|
SHANGHAI COOPERATION ORGANIZATION SUMMIT IN BISHKEK
VALENTIN BOGATYREV,
Director of Analytical Consortium “Perspectiva”, Vice-President of the Central Asian Intellectual Foundation “East”, Bishkek
EURASIAN HOME: “Why is Kyrgyzstan interested in participation in the SCO activity?”
Kyrgyzstan has a lot of opportunities in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Future development of our country, which is located in the middle of Asia and does not have much oil and gas, depends on the regional economic projects in a large measure. The most important one is construction of communication lines and access to the transnational railways and highways.
So we pin our hopes on the resources of the SCO member states to lay the road systems “North-South” and “East-West”. In particular, Bishkek will suggest granting the railway going across China, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan the status of a regional project within the SCO. We shall also insist that the intergovernmental Agreement on creation of favorable conditions for international road haulage in the SCO should be signed as soon as possible.
Hydropower engineering and high technology may also be vital for Kyrgyzstan and promising areas of multilateral cooperation within the SCO. The cooperation in the sphere of development of the rich Kyrgyz hydropower resources serves not only our interests, but also those of all our neighbors.
Now we speak about the economic aspects of cooperation. The security cooperation is of equal importance to Kyrgyzstan. It is not only the fight against transnational criminal organizations, drug trafficking, but also the wider security areas. The SCO has a very good chance of becoming a security guarantor for the large region that is considered to be a global instable place. That’s why Kyrgyzstan maintains the efforts made by the “SCO-Afghanistan” Contact Group and believes that the antiterrorist air base must be in the country.
We believe that settlement of the labor migration issues is a promising and important task within the SCO. A lot of labor migrants from Kyrgyzstan work in Russia, Kazakhstan and China. This is quite a natural process taking place because the incomes and the economy structures in those countries are different. One cannot think that migration is good for some countries and bad for others. The labor migration is good for the host countries and for the countries from which the migrants come. The SCO cooperation makes this process civilized and saves the labor migrants from many problems they face.
Apart from that, the development and implementation of the joint Environmental Security Strategy is one of the tasks of current importance to this country and the other SCO countries.
EURASIAN HOME: “How does Kyrgyzstan’s reputation as one of the most politically unstable Organization’s country influence its status in the SCO?”
I believe that Kyrgyzstan is the most stable country in the Organization for the simple reason that this country has experienced the real democratic interaction between various political forces.
I always cite the words that a boiler with open lid is safer, and in the mountains we can determine the water cleanness in a running spring. In spite of strong confrontation between the authorities and the opposition and rallies occurring from time to time in Kyrgyzstan, we come to terms in the long run. I call it a consensus democracy.
Kyrgyzstan’s reputation as an unstable country is developed by those who fear that their countries may become as free as Kyrgyzstan. This is made especially aggressively by some our neighbors during the election campaigns.
Kyrgyzstan’s domestic policy does not threaten the security, and, I think, it does not cause anxiety to the SCO. It is taken for granted. We are not going to export our democracy to the neighboring countries. On the contrary, we make it clear to the countries: look what we are doing and do still better, do not make our mistakes. Thus, Kyrgyzstan acts as a laboratory of the democratic development pattern.
EURASIAN HOME: “What are the chances that the SCO may become a military and political alliance against the US interests in Central Asia?”
This would be an extremely unwelcome scenario. Now quite a few attempts are being made to draw the SCO member-states into the global face-off on one or another side. We saw the certain forces trying to provoke a conflict with the USA over the military base in Manas (Kyrgyzstan), to cause a clash between Kyrgyzstan and Iran by threatening to use the Manas base against Iran, to take advantage of the issue of the Iran membership in the SCO for the anti-American game etc.
For the Central Asian countries the SCO' turning into a military and political alliance against anybody is unacceptable. This is connected not only with the fact that the USA, the EU, Central Asian countries and China have closely cooperated in economic projects for a long time. But we are also partners in the military, security and political fields. Close cooperation has been developed between those countries and NATO as part of “Partnership for Peace” program. We cooperate with the USA, the EU and NATO in normalization of the situation in Afghanistan. NATO military officers as well as Kyrgyzstan’s businessmen and counsellors work there. So, the attempts to introduce bipolarity once again and to embroil the countries are the relics of the primitive world outlook, which, unfortunately, some political leaders, experts and military officers have not rejected.
EURASIAN HOME: “How do Kyrgyzstan’s participation in the SCO and deployment of the American base in the country serve its interests? Isn’t there a contradiction here?”
There is no problem or contradiction here. On the contrary, Kyrgyzstan’s participation in the SCO and the antiterrorist base in Manas solve a common task – making the region stable and Kyrgyzstan and the other SCO countries secure.
I repeat that there is no contradiction. It may appear only within the framework of an outdated kind of global confrontation.
EURASIAN HOME: “Can the SCO offer mechanisms for solving the energy and water problems in Central Asia?”
Of course, it is necessary to jointly settle the problems of using water and energy resources. Unfortunately, we have failed to develop the regional cooperation here because the countries have too different interests, in many respects they are competitors rather than partners.
Now one cannot say that those problems are being solved in the SCO. The SCO is more likely to be the Organization checking dissension. Anyway that’s good that we do not fight over water, land, energy resources etc., but address those issues, including within the framework of the SCO.
I believe that the SCO will make the best of its potential and I am sure that the Organization is able to solve such important issues. At any rate, it is better and much more important than turning the Shanghai Cooperation Organization into an anti-American military alliance.
August 16, 2007
|
