals, concerts and other cultural activities, assistance with formalities and providing advice and information.

A small guesthouse in Naryn was opened in 1998, (on the way to China on the Great Silk Road, halfway between Bishkek and Kashgar), with the aim was of providing a friendly, clean and comfortable environment for travellers and has established itself as a favourite with tourists and businessmen alike.

It was followed in 2000 by the Silk Road Lodge, a small, purpose built, hotel in central Bishkek which has become the preferred choice of many travellers visiting the capital city.

The company has firmly established itself in the tourism sector in the Republic – working in cooperation with other companies and service providers, and taking a leading role in a number of associations, (such as the Kyrgyz Association of Tour Operators, Kyrgyz Travel – the Destination Marketing Association and the International Business Council).

I think it turned out quite well … it’s still a bit dry – but that was part of the brief … I hope it made Kyrgyzstan sound like an interesting place and gave a feel of some of the myriad of attractions that the country and it’s people have to offer.

Indeed, much has happened over the last fifteen years in the tourism industry in Kyrgyzstan as the country has moved from a “central economy” to one which is governed by principles of a “free market economy”. A monolithic, state-run, service has seen much diversification, development and improvement in the range and level of services offered to potential tourists with the growth of private sector provision. The increased competition introduced by the increase in service providers has led to a need for an improvement in the level of their services, in order to attract and retain customers.

One particular example that illustrates this is the increase in the number of restaurants and cafes, especially in Bishkek, but also throughout the republic as a whole – not just in terms of their numbers, but also in terms of their range, the quality of dishes and the level of services offered. Today, we can rightly say that visitors to the capital have a glittering array of choice when considering places to eat.

This is not to say that the State has no role to play in tourism. There are many components which play a role and can help, or hinder, the development of tourism. The state is responsible for: the visa regime; permissions; border and customs controls; the role of the police; the provision of museums and similar services and the maintenance of an overall healthy environment in which the tourism industry can grow and prosper. The private sector, on the other hand, is rightly concerned in the delivery of services: accommodation; transport; guides; food and entertainment. For tourism to develop as a major part of the economy, it needs to be recognized that there is a symbiosis – both parties, the public and the private sector, need each other.

The government of the Kyrgyz Republic has made serious attempts to encourage the development of tourism. For example, the visa regime has been relaxed for citizens of many countries; the move towards deregulation; measures introduced to help protect and assist foreigners whilst they are here, and a Destination Marketing Organization (to act as Tourism Promotion Agency) which has been established in co-operation with the private sector.

There are several other tools which are available to the government, which could help and assist in the development of this sector of the economy.

The first of these is a favourable tax environment. For example, part of the improvement in the provision of restaurants has been achieved by the introduction of a patent system which has made it possible for small entrepreneurs to start their own businesses and flourish.

Another tool available would be to facilitate the availability of finance – or credit. Unfortunately, there are too few examples where credit has been made available for the development of suitable projects. In most cases it is simply too expensive for most businesses to contemplate – but the emergence of new banking and credit institutions (including micro-finance institutions) can only help to bring further projects to fruition. It would be good if these projects were such as to spread the facilities to communities beyond those traditionally thought of as “tourist destinations” – Bishkek and Issyk Kul – through priority consideration of business projects and preferential credits in the regions. For example, the development of the new facilities at Sary Chelek is to be welcomed

Unfortunately, the government structures that are responsible for tourism in the Republic do not always seem to recognize the move towards the “market” economy. There appears to be confusion between the concepts of “monitoring”, “supervising”, “support” on the one hand and “control”, “trusteeship”, “instructive management” and “administrative levers” on the other. For example, every year since 2001 – the Year of Tourism – has seen attempts to reintroduce measures of control especially in terms of licensing and certification. This thinking seems to equate the “market” with “chaos” – something out of control.

It seems to us that there are three tasks ahead of the government in the immediate future, to continue the trends towards:

1. the improvement of the services for which they are responsible: the work of the relevant ministries, and services such as the Customs and the Police;
2. the re-orientation of public policy towards the principles of the market economy – recognizing the legitimate role of both public and private sectors;
3. co-operation with the private sector in terms of the creation and dissemination of information about tourism potential in the country, and creating a recognizable marketing brand.

The aim for both public and private sectors must be to increase their relevant income (by taxes and turnover) – whilst minimizing costs. This is not just in terms of cash … it also applies to social, personal, cultural, tradition and environmental factors. A healthy tourism sector is good for everyone – for the consumer, the service provider (be it an individual entrepreneur, or company), local communities, the government and the budget.

Co-authored with Emil Umetaliev – President of AKC Kyrgyz Concept.
Published in “Investment Now” – the journal of the International Business Council (IBC) – Bishkek.

Part of my job is to anticipate problems … and then find solutions to them. Sometimes those problems never actually materialize and it seems as if I have wasted so much nervous energy worrying about nothing. But sometimes …

I seem to spend so much of my time worrying about things that could go wrong, that many of my friends and colleagues think I am a pessimist. This is, as far as I am concerned, very far from the truth. I don’t necessarily consider myself to be an optimist — I prefer to think that I am a «realist».

The Kyrgyz, on the other hand, are definitely a very optimistic people — they are always «looking on the bright side». They have a great faith in the future. This is one of their great attractions as a people. Nothing seems to demoralize them.

I am not sure if being an Englishman running a tour company and two hotels in the Kyrgyz Republic qualifies me as a optimist. It is true that I and my fellow investors thought that there was a great untapped potential for the development of tourism in this region.

We took our own money and decided to «risk» it in this venture because we had the optimistic opinion that the Kyrgyz Republic would develop into a tourist destination that would be increasingly attractive to an ever growing group of travelers who wanted to visit beautiful, remote, unspoiled and relatively unknown places with an interesting people, history and culture.

Many of these potential clients may have earlier been happy to «rough it» as back packers trekking through their long summer holidays from university — especially because, as students, they had limited financial resources. Having left university, and entered employment, they now had money to spend on traveling — but little time — they had responsibilities and had to get «back behind their desk» on a specific day. They were a little older, more used to «home comforts» and were ready to pay for little luxuries like hot water.

We made our plans — and committed ourselves It was a good idea. It still is. But what happened … ?

Tourism in the Kyrgyz Republic has suffered so many setbacks, that it is hard to know where to start listing them.

We could start with the fact that it is remote (about as far from the ocean as it is possible to get), very little known in the West (sometimes it doesn’t even appear on maps which are used on internet websites — For some time, the BBC didn’t include it in the list of countries in the world if you want to subscribe to their newsletters), On the one hand this helps to make the country more «exotic», more attractive, but on the other hand it is a huge hurdle which has to be overcome in the competition with other destinations which have more familiar, «magical», names.

The fact that the country keeps changing it`s name is a problem. It is understandable that there may have been a desire to change the former soviet name of Khirgizia — but the choice of Kyrgyzstan has proved to be problematical as other countries in the region with names ending in «stan» have meant that Kyrgyzstan is identified as one of the world’s problem areas … which is largely unfair. (Well, I suppose, I would say that, wouldn’t I? — after all, I have chosen to live and work here.) Officially the name of the country is the Kyrgyz Republic — but that doesn’t exactly «trip of the tongue».

The change in the visa regulations of many of our neighbouring countries ending the «72-hour rule» which allowed transit through one country on the basis of a valid visa for another didn`t help. Tourists wanting to travel the Silk Road, or visit «the stans» now have to queue up in a number of embassies to obtain the stamps that allow them access to this cradle of history and mountain paradise.

Other bureaucratic obstacles exist — such as the requirement for foreigners to register with the authorities (OVIR) after their arrival. To be fair the government and administration seem to understand this one moment and put improvements in place — only for them to removed later on. The uncertainty generated is far from helpful.

Another form of uncertainty has been the changes in the timetable for flights in and out of Manas, and the way that prices changed in mid-season. Fortunately that tendency seems to be resolved.

The trials and tribulations (and cost) involved in trying to organize crossing the Torugart Pass may add a sense of excitement for some tourists — but prove to be too daunting a challenge for many a potential Silk Road traveller.

The change of the basis of the hotel tax led to an increase in costs — from 3 soms per guest to 2% of the cost of the accommodation, (3% in Issyk Kul), has added to costs. We effectively faced something like a fifty-fold increase in the tax burden.

The Chinese testing of atomic weapons in the deserts of Lop Nor, wasn’t as great a handicap as might have been supposed — but it was just another example of the region getting into the news for all the news for all the wrong reasons. Don’t believe the pundits who say that «there is no such thing as bad publicity»!

One of the most spectacular tourist itineraries that go to make up the network of trade routes that has come to be known as the Silk Road is the along Karakoram Highway between Kashgar and Islamabad. Kyrgyzstan is well placed as a staging post on this route to/from the West and for several years it looked as if there was great potential for developing programmes that covered the ancient cities of Uzbekistan, the mountains and nomadic lifestyle of Kyrgyzstan, the mysteries of Western China and the sites of the «Great Game» played out in the nineteenth century between the great empires of Russia and the United Kingdom in Pakistan. But then came a war in Kashmir and two neighbouring countries developing atomic weapons with the economic sanctions and border closures which followed.

A truck load of poisonous chemicals falling off a bridge into a rushing mountain stream killed a whole tourist season for the resorts on Lake Issyk Kul.

Terrorists from the Islamic Movement for Uzbekistan crossing the border and taking hostages — one year some Japanese geologists and some mountaineers of various nationalities the next.

These events led to a number of «travel warnings» being issued by various governments. A travel warning not only puts off potential travelers — they might also invalidate insurance policies. Some relating to the Kyrgyz Republic are still in force and others are being reinforced — strengthened.

A Chinese businessman being taken hostage, diplomats being killed on the streets of the capital, a bus load of traders being hijacked and murdered.

The events of September 11th had a distinct effect. Ironically, the next day had been chosen for a summit to mark the «year for the Support and Development of Tourism» — and such was the sympathy for the people of New York, Washington and Pennsylvania that the participants stood for a minute’s silence, not once — but twice, in memory of the victims. The tourist season was almost over in Kyrgyzstan — but cancellations followed and enquiries for the subsequent year dropped dramatically as Westerners were reluctant to travel far from home.

A political demonstration ends badly with several protesters being shot by police leads to reports in Russian and the Western press of a «civil war situation» in the republic.

The war in Afghanistan (another «stan») and the threat of war in Iraq helped to depress interest for the subsequent season.

The current strength of the som or is it the weakness of the dollar) has put pressure on the economics of pricing policies.

Terrorist action within the borders of the Kyrgyz Republic … street crime … corruption and poverty all take their toll on the market.

Then came SARS — and the closing of the border with China.

Less enquiries from potential tourists … more cancellations from those who had booked.

To top it all, this is the very moment when the State Committee for Tourism decides to try and reintroduce licensing. At a time of crisis for the industry — what does the government do? … try to introduce yet another hurdle for struggling tour companies to negotiate.

I could go on … but what’s the point? I think you must have got the message.

Having said all of that, you might be forgiven for asking why me I am not packing my bags and catching the next flight back to London.

The answer is simple. I am still here, and have no plans to return to the UK, because I still think that there is a great potential for the development of tourism here in the Kyrgyz Republic.

Most of what has happened has come as surprises. If part of my job is to try and anticipate problems — then I don’t like surprises. It means I haven’t foreseen the problem and am unprepared for it — I haven’t yet thought out a solution. I suppose that some of these events could have been foreseen — but I wonder who could have done so in most of the cases listed above.

Rather than surrender to circumstances and give up, I would rather see if we can succeed in «bouncing back» in the face of adversity, like the legendary phoenix, rising from the ashes as a rejuvenated, stronger entity.

It is a challenge and challenges help to make life interesting and fulfilling.

What is needed is a clear vision of what to do next.

I have already decided that 2003 is a «dead year» and started working on a marketing plan for 2004 … and beyond.

First we have to decide our market(s) and priorities. There are several types of tourism market on which the Kyrgyz Republic could concentrate: Recreation around Lake Issyk Kul, (mainly concerned with the CIS market); mountaineering and adventure tourism — trekking, horse riding etc.; Silk Road travels and other regional itineraries; Cultural tourism based on the nomadic lifestyle and homestays; independent travelers; Hunting and Fishing; Eco-tourism opportunities; Elite tourism; Winter sports; Children’s camps; Conference tourism; ….

Each market has its own advantages and problems. For example: recreation around Lake Issyk Kul may bring in the volume of visitors — but the benefits they bring are restricted to a limited area of the country and a short season. Independent travelers tend to visit other regions. Silk Road tours may only be in the country a few days — but tend to leave more money in the country per person per day. Western tourists also spend more money per person — but they have higher expectations and the facilities aren’t always in place. Silk Road travels are attractive for tourists who may visit this part of the world only once in their lifetime — but they are more likely to suffer problems from factors which are outside our own control and the tourists are in the Kyrgyz Republic for only short amount of time so only get a taste of what the country really has to offer — one thing that is desirable is for more tourists to spend longer here — and that means that they have to be informed of what is available here.

There is too much required for successful marketing for each company to deliver alone. The industry is going to have to come together, to unite and co-operate more than it has in the past to try and build a future for the common good. Each company has its own specialisms and strengths. Each has much to offer — but whilst each company undertakes marketing its own products, there is also a need for some form of co-ordination so that the Kyrgyz Republic as a whole is marketed.

We should not concentrate just on tour companies — tourism brings benefits to many sectors of the economy, and many more people can be involved in developing initiatives.

We need a marketing plan which concentrates on what we can deliver based on our existing resources here in the Kyrgyz Republic — the mountains, nature, the people, their culture. Whereas it could be said that Kyrgyzstan is poor in terms of some natural resources … oil, gas, infrastructure … it is rich in many other respects.

There is still «gold» here in these mountains — and it is not all the yellow precious metal that contributes so much to the local economy.

The mountains are still here. The fauna and flora is still an attraction. The sense of history as represented in places like Tash Rabat, or in the petroglyphs of Saimalu Tash and Cholpon Ata are still there. The people are as hospitable as ever. The culture and lifestyle is as interesting as it ever has been.

I am still optimistic — I trust that I am also being realistic.

1. be a citizen of the Kyrgyz Republic,
2. have a degree in Tourism, and
3. have at least three years experience in tourism.

Under this provision I couldn’t be the director of the Celestial Mountains Tour Company.  Although I satisfy the third of these conditions … the company was established in 1997, and so I have over ten years experience … but I fall foul of the other two.  I do have official Residence status here in Kyrgyzstan – but my passport is of “a different colour” … I am not a Kyrgyz citizen.  Also my degree is not in tourism, it’s in Theology and the Psychology of Education.  I also have a postgraduate diploma, but that’s in Mathematical Education … and so wouldn’t help.  Neither would the fact that I taught the IT units on a Tourism and Leisure vocational course back in the UK …

For the record … in 2009 there was another draft law proposed – and it included the same provision.  The law was passed by the Parliament – but vetoed by the President in the face of opposition from the industry, and sent back with the instruction to revise it.

Most people are surprised to learn that I have a degree in Theology, (and the Psychology of Education!).  Indeed, I think it was a surprise to everyone at the time – my friends and family included.  We weren’t a particularly religious family.  My parents, like most English people of their generation, were nominally Christians and would probably have answered “C of E”, (Church of England, Anglican or what is known in the US as Episcopalian), on any form that asked for their religion.

These days I don’t normally talk much about Religion (and despite the name of this page, I am not going to now), but that wasn’t always the case.  It might seem odd for someone with a degree in Theology, but I tend to agree with the old adage that there are three things that you don’t discuss in “polite conversation”: Sex, Politics and Religion … they are private matters, between a man and his lover, the ballot box, and his god.

When I was growing up, on the other hand, I took a lively interest in religion.  It was a major part of my life.  So much so that I wanted to become, (indeed, I planned to become), a Minister in the church.  Looking back at it now, with the benefit of hindsight, it seems to me that a lot of it was social … rather than a question of conviction.  There was no dramatic conversion, no “Damascus Road” experience, no “blinding lights” … but then again, not every believer has such an experience.  Like many others, I sort of “drifted” into the church – and then out again … “a backslider”.

It started when I started attending the Sunday School at the local Salvation Army and then, later, at the Methodist Church, then the local Crusaders Group and finally Bible Classes at the local Gospel Hall … I don’t think I ever attended all four on one day, but my Sundays were pretty busy.

Basically I was taken along at first by one of my friends, but when they “dropped out”, I didn’t.  The “classes” got smaller as more and more people stopped coming and soon I was one of the few left.  The others all seemed to belong to families which were firm members of the church and so were like “conscripts”, whereas I stood out as a “volunteer”.  I got more and more involved in Church affairs on an informal basis and eventually asked the Minister if I could join the church as a member.  He was delighted and probably jumped the gun a little – instead of explaining everything to me and making sure that I understood and was ready he sort of rushed the decision and pushed the process through.  The next thing I know, I am a member.

“Membership has its privileges” as the advertising slogan put it … but it also carries responsibilities and obligations.  Was I ready to accept those?  Looking back on it now I think that I can probably, honestly, say “No”, but at the time I felt ready.  I didn’t, however, accept everything I was told blindly.  Like the early Methodists I was very much a “freethinker”.    I created quite a stir, for example, amongst members of the church, (who are traditionally teetotallers), when I took a summer job as a barman in a local pub.  What was wrong with that? – didn’t Jesus turn water into wine at a wedding? – is the wine an important part of the communion ritual?  The problem wasn’t alcohol in itself, it lay in the abuse of alcohol.  Surely it was better to drink alcohol in the controlled situation of a public house, served by a barman than at home where there were no social controls.

Perhaps, however, I was a little too ready to accept what I was learning … to take things on trust, as a matter of faith.  In life you have to take some things on trust … or faith … and perhaps, looking back with hindsight, I did take too much on trust without asking enough questions and analyzing the stories, accounts and precepts.

After a while I felt ready to take the next step – I really felt that I wanted to work in the church.  So I asked the question about how I should set about it, and once again I found doors being opened for me … I didn’t feel that I was being rushed into something, but I was being “carried along with the tide”.

Finally, someone gave me some advice which seemed sensible.  Our Minister had retired and his replacement was a young man, with a young wife who didn’t really see herself as a wife of the Manse.  Most of the people in the church were a lot older than them and, to be fair, she, in particular, didn’t fit in.  I don’t think it was anyone’s fault – indeed, it might just have been a mismatch … if he had been assigned to an inner city church, then I think they would both felt much happier.  They would have felt that they were making a real difference rather than being tucked away in some backwater.  Eventually, he decided that perhaps he had made a mistake and decided to resign … not just from his post as our Minister, but from the Church as a whole.  It was a blow.  I was shocked, but it was pointed out to me that I was also young and who knows what the future might bring.   Instead of deciding to go to Theological College, perhaps I should think like an actor who always has a second string to his bow for when he is “resting” … that is – when he doesn’t have an acting job … a role to perform on stage.

I knew that this was good advice – as I have said elsewhere, I don’t believe in closing doors until you have to … so I looked around and chose teaching as a suitable “second” career.  As things turned out, it was to end up being my main vocation for most of my life – sometimes, I think, even today when I am running a tour business.

The “backsliding” started after I left home to go to college.  I had chosen my college for several reasons, including:

• it was not far from home,
• it was a Methodist college, and
• it offered me the opportunity to continue my studies in my two “favoured” subjects … Religion and Mathematics.

The Theology lectures I attended, however, started to raise more and more questions in my mind, as did the new subjects that I encountered, such as Psychology and Sociology … and what I was learning in Mathematics gave me the analytical tools to tackle, (although not necessarily to answer), those questions.   I didn’t like the answers that I felt I was being drawn towards … and I started to wonder if I had, indeed, made a mistake.  I then made a fateful decision, on purely emotional grounds, that I needed to take a breather … I needed to think things through for myself before I took an irrevocable step.

I wrote to my Superintendent Minister at home and explained the situation.  I can imagine the shockwave that letter created – I felt some of the ripples sixty five miles away – a much bigger shockwave than my being a Methodist barman.

I wasn’t ready to leave the church at that time … I still felt that I believed … but I felt that I didn’t have (and I don’t have today) the conviction and certainty that I used to have – and that I felt I needed to have in order to become a Minister.   So, I stopped attending church several times every Sunday … but not altogether …  Slowly, however, I drifted away from the church.  My membership lapsed and if anyone asks me now, I tend to say I am agnostic about religion … perhaps, veering towards atheism.

I was once asked whether I felt, as things eventually turned out, if I felt that I had wasted my time in University studying Theology.  The answer is no, emphatically, NO.  I learned a lot in that time – about the culture in which I grew up (- just think about how much of the music, art, history and literature is tied up in religion), about ethics, about people and how to deal with them and, of course, about myself.

It’s part of me.  It helped to make me who I am, and what I am.