Dec 7, 2010

Political Stabilization in the Kyrgyz Republic: Challenges and Perspectives

Bishkek Hyatt Hotel, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan
Opening address by Nadia Diuk, National Endowment for Democracy

On December 7, 2010, the Endowment cosponsored a conference on “Political Stabilization in the Kyrgyz Republic: Challenges and Perspectives” held in Bishkek.  Hosted by NED’s long term partners and grantees the Youth Human Rights Group and Public Foundation “Golos Svobody,” the conference was organized in cooperation with the Presidential Administration of Kyrgyzstan and the UN Regional Centre for Preventive Diplomacy for Central Asia.  It brought together more than 100 members of the government, civil society, international organizations, donors, and embassies for a day-long discussion of the challenges faced by Kyrgyzstan in its efforts to become a stable parliamentary democracy which respects and protects the rights of all its citizens. Nadia Diuk, NED Vice-President for Programs – Africa, Central Europe and Eurasia, Latin America and the Caribbean – gave the opening remarks.

There have been some very famous Americans in Bishkek this week.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was here and spoke about how societies become stronger and more democratic in the 21st Century.  She described the process as a three-legged stool where government is one leg, a free market economy is the other and civil society is the third.  She also stressed that you can’t make progress and have stability unless all three are working together, sharing equal responsibility for success.

At the National Endowment for Democracy we concentrate mainly on this third leg of “civil society,” the non-governmental dimension that is so crucial to creating and consolidating strong and prosperous democratic states.  Following up on the themes Secretary Clinton highlighted, we at the NED would also like to congratulate Kyrgyzstan on having conducted a successful referendum in support of a parliamentary system of government and also for having conducted a free and fair election to the parliament, especially at a time when ethnic strife and turmoil looked as if they would delay and derail this political process.

There are many reasons for Kyrgyz civil society to be proud of its achievements in this year full of upheavals and turmoil.  First and foremost, civil society groups here did not divide along ethnic lines to reflect different interests – both Kyrgyz and Uzbeks worked together to uphold the broader universal values of freedom and democracy. They played a crucial role in helping the society to move forward.  We commend the civic groups in this country for their ability to work well during such demanding times; to seize opportunities and perform well despite many obstacles.  Kyrgyz civil society stood for the values of pluralism and tolerance, for the rule of law and democratic elections.  The NGOs played an important role in stabilizing the society after the revolution, helping the provisional government to govern, providing input into drafting the constitution, and making sure that the election process during the constitutional referendum and the parliamentary elections was free and fair.  The parliament was elected fairly and many parties were free to compete. The parliament contains five parties that truly represent different interests and different political ideologies.  These are monumental achievements!

I would like to say some more on the theme of the conference—“political stabilization.”  I already mentioned one way to look at stability, that you need equal efforts by government, in the economy and by civil society to achieve a stable political system.

The idea of stability is often invoked in this part of the world.  You often hear political leaders speak about stability as well as peace, justice and all those good things ….  Of course, it is a good thing to have stability, but often, it is counterposed as the opposite to democracy, as if stability and democracy are two incompatible states.  This is an area which I hope the conference will explore to determine that stability and democracy are not mutually exclusive, but that in fact they reinforce one another and are both needed equally if a society is to make progress.

There is false stability, which is based on the idea that leaders must control any part of the society that looks as if it may be independent or where they see potential opposition. And then there is true stability, which is much stronger since it comes out of a recognition that a state is stronger if its various constituencies are represented and there is a consensus of many different forces working together for the good of everyone.

False stability comes out of a lack of trust of the citizens, when political leaders believe they know best what is good for the people and try to impose it by controlling the media, controlling the outcome of elections, and controlling the judicial system.  But this kind of rigid control cannot ensure the stability of a country if the people’s will is not represented and if that huge resource of civic activism is being undermined and restricted.  The more rigid a political system gets, the weaker it will eventually become and more subject to sudden cracks and splintering.

True stability is based on a sense of trust between the various parts of a political system and society.  The government trusts civil society and the citizens to support its executive decisions which are in turn informed by, carried out on behalf of, and expressed as the will of civil society and the people.  There is a partnership that lies at the base of democratic development that is the foundation of a healthy and prosperous state.  And there are no short cuts to stabilization.  This relationship between civil society and government needs time to mature and become effective.

You might hear political leaders say that they need to “impose” stability, for example, to attract foreign investment.  Well this also is a false understanding of stability.  No foreign investors will feel their investments are safe in a country where there is no protection of property and assets under the rule of law, and where citizens cannot gain a fair trial under a corrupt judicial system.  Corruption is more likely to thrive where there is no free press and no investigative journalists to shine the light of truth on shady deals.

Stability is based on openness and engagement with the outside world, where not only the government has relationships with other governments but civil society also engages through public diplomacy with other nongovernmental actors in the international community.  There are many institutions that promote such engagement such as the OSCE, Community of Democracies, various United Nations organizations and many other international organizations, some of which are represented in this room with us today.  We welcome Kyrgyzstan’s participation at such forums represented both by its government and civil society.

This conference will be a good opportunity to reassess the state of stability and democracy in Kyrgyzstan and to make sure that it is heading in the right direction.  This gathering of civil society groups, government, donors, experts, and participants from the international community will be an important step in discussing and planning strategies for the next year.

Today we will try to chart a common course. I call on the presenters to focus on the future, to think about the next year and what can be achieved. What are the priorities for civil society? And how can the international institutions be helpful?   On behalf of one of the co-sponsors, I welcome you to this conference and look forward to what promises to be a most productive program.

Nadia Diuk, NED Vice-President for Programs – Africa, Central Europe and Eurasia, Latin America and the Caribbean, gave the opening remarks at a NED-cosponsored conference on political stabilization in Kyrgyzstan. Participants included Mr. Emil Kaptagaev, Head of the President's Office, representing the Honorable Roza Otunbaeva, President of the Kyrgyz Republic, as well as members of the Kyrgyz government, Parliament, and civil society. They were joined by experts and academics from around the world.