CENTRAL ASIA SECURITY POLICY BRIEFS #14 Geographical Enclaves of the Fergana Valley: Do Good Fences Make Good Neighbors? By Rashid Gabdulhakov
Key points:
1. Demarcation of borders can be a complex, troublesome and even aggressive process. During the formation of the USSR, borders between the member republics were drawn by the “center” (Moscow) and carried a symbolic character, as all the member republics collectively comprised one greater state – the USSR. As a result of vague language of border defining documents, nearly 30% of the borderline between Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan remain disputed. Disputes over border demarcation are present between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as well. Border disputes have caused tension outbursts in the near- border village settlements.
2. Central Asian republics are suffering from lack of cooperation. Rivalries between the gas-rich downstream countries and the upstream neighbors, with water glacier reserves, are negatively effecting bilateral relations – not to mention the history of ethnic clashes and tension that persists in the Ferghana Valley. This most densely populated region of Central Asia is home to several geographical enclaves – territorial units that further complicate the demarcation process and affect the bilateral relations between the states involved.
3. While the affairs between the states have an effect on residents of enclaved territorial units, the very residents of these territories may cause tension, to which the governments of the respective states react. Tension in an enclave may have an influence on the population residing in the surrounding state – population that do not necessarily share the identity with residents of the given enclave. A legal solution in the question of enclaves and wellbeing of their dwellers is an immediate must.
Introduction 4 1 #
The collapse of the state as large and diverse as s
f the USSR inevitably led to disputes over natural e i
r and industrial resources, and, of course, the B
border lines. In sections of the borderline between
y Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, if the border were to c i l be installed and fences built, half of the o
P households would end up living in Uzbekistan and
1 Figure 1: Map of Ferghana Valley enclaves y the other half in Kyrgyzstan. There are entire t i
r territorial units that are located in another state; Negative relations with both the mainland and the u surrounding state may influence the enclave
c these units, as a general rule, are referred to as
e “enclaves.” In these enclaves there are found residents to seek independence, or act violently. S households whose living room is located in The more negative factors there are in the scheme a i Uzbekistan, and the terrace in Kyrgyzstan. of relations, the more anxious and tense will be the s A
RASHID GABDULHAKOV is an alumnus of the OSCE Academy in Bishkek, class of 2013. l a
r Currently he is working as a Political Science Instructor at the International University of t
n Central Asia (IUCA) in Tokmok, Kyrgyz Republic. Rashid received his BA in Political Science e at Whitworth University in Spokane, Washington State, USA and has worked with UN C Volunteers in Uzbekistan. Rashid's research interests fall on Central Asian region, nation 1 building, natural resources, border demarcation, and geographical enclaves. 2 Central Asia Security Policy Briefs #14 patterns Some complicates Soviet Border fact administration K majority spoken allocated the and usually The use respect V their enclave Kyrgyzstan Sokh embedded hand, “ e countries. c The Understanding recommendations is enclaves economic V as: second enclave the brief historic, Ferghana This and The national processes Uzbekistan. involved cause situation mainland o x alley alley y u c provided, r territory g l n paper that the exclaves. “ a NTD term formation emergence helped consists y t v policy r surrounding z describes is enclaves, y e enclaves, republics , scholars term
explained ”. tension by
economic, this to part demarcation territorial of . in of 3 phenomenon an s “ in
” o states t 3) general to exclave h u T characteristics, its their , the f border Given that state V
into fact
r rue e produce land population, is border the T “ In brief r alley key Uzbek a enclave
provides oday o of inhabitants. U of enclave u the conclusion, l z country of a the helped n enclaves, mainland the a took and was the b people unit the of outbursts are n of view points d – ” e via part definitions delimitation are provides ' d demarcation, e legal
s this the “ negotiations host describes k enclaves following: Ferghana
host Sokh. d enclaves/exclaves Kyrgyz i Kyrgyzstan, the tensions looks enclave is state s ” carried both
u the
place made. t in . of located between a n an b enclaves draft USSR Feghana resources, are and based Soviet definition, ” n are i regards y in t state a . assumption
' For state. s
state. enclaves at Enclave, overview such a foreign and a w Barak Republic, U between territorial an the own in stressed summary out introduced. n various and a a 1) are within z instance, and o V inside (NTD) s Union. b territorial and
on t the land alley today
overview h In history Soviet while e in as to It Sokh V the e overview k the g territory as T
territory the alley r a is i both legal village i ajikistan the s Sokh
v covers all 1920s in on t manner factors exclaves of Uzbekistan. Kyrgyzstan. e . enclaves common a ” c issues. units echo took “ despite that others and n first “ 2 of abnormal o the n respect
is Ferghana republics, brotherly language the
since enclaves Feghana enclaves u
of aspects, unit findings n . 2) t a i o is of s part during t spoke place. that policy of Thus, of y these when
other three
were such “ , their
true The The that and of find t t the the the the the the h h o to to of in is is e e a ” ” r
constructed structures, enclaves with as of However battles fluctuating then enclave history status terminate help 5) increasing o among rapid populationgrowtharelikelytocauseanxiety limited 4) demand suf surrounding make through located 3) based enclave major shared surrounding the between enclave with all fundamentally 2) likely state role. 1) significance There approaches political issue V USSR, new them p alley Legal/Historical: Economic: Resources: Population: T struggle p mechanisms the ficient erritorial: o relationship ' r tense enclaves s the define to to If of . There t identity the the . actors. on u of over province, the If are cause nine be ethnicity located n resources, in it, and enclaves. would independence. , residents the i the map, their the t surrounding are resources i enclave such enough, insignificant the the speculations e enclave over status notion land bilateral s of to present. but refer five two the states of state
state, enclave
is factor If Location not tension Financial influence religion
the addressing ground significant i be emerged The which the as n Any of a the in they and countries – status
sometimes or to major scarcity enclave
always of manipulation With likely river t may and a the – do dwellers may of residents h limited is enclaves. contradicting identity on or
may its e are relations. While desirable Concrete natural regardless and enclave the or are not is
, vary of , phenomena. the state, middle legal of 282 major of deprivation are s may be of if possible. ethnic usually identify and not factors u with the third agree in the disagreements. their located the the and of may r tempt rich the 5 r the tense job likely and
of o enclave the status. enclaves in always scholarly of u enclave, later cause provocations. are enclave road, resources Enclaves then product state, its the n origin. existence. enclave of be af unit With enclave, dwellers between an enough on legal d opportunities force their relations defined themselves fairs problems: i legal of to that n as the The the hostile, in on enclave collapse the a g 4 in of cause absorbing the
their
with the the Nearly conflicts well. this the them becomes between the result on agreements s surrounding status work land documents, types, plays relationship of or enclave define t dwellers may enclave a backbone Ferghana the based enclave. and which and the t inherited and that that between and in enclave, possible e tension, Another identify to , for twenty on
of states a Legal mind, serve of world of seek with, t thus self- thus flow and and and h key are the the the the the the the the the on u to is is a a s
3 Central Asia Security Policy Briefs #14 Uzbek residents and decision-makers, carried product claiming historians structures, dependent would who enclaves the of Generally as some sourcesreferto causes further T located Some village, these The Qal Some Qora/Chongara D Qal population e also Sokh, caused four The of Overview do residing enclave another given between have enclaves governments territories territorial states ayan n z the is not h enclaves. ' ' c Ferghana acha acha/Kayragach(T reason a current indicated intentionally major l exist language. enclave. n do a tiny necessarily an enclave, enclaves, and Shahimardan, territories village have complicates g which confusion of tension v in out in enclave a that may away these , are e shared was explain i territories in of internal influence units, historians the l the sizes. had other may
for / Feghana thus Policy J on based the an land Shahimardan, i of by a as in V to n Some various surrounding have with a 7 territories n cultural states alley the but
outbursts (Uzbek
Figure ef default i Ferghana Moscow master small the - cause such divided that Sarvan/Sarvak/Sarvaksoi enclaves between the is in the Thus, making share with U A division fect (regional) the Brief respective the y the are z on also their argue borders an not i south issue V l b say and ajik V they names T , very previously one on ties as alley reference as
orukh ayan asanotherenclave, situation, e legal gives a enclaves the the provides influence plan ' tension a the since s of k part only on enclave in as Dzhangail their proximity residents one n the to the over that valley of i state in share. identity of of d s decisions. two delimitation for residents desires the enclaves land status and the this we their used
them a t of and of states Sokh. various a same square Q on more projection Soviet the the the instance, the post-Soviet – n states, see Uzbek the existing Brief. a and the in enclaves to an in
in to ) minorities T in l relations its with Barak. on a the of complexity ension , village Kyrgyzstan). Kyrgyzstan), the of cultural c reference react. to W overview simple majority creation it Bolsheviks, This or of emergence states sometimes own which the 6 h that today kilometer minorities
area of residents a republics enclaved e SSR, relations way a W and such regional / political
s village C on name. estern notion spoke There that larger Other Thus, these t in (T h have
way e may was with era: that and that o is ties this ajik the the r an as n of of of to of is a n - , ; .
to borderline prioritized t in (IMU) The colleges 1 Uzbek is local the carried state. mainland state (99.4%), Sokh territories country road through inconvenient administrative a south rest completely long with corridor Attempts including border challenging between U m sides province Sokh Sokh surrounded populated As SSR remained N such the since land o 1,654 n z a e w prevent b printed
t the m a i Uzbek e state of , attempt o a Sokh. ” a unit r after o newspaper as k
is , n that d 1 T to of Sokh l of r the i dwellers government, s a s t ajikistan a students result, , 1990s out located to demarcation 1 e
the t Sokh, enter km l Sokh, n which 2 that is a
and the was this r which d T
state, the or the i Kyrgyz have n by which under n t with connects T ajikistan in disconnect u SSR, s the The in
border laid by residents enclave a e in of m wide
serve issue of a enough ethnic r t IMU hosts the the given province. T r
e i Kyrgyzstan. n were the two the would and ficial increased i v Sokh ajik in anti-personnel region t x d also was , triadic Kyrgyz o the been o out in e are adds c
some the “ country Republic, the f T r l
incursions Sadoi corridor
Islamic of 2,233 i a spheres K ajik Sokh, a the was the post-Soviet T there security v r language. to given e y are is enclave, language l enclaves. an just o ajiks, Batken center e connect
t nearly for r administration speak and a e enclave g the , a the complex, made impossibility language, D
r inside road y of fourth relationship side disputed d made n autonomous Despite Sokh students. z e the a 1 through along a are 0 , north Movement Batken s to l suspicions
n the latter who i l inter-ethnic t m due
as H d of a of T . Uzbekistan Kyrgyz that 1
has n 13 f entirely i ajik, with 28 a 5 and mainland and ” to t r element, Kyrgyzstan a 9 trade, , mines
enclaved a of i U v this of (the e . are
with to is
separate t of i schools and z At states According n i in trade n 14 the connects o province t the refused although Uzbekistan. b and d mountains h the its g the n e some even nearly Uzbek s
e the Sokh corridor of V
3 side, k h
of an of water Sokh between oice in region
signed i ( a of professional constructing ethnic p education r surrounding province N rest e Uzbekistan Uzbekistan “ same a land conflicts n an
the alternative ethnic has territories, during T l that u areas. a
republic. T ' b as s a laid of D enclave, t citizens, from t ashkent enclave h e attempt U i it the entirely issues, Batken o ) Uzbek 17 o to of t Sokh) would
within w n z serve travel is to for r been 1996 time, T s i b a 1 The root e t two ajik 1 the the not the the the the the h km i
e n e e i
is is a – p n d s k 8
4 Central Asia Security Policy Briefs #14 situated in V V negative ef is disagreements incidents shared Shahimardan T enclave. states then, demanded situation of residents significance historical enclave fact with Shahimardan Uzbekistan the mainland. identify Uzbeks. Shahmardan t The Kyrgyzstan. l through Uzbekistan. S one home explains The Shahimardan specifically stimulations m there state benefits time stimulation e The e h x orukh orukh, h h a e suf s jeopardy c Uzbekistan. a i e
s son-in-law n l h point a predominant mainland enclave
Sokh. that
l fering p i a v - and are m may of i o n t e n now positive o a p themselves d by , 1 that c Shahimardan, its 6
a r u inside around an
u is carried
and o no d the between the l . w territorial ” prominent r a fect onlifeinsidetheenclave a and n U This
in emergence.
Uzbekistan of However i by annexation would t has n h may ethnic allows v is Ethnic s z specific i Unlike exclave education are o fer
i e with b enclave state would agreement majority of c m is home Evgeny n n e In economic h i stimulation. s
Batken notion the - k on i the
suf the never be
e Uzbek d i the 2004 b s of the in i n 1 e s t e is fering the for a Prophet unimaginable as c Uzbeks. fered title 7 ties
challenge , i demarcation p a to Sokh, enclave economic n n e prone unit
Uzbek Kyrgyz d e way , enclave g s territory V closer , the descendants
may 6,000 of k
thus e and visa
made n
and
of population two inokurov Kyrgyzstan Shahrimardan province of m s r with wellbeing d made c a t c from Hamzaabad. the
o in o mean that t e r h to media Shahimardan. In
i no enclave be m Muhammad f n b poet the Kyrgyzstan. states free e a side, people, has Letting connected t e the be p t r r Uzbekistan the h attempts population the ,
d r explained stimuli
border some of between major e i
, has enclave s f a suspicious e t
r but Hamza, in changed . e travel h of o a territorial as case c social betrayal have of of d e s T ' m s s the ' o and s ajikistan, s
u of
at with the it the residents
n e lawmakers r go a o of “ r is tried dilemmas economic
roads Khalif o m residents mainland the n o f ; of . fered
to
tourism into enclave m p a e general u the a with cultural thus causes 1 Kyrgyz 91% Border via sector of o and g e 7 of i n native Sokh, n y make same of
since s trade a t to unity d of l h
i The a t t two i the the the the the Ali, i n i n n do go v v by its its o of at i is is a g d e e c f ,
residents government residing ethnic of over during Kyrgyzstan h blockade taken shared an an access enclave residents cattle, procedures continue south enclave, Kyrgyzstan tucks when highly Kyrgyzstan, 600 Kyrgyzstan. crossing province Barak Barak the unprecedented d Kyrgyzstan mortars violence car citizens neighboring c road T construction On travel V causes bilateral s Republic ajikistan, c a o orukh i s e s n spread . example p 2 n
countries April indirect f people 0 u 200 l a construction
i a residents through c t r A by inconvenient. of which n the e is i that clashes t o of between
tension residents
that d points. to , occurred, Kyrgyz year relations in in 27, and and of
a
the on of living the e e Barak on ethnic of V c s who r should t in located ' respond Kyrgyz where o s e h The populationofBarakisonlynearly and as the Uzbekistan orukh negative of were c delivered the January Kyrgyz Barak. is a 2013, o r Kyrgyz the as violence is a the country demanded the r will d i a later l n life of i the a that demand outbursts. low
t 130 residents in roads road, g o featured to clashes the t customs neighboring area enclave. and Barak
c e have traveling r allocate disputes in enclave as have between o y , d the dwellers on mainland main r 2 village After when in ” n e sq. 2 village are
two on to the .
side , attacked s a the T There 2 which that 2013, ef the w and t 1 c into bilateral as humanitarian r ; attacked enclave.
took t km.
the fect u h resettlement i enclaved an January occurring it source o in the states. c 19 of T e 1 by that Uzbek T towards 8 the n land complicate t ajik they n h
through closure located
is ajikistan i over the the Ak-Say
Sokh o who On was Much
road i was impact hostage the rebelled closure incidents s on n Kyrgyzstan. Uzbekistan i the n r
state, the
Kyrgyz the border units e Kyrgyz
2 several enclave. relations r c one do 3 s not of Thus, another Kyrgyz territory e t even two had Border find o i h excavators. only construction 1 d like s territorial m government e Sokh, of income outside the 1, in e u attacked considers sanctioned not for
on enclave p of into the n l and to block t guards l states, against aid e the side the themselves in in t i e city 2014, an c territory them exclave s any n all flee occasions d 25 minorities a .
desire drivers c cars the the 24 southern between
crossing t In such l enclave blocked incident e Andijan a o
border- of on sale to
This i for s began v of in f action posts, n unit 2010, Thus,
in Sokh Sokh
e have Osh,
T fired new fear “ The
and that t ajik t the the the the the the the a h h as by by by o of to of of of is is n e e f
entirely surrounded by another state, and perhaps suffer from fear of revenge on behalf of the neighbors, even if this revenge action is not surrounding country and the enclave are performed by the surrounding state, but rather on multidimensional. Each actor is defending its own the civil level. In other words, the states involved interests and these interests sometimes converge, react to the behavior of societal groups, and not and at other times contradict each other. Generally, vice versa. in the world practice, the ultimate solution to the issue of enclaves is some form of integration Conclusions/Recommendations between the states involved, or at least an ease of border-crossing policy for the enclave residents !Enclaves can create major inconveniences both and visitors. Thus, the relations between the for the states involved, and for the enclave involved states (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and dwellers. National security, territorial unity, Uzbekistan) outweigh the effects of enclaves on the freedom of movement and economic issues are at bilateral relations between them, and can change stake in this uneasy balance. Given the vague the situation in a positive manner. Fences are not language that was used in the historical always the best solution for the areas where documents that describe the borders in the different ethnic groups have been living together for Ferghana Valley, the process of border centuries, and shared water resources and pasture demarcation between Central Asian states can lands. ! take years to be resolved. With this in mind, a Respective states should listen to the demands systematic, transparent and professional and concerns of the residents of enclaves. mechanism of negotiations is a must. Unaddressed and ignored issues further weaken ! First and foremost, there is a dire need for the faith of enclave residents in any legal protection, regular dialogue between the border experts and and stimulate individual actions, and “struggle for politicians from all sides. Only systematic justice” via violence, as has been the case with negotiations and political will at the highest level Vorukh, Sokh and Barak residents. ! with input from the local level can bring fruitful While the initiatives of international, multinational results in the process of border demarcation and and regional organizations, such the OSCE are the question of geographical enclaves. Border- important, only the states involved can guarantee related negotiations should not be based on mutual trust and transparency in border ultimatums; rather, they should carry an open and negotiations, and define the legal status of their constructive character, in order to avoid enclaves, with regards to socio-economic well- provocations and conflicts in border areas. being of enclave dwellers.
4 !Governments should be concerned with the faith
1 Wellbeing of the people residing in near-border-
# of minorities residing on their territories and
areas should be taken into consideration when
s ideology of friendship would play a major role in this f borderlines are delimited and possible border e
i regard. Central Asian states, generally, need to
r posts or even fences are installed. emphasize their cultural and historical links and B ! As enclaves can and do exist as legitimate
y similarities as opposed to differences and rivalries. entities, the question in the case of Ferghana c i
l Independent for over two decades former brotherly Valley enclaves is ease of travel for the enclave o republics have drifted far from common ground of
P residents, economic development inside of the identity. As a region, Central Asia has the chance of
y enclaves and general bilateral relations between t i withstanding major threats, both external and r the states involved. While the corridor solution is
u internal. Lack of cooperation further degrades the
c less likely to become reality, enclaves can
e realities and living conditions of the people in peacefully exist; they do not have to impose S
general, and residents of near-border areas problems and threats. With this in mind, ideally, a
i specifically. Central Asian enclaves could be utilized as tourist s
A destinations. The legal curiosity can be wisely
l
a “sold” as a tourist attraction. This tactic would help r t stimulate the economy of enclaved territorial units, n
e would lessen the level of suspicion towards the
C enclaves and would lessen the level of aggression among the residents of the enclaves. The 5 relations between the mainland state, the Notes
1 Enclaves of the world,
1 August 12, 2013). # 13 Farangiz Nadgibula, “Uzbekskiy Anklav Sokh v Kirgizstane naselenniy Tadjikami,[Uzbek Enclave Sokh within s f Kyrgyzstan, Populated by Tajiks]” Radio Liberty, June 14, 2010,
i 2013).
o 15 European Comission “The European Union Mine Actions in the World”, Luxembourg: Of?ce for Of?cial P
Publications of the European Communities, 2005, p.58, y t
i
u 16 Enclaves of the World,
e 17 Igor Rotar, “Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan Heighten Tension in Violent Local Dispute,” Eurasia Daily Monitor, Vol. S
10, Issue 17, January 30, 2013. a
i 18 David Trilling, “Week After Tajikistan-Kyrgyzstan Border Clash, No Resolution in Sight”, Central Asia Today, s January 19, 2014,
l 19 Farangiz Najibullah, “Uzbek, Kyrgyz and Tajik Lives Collide in Sokh,” Radio Liberty, June 3, 2010, a r
t
C 20 Aisa Plus, “UMVD Tadjikistana po Sogdu: situatsiya v rayone anklava Vorukh stabilizirovalas.” [MIA of Tajikistan: the situation near Vorukh enclave has stabilized.] April 29, 2013,
22. Enclaves of the world,
s f e i r B
y c i l o P
y t i r u c e S
a i s A
l a r t n e C 6 OSCE ACADEMY - GCSP INTERNATIONAL Central Asia Security Policy Briefs SECURITY PROGRAMME are published by the OSCE Academy in Bishkek and the Geneva Centre for Security Policy. Central Asia Security Policy Briefs Series Available This series deals with current issues of comprehensive on-line at www.osce-academy.net. security relevant for Central Asia. This includes but is To order hard copies free of charge or submit a not limited to such themes as socioeconomic text write to [email protected]. determinants of security, identity-based conflicts, Submission guidelines are found at the end of political Islam, ethnopolitics, security organizations, each issue. bilateral relations, the situation in Afghanistan and other neighbouring states. Central Asia Security Policy Briefs OSCE Academy in Bishkek, will be published on-line in the pdf format, with printed Botanichesky 1A, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, 72004 copies available. The language of publication is English. Tel: 996 312 54 32 00 Submissions can be made in English or Russian. We Fax: 999 312 54 23 13 will make Russian translation of select Briefs. www.osce-academy.net
Submission guidelines: Geneva Centre for Security Policy, 1. OSCE Academy GCSP ISP Central Asia Security Avenue de la Paix 7bis P.O. Box 1295, Policy Briefs are submitted to the OSCE Academy and CH-1211 Geneva 1 GCSP preferably after preliminary discussion. www.gcsp.ch 2. The content of Central Asia Security Policy Briefs does not necessarily reflect views of the OSCE Academy or GCSP. 3. A Central Asia Security Policy Brief is a 3000-3500 words (inclusive of key findings and endnotes) paper. The Security Policy Briefs should include a short author bio noting one or two recent publications, research focus and e-mail contact details. 4. Submissions have to be sent to [email protected] in the .doc or .docx format.
4 5. Use of diagrams for presentation of arguments is
1 welcome and clear identification of. #
s 6. Recommendations will be enhanced by setting them f
e apart from other text in a box. i r 7. To acknowledge sources and relevant literature, please B
y use endnotes. c i
l 8. At the beginning of the Brief will be a list of key
o findings/recommendations. P 9. While the structure of a Central Asia Security Policy y t i
r Brief may vary depending on the preferences of the
u author, as a product addressing policy and expert c
e communities it must outline (1) existing challenges, (2) S proposed or implemented responses, (3) policy dilemmas a i and trade-offs, and present (4) recommendations based s
A on analysis of alternative policy options.
l a r t n
e NB: The views expressed in this paper are entirely
C and solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the OSCE 7 Academy in Bishkek or the GCSP.