DOCSLIB.ORG

September 2016 Muhiddin Kabiri, Leader

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
September 2016 Muhiddin Kabiri, Leader BIRTH AND DEATH OF DEMOCRACY IN TAJIKISTAN: MEMORIES AND REFLECTIONS ABOUT ELECTIONS FROM 1990 UNTIL 2016 CAP PAPERS 174 September 2016 Muhiddin Kabiri, Leader of the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistan (Nahzat) Voting feasts during the Soviet period When we talk about elections in Tajikistan and consider the history of these elections, it is worthwhile to begin with the Soviet period. In the Soviet Union, elections were not considered independent democratic institutions, but rather a tool for consolidating the legitimacy of decisions made by the Communist Party. And therefore as a rule, elections for the Soviet Supreme Council took place only after the candidates had been predetermined by Moscow. Similarly, the candidates elected for the Supreme Council of the Republic of Tajikistan were the candidates nominated by the Central Committee of the Communist Party in Dushanbe, the republic’s capital. We never heard of alternative candidates; only one candidate was proposed for each position, so it is interesting that they continued to call them elections, since elections require a choice of at least two candidates. Nevertheless, during the Soviet period we did go to the polls and the whole country voted exclusively for single candidates. I do recall that our candidates for the Supreme Council of the USSR were not from Dushanbe. I remember that the candidate for our area was a Mr. Podgorny, whom no one had ever seen in Dushanbe or anywhere in Tajikistan; he was in Moscow. Nevertheless, people voted for him. I also remember that people went to elections as they might go to a concert: there was music all over town, and pilaf (the traditional rice dish) was served at each site, so elections turned into national holidays. Further, people considered it necessary to vote to fulfill one’s Soviet duty. Nobody was interested in the person that was to be elected or his policies. If people can remember elections during the Soviet period, this is what they remember as being positive: there were never any problems, no violence, and no fraud. The people’s perception of elections was shaken by experiences during the early years of independence. We can say that the first free elections in Tajikistan were the elections of the Supreme Council of Tajikistan in 1990, one of the last years of the Soviet Union. When parliamentary 1 elections were held for the first time in Tajikistan, independent candidates entered the Supreme Council, including the Kozikalon or Mufti of the Republic of Tajikistan, Hoji Akbar Turanjonzoda, and another spiritual leader from the Kulob region, Aidar Sharifzoda, as well as religious people from the Sughd oblast. Also elected to the Supreme Council were democratically minded candidates like the poet Bozor Sobir and Toirat Dzhobor, the founder and then leader of the Rastokhez movement, or Asliddin Sohibnazar, who later became leaders of democratic parties. Consequently, the parliament reflected various alternative points of view. Thus, I would consider the parliament during that time as strong and pluralistic. For ordinary people, processes in the parliament were broadcast on TV, and people were able to watch the deputies discussing various questions, follow the questions that were addressed, and observe the deputies’ suggestions. Politics became very interesting to everyone. The parliament from that time is still a popular part of Tajikistan’s history — a parliamentary system considered democratic and independent. I remember as a student that during those elections I was in the pre-election team of the poet Bozor Sobir, because he was born near my settlement and he was my distant relative. He was a famous poet and a freethinker; he had always been against the Soviet system, which is one reason people loved him. Several local officials ran as opponents, some even from the party apparatus, and all of them lost to the democratic candidates. The people had voted for the alternative candidate. However, many others who entered the parliament were officials or party figures, including the current president of Tajikistan, Emomali Rahmon, who was then chairman of a kolkhoz (collective farm), with the local prosecutor running as his opponent. Thanks to those democratic elections — the only democratic parliamentary elections that Tajikistan experienced — Rahmon became a deputy of the Supreme Council. The only free elections in Tajikistan Paradoxically, the first free parliamentary elections in Tajikistan took place in the last years of the Soviet Union, and this was the case in other Soviet republics as well. In Russia, for instance, many democratically-minded people were voted into the Supreme Council of Russia; both Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan had many oppositional deputies elected. The first free presidential elections in Tajikistan did not take place until after independence, in late 1991. In November of that year, when there were several strong candidates for the presidency of Tajikistan, the Communist Party and the Soviet nomenklatura backed the former Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party in Tajikistan, Rahmon Nabiyev. Nabiyev had once held the top position in the country, but then was dismissed by Moscow for apparent mistakes. He was considered the most suitable figure because he was a native of the Sughd province, in the north, and therefore he had support from that region as well as from the Soviet nomenklatura, and they could also get support in the Kulob region in the south, which was part of an alliance with the northern part of the country. During those years we could feel a strong sense of regionalism, one of the remnants of the Soviet period. The opposition had proposed an independent candidate, Davlat Khudonazarov, the former chairman of the Union of Cinematographers of the USSR. Khudonazarov was from Badakhshan and he was an Ismaili when it came to his madhhab (religious affiliation). Despite this, the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistan, largely made up of Sunni Tajiks, the Democratic Party (Rastokhez Badakhshon), and all the other democratic forces supported Khudonazarov’s candidacy. He won about 40 percent of the vote while the Communist Party’s candidate got more than 50 percent of the votes. What is most interesting, however, is that nobody challenged the results, because everybody recognized that there had actually been a democratic and transparent election in Tajikistan. In other words, the people and the political parties participating in the process considered the elections to have been democratic. It also meant that the Tajik people were politicized enough to know the rules of the game. When I hear of people today being portrayed as insufficiently politically educated, I do not agree, because back then no individual and no party — whether they won or lost — protested 2 or challenged the results of the elections. What happened, however, is that the victorious party started to realize that the opposition held considerable potential, as it had collected about 40 percent of the votes, and they could not simply ignore this potential. This is why a coalition government was created, which allowed for stronger representation. For a while, active political figures entered the government, such as Davlat Usmon, who held the post of first deputy prime minister. Other ministers were chosen from the Democratic Party and from Rastokhez, although key posts were reserved for the Communist Party and the former Soviet nomenklatura. During this period, people were very tolerant and willing to cooperate. Tajikistan, for the first time since the Soviet period, set an example for constructive communication, with a common language among all political players in the country. Things went differently in other Central Asian countries and in the European part of the former Soviet Union, where heavy confrontations between political parties broke out. By 1992 conditions had become clear in all these republics: the former nomenklatura was back in power, this time acting in the name of presidents, as presidents were now the heads of state in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and even Russia. Boris Yeltsin may have been the most democratic head of state among the above-mentioned new countries, but in most cases the top posts were generally held by former Communist Party members. The Tajik example, at that time considered a democratic island in the former Soviet Union and especially in Central Asia, did not please everyone. I remember that we had good, independent mass media and freedom of the press was rather well developed. In previous elections, our political parties had published their newspapers somewhere in the Baltics or in Georgia, and brought them to Tajikistan by plane. After the presidential elections, however, printing oppositional publications became easier and some opposition parties from other Central Asian republics even wished to publish their newspapers in Tajikistan. The slow death of a democracy that had barely started Those elections, as I said, took place in the autumn of 1991. The following winter, I remember that Kazakh opposition parties and Uzbeks wanted us to print their newspapers. I do not actually remember whether this came about, but they did approach us to explore the possibilities. Printing companies agreed because the conditions in Tajikistan allowed it. In 1991 I began studies in Yemen and was observing events from far away. Thus, I did not witness how this coalition government performed, and it is difficult for me to judge, but I know one thing: Moscow and Tashkent were not pleased by this government’s work, precisely because representatives of various political parties had become part of the government, and hence set a new alternative example for the region. They feared that a similar government could be demanded in Tashkent, in Alma-Ata, and in Russia as well, which would challenge their ruling elites and governments. However, the coalition government — which was then called the government of national unity — made mistakes and did not manage to resolve the tensions among the regions, especially with regard to Kulob and Sughd (the Leninabad area of that time).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The 'Stans' at 20
    The Central Asia Observatory (OAC) was established in 2007 by three Spanish institutions involved in the area: Casa Asia, CIDOB and the Elcano Royal Institute. The ‘Stans’ at 20 (WP) Martha Brill Olcott Area: Asia – Pacific / Central Asia Observatory Working Paper 21/2011 - 28/12/2011 Elcano Royal Institute Madrid – Spain www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano_eng 1 The Central Asia Observatory (OAC) was established in 2007 by three Spanish institutions involved in the area: Casa Asia, CIDOB and the Elcano Royal Institute. The ‘Stans’ at 20 (WP) Martha Brill Olcott * Introduction In late December the five Central Asian countries enter their third decade of independence, effectively achieved when Mikhail Gorbachev resigned as President of the USSR and turned the Kremlin over to Boris Yeltsin as President of the Russian Federation. 1 While these countries began to declare their independence as early as 31 August 1991, beginning with the Kyrgyz Republic and ending with Kazakhstan on 16 December, 2 there was not the same popular and elite pressure for independence in the Central Asian region that was found in the south Caucasus, not to mention in the Baltic region. The leaders of the Central Asian republics all wanted more economic, cultural and political autonomy, but they were also very conservative and feared that independence might bring ethnic or political unrest to their republics. 3 These fears were borne out in Tajikistan, but everywhere else the transition to independence went smoothly. Now, 20 years later, these five republics have developed into very distinct countries. The ‘face’ of each country is different.
    [Show full text]
  • Elections in Tajikistan November 6 Presidential Elections
    Elections in Tajikistan November 6 Presidential Elections Frequently Asked Questions Europe and Asia International Foundation for Electoral Systems 1850 K Street, NW | Fifth Floor | Washington, DC 20006 | www.IFES.org November 1, 2013 Frequently Asked Questions Who will Tajikistani voters elect on November 6, 2013? ............................................................................. 1 What is the current political situation in Tajikistan? .................................................................................... 1 Why is the presidential election important? What is at stake?.................................................................... 2 Who are the candidates for President? ........................................................................................................ 2 Who can run for President of Tajikistan? ..................................................................................................... 3 Who is eligible to vote?................................................................................................................................. 4 How is the voter registry managed and maintained?................................................................................... 4 What laws regulate the presidential elections in Tajikistan? ....................................................................... 4 How many registered voters are there? ....................................................................................................... 4 What is the structure of the
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Research Division Country Profile: Tajikistan, January 2007
    Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Country Profile: Tajikistan, January 2007 COUNTRY PROFILE: TAJIKISTAN January 2007 COUNTRY Formal Name: Republic of Tajikistan (Jumhurii Tojikiston). Short Form: Tajikistan. Term for Citizen(s): Tajikistani(s). Capital: Dushanbe. Other Major Cities: Istravshan, Khujand, Kulob, and Qurghonteppa. Independence: The official date of independence is September 9, 1991, the date on which Tajikistan withdrew from the Soviet Union. Public Holidays: New Year’s Day (January 1), International Women’s Day (March 8), Navruz (Persian New Year, March 20, 21, or 22), International Labor Day (May 1), Victory Day (May 9), Independence Day (September 9), Constitution Day (November 6), and National Reconciliation Day (November 9). Flag: The flag features three horizontal stripes: a wide middle white stripe with narrower red (top) and green stripes. Centered in the white stripe is a golden crown topped by seven gold, five-pointed stars. The red is taken from the flag of the Soviet Union; the green represents agriculture and the white, cotton. The crown and stars represent the Click to Enlarge Image country’s sovereignty and the friendship of nationalities. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Early History: Iranian peoples such as the Soghdians and the Bactrians are the ethnic forbears of the modern Tajiks. They have inhabited parts of Central Asia for at least 2,500 years, assimilating with Turkic and Mongol groups. Between the sixth and fourth centuries B.C., present-day Tajikistan was part of the Persian Achaemenian Empire, which was conquered by Alexander the Great in the fourth century B.C. After that conquest, Tajikistan was part of the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom, a successor state to Alexander’s empire.
    [Show full text]
  • Tajikistan Health System Review
    Health Systems in Transition Vol. 12 No. 2 2010 Tajikistan Health system review Ghafur Khodjamurodov • Bernd Rechel Bernd Rechel (Editor) and Martin McKee (Series editor) were responsible for this HiT profile Editorial Board Editor in chief Elias Mossialos, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom Series editors Reinhard Busse, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Josep Figueras, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Martin McKee, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom Richard Saltman, Emory University, United States Editorial team Sara Allin, University of Toronto, Canada Matthew Gaskins, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Cristina Hernández-Quevedo, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Anna Maresso, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies David McDaid, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Sherry Merkur, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Philipa Mladovsky, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Bernd Rechel, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Erica Richardson, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Sarah Thomson, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Ewout van Ginneken, Berlin University of Technology, Germany International advisory board Tit Albreht, Institute of Public Health, Slovenia Carlos Alvarez-Dardet Díaz, University of Alicante, Spain Rifat Atun, Global Fund, Switzerland Johan Calltorp, Nordic School of Public Health, Sweden Armin Fidler,
    [Show full text]
  • BTI 2008 | Tajikistan Country Report
    BTI 2008 | Tajikistan Country Report Status Index 1-10 3.80 # 106 of 125 Democracy 1-10 3.73 # 100 of 125 Market Economy 1-10 3.86 # 104 of 125 Management Index 1-10 4.48 # 87 of 125 scale: 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest) score rank trend This report is part of the Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) 2008. The BTI is a global ranking of transition processes in which the state of democracy and market economic systems as well as the quality of political management in 125 transformation and developing countries are evaluated. The BTI is a joint project of the Bertelsmann Stiftung and the Center for Applied Policy Research (C•A•P) at Munich University. More on the BTI at http://www.bertelsmann-transformation-index.de/ Please cite as follows: Bertelsmann Stiftung, BTI 2008 — Tajikistan Country Report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2007. © 2007 Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh BTI 2008 | Tajikistan 2 Key Indicators Population mn. 6.5 HDI 0.65 GDP p.c. $ 1,206 Pop. growth1 % p.a. 1.2 HDI rank of 177 122 Gini Index 32.6 Life expectancy years 64 UN Education Index 0.90 Poverty3 % 42.8 Urban population % 24.7 Gender equality2 - Aid per capita $ 38.8 Sources: UNDP, Human Development Report 2006 | The World Bank, World Development Indicators 2007 | OECD Development Assistance Committee 2006. Footnotes: (1) Average annual growth rate 1990-2005. (2) Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM). (3) Percentage of population living on less than $2 a day. Executive Summary Tajikistan is among the few post-conflict countries that have moved quickly from war to internal stability and have formed a functioning government.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction on the Book Review Roundtable
    CIVIL WARS 2018, VOL. 20, NO. 3, 436–437 BOOK REVIEW Introduction on the Book Review Roundtable The Origins of the Civil War in Tajikistan: Nationalism, Islamism and Violent Conflict in Post-Soviet Space, by Tim Epkenhans, Lanham et al.: Lexington Books, 2016, 401 p, £84.63 (Hc). ISBN: 978-1-4985-3278-5 Located in Central Asia and bordering the north of Afghanistan, post-communist Tajikistan experienced a vicious five-year (1992–97) civil war only months into its independence from the Soviet Union, a war which, according to Islam, Iran and Central Asian historian, Professor Tim Epkenhans of the University of Freiburg, took anywhere from 40,000 to 100,000 lives out of a then population of 5.5 million. Tajikistan’s civil war thus took the second highest toll by way of body count in the post-Soviet space after the two Chechnya–Russia wars in the 1990s, which had resulted, according to The New York Times, in an estimated 160,000 dead. It is fair to state that the causes of the Tajik civil war were multiple, including the spread of Islamism among a segment of the population which had been inspired by their Persian speaking kin in Afghanistan and Iran, in addition to serious economic dislocation in the immediate aftermath of communist rule, and the consequent scramble for control of state-owned resources on the local and national levels by armed groups strengthened by ethno-regional and ideological fervour. The war pitted an alliance of neo-Soviets primarily based in the capital city Dushanbe and the southern Kulob region against Islamists largely made up of individuals of mountainous eastern Gharm origins, many of whose parents and grandparents had voluntarily moved in the Soviet era to the newly irrigated southern Vakhsh valley to become state cotton farmers in Tajikistan’s southern Qurghonteppa region, which became the violent epicentre of clashes during the civil war.
    [Show full text]
  • Elections in Tajikistan 2016 Constitutional Referendum
    Elections in Tajikistan 2016 Constitutional Referendum Frequently Asked Questions Europe and Eurasia International Foundation for Electoral Systems 1850 K Street, NW | Fifth Floor | Washington, DC 20006 | www.IFES.org May 18, 2016 Frequently Asked Questions What will Tajik citizens be voting on in the May 22 referendum? ............................................................... 1 What is the current political situation in Tajikistan? .................................................................................... 2 Why is the referendum important? What is at stake? ................................................................................. 2 Who is eligible to vote?................................................................................................................................. 3 How is the voter registry managed and maintained?................................................................................... 3 What laws regulate the holding of constitutional referenda in Tajikistan? ................................................. 3 How many registered voters are there? ....................................................................................................... 4 What is the structure of the government? ................................................................................................... 4 What kind of voter education has been conducted for the referendum? ................................................... 4 What is the election management body? What are its powers? ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • English French a Number of Publications May Be Released in Another Languages Than the DEC — Decision German Italian Six OSCE Working Languages
    OSCE Quarterly Selections 1/2015 January – March 2015 The six following groups have been designed with view to help readers to navigate among the “official document” collections available on the web. Each group is chronologically organized and provides links to individual documents as well as their language variations (when available): I. OSCE PERIODICALS AND PUBLICATIONS. II. DECISIONS, CONSENSUS DOCUMENTS AND JOURNALS OF THE DAY yielded by regular OSCE negotiating and decision making bodies (such as plenary meetings of the Permanent Council and the Forum for Security Co-operation). III. SELECTED STATEMENTS, INTERVENTIONS, REGULAR REPORTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS made by the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office and High Officials representing OSCE structures, institutions and field activities. Statements and contributions made by national delegations during regular plenary meetings are grouped according to the negotiating body they were delivered at. These groups are available on the web accordingly: PC at www.osce.org/pc/109624 and FSC at www.osce.org/fsc/109625 IV. CONSOLIDATED SUMMARIES, REPORTS AND AGENDAS (non-consensus) released by/at various OSCE meetings, events, conferences, seminars and workshops. V. ELECTION OBSERVATION REPORTS prepared by various types of election missions, as well as statements or invitations concerning election observation in participating States. VI. SELECTED INTEREST AND REFERENCE DOCUMENTS relating to events or activities within the three OSCE dimensions (some of which may have taken place in the past few months or last
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects and Basic Choices of the CFSP (Part II, Point E, Paragraph 25
    Council of the European Union Brussels, 23 July 2014 (OR. en) 12094/14 PESC 793 COPS 191 FIN 503 PE 309 OUTCOME OF PROCEEDINGS From: General Secretariat of the Council On: 22 July 2014 To: Delegations No. prev. doc.: 11221/14 PESC 672 COPS 159 Subject: Main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP (Part II, point E, paragraph 25 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013) – 2013 – Annual report from the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to the European Parliament Delegations will find enclosed "Main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP (Part II, point E, paragraph 25 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013) – 2013 – Annual report from the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to the European Parliament", as endorsed by the Council on 22 July 2014. 12094/14 MF/fh 1 DG C 1 EN MAIN ASPECTS AND BASIC CHOICES OF THE CFSP (PART II, POINT E, PARAGRAPH 25 OF THE INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT OF 2 DECEMBER 2013) - 2013 PART I: LOOKING BACK AT 2013 ............................................................................. 6 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 6 1. Examples ............................................................................................. 8 2. Global issues ..................................................................................... 13 3. Strategic partners ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 27 TW English 20161121 141
    Тurkic Weekly 2016 19 (27) (9-15 May) Тurkic Weekly aims to keep you regularly informed on the latest news of the Turkic World. Turkic Weekly provides you with reliable information and timely analysis on key political, socio-economic and scientific events across Turkic-speaking states. This Newsletter is diligently prepared by the International Union of Turkic Academy. VICTORY DAY CELEBRATION The 71st anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War was celebrated on May 9. On this occasion the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev visited Russia, where he took part in a military parade on the Red Square in Moscow. Current issues of bilateral cooperation, as well as a number of topical issues of regional and international agenda were discussed on a separate meeting of Nursultan Nazarbayev and Vladimir Putin. President of Kazakhstan congratulated V. Putin with the 71st anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, also with the first launch of the rocket from the cosmodrome Vostochny. In addition, Nursultan Nazarbayev reminded about the upcoming session of the High Eurasian Economic Council, the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Council of CIS Heads of States in the current year. In his turn, the President of Russia thanked Nursultan Nazarbayev for his visit to Moscow to participate in the parade in honor of the 71st anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. "I am confident that our relations will develop positively and multifaceted as it has been up to now. Your attitude that you have expressed today and tomorrow will certainly strengthen our trust and create good conditions for further development of our friendly relations", - said Vladimir Putin.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran-Tajikistan Relations Internal and External Challenges
    JOURNAL FOR IRANIAN STUDIES Specialized Studies A Peer-Reviewed Quarterly Periodical Journal Year 2. issue 5, D e c . 2 0 1 7 ISSUED BY Arabian Gulf Centre for Iranian Studies Iran-Tajikistan Relations Internal and External Challenges Mohammad Shakir (Ph.D.) International and Central Asian Affairs Researcher ran’s policies towards Central Asia have been shaped by its interest in the regions vast market, its joint Icultural identity, and the involvement of competitors with similar strategic interests. Even though, known as Iran’s “strategic depth”, relations with the region withered post-1979 revolution. This was because of Iran’s plan on exporting its revolution and conservative culture, leading to resistance in the region. Also, Iran proved incompetent in undermining global powers in the region, which were countering the Iranian role. Journal for Iranian Studies 69 The post-Soviet Union period resulted in a suitable environment for Iran’s expansion in Central Asia. Iran diligently began to explore new avenues for cooperation in this vital region. However, this in most cases, was unsuccessful, as Central Asian states did not incline towards Iran’s ideological impulses, given their concern over Iranian hegemony. One of the countries in which Iran had some success was Tajikistan, particularly via proselytizing in its cultural and religious domains. However, after a period of time Iran- Tajikistan relations severed and reached the level of estrangement. This study aims to discuss the reality of the Iranian role in the Central Asian states, and its political and economic ambitions, in what is known as its “heart”- Tajikistan. Also, the study analyzes relations between Iran and Tajikistan by discussing the determinants and goals of these relations, the points of difference and agreement between both sides, and the impact of regional and international powers on relations between the two countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Cahiers D'asie Centrale, 26
    Cahiers d’Asie centrale 26 | 2016 1989, année de mobilisations politiques en Asie centrale 1989, a Year of Political Mobilisations in Central Asia Ferrando Olivier (dir.) Édition électronique URL : http://journals.openedition.org/asiecentrale/3218 ISSN : 2075-5325 Éditeur Éditions De Boccard Édition imprimée Date de publication : 30 novembre 2016 ISBN : 978-2-84743-161-2 ISSN : 1270-9247 Référence électronique Ferrando Olivier (dir.), Cahiers d’Asie centrale, 26 | 2016, « 1989, année de mobilisations politiques en Asie centrale » [En ligne], mis en ligne le 01 novembre 2017, consulté le 08 mars 2020. URL : http:// journals.openedition.org/asiecentrale/3218 Ce document a été généré automatiquement le 8 mars 2020. © Tous droits réservés 1 L’année 1989 symbolise, dans la mémoire collective, la fin du communisme en Europe, mais il faudra attendre plus de deux ans pour assister à la dissolution de l’Union soviétique et à l’accès des cinq républiques d’Asie centrale à leur indépendance. Pourtant, dès le début de l’année 1989, avant-même la chute du mur de Berlin, la région fut le siège de plusieurs signes avant-coureurs : le retrait de l’Armée Rouge en Afghanistan ; l’arrêt des essais nucléaires soviétiques au Kazakhstan ; l’apparition des premières tensions interethniques dans la vallée du Ferghana ; l’adoption par chaque république d’une loi sur la langue. Autant de moments qui montrent combien l’année 1989 a marqué l’histoire récente de l’Asie centrale. Ce nouveau numéro des Cahiers d’Asie centrale est donc consacré à l’étude des transformations sociales et politiques survenues au cours de l’année 1989 afin de comprendre à quel point cette année constitue un moment fondateur des mobilisations politiques en Asie centrale.
    [Show full text]