Potential for Peace and Threats of Conflict

Transcription

Project has been funded
by the Norwegian Government
Executing partner
Potential for Peace and Threats of Conflict:
Development Analysis of Cross-Border Communities in Isfara District of the Republic of Tajikistan
(Vorukh, Chorkhuh, Surkh, Shurab) and Batken District of the Kyrgyz Republic
(Ak-Sai, Ak-Tatyr, and Samarkandek)
Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
July, 2011
This report was produced by Jamoat Resource Centre of Vorukh (a non-governmental
organization). JRC Vorukh is an executive partner within the framework of UNDP Tajikistan’s
project – Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley. The project was funded by
the Government of Norway. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily
represent those of UNDP, the Government of Norway, or of the institutions that are mentioned
herein.
1 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Executive Partner
Jamoat Resource Centre of Vorukh (JRC Vorukh) is a non-profit, non-governmental
organization. JRC Vorukh was established and registered by the Department of Justice of
Sughd region on 27th of February, 2003.
Under the by-laws of JRC Vorukh, the organization aims to improve living standards and
economic situation in Isfara district, as well as to protect civil, economic, social, and cultural
rights and freedoms of citizens living in the Isfara district.
Mission objectives of the organization:
-
Improving social and economic conditions of the citizens.
Exposure, research, and resolution of community problems.
Support and development for economic reforms.
Carry out research and consultation activities for various programmes and projects.
Within the framework of the Law on Local Self-Governance, implementation of
programmes and project.
Implementation of programmes for employment opportunities and income generating
activities.
Assistance in establishment of business networks for local entrepreneurs
Provide information and trainings for effective entrepreneurial activities.
Organizing cultural events
Has the right to found microfinance and for-profit organization.
Since 2003, JRC Vorukh has been operating as an executive partner for UNDP Kyrgyzstan’s
and UNDP Tajikistan’s joint cross-border projects. Projects were aimed at conflict prevention,
development of cross-border cooperation, and strengthening positive interaction between crossborder communities.
Since 2004, JRC Vorukh has been a member of the Fergana Valley NGO Network
(http://www.dolinamira.org/index_en.html)
Target districts and villages/jamoats
7
5
2
6
1
3
4
1 – Chorkuh jamoat (TJ)
2- Surkh jamoat (TJ)
3 – Ak-Sai village (KR)
4 – Vorukh jamoat (TJ)
5 – Samarkandek village (KR)
6 – Ak-Tatyr village (KR)
7 – Shurab jamoat (TJ)
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 6 Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 16 Examination of Conflict Potential and Description of the Main CRFs in Cross-border
Relations of Isfara-Batken District Communities. ................................................................. 20 1. Access to Land .................................................................................................................. 20 1.1 Borders and Disputed Territories: Demarcation and Delimitation of Borders ................. 21 1.2 Problems with Crossing the Border ....................................................................................... 24 2. Access to Pastures and Forests ...................................................................................... 25 2.1 Access and exploitation of forest-resources ......................................................................... 28 3. Access to drinking and irrigation water .......................................................................... 30 3.1 Inter-farm canals ....................................................................................................................... 37 Roles and actions of parties involved .................................................................................... 39 4. Actions of state officials ................................................................................................... 39 4.1 Dialogue between Tajik-Kyrgyz state officials ...................................................................... 42 4.2 State officials and conflict management skills ...................................................................... 45 4.3 Aspects of conflict prevention in local development plans ................................................. 46 4.4 Accountability and transparency of state officials ................................................................ 47 4.5 Confidence in state officials and assessment of their actions ........................................... 47 4.6 State officials and infrastructure ............................................................................................. 51 5. Actions of border security and law enforcement authorities ........................................ 52 5.1 State officials and security forces .......................................................................................... 53 5.2 Policy of intimidation ................................................................................................................ 53 5.3 Competency and mandate of border guards ........................................................................ 55 5.4 Actions of security forces against “creeping migration” ...................................................... 55 5.5 Dislocation and competence of Tajik border guards ........................................................... 57 5.6 Actions of law enforcement officials and cross-border roads ............................................ 60 5.7 Security forces and cross-border trade ................................................................................. 62 5.8 Cross-border crime ................................................................................................................... 64 4 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
6. Role of women in cross-border conflicts ........................................................................ 66 7. Interethnic relations .......................................................................................................... 69 7.1 Potential for peace and development .................................................................................... 71 7.2 Potential for conflicts: The factors of youth, unemployment, and religion. ...................... 72 8. Access to information ....................................................................................................... 75 Recommendation...................................................................................................................... 79 Access to Land ......................................................................................................................... 79 Access to Pastures and Forests ............................................................................................. 81 Access to drinking and irrigation water ................................................................................. 84 Water management: Joint resolution of problems of water distribution. ...................................... 85 Local authorities: Culture of water management ............................................................................. 87 Water and security forces .................................................................................................................... 87 Water and international organizations ............................................................................................... 88 Actions of state authorities ..................................................................................................... 88 Authorities and access to land: Actions to reduce the potential for conflicts .............................. 89 Rapid response to conflict situations and local capacity to prevent conflicts .............................. 90 Local Development plans and conflict prevention approaches ..................................................... 92 Village/jamoat state officials ................................................................................................................ 92 Transparency and accountability of state officials ........................................................................... 93 Dialogue between state authorities .................................................................................................... 93 State authorities and International Organizations ........................................................................... 94 Actions of security officials ..................................................................................................... 94 Interethnic relations ................................................................................................................. 95 Women and cross-border relations ........................................................................................ 97 Youth and cross-border relations ........................................................................................... 97 Awareness-raising and information sharing.......................................................................... 99 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................ 102 5 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Introduction
This report provides an assessment of a potential for conflicts in cross-border communities of
Tajikistan’s Isfara (Chorkuh, Surkh, Shurab, and Vorukh jamoats) and Kyrgyzstan’s Batken
districts (Ak-Sai, Samarkandek, and Ak- Tatyr). The report offers an analysis of major conflict
risk factors (CRFs), describes cross-border relationship trends of recent years, as well as
presenting general recommendations for the ways of reducing risks of conflict in the region.
The Ferghana Valley is known as a place with a high potential for regional instability. The target
communities of this report can be regarded as being at the highest risk of conflicts. The border
communities in question present a wide range of potential conflict risk factors. There is more
than 60 year history of conflicts between these communities, which stretch back to the Soviet
era.
In the 1980s, the Tajik communities of Chorkuh and Vorukh, and Kyrgyz communities of Ak-Sai
and Ak-Tatyr, experienced direct clashes, which at the time resulted in human casualties. In the
post-Soviet space, on the verge of armed conflict, disputes and clashes were exacerbated
further by the lack of adequate access to natural resources.
A surprising tranquillity in cross-border interrelations, from the spring of 2010 until early spring
2011, gave experts a reason to praise the potential for peace in the region.
However, the reignition of conflicts, in the spring of 2011, significantly weakened the optimistic
predictions. According to local authorities and experts, the reason for tranquillity during this
period was due to internal turbulence in the Kyrgyz Republic (the so-called “June-events” in the
South of Kyrgyzstan). Following the formulation of a new Kyrgyz parliament and gradual
stabilisation of the country, people’s attention turned back to the issues that dominated their
lives prior to the “June-events”, i.e., dealing with the border communities of a neighbouring
state.
The spring/summer of 2011 demonstrated that regardless of joint efforts of local authorities and
donor community, “conflict risk factors and issues of contention have risen in numbers. Such a
reality is a result of recent political developments in all Central Asia countries”.1
Potential for conflicts, in the region of our research, is influenced by many different factors, can
be regarded as high, and has a tendency for enlargement. Two major alarming criterions,
defining the potential for conflicts, are: First, the number of conflict risk factors in the region
1
Matveeva, Anna. “Центральная Азия – Стратегический подход к построению мира”. www.international‐
alert.org 6 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
(community representatives and local experts refer to 8 major CRFs). Secondly, all the CRFs
are interlinked and can influence a wide range of areas of life. For example, access to land is
directly associated with the existence of disputed territories, access to water is linked to transboundary rivers.
Filed surveys and interviews identified the following CRFs as being the most destabilizing
factors in the region:
- Resource-related disputes (such as land, water, pastures, and forests);
- Territorial disputes (existence of disputed territories, un-demarcated borders);
- Border-related issues (presence of border guards and checkpoints, restrictions on free
movement of people, goods, and services);
- Actions of authorities and security forces (law enforcement agencies, border security
agencies);
- Socio-cultural relations and inter-ethnic tensions;
- Religion;
- Cross-border crime;
- Lack of information
Analysis of the situation in target areas shows that, just like in the past, cross-border conflicts
are associated mainly with resource-related problems (land, water, pastures, forests). However,
in terms of access to natural resources, the main issue of contention has changed focus. While,
as early as 2010, most of the Tajik-Kyrgyz clashes and disputes were caused by severely
inadequate access to water resources, the main origin of resource-related disputes at the
present time is caused by territorial disputes ( increasing shortage of land resources, as well as
due to disputes over the ownership of land). A new characteristic feature of land-related
incidents is the regular interventions of border guards in cross-border quarrels.
At the present time, access to land remains one of the most contentious issues (within the Tajik
communities themselves, and in relation to their Kyrgyz neighbours). This issue is most critical
in Chorkuh (with a population of approximately 35 000). Three to four years ago, the jamoat had
0.03 hectares of land per capita. At the moment, Chorkuh and Surkh jamoats have four times
less land than other Tajik villages of the region. Rapid population growth and lack of building
lands - two interlinked problems - have resuledt in illegal territorial expansion of the jamoats into
disputed territories.
The presence of disputed territories, as well as undemarcated state borders, add their toll to
land-related tensions. Furthermore, the existence of a variety of maps, published in different
eras, is also having an influence in cross-border interrelations. During disputes, both sides use
the map that best reflects their interests.
Both sides tend to accuse each other in illegal acquisitions of disputed territories: Tajiks call
these actions "illegal seizure of disputed territories", while Kyrgyz describe it as a “creeping
migration of Tajiks" to their territory. The basis for these allegations derives from different maps,
each depicting borders and territories in their own way.
Due to the higher activity of local authorities, as well as abetter understanding among the
population in the laws, illegal land transactions in disputed territories have seen a slight decline.
Nevertheless, the issue remains a major cause of tensions in the region.
Recent years have witnessed a rapid increase of internal migration from rural areas of
Kyrgyzstan to economically more developed regions of the country. This has led to a mass
outflow of Kyrgyz residents from border territories, which, in turn, has been followed by illegal
transactions of land in the region of our research. In the future, with completion of the
demarcation process, the illegally acquired lands could cause new tensions and conflicts
between cross-border communities.
Information on results and progress of the Intergovernmental Commission for Demarcation and
Delimitation (ICDD) of borders is almost non-existent and the process is widely being regarded
as "protracted".
In recent years, land-related disputes have risen in numbers, in tenacity, and have been
accompanied by increased involvement/intervention of border guards. In the past, land disputes
were resolved by local authorities, experts, land management officials, and community leaders.
Currently, the major role in these disputes is played by border guards and law enforcement
personnel. Involvement of armed personnel in disputes has a potential for aggravating existing
tensions and provoking an armed conflict between the two sides. Analysis of recent events
shows that virtually all incidents, even relatively minor disputes, have been accompanied by
armed elements from the security sector of the two sides.
Access to water (issues of water allocation and inefficient use of water resources) remains one
of the major CRFs in the cross-border communities. The problem is characterized mainly by
inefficient and uneven distribution of water resources. In addition, the "unwillingness" of local
communities to comply with existing bilateral treaties and agreements on water usage deepens
the regional water-related controversies.
Tajik and Kyrgyz experts believe that regional water-use strategies are at the core of the
problem, while the lack of commitments to existing agreements is only a secondary issue. The
strategies were developed in the mid-1950s, and, regardless of fundamental changes in social
and political setting, have not been revised since.
Water management issues, which are predominantly run by Vodhoz (water management
authorities), require an improved interstate coordination and cooperation. Most regional waterrelated problems are related to the cross-border river of Isfarinka. Most of the water related
disputes between Tajik and Kyrgyz communities of the region are related to the exploitation of
water canals, which start from Isfarinka River.
Failure to comply with previous water management agreements originates from the lack of
accountability and absence of sanctioning mechanisms for illegal actions. This has led to water
being used as leverage and as a pressuring instrument by both sides. Poor maintenance and
the outdated infrastructures of water pipelines make effective usage of water even harder.
The absence of a culture and mechanisms for joint water management, as well as reluctance to
sympathise with each other’s problems, has produced negative/destructive behaviours on both
sides. For example, Tajiks, living upstream of the Isfarinka river, use excessive amounts of
irrigation water, thus weakening the water stream in neighbouring Kyrgyz villages. Kyrgyz
villages return the favour to Tajik villages lower down, which results in even lower water
pressure down the stream. In short, mishandling and abuse of water canals has a straining
effect on interethnic relations of cross-border communities, thus increasing the potential for
conflicts.
Research respondents have noted that, in recent years, ‘security forces’ are becoming a driving
force behind water-related conflicts as well. Kyrgyz border guards, for example, have been
continuously obstructing the mandated work of Tajik mirabs (selected individuals responsible for
managing water canals (opening and closing canals in jamoats) in Tajik mahallas (village
quarters). Dissatisfied with such actions, local residents often ask the question; "Who gave [the
Kyrgyz border guards] the right to substitute local authorities and water management officials in
managing and controlling water-related incidents?".
Furthermore, the use of dozens of cross-border “inter-farm” water canals has yet to be settled
by Tajik-Kyrgyz authorities. Instead of a set of formal, mutually recognized treaties, authorities
are formulating verbal agreements with reciprocal concessions.
In the current situation, both parties are gradually losing confidence in their ability to jointly
manage cross-border water resources. Instead, opinions are forming in favour of a new, more
independent, water infrastructure, which would end the tense interdependency between the two
sides.
A relatively new factor, in terms of access to natural resources, is the export of pebble, gravel,
and sand from the Isfarinka River. These resources are used as construction material by local
communities. Daily, approximately 100-200 trucks of gravel and sand is being extracted from
the river. In general, disputes over the access to these resources occur during river flooding,
when Tajik residents start to extract the recourses from more accessible parts of the river on the
Kyrgyz side (mainly from Samarkandek, but also from disputed territories). Based on the
argument that the extraction of these materials is ecologically destructive to the river, the Kyrgyz
side has been trying to prevent removal of these resources by all means. Having said this,
according to expert opinions, the dealing of these natural recourses is a significant income
activity for both sides. This contentious issue has already given rise to numerous notable
incidents. Although local authorities have become relatively concerned about the developments,
the effectiveness of their attempts to control the situation has been limited.
In comparison to other CRFs, access to grazing lands and forest-resources is slightly less
divisive. In the Soviet time, with symbolic borders, shared pastures and forests were not a
problem, even though livestock of the villages was numerically larger than today. Gradually,
following the collapse of the Soviet Union, new borders, or the lack of them, have come to play
a major role in the lives of people in the region. Due to the territorial partition, both communities
have found it harder to access good grazing lands.
Problems with pastures and forests are closely linked to environmental issues. Unregulated use
of these resources has a negative effect on the conditions of pastures and causes an annual
decrease of grazable land. In turn, the ever-increasing scarcity of natural resources brings along
a larger number of cross-border disputes and clashes.
As a preventive action against gradual degradation and destruction of pastures, the Kyrgyz side
has suggested to sharply limit grazing rights for Tajik residents who use Kyrgyz pastures for
grazing their livestock. The unilateral solution contains a potential for future clashes between
Tajik and Kyrgyz communities, which have a tradition of using each other’s lands for grazing
their animals.
If not dealt with in a mutually acceptable way, pasture-related problems could cause future
interethnic tensions amongst the communities.
Due to energy deficiency in cross-border communities – electricity, fuel andcoal - , there is a
pressing tendency of illegal logging of forests for domestic use. Illegal logging had been slightly
reduced by a series of awareness-raising activities, as well as by the establishment of ekoposts
(environmental checkpoints) on the Kyrgyz side. Environmental authorities and ekopost border
guards, with occasional use of firearms, have been confiscating illegally logged wood from
Tajiks. These activities, as well as use of firearms by the guards, have been increasing the
potential for an armed conflict in the region.
After relative calmness over the past two years, the problem of illegal logging has returned.
Tajikistan’s energy crisis in the spring of 2011 and the resulting increase of fuel prices has
forced the residents of cross-border communities to move their attention back to the forest
resources.
Actions and relations between the two countries have not undergone any major changes since
the gaining of independence. Although occasional controversies over cross-border issues are
not reflected in interstate cooperation, official policies of collaboration are continuously tested by
cross-border problems of Isfara and Batken districts.
In the process of solving border-related problems and resolving disputes, authorities are often
faced with a dilemma - whether to adhere to policies of peaceful coexistence and cooperation,
or to safeguard national interests and meet the needs of local communities? At times, in
complex territorial disputes, it becomes impossible to combine both. As a result, a decision is
often made in favour of only one of the principles.
The research results show that many border problems arise due to the lack of coordination
between governmental agencies of the two sides, both on local as well as on district levels of
administration. Mechanisms for reconciliation, collaboration, and rapid resolution of cross-border
issues, rest on the shoulders of groups such as a number of bilateral committees of local
authorities, various working groups, councils, and traditional monthly meetings of heads of local
governments. Regardless of all this, interviews with local experts revealed many shortcomings
and inefficiencies in the work of these groups and institutions.
In addition, frequent cases of cross-border incidents point to a weak ability of the authorities to
foresee, identify, prevent or resolve conflicts via negotiations, in a way that would satisfy and
accommodate demands of all the involved parties.
Strategic plans and development programmes go to show that the Tajik and Kyrgyz
governments have a high interest in advancing the development of their border regions.
However, during the planning period as well as while implementing development programmes,
insufficient attention is paid to aspects of conflict risk reduction and conflict prevention.
Regardless of the fact that almost all sectors of socio-economic development (such as
agriculture, commerce, communication and water infrastructure) are interconnected and jointly
contribute to the conflict potential in the region, neither regional nor jamoat development
programmes entail strategies for managing or preventing conflict.
According to the research data, the transparency and accountability of local authorities and
government representatives is low at best and fully lacking at worse. This has a direct influence
on the effectiveness of official decision and means of managing conflicts. Therefore, it is
necessary to develop mechanisms that would establish positive links and build confidence
between local authorities and the public.
Both Tajik and Kyrgyz respondents agreed that increased involvement of border guards in
recent cross-border disputes is a major destabilizing factor in the region. Border guards and
police, although mandated to ensure public safety and protect public order, have been
continuously provoking conflicts and injecting additional tensions into Tajik-Kyrgyz disputes.
The checker board-like settlements and borders, interdependent transportation links, the Tajik
enclave of Vorukh, as well as the presence of security forces and unauthorized checkpoints,
have had a negative influence on cross-border relations. The creation of obstacles for free
movement, by either side, is immediately reciprocated by the other side. A general opinion of
the expert community is that in such a volatile region, actions of border guards should be strictly
limited, or, otherwise, their actions may well inflame inter-ethnic clashes.
The analysis of current events goes to show that border guards often exceed their mandate. In
the past, border guards only patrolled the borders along the disputed territories or at
strategically important sites. Currently, they are involved in almost all spheres of interaction
between the communities of the two neighbouring states. Border guards have already been
acting as arbitrators, law enforcers, water and forestry authorities, and even as land surveyors.
In April 2011, the target communities of the research experienced four large incidents in which
the roles of protagonists were played by the representatives of security forces, including the
border guards.
In comparison to the border guards, people have fewer complaints towards the law enforcement
officials. Nevertheless, the actions of local law enforcement agencies continue to be a conflict
risk factor in the region. The Kyrgyz communities, for example, are more displeased about the
actions of Tajik law enforcement officials, and less about the behaviour of Tajik border guards.
According to the residents of the border communities, conflicts are caused not as much by the
state borders, as they are by actions of border guards and police, who are using the borders as
a tool for extortion (by establishing unauthorised checkpoints and causing restrictions to
freedom of movement).
Cross-border roads, particularly entrances and exits from one territory to another, often become
targets for illegal checkpoints. On the one hand, they are used to extort money from the users of
the roads. On the other hand, they serve as a leverage during cross-border disputes.
Twice in the past, in the years 2000 and 2003, local residents have witnessed a so-called "war
of roadblocks”, when both sides erected unauthorized police or military checkpoints on different
stretches of a same road. Both sides reciprocated each other’s actions, thus escalating the
tensions. For such incidents, it is often ordinary people who pay the price.
Following the adoption of bilateral agreements, prohibiting establishment of unauthorized
checkpoints, freedom of movement was accompanied with a relative calmness for a certain
period of time. However, in violation of existing agreements, both sides have yet again resorted
to old tactics. In 2011 alone, several cross-border incidents have been directly caused by
unauthorised checkpoints.
All of the conflict risk factors are having a direct impact on interethnic relations between the
cross-border communities. Continuous disputes over scarce natural resources create stress and
suspicion towards each other. A few years ago people were inclined to treat occasional conflicts
as a problem, which can and must be addressed jointly. With time, however, both sides tend to
interpret any type of dispute as a threat to the interests of their ethnic groups.
The interethnic relations are also influenced by such factors as youth and religion. Under
appropriate conditions - with prospects for education, employment, and/or a role in decision
making -, the youth have a great potential as a peace and development promoter. In the
absence of such opportunities, socially and economically precarious young people are
becoming more aggressive, ill-tempered, and are increasingly turning their anger on the
opposite side, causing inter-ethnic fights and confrontations.
A factor of religion also plays a role in the inter-ethnic relations. Although both Kyrgyz and Tajik
are Hanafi Sunni Muslims, experts point to a fairly high level of intolerance between fairly more
religious Tajiks and generally more secular Kyrgyz. Although religion cannot be a direct cause
of a conflict, it has a potential to intensify disputes and further weaken the interethnic relations.
Unlike in previous assessments, nationalism has risen to become a considerable conflict risk
factor. Spread of ethno-nationalism in Kyrgyzstan as well as in some border communities on
the Tajik side could intensify the community relations and contribute to the severity of border
disputes. For example, two nationalist groups in Kyrgyz villages of Ak-Sai and Khoji-Alo have
been spreading nationalistic ideas and have attempted to foment ethnic hatred in these villages.
The internal affairs authorities of the villages are monitoring the groups and have informed on
their existence to law enforcement agencies in neighbouring districts.
Active involvement of women in disputes is also a relatively new factor. However, it is neither a
sign of women becoming more aggressive, nor a result of changes in women’s societal status or
in political decision-making power. The women-factor is related to the labour migration of men
from villages, which results in new social structures as well as in a new division of labour
amongst women and men.
This document shows that the role and behaviour of women in conflicts, as well as their
attitudes and perceptions of other ethnic groups, depends on their place of residence. Tajik
women, whose households are in direct contact with Kyrgyz villages and closer to the disputed
territories, are more dogmatic and aggressive in their attitudes towards their Kyrgyz neighbours.
Women from villages, which are located away from the borders are less aggravated by the other
side and are able to find more perspectives for interethnic interrelations with their neighbours.
The situation with access to information in the cross-border communities of Batken and Isfara
districts is unfavourable. On the Tajik side, an independent print media is almost nonexistent,
mainly due to its high printing costs and the lack of distribution networks. There is, however, a
well-established distribution network of state-owned print media, which is accessible after
subscribing to specific governmental publications. Having, these publications do not contain or
provide the necessary information needed by the residents of the border communities.
In recent years, the Government of Tajikistan has taken a number of measures in improving the
scope of TV broadcasting. As a result, residents of border communities of Isfara district have
the opportunity to watch the main state and regional TV channels. However, as noted by most
respondents, the state and local TV channels do not contain information or analytical
programmes pertaining to the problems of their daily lives.
Thus, rumours become the main source of information for people in the cross-border regions
and the lack of necessary and reliable information forces the communities to assume the worst
and blame the other side for their problems, as well as developing negative stereotypes of the
‘others.’
Results of the research show that residents of the border communities are unable to receive
information regarding proceedings and measures taken against officials who have been
violating laws, misusing their position, or have been a cause of specific cross-border incidents.
This situation gives rise to a lack of transparency and accountability in relations between the
authorities and residents. Moreover, an absence of systematic awareness-raising mechanisms,
regarding relevant laws and bilateral agreements, creates misunderstandings and deepen the
existing problems.
Journalists who write about the border issues and interethnic relations should always consider
the sensitivity of these issues and adhere to the principle of "do no harm". Often, information on
Tajik and Kyrgyz news websites, particularly which has been produced by journalists from
foreign news agencies, is often one-sided, far from the reality, and even provocative.
Surprisingly enough, there has been no reaction from local authorities, civil society, or from the
journalistic community to such disinformation.
Methodology
This report was commissioned by UNDP Khujand Area Office and is part of UNDP Tajikistan’s
two-year long project - "Conflict prevention and mitigation in the Ferghana Valley"- , funded by
the Norwegian Government. The project has been executed in collaboration with local
authorities of the Isfara district and non-governmental organizations of the region. The aim of
the project is to reduce the potential for conflicts in cross-border communities of Isfara district by
creating necessary societal conditions as well as through resettlement of residents from jamoats
of Chorkuh and Surh to the jamoat of Shurab.
In 2010, a conflict risk analysis was conducted in cross-border communities of Isfara (TJ) and
Batken (KG) districts. The purpose of the analysis was to determine potentials for peace, as well
as to examine developments in the cross-border communities of Chorkuh, Surh, and Shurab
jamoats in Isfara district, as well as in Aksay, Ak-Tatyr, and Samarkandek villages in Batken
district.
The main purpose of this report and the research on which it is bases is to analyze and assess
major conflict risk factors in the target areas of the project, determine the relations of these
factors, as well as compare tendencies and developments of the present time with those of
previous years. While the first report was largely based on quantitative research data, this study
uses a variety of methods, including qualitative sources from interviews, focus-group meetings,
and expert opinions.
The report is not intended to reflect the realities in other border communities of Batken and
Isfara districts, although many of the conclusions and recommendations may be applicable to
other border communities as well.
This report is based on field research conducted by UNDP’s sub-contractor, a nongovernmental organization – “Jamoat Resource Centre of Vorukh” (JRC). JRC has been a key
partner of UNDP Tajikistan’s and UNDP Kyrgyzstan’s joint cross-border cooperation initiatives
and conflict prevention projects. During the field research, JRC employed research
methodologies, which had been developed during a previous joint-project of UNDP Tajikistan
and UNDP Kyrgyzstan - “Cross-Border Cooperation Project”.
The research methodology is based on thematic cluster indicators, which allow the better
understanding of the causes of tensions, complexity of separate events and specific cross16 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
border developments, as well as facilitating identification of main actors, their views, and
relations to conflict risk factors.
The following clusters have been used in this research:
-
socio-economic cluster (access to land, water, the use of pastures and forests, labour
migration)
-
social and cultural cluster (inter-ethnic relations, religion, role of women and youth,
media)
-
cluster of cross-border issues (delimitation and demarcation of borders, disputed
territories, "creeping migration", cross-border trade, role of authorities and institutions)
Limiting the number of conflict risk factors to those that directly relate to the dynamics and
developments in the region, provides for the use of both qualitative and quantitative research
methods.
Qualitative data and analysis of such information allows the examination and detailing of
specific disputes, conflicts, as well as the daily relations of cross-border communities. Moreover,
the results of a qualitative research allow a more concrete understanding of the realities through
the views of the public, governmental agencies, and non-governmental organizations. The
analysis is inclusive of a wide range of opinions, while given recommendations can be exploited
by all actors involved.
The research consisted of four stages.
I.
Preparatory phase:
- preparation of questionnaires for the survey
- planning of focus-group meetings and expert interviews
- defining discussion topics and themes
- building up a research team
The research team consisted of eight experts. Four of them were permanent employees of JRC,
the other four were brought in from different NGOs. Out of three women on the team, one was a
Kyrgyz national. All researchers had previous experience of taking part in similar projects,
conducting surveys and interviews, and were skilled in conflict analysis.
After the completion of the preparatory phase, the research team met with senior officials from
UNDP Khujand Area Office and agreed upon the format of questionnaires, composition of focus
groups, and topics for interviews. Subsequently, formats were refined in accordance with
comments and recommendations.
II.
Practical phase:
- collection of qualitative and statistical data, through questionnaires and focus group
meetings (focus-group meetings were held with residents of the border communities)
- interviews conducted with key individuals, including experts, government authorities and
journalists.
During practical phase, the team also studied and analyzed media material, reports, and other
documents (bilateral agreements, treaties, protocols of bilateral meetings/commissions).
Qualitative methods
Interviews:
For the purpose of conducting semi-structured and in-depth interviews, the team developed
questionnaires and defined key categories of questions. Over 30 interviews were conducted
with representatives of local executive authorities, relevant government agencies, rural
municipalities, law enforcement and security agencies, as well as with community leaders.
Further in-depth interviews were conducted with local authorities on both sides (three interviews
in the Rural Council of Batken district, and four in various jamoats of Isfara district), with
journalists, analysts, political scientists, representatives of international organizations and
NGOs, and other experts. Although most of the interviews were conducted on the Tajik side,
several important interviews were conducted also on the Kyrgyz side of the border.
Focus group meetings:
Questions for the focus groups were closely connected to the themes of the questionnaires, but
not limited to the same subject matter. When selecting focus-group participants, a point of
emphasis was made on the necessity to include residents of those villages and communities
which are in direct contact with the border and experience cross-border tensions the most. A
total of six focus-groups were assembled (residents from jamoats of Chorkuh and Vorukh;
residents from target areas of the Batken district; residents of Vorukh jamoat; residents from the
village of Khojai Ailo; women from resettling families, which are direct beneficiaries of the
project; and residents of Shurab). In Shurab, 40% of participants were ethnic Kyrgyz. All in all,
80 people took part in the focus-group meetings (men, women, and youth).
Quantitative methods:
Alongside qualitative data, additional quantitative/statistical data was collected and quantitative
parameters were defined. In the course of the study, while using a variety of methods and data
sources, special attention was paid to the quality (accuracy) of the information.
Questionnaires:
In order to obtain comprehensive and wide-ranging information about the presence of potential
for conflict in the region, the research team used a polling method. The survey involved 100
respondents (70% Tajik and 30% Kyrgyz).
Division by sex was as follows:
-
on the Tajik side, 50% of respondents were male and 50% female;
-
on the Kyrgyz side, 53% were male and 47% were female.
Age limit of respondents was set at 18 years and older.
Division by age was as follows:
-
on the Tajik side, 27% were 18-35, 51% were 35-60 and 22% were 60 and over.
-
on the Kyrgyz side, 33% were 18-35, 53% were 35-60 and 14% were 60 and over.
III.
Analysis phase:
- processing and analysis of data
- writing a draft report. (At this stage, experts held a consultation meeting with UNDP staff,
which reviewed and commented on the preliminary results of a first version of the
report).
During the research, the team faced the following problems:
Absence of databases of systematically filed legal documents, agreements, and governing
bilateral treaties. During interviews and focus group meetings, respondents referred to official
documents and minutes of various meetings. Yet, in most of the cases, officials could not
provide specific documentation upon a request. This is especially evident at a local government
level.
Lack of a filing system of complaints (in our case, complaints of residents from the border
regions).
Difficulties in interviewing representatives of law enforcement agencies and border security
officials. Researchers were impeded from gaining necessary information from these actors, who
appeared to highlight the confidentiality of cases or their lack of authorization to disclose
information in order to impede research.
Examination of Conflict Potential and Description of the Main
CRFs in Cross-border Relations of Isfara-Batken District
Communities.
1. Access to Land
At the present time, access to land remains one of the most contentious factors within the
research and is regarded as extremely problematic, if not critical. The problem is particularly
acute in the jamoat of Chorkuh, home to 33,772 residents (17,915 - 49.98% - women).
According to the Chairman of the Isfara district, S. Ashurov, 3-4 years ago, residents of Chorkuh
and Surkh had no more than 0.03 hectares of land per capita. Currently, the land scarcity is
even more severe – people in these jamoats have four times less land per capita, in comparison
to other jamoats of the district. (In comparison to Isfara town, with 8 hectares of land per capita,
Chorkuh has no more than 2.4 acres of land per capita). In recent years, local authorities have
tried to alleviate the problem by reducing the number of new land rights for house construction
in the jamoat of Chorkuh. At the present time, Chorkuh residents have practically no land even
for residential gardening. According to S. Ashurov, resettlement of people to places with more
land is a natural and the only answer to the problem.2
Annual population growth in the most densely populated jamoat of Chorkuh is 750-800 people.
Population density is 1person/185m2. In fact, there is not a single household, out of 6,549,
which is currently accommodating a single family unit. 2,729 household are comprised of two
family units, while the rest of the households consist of more than two family units. 2,360 people
are on the waiting list for receiving house construction rights on new lands. The presence of
disputed territories in the proximity of Surkh and Vorukh jamoats, makes the land shortage
issues even more problematic.
Land distribution, together with unlawful allocation of lands during the early times of the Tajik
independence, causes controversies and problems within Tajik communities themselves. Acute
shortage of land has encouraged illegal land trading and abuses of authority. The best lands
2
Churkuh Jamoat Development Plan 20 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
have been granted to influential and wealthy people, while ordinary residents have to be content
with long waiting lists as well as with poor, almost unfarmable, plots of land. Current Tajik land
law states; land is an exclusive property of the state; land is allocated for habitation and
cultivation, and is transferable by inheritance; and if the land is not cultivated (such as for house
construction and farming,), the state reserves the right to revoke the land rights. In theory, the
law guarantees effective use of land in the best interests of the people. However many
residents in Tajik mahallas, experiencing the shortage of land, are forced to acquire new plots
through illegal land transactions. Officially, land may not be sold or bought. However, demand
creates supply, and “black market” provides platform for such illegal activities.
In recent years, central and local authorities have stepped up against illegal land transactions
and plot distributions. State authorities of Isfara have been taking effective measures to fight
corruption in this sphere and to ensure transparency and fairness of the land distribution
process. According to the Deputy Chairman of the Isfara town, also the Chairman of the
Commission for Land Distribution, O. Mamadov, in order to guarantee transparency of the
process, names of new land owners are published in local newspapers - Imruz and Nasimi
Isfara. Every resident has the opportunity to see the lists and, in case of suspicions over legality
of land allocation, has a right to file an anonymous complaint by phone. “There have been
several cases when decisions to allocate land have been revoked”, said Mamadov, adding that,
“this approach will allow [authorities] to avoid violations of laws and manage the difficult process
more effectively."
The shortage of land on the Tajik side exacerbates relations with bordering Kyrgyz villages and
is directly linked to territorial claims of the two sides.
1.1
Borders and Disputed Territories: Demarcation and
Delimitation of Borders
An important role in augmenting the conflict risk potential in the region is played by insufficient
demarcation and delimitation of the Tajik-Kyrgyz border. Territorial claims are a cause of most
of the disputes. Using different arguments, the two sides cling to their historic rights for disputed
territories. There are several documents and resolutions, produced by Soviet authorities, which
can be interpreted in favour of one or another of the disputants. Soviet central authorities,
charged with addressing border related issues, had repeatedly reconsidered and amended their
decisions about Tajik and Kyrgyz territorial boundaries. The existence of varying maps,
published at different periods of time, is a major problem for resolving current territorial
disputes.3
For the first time, the official Tajik-Kyrgyz state border was established in 1924-1925, following
the territorial delimitation of Turkmenistan. Ignoring geographic, economic, cultural, and ethnic
characteristics of regional peoples, this territorial division was officially approved in 1927.
During 1955-1957, due to the discontent of cross-border communities over land rights, a TajikKyrgyz Joint Commission revised and published a new map in 1957. The map was approved by
the Council of Ministers and the Central Executive Committee of Kyrgyz Autonomous Soviet
Socialist Republic. Most importantly, however, the Supreme Council of the Soviet Socialist
Republic of Tajikistan did not accept the new borderlines and the new map.
In the current disputes, the Kyrgyz side likes to refer to a 1989 map, which was also produced
during the Soviet period by a Tajik-Kyrgyz Joint Commission, marking the borders in
accordance to actual usage of land and by residence of Tajik and Kyrgyz communities.
The Tajik side not recognize legitimacy of the last two maps (from 1957 and 1989). The maps
are believed to violate Tajikistan’s territorial integrity. Instead, Tajikistan has offered to use the
1927 map, which at the time was legally accepted and recognized by both Tajiks and Kyrgyz.
Regional Strategic Development Plans of Isfara and Bakten districts have offered the following
data:
71 plots in Isfara district (32,400 hectares) are regarded as disputed territories (26,400 hectares
in Surkh, Chorkuh, and Vorukh).
149 plots in Batken district (3001.2 hectares) are regarded as disputed territories.
-
With Uzbekistan, 50 plots are disputed - 803.6 hectares. 42 out of these 50 are occupied
by Uzbeks – 742.3 hectares -, and 8 by Kyrgyz – 61,3 hectares).
-
With Tajikistan, 99 plots are disputed – 2197.6 hectares. 70 plots are occupied by Tajiks
– 473.5 hectares – , and 29 by Kyrgyz – 1,774 hectares. Out of these plots, 23.5
hectares are officially regarded as disputed in the Batken district.
Current territorial disputes, dating back to the Soviet era (including the1975 and 1989 armed
conflicts between Ak-Sai and Uch-Dobo (KR) and Vorukh and Khojai-Ailo (TJ), have become
3
More information on this topic can be found in “Кыргызстан‐Таджикистан: курс на укрепление партнерства в контексте региональных связей”, Т. Usubalyev Foundation and F. Abert Foundatio in Kyrgyzsta, Bishkek, 2010. http://library.fes.de/pdf‐files/bueros/bischkek/08172.pdf 22 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
exponentially tense. The early years of independence were characterized by a decline of
industry, widespread unemployment, exodus of populations, as well as by a shift towards
agricultural. As such, land had become the main source of income and employment.
2000 and 2001 were marked by frequent land disputes and continuous ethnic tensions between
cross-border residents of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. At that time, inter-district negotiation of
officials resulted in a decision to ban cultivation and expansion into disputed territories while the
work of the Tajik-Kyrgyz Joint Commission for Demarcation and Delimitation was still in
progress. However, between 2005 and 2006, several land-related incidents were documented
between residents of Min-Bulak village (KR) and Surkh jamoat (TJ).
The two sides continuously accused each other in building settlements on disputed territories.
Tajiks call this process a "seizure of the disputed territories", while the Kyrgyz regard it as a
process of “creeping migration". Expansion into disputed territories and consequent tensions
have also been documented in Kyrgyz municipalities of Aksai (Kara and Chekdobo districtcommunities of Koktash village (KR)), Samarkandek (Minbulak and Minoruk villages) and
Aktatyr (Uchdobo and Kermetoo villages), as well as in their neighbouring Tajik jamoats of
Chorkuh (district-communities of Langar, Siehkuh, Kakyr, Samani, and Khojai-Ailo), Surkh, and
Vorukh. Sides often use old maps to justify their claims for lands.
Although a number of legal trainings by NGOs and a more active involvement of local
authorities have resulted in a decrease of cross-border incidents, the issue continues to be a
major conflict risk factor in the region. As highlighted, recent years have been marked with a
rapid increase of internal migration of Kyrgyz residents from rural areas into more economically
developed regions of the country. Such a migration process has led to a massive outflow of
Kyrgyz residents from border communities, which, in turn, has been followed by illegal land
deals (plots of the migrants have been sold and bought illegally). In the future, with final
demarcation and delimitation of borders, the illegally obtained lands could be a cause of new
disputes and tensions.
Over the past decade, Tajik-Kyrgyz cross-border relations have experienced considerable
improvement. The complex and problematic cross-border issues, which exist mainly in the North
of Tajikistan, are overshadowed in importance by transnational interest for cooperative relations.
The two states often neglect the cross-border troubles merely to advance their economic or
political agendas, while, even after 20 years of independence, borders are not yet fully
demarcated and continue to cause interethnic tensions and clashes.
As a result of the latest Tajik-Kyrgyz Demarcation Committee meetings, 541km of the border
(approximately 50% of the entire border territory) was demarcated and defined. However,
demarcation and delimitation process in the Ferghana Valley lands, at the most controversial
parts of the border, seems to be more problematic and slow.4 Officially, the Joint Committee for
Demarcation and Delimitation of Borders continues its work. However, information about the
progress of their work continues to be inaccessible. According to the Ambassador Extraordinary
and Plenipotentiary of Kyrgyzstan, “due to the explosive nature of regional border issues, any
decision of the Committee could have negative and unexpected consequences for the crossborder communities.”5
From March till June 2011, jamoat of Chorkuh alone has witnessed four major clashes, which,
one way or another, were related to the disputed territories. The factor of the disputed territories
is once again regaining urgency and attention.
1.2
Problems with Crossing the Border
In previous years, negotiations on local and central state levels have resulted in the removal of
illegal checkpoints. Nevertheless, money extortion, creation of barriers for the free movement,
as well as occasional incidents with customs officials and border guards, are still taking place on
cross-border roads of the region.
According to local residents, conflicts are caused not as much by disputes over the territories as
they are by the creation of barriers for free movement and by arbitrary checkpoints. According to
local experts, land disputes are accompanied by a trend of increased involvement of security
forces (law enforcement, border guards) in the disputes. In the past, more often than not, land
disputes were resolved by individuals such as the heads of local government, specialists, land
management authorities and community leaders. At present, cross-border disputes have seen a
sharp increase in the involvement of security officials with firearms.
In addition, there has been increase in cases of unlawful arrests and detentions of Tajik citizens
by Kyrgyz security forces. For example, last year, land surveyors from Chorkuh and Isfara town
4
Alamanov S., "Об истории, современном состоянии и перспективах юридического оформления кыргызско‐
таджикской государственной границы", Кыргызстан‐Таджикистан: курс на укрепление парнтерства в контексте региональных связей, Т. Usubalyev Foundation and F. Abert Foundatio in Kyrgyzsta, Bishkek, 2010. http://library.fes.de/pdf‐files/bueros/bischkek/08172.pdf 5
Interview with an international expert in the field of conflict prevention, Dr. A. Matveeva, February 2010 24 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
were arrested by Kyrgyz Special Forces during their field work activities on the territory of
Tajikistan. They were taken to Batken Police Station and were held in a detention cell for eight
hours. Following an intervention of Isfara authorities, the surveyors were released. Kyrgyz
officials have still not specified the grounds for the detention of the surveyors.
Involvement of armed elements (law enforcement officers, border guards) in the disputes is an
aggravating factor and could spark an armed conflict.
Due to more strict regulation and procedures, the involvement of Tajik border guards is less
visible and less alarming. On the Kyrgyz side, however, nearly all incidents, even relatively
minor disputes, have been accompanied by the involvement of the Kyrgyz military.
2. Access to Pastures and Forests
Access to grazing lands and forest resources is less distressing in comparison to other CRFs. In
the Soviet period, when borders were symbolic, joint use of pastures and forests was not an
issue of contention, even though numbers of the livestock were higher than today. Gradually,
with the formation of new borderlines, both communities were faced with problems. Tajik
villages are located mostly on planes, while the main grazing lands are located on the Kyrgyz
side. Further, some of the good grazing lands are located on the disputed territories, adding to
the problem of accessing these natural resources.
The following grazing lands are regarded as disputed territories:
Vam (800ha), Chechelik (100ha), Zhiptik (approximately 100ha)
In the summer season, both communities use grazing lands in remote Kyrgyz and Tajik
territories.
Kyrgyz grazing lands: Teshiktash (700ha), Ak-Terek (650ha), Almaly (900ha), Kip (800ha),
Suksurluk (1000ha), Gerevshin (1500ha). Ak-Suu (800ha), Kara-Suu (700ha), Mesha (2500ha),
Kishemish (1200ha), Kyk (3000ha), Ylar (1000ha),
Tajik grazing lands: Puli Oftobruy (400ha), Lar (50ha), Shahi Safed (300ha), Kipkon (300ha),
Sari Sot (700ha) and Havzak (300ha).
Tajik villages which use the grazing lands: Vorukh, Tochikon, Chorkuh, Khojai-Ailo, Surkh,
Naiman
Kyrgyz villages which use the grazing lands: Min-Bulak, Min-Oruk, Koktash, Ak-Say,
Samarkandek, Ak-Tatyr, Uch-Dobo
In addition, excessive exploitation of pastures and forests give grounds for environmental
concerns. Unregulated use of these resources causes their annual decrease. In turn, the everincreasing scarcity of natural resources gives rise to more disputes. Annual increase of livestock
on both sides creates an even larger shortage of pastures and ecologically overloads the
grazing lands. Kyrgyz experts have pointed to a gradual degradation of pastures. As a
preventive action, the Kyrgyz side has suggested it will sharply limit the exploitation of their
pastures by Tajik communities. With the absence of constructive dialogue on the issue, such a
unilateral decision will inevitably increase tensions and disputes amongst the users of crossborder pastures.
The Kyrgyz communities of Ak-Sai and Kermetoo villages are more concerned about transiting
their livestock through Tajik territories. When moving the cattle to pastures in Tooshkandyk,
Kishemish, Ular, Gerevshin and other lands, Kyrgyz villagers are forced to cross through the
Tajik enclave of Vorukh, which often leads to fights between Kyrgyz shepherds and Vorukh
residents. Tajiks, in turn, complain about damage to their crop and farming lands by Kyrgyz
livestock. Tajik villagers are unable to fence off their farming lands, due to a lack of financial
resources.
Occasionally, Tajik shepherds are prohibited to pass their cattle through “environmental
checkpoints” of questionable validity set up by Kyrgyz authorities. According to one respondent,
intolerance towards each other plays an extra role when the two sides have disagreements.
Tajik communities often employ Kyrgyz shepherds to graze their livestock on Kyrgyz lands. Due
to bureaucratic procedures and extortive actions of authorities, this is the easiest method of
accessing distant pastures. Even with all the necessary documentation, Tajik respondents feel
that they would not be safe from arbitrary money extortion by border guards, employees of
environmental agencies, employees of municipalities, police, and even youth gangs. For legal
reasons, Kyrgyz shepherds often document the Tajik livestock in their name in order to have a
more trouble-free access to grazing lands on their side. With no written agreement between
Tajik owners of the livestock and Kyrgyz shepherds, loss of the property leads to quarrel over
compensations and creates further tensions between the two sides. Thus, a natural event, such
as loss of cattle during grazing, could have a deepening effect on the tense cross-border
relations. Every year, 50 to 100 small and large cattle are lost in this process.
Previously, the Kyrgyz Parliament had adopted a resolution, permitting Tajiks free access to
Kyrgyz pastures. In 2009, the governments of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan signed a joint
memorandum, allowing Kyrgyz land owners the right to rent their lands for grazing of Tajik
livestock, thus lessening the tensions. However, expectations that the spring of 2010 would be
more tranquil were short lived. As one Tajik shepherd noted, after paying 6,000 soms (officially
documented only 3,000 soms) to the administration of Ak-Tatyr province (KR), he received a
granting documentation to graze his livestock on Kyrgyz territory. Regardless of paying 60
soms(1.5-2$) /cow and possessing official documents, the shepherd experienced a lot of
problems with accessing the pastures. At the checkpoint of "Bedaki" (an ecological checkpoint
of Kyrgyzstan, manned by armed border guards), border guards gave no value to the
documentation. The argument was that the shepherd did not possess official permission from
the forestry authorities or from border authorities of Batken. Having given an inducement, the
shepherd was allowed to pass.
A few more pasture-related factors shape the potential for conflicts:
‐
Differences in tariffs on pastures, lack of clear pricing, and annual alteration of prices for
foreign livestock. Tajik citizens complain that they are paying disproportionately more for
grazing their cattle, in comparison to the Kyrgyz (in average, Tajiks pay 200-250
soms/head/month, while the Kyrgyz are paying approximately 30 soms/head/month). As
noted above, even with appropriate and timely payments, there is no guarantee that
Tajik cattle will be allowed to pasture on Kyrgyz territories. Therefore, Tajik citizens and
Kyrgyz shepherds enter into oral agreements, bypassing the laws. The amount, which is
required for acquiring documents, is paid directly to Kyrgyz shepherds.
Kyrgyz shepherds benefit from these deals the most. According to a separate research,
conducted within the framework of a UNDP project - "The environmental aspect of an
early warning system"-, Kyrgyz shepherds receive on average 800soms/head of cattle
from Tajik livestock owners. The fee includes the cost of grazing permits and shepherd’s
services. In addition, shepherds receive milk, butter, and other products during the
grazing season. Furthermore, shepherds do not indicate the real numbers of their
livestock, and pay only for their private cattle. The forestry officials are physically unable
to verify the actual size of the livestock or determine which of the livestock belongs to
Tajik communities.
‐
Inconsistencies in actions of veterinary services. As neither of the sides recognise
vaccinations of the veterinary of neighbouring states, the livestock has to be revaccinated on the Kyrgyz side prior to the admittance of animals to Kyrgyz pastures.
Livestock needs to be vaccinated on both sides of the border. Experts argue that, such a
low level of cooperation between the veterinary services of Batken and Isfara districts
can be explained by financial benefits of the process, rather than by an insufficient
quality of vaccines.
‐
Lack of legal mechanisms for monitoring implementation of environment laws and
regulations, governing the use of pastures, as well as low knowledge of laws and
regulations create extra problems. Practice has shown that existing regulations for the
use of pastures and forests require detailed refinement. According to experts, the main
cause of problems is that people are not aware of laws. In this regard, JRC Vorukh and
the Batken branch of FTI conducted an awareness-raising campaign in the region
(explaining Kyrgyz laws and regulations on pastures and forests). The work was carried
out through a joint project of a “Valley of Peace” programme. It is also necessary to
revive work of cross-border schools clubs, "the Green Patrol", created in collaboration
with UNDP.
In the absence of a solution that would leave both sides satisfied, the problem of sharing the
pastures can be a serious problem for Tajik-Kyrgyz cross-border relations. This year, Tajik
livestock was sent to Kyrgyz pastures with a 20-day delay, due to the these highlighted factors.
In this regard, adoption of intergovernmental or interagency agreements on pastures could
have a positive effect in reducing tensions.
Introduction of mechanisms that would allow problem-free sharing of pastures, stop arbitrary
and unlawful behaviour of law enforcement/border security agencies, as well as
accommodating joint attempts to deal with problems, would be ideal in the current situation.
2.1
Access and exploitation of forest-resources
Due to acute energy deficiency – including for electricity, fuel and coal. -, illegal logging of
valuable trees – such as juniper, apricot, almond and shrub, has become a day to day
occurrence. The wood is used for domestic heating and cooking. The problem of cutting down
forests has been to some extent tempered by newly introduced penalties, ecological
checkpoints, as well as by awareness-raising activities of state authorities and NGOs. However,
in particular ‘ecological checkpoints’ have increased tensions between Tajik residents and
Kyrgyz border guards, which have been confiscating illegally logged wood.
Batken law enforcement authorities have been continuously witnessing illegal logging of rare
juniper trees in the forests of Batken district. Forestry specialists argue that logging of valuable
trees by residents of Tajik villages is commercial by nature and has little to do with energy
scarcity. According to the Forestry Committee of Batken district, from 2005 till 2007, 175ha have
been logged. Currently, an average of three trucks of juniper trees is transported out of the
region daily.6 Tajiks regard these accusations as groundless and counter the accusation with
the same arguments. Tajiks would argue that they have little means of collecting basic firewood,
not to mention mass logging of juniper.
A Tajik woman from a focus-group meeting said the following about interrelations of Tajik
communities and Kyrgyz border guards:
“As soon as we go to collect firewood, or just cross a Kyrgyz territory, it becomes a
pretext for a showdown. Last year, for example, Kyrgyz border guards shot at young
men – two students. These guys went to collect firewood and grazed cattle at the same
time. I and four other women witnessed this incident and had to seek for cover when the
shooting started. We returned home only late at night, when the shooting ended.
Wounded youth received treatment in hospital. Even the Mayor of Isfara came. He
advised everyone to be more patient. None of the Kyrgyz border guards has been
punished. There have been frequent cases of ungrounded arrests. Some of the arrested
were harshly beaten, and their livestock confiscated."7
In some of the incidents, Kyrgyz border guards have employed firearms. On one such occasion,
a twenty-year-old Tajik male was shot and killed by a Kyrgyz border guard after a fight allegedly
broke out when he and six others were discovered chopping wood in Kyrgyz territory.8 Local
authorities had to work hard to prevent a spill-over of people’s emotions into a full conflict.
6
Strategic Development Plan of Batken District, 2007 7
Interview with a female resident of Khojai‐Ailo village (TJ), June, 2011 8
http://reliefweb.int/node/176790 29 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
According to local experts, the issue with the lack of energy supplies has stabilized over the
past two years and consequent problems have also lost their sharpness. However, the Tajik
energy crisis in the spring of 2011 and the rising prices on fuel and products, have again forced
the locals to draw their attention to forest-resources.
Some of the experts, however, are even more pessimistic in their prophecy. A possible increase
in the shortage of fuel in the autumn-winter of 2011-2012, could lead to new clashes between
local residents and border guards. This with other factors referenced here, could easily develop
into a major violent conflict.
3. Access to drinking and irrigation water
Access to water and inefficient use of water resources continue to be major conflict risk factors
in the cross-border communities of Isfara and Batken districts. The problem is not associated
with deficiency as much as it with inefficient and uneven distribution and exploitation of the
resource. The inability of local communities to comply with bilateral water-related treaties and
agreements only adds to the problem. The situation has stayed virtually unchanged over recent
years.
Some Kyrgyz officials believe that water allocation and water use strategies, which were
developed in the mid-1950s, are at the core of the problem. In recent years, several attempts
have been made to review exploitation mechanisms of the Vorukh-Shurab and MehnatabadAqsai water canals. However, they have not resulted in any type of new bilateral treaties or
agreements.
Experts note that the intensive use of land, expansion of living territories, and development of
new lands will amplify water scarcity in the region. Thus, the region is in dire need of modern
technologies which would guarantee effective and productive use of water recourses in all
sectors.
Water management issues require better coordination and cooperation between water
management authorities on both sides. Water problems in the region (also in Vorukh, Chorkuh,
Surkh, and adjacent municipalities of Samarkandek, Ak-Tatyr and Ak-Sai) are, one way or
another, related to water canals from the cross-border river of Isfarinka. Water resources of the
river are distributed amongst three countries in the region (Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and
Uzbekistan) and follow a complex scheme, developed in the Soviet period:
“From 1st of October till 1st of April, water fills the Tortgul water reservoir in Kyrgyzstan;
from April till June (with minor changes in June), the following limits are set for using the
water from the river: 61% Isfara (Tajikistan), 17% Kanibadam (Tajikistan), 16% Besharyk
(Uzbekistan), 6% Batken (Kyrgyzstan); from June onwards, 28% of water is taken by
Kyrgyzstan, the rest is distributed among the remaining “customers”.
According to experts, this type of of water distributing method is outdated, very confusing, and
does not satisfy all the parties involved. Thus, speaking about the problems of management and
exploitation of Isfarinka River, the Head of Water Management in the Isfara district, A.
Shomirsaidov, noted that each year, starting from 1f October to 1 April, all the water from
Isfarinka River accumulates in the Tortgul water reservoir, leaving Isfara district virtually with no
water at all.
The Chairman of Samarkandek Municipality (KR) is also unsatisfied with the system and during
an interview stated that that "the existing water distribution method is very unfair for Kyrgyz
residents of the region."
Due to the obsolete technical equipment, it is impossible to determine country specific amounts
of consumed water. Water management authorities are no longer taking monthly
measurements, as it was done by all three countries during the Soviet times. Kyrgyz border
security checkpoints prevent authorities carrying out measurements where they can physically
be made. More positively, over the past few years, while the Tajik and Kyrgyz sides have been
in continuous rows with each other, the Uzbeks have distanced themselves from the disputes.
This can be regarded as a minor positive factor in the severity of water-related disputes.
Tajik-Kyrgyz cross-border communities use irrigation water for drinking and vice versa, which
makes it difficult to know what the water is actually used for (Vorukh-Shurab water pipeline is a
good example of this). A particularly acute situation over irrigation water has formed in rural
districts of Aksai, Ak-tatyr, and Samarkandec (Batken district), as well as in Tajik jamoats of
Chorkuh, Surkh, and Vorukh (Isfara district). In these communities, water disputes go back in
time and have several times led to interethnic violent conflicts.
Failure to comply with water agreements, lack of accountability, absence of discipline, obsolete
equipment, and exploitation of water resource as a pressuring mechanism against each other
have led to accumulating tensions and mistrust. Lack of a tradition of joint use of water and
reluctance to sympathise with the other side has intensified the problem. For example, Tajik
villages, located upstream of the Isfarinka River, take more water than they actually need, while
Kyrgyz villages lower down, do the same to their Tajik neighbours downstream from them. As a
result, those communities that are located further downstream, experience continuous water
shortages.
All the water relations of cross-border communities, and the risks for conflicts, are formed
around a number of sources that originate from the Isfarinka River.
The Turtgul water canal (also known as the Friendship Canal) can be regarded as a cause of
most of the water-related disputes in the region. In the past, mahallas of Langar, Buston, Kakir,
Somonien, and Konchuk in Chorkuh jamoat, as well as Kyrgyz villages of Koktash, Minbulak,
and Aksai received their water from an aryk (a small irrigation canal) of the Nazarboi stream. In
the 1960s and 1970s, the Kyrgyz side started construction of the Turtgul water canal using the
water from the Nazarboi stream.
The aim of this significant plan was to fill-up the Tortgul water reservoir, which would have
allowed the irrigating of thousands of hectares of new land as well as improving water supply to
the villages highlighted. The construction effort was carried out jointly by Kyrgyz and Tajik sides.
Prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, in accordance with a joint agreement, the Kyrgyz side
was supplying Tajikistan with the exact amount of water that was necessary for households and
irrigation of fields. However, following the collapse of the USSR, the issue of water distribution
and the use of the canal has become more problematic each year. Often, some of the mahallas
have had to endure long periods of time without irrigation or drinking water.
Prior to building the village of Samarkandek (1000ha), the Kyrgyz side was supplying Isfara
district with sufficient amount of water from the Turtgul water reservoir. Following the cultivation
of land for the new village, the Kyrgyz side started to use large amounts of water for Isfarinka
River and gradually discontinued supply of water from the Turtgul water reservoir to the Tajik
side. Residents of Tajik villages believe that water is being used as leverage during disputes as
well as a mean of enrichment of certain individuals.
According to the Vice Chairperson of Chorkuh jamoat, A. Sharipov, government authorities
have made several attempts and decisions to settle the ongoing disputes over the water use
from the Tortgul canal. Based on a directive of a Tajik-Kyrgyz inter-ministerial working group of
water management authorities, Kyrgyzstan should take all necessary measures to ensure water
supply to PK70-50 to a volume of 30l/sec. The directive was signed on 06.18.2009 by S.
Ekubzod, Ministry of Land Reclamation and Water Resources of the Republic of Tajikistan, and
R. Kamchubekov, the Head of Water Resources Department of Ministry of Agriculture, Water
Resources and Processing Industry of the Kyrgyz Republic. The directive was based on a
previously adopted protocol, dating back to 15.06.1989. However regardless of official
declaration, directives, and agreements, such initiatives are constantly ignored and violated.
This has encouraged popular doubrs about governments’ ability to make mutually binding and
effective agreements in the sphere of water management.
Research respondents have also expressed their discontent for a recent trend of increased
involvement of security forces in water-related disputes. Kyrgyz border guards are continuously
interfering in mandated water management procedures of local residents. Tajik communities
argue that water management authorities and local government officials have the right to interfe
in disputes, not the Kyrgyz border guards. Kyrgyz border authorities, however, argue that Tajik
villages are using water canals to cultivate disputed lands (such an action is prohibited by
bilateral treaties). The border guards have been instructed to prevent expansion into the
disputed lands and are using this as a mandate to interfere in water-related quarrels.
A few years ago, UNDP Khujand Area Office, with EU funding, built a new water canal which
provided the Surkh jamoat with access to pure drinking water (prior to this project, the jamoat
had no access to clean drinking water). However, some of the quarters of Surkh still remain
without this vital resource. The Chak mahalla (renamed to Gulsiton), which borders Kyrgyz
village of Ming-Urjuk, is one of such places. The mahalla receives drinking water from the
neighbouring Kyrgyz village, which has often cut of the water supply to its neighbours.
In terms of irrigation water, the Surkh jamoat exploint mainly the Isfarinka River. Nevertheless,
some of the lands (Navobod mahalla, and dehkan farms 10, 11, and 13 of Sakhobat) (brigade
number 10, 11, and 13) of Surkh rely on the Tartgul canal (KR). Conflicts occur annually
between residents of Surkh and neighbouring Kyrgyz villages.
Residents believe that it is necessary to generate a contract with the Kyrgyz side, which would
grant an unrestricted access to the Turtgul canal for irrigation purposes. If rationed
appropriately, both sides would have enough water for their needs.
According to water management authorities of Isfara, the Kyrgyz side is obligated by an
agreement to provide an annual amount of 10 million cubic meters of water to Surkh. Tajik water
specialist reminds that:
“Prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, [Tajik side was] receiving the 10 million cubic
meters. In recent years, however, it is becoming harder by the time. The Kyrgyz side
argues that the agreement to supply the water is obsolete and outdated”.
In turn, the Kyrgyz side states that Tajik-Kyrgyz water-related tensions are caused by
inappropriate water allocation systems and mechanism. A Tajik-Kyrgyz bilateral agreement, for
using Isfarinka River, dictates that between April and July, water is channelled into Isfarinka for
irrigation purposes. Thus, the Tortgul water reservoir cannot be sufficiently filled in order to
provide irrigation waters even for Kyrgyz villages. On the other hand, the Kyrgyz are also
troubled by a possibility that, with increased water supply, Tajik communities might start to
cultivate disputed lands in the proximity of Kyrgyz villages.
The Mehnatobad-Aksai water canal has been the basis of conflicts between Vorukh jamoat
and Kyrgyz municipal of Aksai since 1970s. Construction on the canal began in the early 1970s
and ended in 1974 (at the time, lands for the Vorukh jamoat were being cultivated in the terrain
of Mehnatobod). Kyrgyz dissatisfaction was caused by the fact that the tail part of the canal runs
through Kyrgyz territories. The discontentment caused a major conflict at the time. In order to
resolve the conflict, the governments of the two Soviet Republics signed an agreement under
which the Kyrgyz side will provide 402ha of land in exchange for 450liters/sec of water from the
Mehnatabod canal. However, due to a substantial increase of farming lands, the Tajik side was
unable to fully meet the conditions of the agreement. As a result, the Aksai (KR) community was
forced to build an expensive pumping station to maintain the flow of irrigation water to its lands.
Mud and dirt have been continuously destroying the structures of the canal; equipment is
outdated and can hardly withstand the water pressure. Local communities, with assistance from
various donors, have repaired the canal on several occasions. Nevertheless, sufficient delivery
of water for Kyrgyz communities has not been made possible. Adding to the technical problems
is an annual increase of water consumers.
The Tajik village of Tadzhikon also experiences the shortage of water. Residents of the village
have organized groups of people who are charged with closing pointlessly open water hatches
of the canal, in order to ensure adequate flow of water to their village. The villagers are
recommending their Kyrgyz neighbours to do the same. However, this action is not only
laborious, but also risky (closing of hatches could cause clashes with water users).
Tajik communities have even offered to replace worn-out parts of the wastepipe with ground
trenches, which, however, would run through disputed territories. The Kyrgyz side, fearing that
the Tajik side will have an opportunity to get their hands on the disputed lands, does not agree
to such a solution. In addition, access to the structures of the Mehnatabad canal is prevented by
Kyrgyz border guards at Badaki environmental checkpoint.
The Machoi - Aktatyr canal also has a history of conflicts. One of the major conflicts took place
in 1989. During the incident hundreds of people from the Tajik village of Khojai-Ailo and Kyrgyz
village of Samarkandek, as well as from surrounding villages, got involved in the clash. The
conflict was halted with use of the military and by introduction of Martial Law in the region.
The canal runs through the Tajik village of Khojai-Ailo and provides water to farms in Chorkuh,
as well as to Kyrgyz villages of Ortoboz, Uchdobo, Samarkandek, Kokterek, and Aktatyr. Each
year, an ever-increasing number of residents in Samarkandek create an exponential demand
for irrigation water from the main water source in this part of the region, the Machoi – Aktatyr
canal. Tajik respondents argue that the technical capability of the canal has already reached its
limit (it has been continuously expanded for irrigation purposes). A further expansion would
eventually flood the adjacent houses. Thus, due to the security issues, Tajiks have been
preventing an increase of water-flow to the Kyrgyz villages. The Kyrgyz side regards these
actions as a pressure instrument against them. The actions are often immediately reciprocated
by the other side, resulting in a shortage of water on both sides of the border.
Two communities have offered technical solutions to the problems assiciated with the Machoi –
Aktatyr canal. However, a lack of funds has been delaying execution of these plans.
The Vorukh-Shurab water pipeline has been a cause of conflict for over 20 years. Luckily,
water disputes around the pipeline have not yet evolved into open clashes. This is largely due to
the fact that the conflicting parties are not directly in touch with each other. The pipeline was
built in the mid 1960s to provide a mining town of Shurab with drinking water. After the
disintegration of the Soviet Union, with the crumbling of industrial sector, Kyrgyz and Tajik mine
workers lost their source of revenue. In a previously flourishing mining region, agricultural work
became the main income generating activity (mining took place in Shurab).
An increase in farming and land cultivation gave rise to higher demands for water. People
began to exploit the pipeline by making illegal taps into the pipeline itself. As a result, the
pipeline, which used to supply water to hundreds of thousands of people in the region, lost the
capacity to deliver water to even the 5,000 residents of Shurab (40% Kyrgyz).
With the advent of spring, Shurab residents start to feel an acute shortage of irrigation and
drinking water. They are forced to either buy the water or walk many kilometres to a well and
queue for hours. This situation causes dissatisfaction amongst the local population. To
somehow reduce the social tensions, Shurab authorities and communal service workers have
been walking down the pipeline, closing illegally tapped openings in the line. This activity has its
own problems, as it leads to arguments and rows with users of the pipeline (who have often
illegally tapped the line).
Tensions arise not only amongst Tajik and Kyrgyz residents of Shurab, but also amongst Tajik
residents from Shurab (TJ) and Khojai-Ailo (TJ). Attempts by Tajik and Kyrgyz authorities to
deal with the illegal tapping of the pipeline have been ineffective and have brought no results.
Given that the length of the pipeline is 32 km, 17 km of which lies on the territory of Kyrgyzstan,
and almost half of the pipeline passes through densely populated areas, the efforts to control
the tapping and illegal use of water are easier said than done. Joint raids against unauthorised
taps have had little results. On the brighter side, a negotiation process and public awarenessraising campaigns have had some positive results in recent years. Local communities have
managed to agree on a joint water time-schedule, allowing Shurab residents to stock a
necessary amount of water at a certain period of the day.
In this regard, it should be noted that UNDP, in support of the governmental programme for
resettlement, has implemented a number of infrastructure projects to improve supply of water to
Shurab. Respondents have stated that, as a result of these efforts, Shurab has begun to receive
a greater volume of water in comparison to previous years.
The Jui Dam water canal, 5km in length, provides irrigation water to more than 12,000 people
in several mahallas of Chorkuh and Kyrgyz village of Koktash. Most disputes and conflicts takes
place in the period between March and October. Each year, prior to the agricultural season,
water canals and aqueducts have to be cleaned of accumulated silt and sand. Chorkuh jamoat
alone, has more than 30 small and large cross-border water sources, which originate from the
Jui Dam canal. Tajiks argue that the Kyrgyz side does not only refuse to take part in the
cleaning efforts, but even prevents these activities.
According to mutually-agreed rules, planting of trees or any kind of construction in the proximity
of the canal is forbidden (the ban facilitates clean-up efforts). Ignoring these rules, residents of
Kyrgyz villages continue to plant saplings along the canal. Fearing that Tajiks would harm their
trees, Kyrgyz villagers have been physically preventing the maintenance of the canal.
A similar situation exists in the mahalla of Somoniyon, where Kyrgyz road-workers of Osh-Isfara
highway built a pipeline in a place where the road crossed with the Jui Dam canal. The pipeline
does not meet technical requirements and accumulates a lot of sand and silt. Tajiks are not
allowed to clean this part of the Jui Dam canal. As a result, 260ha of dehkan farms and 500ha
of other farming lands in Chorkuh jamoat find themselves without water. Dissatisfaction with the
situation often leads to fights and other confrontations.
3.1
Inter-farm canals
According to Isfara water management authorities, there are approximately 40 inter-farm canals
between Tajik and Kyrgyz communities (jointly used by Tajik and Kyrgyz communities).
Currently, however, there are no bilateral agreements between the Isfara and Batken water
management authorities regarding the use of these water resources. Everything is done through
verbal agreements and with mutual concessions.
When researching water conflicts, it is often difficult to determine the time of their occurrence, as
they often repeat annually with surprising similarities. In the Soviet times, the region depended
on a single interdependent system, with a common infrastructure network for water
management, energy supply, and transport lines. Today, the disintegration of existing drainage
and irrigation systems exacerbate water scarcity and have a negative impact on the lives of
local communities, as well as contributing to the emergence of ethnic tensions.
The existing realities in water exploitation turn the attention of communities towards more
independent and self-efficient systems. People are losing their faith in joint ways of using water
resources, and are gradually beginning to seek ways to develop a more independent water
infrastructure for themselves.
The following factors have an influence on water-related tensions and conflicts:
- High rate of population growth (expanding amount of water consumers, increase in
arable land in the face of limited water resources);
- Lack of effective disciplinary mechanisms for water management;
- Deteriorating water infrastructure, lack of technical maintenance of water systems;
- A low level of tolerance and leniency between Tajik-Kyrgyz communities (Cooperation
between cross-border communities has decreased. People lack the understanding that
water resources have to be exploited jointly, in cooperation with each other);
- Disputed territories exacerbate the water-related tensions. Absence of demarcated
borders makes water management initiatives more complex and difficult;
- Weakness or absence of conflict prevention skills within the communities. (Tolerance
raising and cooperation framework projects have brought little results, due to
unsustainable approaches);
- Lack of reliable information and excessive "secrecy" of official decision and actions in the
field of water management (Lack of information generates mutual mistrust). For
example, when the Kyrgyz side decided to build a water reservoir next to the village of
Khojali-Alo (TJ), they did so without any prior negotiation or agreement with the Tajik
side. Having received no information about the true intentions of the Kyrgyz side,
confident that these actions would limit the flow of water to Tajik mahallas, people
started to protest against the reservoir;
- Active intervention of security forces (police, border guards) in water conflicts is only
heating up the situation and has a potential to lead to unpredictable violent clashes.
A relatively new factor in resource-related conflicts is the extraction of river pebbles, gravel, and
sand from the river of Isfarinka, which is used by local communities as a building material.
Immediately after the peak of the agricultural season, communities begin construction work.
Thus, after April, construction material is in high demand. Tajik and Kyrgyz communities benefit
from these resources equally. Approximately 100 to 200 trucks of gravel and sand are being
extracted from the river daily.
During river floods, the Tajik side is forced to extract these resources from more accessible
parts of the river, on the Kyrgyz side (mainly from Samarkandek area, and from disputed
territories). The Kyrgyz side prevents their Tajik neighbours extracting these resources on their
territory. Kyrgyz argue that extraction of these natural resources is causing ecological damage
to the river; it changes the level of the river bed and washes off the coastline. Although both
sides have their own arguments, experts stick to an opinion that these resources are extremely
profitable and are used for income generation by both sides.
Some of the respondents noted that removal of gravel and sand from the Isfarinka River has
become the number one conflict risk factor for 2011. Six incidents have already been recorded
in this year alone. Incidents have occurred between residents of Khojai-Ailo (TJ) and Ak-Sai
(KR). In comparison to previously, the activity is becoming more deliberate and more
systematic. It generates enormous profits and involves a variety of actors (such as government,
criminal gangs and law enforcement agencies. Negative developments in regard to the
extraction of pebble, gravel, and sand have attracted the attention of local governments.
However, the lack of responsive actions by the authorities has created suspicions about their
association with the problem.
Roles and actions of parties involved
4. Actions of state officials
Since independence, Tajik-Kyrgyz relations at the central level have not undergone any major
changes. Cross-border disputes have little effect on the high-level bilateral affairs of the two
sides. The heads of two governments are constantly reaffirming their commitment to the
principles of neighbourly relations, to maintaining and strengthening friendly relations, as well as
to long-term partnership. All intergovernmental meetings are marked with a common approach
to issues of regional and international security, mutual commitments to border demarcation and
peaceful settlement of cross-border conflicts.
In general, district authorities have also adapted the central policies of their governments.
Governmental partnership between the two sides are built in a spirit of mutual understanding
and mutual respect. For example, in late April of 2011, town of Batken (KR) hosted a KyrgyzTajik friendship festival ("Aigul and Guli Surkh” – Friendship Bridge). The festival was attended
by the Chairman of Sughd region (Isfara district is part of the Sughd region), K. Rasulzade and
by the Governor of the Batken region (KR), A. Burkanov. According to the Governor, "the
festival is a significant regional event. The geographical, economic, spiritual, and moral
proximity, as well as close family-based ties between the two peoples require regular meetings
and contacts at the regional level. The two sides have many agreeable issues as well as a
mutual desire to further strengthen the ties. Policies of our presidents support this initiative."9
Despite the rhetoric of regional authorities, the realities of everyday life in cross-border
communities are not always accompanied by festivities. Residents find themselves in conflict
with each other, when faced with problems of access to vital resources and other border issues.
The overall economic, political, and cultural gap between the cross-border communities in the
9
United Nations Development Programme of the Kyrgyz Republic, http://www.undp.kg/en/media‐
room/news/article/3‐news‐list/1496‐ajgul‐i‐guli‐sur‐most‐drujby 39 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
region has yet to be abridged. Thus, the Tajik-Kyrgyz interstate relations are continuously tested
by the daily problems of cross-border communities of Isfara and Batken districts.
When solving border problems and resolving disputes, authorities often face a dilemma:
Whether to adhere to a policy of peaceful coexistence and cooperation, or to protect interests of
their communities/electorate? In complex territorial disputes it becomes difficult or even
impossible to combine the two approaches at the same time. As a result, a decision is often
made at the expense of one of the choices. This research indicates that many border problems
arise as a result of poor coordination between governmental official of the two sides. There is
also a lack of coordination amongst various non-governmental actors on both sides, which can
produce equally fruitless results.
A good example of lack of coordination was witnessed in March 2008. According to an expert
opinion, "unilateral and uncoordinated actions of all the main actors in Khojai-Ailo (TJ) and
Aksai (KR) - public, local authorities, security agencies, and donors - , brought the two
communities to the verge of an armed conflict."10 Residents of Kahijai-Ailo were upset by the
construction of a dam upstream from Khojai-Ailo.
Tajiks accused the Kyrgyz of breaking the guidelines against unilateral exploitation of crossboundary rivers. The Tajik side was cut off from access to irrigation water for a few days, and
thus set out to destroy the dam. The arrival on the scene of the Chairman of the Isfara district
and Tajik law enforcement authorities provoked outrage on the Kyrgyz side. At the time, the
incident received considerable attention from authorities on all levels. Thus, immediately after
the incident, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic expressed his concerns and
stated that "it was the Chairman of Isfara district, accompanied by law enforcement authorities,
who led a group of people with the intention of destroying the dam." In turn, a former Chairman
of the Isfara district, M. Ekubova, said that the incident occurred on a disputed territory, thus the
construction of the World Bank funded dam was illegal."
Tajik and Kyrgyz analysts agree that involvement of armed law enforcement personnel in
disputes has a large potential to ignite a violent conflict. A noteworthy factor of the case was
that the unilateral and uncoordinated actions on one side were immediately reciprocated, which
furthered the tensions and had a negative effect on conflict resolution.
10
Interview with B. Valiev, a journalist from Asia Plus. June, 2011. 40 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
A similar episode took place this year. Description of the incident is as follows (both sides have
their own defence) :
On 17 March 2011, Kyrgyz community members, accompanied by armed soldiers, cut down
approximately 400 trees in Siehkuh territory (known in Kyrgyzstan as Kara). Tajik residents of
Chorkuh jamoat claim that they had planted the trees 18 years ago. According to the Chairman
of the Chorkuh dehkan farm, N. Olimov, "security forces of Batken district chopped down 400
apricot trees, without any prior notification”. The trees were planted 12 years ago and the land
on which the trees were planted is not a disputed territory, but belongs to Chorkuh dehkan
farm.”11
Batken authorities confirmed the incident and added that the Tajik communities had violated
existing agreements by planting the seedlings on Kyrgyz lands. The Head of the Defence
Forces in Batken region, T. Eshaliev, announced that he was present "during the destruction of
seedlings, which were planted not 12 years ago, but during the past few years."12
Defending the actions of the Kyrgyz authorities, Ashaliev noted that “Tajik side had been
repeatedly warned about the illegal exploitation of the Kara territory by residents of Chorkuh,
and were even invited for talks on 17 March”. Eshaliev added that, “no one from Tajik authorities
showed up for talks at that day. After Tajik side had ignored the call for negotiations, we decided
to cut down the saplings, which were planted on our territory."13
Uncoordinated actions of authorities, disregard for the potential of conflicts, and lack of
mitigation techniques in conflict situations facilitate rapid escalation and violent manifestation of
tensions. The need for coordination and interaction between Tajik and Kyrgyz state structures is
apparent.
Unfortunately, regional actors and parties involved lack processes to learn from these incidents.
Nevertheless, the increased tendency of such incidents has forced Tajik-Kyrgyz district
authorities to finally meet and discuss recent developments.
11
Interview with the Chairman of the Chorkuh dehkan farm, N. Olimov. June, 2011.
12
Safar, Tokhir. “Весна тревоги на кыргызско-таджикской границе”, Radio Azattyk, March, 2011.
http://rus.azattyk.kg/content/kyrgyzstan_tajikistan_conflict/4726510.html 13
Ibid. 41 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
4.1
Dialogue between Tajik-Kyrgyz state officials
An important factor in building trust between cross-border communities and preventing conflicts
in the region is a sustainable governmental dialogue. The legal basis for diplomatic relations
was established on 14 January 1993. To date, more than 70 intergovernmental and
interdepartmental agreements have been signed between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, covering a
wide range of issues.
The entire package of bilateral treaties and agreements are aimed at strengthening cooperation
in political, economic, social, and cultural spheres, as well as towards effective management of
priority aspects in security, sharing of natural resources, transport, and communication.
Cross-border relations in Isfara and Batken districts require a particular effort in cooperation and
coordination. Bilateral meetings of local authorities, joint committees and working groups,
councils of elders, and traditional monthly meetings of local government leaders, can be
regarded as positive steps in the direction of more effective cooperation and coordination.
However, as local experts and government representatives have noted, the low efficiency of
such institutions is made evident by the recent increase of tensions and disputes. Experts argue
that the ineffectiveness of collaboration can be explained by the following factors:
- Instead of conflict prevention and mitigation of conflict potential, the main aim of
cooperation is to seek conflict resolution and settlement of already occurred incidents
and disputes;
- Usually, government representatives and committee members do not seek to eliminate
causes of conflicts, but rather only the symptoms. As a result, preventable disputes
develop into wider conflicts;
- Little attention is paid to conflict analysis. This can be explained by a lack of competence
and skills for conducting such analysis (or by a limited time-frame of meetings, which
usually lasts only for one working day);
- Absence of mechanisms for bilateral monitoring of agreements. In a best case scenario,
implementation of an agreement is monitored separately by each side and findings
shared with the other side;
- Absence of sanctioning mechanisms for ignoring bilateral agreements;
- Frequent changes in government personnel. This factor has a negative effect of stability
of dialogues as well as on the effectiveness of joint problem-solving procedures. (Oral
agreements, as well as principles of joint work have to be reviewed all over again, and
mutual trust rebuilt, once a new government representative has taken his post. There is
no mechanism for succession of decisions. Often, the same committees and working
groups are formed several times and previously agreed decisions have to be concurred
on again. The change of a single leader can also be accompanied by the change of an
entire administration);
- Low level of participation of civil society representatives in the process of interstate
cooperation and coordination;
The Chairman of the Isfara town, S. Ashurov, agrees with the criticism. In regard to increased
cross-border incidents, Ashurov noted that:
"Unfortunately, these events have revealed inadequacy of work of addressing crossborder disputes. Joint meetings have not produced joint conflict analysis or review of
events. Actions were limited to protocols and plans, which remained mostly on paper. If
we fail to take concrete actions or create solutions for each individual incident, we will
face the same problems over and over again. The lack of specific solutions and results is
creating discontent amongst population towards the authorities."14
A positive shift in terms of streamlining joint commissions was made at a joint meeting of S.
Ashurov and the Head of Batken district, H. Aksynov. The meeting was held on 18 April 2011, in
the village of Minguruk (KR). It was attended by the heads of border agencies and law
enforcement officials of the two districts. As noted by journalists and experts, discourse on
cross-border issues was constructive and objective. As a result of the meeting, a decision was
made to establish a permanent Isfara-Batke Joint Commission for processing and assessing
complaints of citizens in matters of cross-border disputes. The commission will be comprised of
heads of district administrations, heads of agricultural affairs, heads of land and water
management authorities, as well as by heads of local cross-border communities. During the
meeting, particular attention was paid to resource-related issues (land, water, pastures).
Heads of delegations noted that agreements for exploiting Isfarinka River needed to be
amended. Given the importance of the issue, within the framework of the newly established
commission, a joint working group on water and land affairs shall assemble quarterly.
For a joint investigation of circumstances and causes of an incident, which occurred on 6 April
2011, a working group of prosecutors and internal affairs officials was established. The incident
took place on a cross-border road of Koktash-Samani. An unapproved checkpoint on the road
and the delinquency of law enforcement authorities caused a cross-border incident. The
14
Interview with the Chairman of Isfara district, S. Ashurov. June, 2011. 43 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
working group will investigate the incident and report the findings to the Isfara-Batken Joint
Commission. Deterioration of ethnic relations, and frequent clashes and fights between youths,
led the delegates to establish three joint councils; one for elders, one for women, and one for
youth.
The effectiveness and efficiency of the Joint Commission could also be ensured by inclusion of
all governmental agencies, from all levels of governmental structure. S. Ashurov noted that, "the
current situation requires establishment of a similar type of commission at the regional level.
Practice shows that, on Kyrgyz side, it is mainly regional administration that takes part in the
cross-border discourse, which has an obvious effect on cross-border negotiation processes."
An expert on cross-border relations, Tilav Rasulzoda, argues that "the cross-border issues
should be addressed at a senior level in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, as well as in parliaments of
both countries. There is a need for a joint committee or a permanent group that would address
specific problems as well as meet the people and solve their problems."15 In this framework,
Kyrgyz side has a parliamentary working group in the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Interparliamentary Cooperation of the Jogorku Kenesh (parliament), which is specifically designated
to deal with border related issues.
Cross-border dialogue amongst authorities is an important factor. Effectiveness of such
dialogues depends on organizational effectiveness and the inclusiveness of meetings. Existing
problems have to be discussed jointly, at all levels of government. Cross-border inter-regional
meetings could adopt a procedure of analysing the problems, identifying solutions, and
developing a joint action plan. For these purposes, UNDP has already been facilitating a
number of dialogues among Tajik-Kyrgyz authorities for addressing cross-border issues, and
continues such initiatives within the framework of "Conflict prevention and mitigation in the
Ferghana Valley" project (organizing forums, round tables, and conferences). The expected
outcomes of these meetings are to develop joint solutions for cross-border problems, to develop
sustainable mechanisms for joint response, as well as to incorporate the opinions of local
residents in the decision making processes.
15
Interview with an expert on cross‐border relations, T. Rasulzoda. June, 2011. 44 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
4.2
State officials and conflict management skills
Practice shows that regional government authorities play a significantly role in the region where
internal socio-economic problems are accompanied with cross-border ethnic tensions. The roles
of such officials encompass not only the social and economic development of their communities,
but also include analysis, management, and prevention of conflicts. However, the frequency of
cross-border incidents indicate the weakness of authorities, both at the regional and district
levels, in identifying, foreseeing, and preventing conflict situations, as well as conducting
negotiations and resolving conflicts peacefully.
Local authorities have a significant role to play at the earliest stages of a potential conflict. Yet,
the analysis of conflicts has revealed a tendency for delayed reactions to cross-border conflicts.
Often, interventions takes place after a cross-border dispute has already escalated into an open
confrontation. In the past, the Early Warning System (EWS), which was developed in
collaboration with UNDP for cross-border conflicts, included a package of measures to identify,
predict, and prevent conflicts through a network of local monitors. It also served to strengthen
the capacity of border communities and local authorities to prevent conflict escalations. This
system was developed to facilitate rapid decision making during conflicts and serve as an
information sharing mechanism amongst local authorities, communities, and other stakeholders.
The successful EWS was able to identify the main conflict risk factors within and amongst the
communities. Unfortunately, due to factors such as frequent changes of government officials,
internal and external migration and the weakened role of the Jamoat Resource Centres, the
system was unsustainable. In places the system is used (Vorukh, Samarkandek), the level of
conflict potential is significantly lower in comparison with other communities. It is, therefore,
necessary to consider the possibility of "reactivating" the system and developing a sustainable
mechanism for monitoring and preventing conflicts. The EWS has to be manageable
independently by local authorities, communities, and institutions.
State authorities have to understand that peaceful development of cross-border communities
depends on the capacities of local institutions, both governmental and civil. Capacity building for
conflict prevention should be accepted and viewed positively by state officials. In cooperation
with state authorities, it is necessary to continue training programmes for various regional actors
(such as community members, NGOs and government officials). Given the fact that there is no
systematic approach in government agencies to prevent and transform conflict, it is important to
consider the possibility of creating a special institute within the framework of local state
authorities, which would be directly engaged in analysing, preventing, and resolving borderrelated conflict. Such a practice is already has already been set up on Kyrgyz side. According to
the opinion of an international expert, A. Matveeva, “special conflict prevention institutes, which
could be formed and manned by local authorities, should provide mediation, negotiations, and
conflict prevention trainings for residents of the region."16 In Isfara district, officials have already
taken steps to systematize such trainings within the framework of the Department of Internal
Economic Relations. Even though similar previous initiatives have been as comprehensive, it
would be recommendable to utilize the potential of the District Development Committee, which
has extensive experience in various conflict prevention projects and programmes, and to
establish a systematic approach for organizing trainings and consultations on conflict
management and conflict prevention.
4.3
Aspects of conflict prevention in local development plans
It is generally recognized that conflict risk reduction and conflict prevention approaches must be
incorporated into governmental socio-economic development plans on all levels. Districts of
Isfara and Batken should pay extra attention to the necessity of integrating conflict prevention
and cross-border cooperation plans into their local development programmes.
Currently, the governments of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are both concentrating their efforts on
development of separate communities in the region of our research. For example, during his
visit to Isfara, the Prime Minister of Tajikistan, O. Okilov, marked as a priority the socioeconomic development of Shurab town (home to some 2,500 (40%) ethnic Kyrgyz ). At the
present time, the development plan of Shurab is being developed.
UNDP Khujand Area Office, with financial support from the Norwegian Government, continues
to implement "Conflict prevention and mitigation in the Ferghana Valley" project in the region.
The goal of the project is to reduce the potential for conflicts in cross-border communities by
creating appropriate living conditions as well as by resettling residents from the jamoats of
Chorkuh and Surkh to the Shurab town. According to Isfara officials, UNDP’s initiative has
"created a significant impetus for the governmental directive (№530, 01.10.09) for the
resettlement of 850 families from the border jamoats of Chorkuh, Surkh and Vorukh into
Shurab." (The directive is titled as: “Internal resettlement of fit-to-work residents from densely
populated mountainous regions into the unexploited valley lands”. Lands for the resettlement
purposes have been reserved from 2010 till 2012)
16
Interview with an international expert, A. Matveeva. February, 2010. 46 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Correspondingly, during a visit of the President of the Kyrgyz Republic, R. Otunbayeva, to the
Batken region, much attention was paid to the concerns of Kyrgyz border communities. During
her visiti, President Otunbaeva recommended adding into the existing development
programmes of the region a special pilot project for socio-economic development of Batken
district’s border communities.
It needs be noted that despite high level o interest in developing border communities, regional
and municipal strategic plans and development programmes are still lacking aspects of conflict
prevention in the cross-border communities. In addition, Regional Development Plans and
Jamoat Development Plans have almost no joint projects or initiatives in such crosscutting
sectors as agriculture, commerce, communication and water infrastructure. Currently, UNDP is
cooperating with the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade under a joint project - "The
Rural Growth Programme" (RGP)-, and provides technical and advisory support to jamoats of
the Sughd region in developing and implementing medium-term programmes for socioeconomic development. It would be recommended to include aspects of conflict prevention and
mitigation into the future programmes of the RGP.
4.4
Accountability and transparency of state officials
Transparency of actions and accountability of local authorities play a major role in averting
conflicts and building confidence within and between local communities. Past surveys suggest
that the transparency and accountability of local authorities and government officials are weak,
at best, fully lacking at worst. As such, many governmental conflict prevention initiatives are
received with suspicion and often prejudice by Tajik-Kyrgyz communities of the region. In this
regard, one of the main regional objectives should be the creation of mechanisms for
establishing links between the government and the people, which in itself is a necessary
precondition for effective governance.
4.5
Confidence in state officials and assessment of their actions
According to the survey and focus group interviews, residents of border villages have a sense
that local authorities merely register their complaints and grievances, instead of acting upon
them. Residents lack information about responsive decisions and the actions of authorities in
regards to their complaints. Residents tend to think that conflict resolution is regarded by the
authorities as a one-time settlement of an incident, and that officials have no contingency plans
for repetition of the same incident.
A Tajik journalist, N. Mirsaidov, argues that, "most frequent cause of conflicts is the poor
management of border communities by state institutions. All of the conflicts and incidents are
characterised by either disregard for tensions or provocative actions of state officials and
security authorities.”17 Thus, the lack of transparency and accountability of authorities, as well
as absence of reliable information, reinforces public opinion of being neglected by the
government.
Lack of trust towards the state officials was reinforced by the incident on 8 April 2011: After a
series of conflicts between residents of Kok-Tash (KR) and Somonyon (TJ), authorities of the
two sides had an emergency meeting to consider and reflect on the dangerous developments,
and tried to indentify causes of the tensions, which started on 6 April. However, after failing to
resolve the ongoing incident and tensions, an even larger episode was to follow.
Frustrated by the incompetence of authorities and lack of information about the measures
against the perpetrators of the act that led to the initial conflict, residents were ready emotionally
ready to act.
The following is the official description of the events by the Department of Public Relations and
Mass Media of the Border Security of Kyrgyzstan:
"On 8 April, at around 1pm, (15 km from the incident site of the incident the bilateral meeting of
regional authorities was in process), border guards at the "Kapchygay" checkpoint detected
approximately 20 citizens of Tajikistan on the Kyrgyz territory, who were illegally loading gravel
into eight "KAMAZ" vehicles. Upon the demands to stop loading, Tajiks reacted with aggression
and, according to the border guards, made an assault with an attempt to seize their weapons. In
order to prevent this action, border guards fired warning shots into the air. Consequently, Tajiks
fled the scene. This incident was followed by unlawful actions of Tajik and Kyrgyz residents.
Approximately 200 residents of Khojai Ailo (TJ), dissatisfied with the actions of border guards,
blocked the Batken-Aksai road and stoned a car of an Aksai police officer. Consecutively, in
protest against the actions of Tajik youth, more than 100 residents of Aksai village blocked the
section of the Isfara-Vorukh highway and damaged a car of a resident of Khojai Ailo. More than
200 cars queued on both sides. During the confrontation, which lasted around 7 hours, security
forces on both sides barely managed to avoid all-out violent clash. People disperse only after
both leaders of cross-border districts arrived on the scene."
17
Interview with a Tajik journalist, N. Mirsaidov. June, 2011. 48 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
During the incident, both sides demanded immediate demarcation of borders, easier movement
in the region, and pacification of the youth. One of the leaders of the Aksai village noted that the
incident "was a manifestation of peoples will to be heard by the authorities”.18 A local expert, H.
Tahsinov, noted that "the conflict was triggered by the actions of Kyrgyz border guards and
security forces. The fact that the incident took place at the time of bilateral meeting of the two
sides shows the unaccountability of security forces."19
Relations between communities and local government representatives are often formed though
personal acquaintances with individual members of the government. At the same time, people
rely only on those government officials who have the interest and ability to deal with crossborder problems. The popularity of a leader depends on his/her actions. Those officials that
seek compromises and make concessions are often regarded as “traitors” of national interests
and automatically lose support.
Local Kyrgyz authorities are, more often than not, considered by Kyrgyz communities as
mechanisms for resolving conflict in their favour. The uncompromising and more categorical
approach in cross-border relations, elevates their popular support. In other words, Kyrgyz
communities have more confidence in their leaders simply because they manage to protect
Kyrgyz interests more sturdily. "Such a populistic approach of the authorities is short-sighted in
terms of conflict resolution, and is most likely caused by the fear of losing their jobs."20
Inconsistencies between statements and actions deepen the negative attitudes of people
towards their leaders. Thus, in the course of negotiations, heads of local governments might
make mutual commitments and concessions, which are later neglected due to a change in
circumstances. An inability to stand by their decisions makes local authorities unpopular and
adds to the potential for future conflicts.
Often unrealistic or unkeepable promises are made to reduce the heat of a topic or to please
higher leadership. This type of strategic positioning not only lessens the value of official
decisions, but also encourages people to act on their own. Furthermore, decisions and
agreements are often merely verbal and involve little follow-up action. These factors confirm the
18
Interview with the Head of Aksai village. June, 2011. 19
Interview with a local expert, H. Tahsinov. June, 2011. 20
weakness of accountability of authorities as well as the lack of mechanisms for monitoring
implementation of agreements.
According to respondents, the Tajik communities have less confidence in their local authorities,
than the Kyrgyz. It is likely that these negative attitudes are due to the abuse of authority power
through illegal land transactions and lack of firmness in addressing cross-border issues. Trust
towards authorities depends largely on the ways they manage the most pressing issues in
cross-border relations. In this regard, some positive measures were introduced by district
authorities. The new approach of publicizing land distribution and names of new land owners,
as well as Saturday meetings with groups of residents (instead of meeting privately) are
guaranteeing a better transparency in the process of land allocation.
Nonetheless, most of the agreements and decisions, governing the cross-border communities,
are simply declarations. In other words, decisions are made without any consultations with local
residents, and have had little positive effect on the communities. This leads towards more selfreliance and less hope that authorities will be able to solve local problems. Local authorities play
an important role in addressing disputes and tensions within the region. One way or another,
people have to rely on their leaders, since most of the problems cannot be solved without
government initiatives.
According to some residents of Tajik villages, their leaders employ "permissive" policies and
make compromises to the detriment of their interests. In this regard, when making mutual
concessions and compromises, officials should be able to explain to the people the
circumstances of a decision. Residents have to be informed that their demands cannot be fully
met. Reasons for specific decisions and actions have to be comprehendible to all.
Often, the credibility of authorities is also linked to the issues of demarcation of borders. Any
type of information regarding this process is highly welcomed by the residents of border
communities. The work of the Joint Commission for Demarcation and Delimitation of Borders
has lasted over a decade. Lack of information about its progress leads to the thinking that the
commission is unlikely to achieve positive results and forces people to resort to such actions as
"creeping migration" and illegal occupation of disputed territories.
4.6
State officials and infrastructure
The survey and focus-group meetings also revealed that, just as in the past, Kyrgyz and Tajik
communities see the settlement of territorial disputes mainly through ethnic partition. Peaceful
co-existence in a confrontational environment becomes exponentially difficult, especially in the
areas where communities are in direct contact with each other. Both sides, disappointed with
joint initiatives, seek to find independent and self-sufficient ways of solving problems. However,
due to the “checkerboard-like” borders and shared resources, the end-result could only be
partial self-sufficiency.
In May 2011, President Otunbaeva visited the construction site of the Aksai-Tamdyk-ChuurganBaba highway. The road is built in order to bypass the Tajik enclave of Vorukh. As noted in the
official report of the visit, "relations between the citizens of neighbouring countries have become
so strained that it was decided to build a bypassing road around Tajik territories."21 The
President also noted that, "residents of Batken district should feel that they are citizens of the
sovereign republic of Kyrgyzstan, rather than being simply residents of a bordering region with
complex problems."22 The President demanded that the Ministry of Transportation would
complete construction of the road as soon as possible. The Ministry of Defence and the Border
Guard Authorities were given the task of assisting with construction work (mainly rock
detonation).23
This might be regarded as a repetition of history. In 2000, during the so-called "war of
roadblocks", the Tajik side was forced to build a separate bridge and provide an alternative
passage for its citizens, bypassing Kyrgyz roadblocks in the area of Dostuk village.
An increase in the intensity and quantity of conflicts between residents of border communities
forced the authorities to implement financially costly actions, independently from each other. A
conflict prevention specialist from UNDP Kyrgyzstan, speaking about the tendency of
autonomous problem-solving, notes that "in recent years, the absence of enforcing mechanisms
of bilateral agreements, is forcing the parties to question the effectiveness of cooperation in
sharing water resources.” The expert also added that, “both sides are becoming progressively
more isolated from each other, thus seeking unilateral solutions for their problems. With further
deterioration of trust, tendency for independent actions (building canals, roads, electric lines,
21
Information about President Otumbajeva’s visit to Batken region. http://fergana.akipress.org/news:125431/ 22
Ibid. 23
etc.) will certainly increase. When existing regional and even state agreements are ignored, it is
only natural that each party will seek unilateral ways of resolving the problems."24
5. Actions of border security and law enforcement
authorities
In recent years, the actions of border guards and law enforcement officials have been
increasingly developing into a conflict risk factor and are regarded by Tajik and Kyrgyz crossborder communities as the main destabilising factor in interethnic relations. Border guards and
police, instead of ensuring public safety and order, are themselves becoming a source of
provocations and tensions. Currently, popular impression is that "security forces are mainly
occupied with extortion and personal enrichment, rather than with protection of civil rights and
maintenance of public order."25
The lack of demarcated borders and existence of disputed territories has long complicated the
lives of local residents. The strengthening of border security and restrictions on crossing the
border are restraining access to vital natural resources and further exacerbating tensions
between the communities.
The perplexity of borderlines, interdependent transportation lines (crosscutting roads), the
presence of a Tajik enclave on Kyrgyz territory (Vorukh), and checkerboard-like structure of
Tajik and Kyrgyz communities are directly related to, or influenced by, the actions of security
forces (law enforcement and border guards). Transit through neighbouring territories or entry
into the enclave of Vorukh is complicated by unauthorized roadblock and checkpoints. The
creation of obstacles for movement by one side is immediately reciprocated by the other.
In recent years, people are increasingly becoming victims of illegal actions of border guards. As
noted in a focus group meeting:
"At one point [people] believed that ‘the war of roadblocks’ would never repeat. However,
today [cross-border residents] are facing increasing number of cases of ethnicity-based
harassment and discrimination by border guards. By each day, free movement is becoming
ever more difficult. On the pretext of checking passports, border guards are stopping cars
and pedestrians to extort money. There have been cases of beating up of civilians.
24
Interview with a UNDP Kyrgyzstan staff member. June, 2011. 25
Interview with a local independent expert. June, 2011. 52 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Problems with crossing the borders as well as actions of border guards are forcing people to
avoid main roads and interaction with the guards."26
N. Mirsaidov, a local journalist, argues that most incidents with military (border guards)
involvement are related to goods and money extortion. According to the journalist, "in such a
volatile region, power of the military and border guards should be extremely limited. Otherwise,
their actions may well inflame inter-ethnic clashes."27
5.1
State officials and security forces
It should be noted that President Otunbayeva has paid a lot of attention to the situation in the
Batken district. This year alone, the President, together with members of the Kyrgyz
Government, visited the region twice. Alongside with the socio-economic problems of the
region, special attention was directed towards strengthening the state borders and fighting
extremist organizations.
At a meeting with security officials, Otumbajeva said the following:
"It is very important to protect state borders and carry out actions to curb the activities of
organized criminal gang. The entire world is jointly fighting against subversive actions of
international terrorist organizations. By virtue of our geopolitical importance, focus of various
external powers has turned toward us, which means that the importance of border security
cannot be underrated. In 2010 alone, 50 border related incidents, 24 on Tajik-Kyrgyz border,
have been documented. These figures speak for themselves. Most importantly, however, if
not for apt and clear actions of security agencies, many of these incidents could have easily
turned into armed conflicts."28
5.2
Policy of intimidation
Analysis of the current situation in cross-border communities and assessment of the role of
security officials shows that the security forces do not always act within the limits of their
26
Interview with focus‐group from Vorukh. June, 2011. 27
Interview with a political analyst/journalist, N. Mirsaidov. June, 2011. 28
From President Otumbajeva’s speech in Batken, 7th of February, 2011. http://www.centrasia.ru/newsA.php?st=1297167300 53 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
mandate. In the past, actions of security forces were limited to patrolling the border, mostly
alongside the disputed territories, and protecting strategically important sites. Today, the
involvement of border patrol has become visible in all aspects of the cross-border relations.
Border guards act as arbitrators, law enforcers, land surveyors, environmental authorities, as
well as water and land administrators.
“A wider involvement of border guards in cross-border disputes is a mean of intimidation and
demonstration of force.”29 One way or another, such an accusation could be directed at both
sides. Researcher from the Presidential Institute of Strategic Studies of Kazakhstan, Gulnur
Rakhmatullin, notes that the "increase of unilateral actions is a dangerous trend, which
increases the potential for an armed, interethnic conflict."30
Rakhmatullina argues that under current conditions, the use of weapons is only a matter of time.
She reminds that at a meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Inter-Parliamentary
Cooperation of the Jogorku Kenesh (Kyrgyz Parliament), while examining a separate incident, it
was recommended to "use all the necessary measures, including the use of force, in order to
avoid similar incidents and protect the territorial integrity of Kyrgyzstan."31
Such statements and recommendations by parliamentarians are a very dangerous precedent,
which could be perceived by residents of border communities as an endorsement of violence.
Effects of reciprocation of such statement could be detrimental for the fragile “peace” of crossborder communities
The following example depicts the use of military as a pressuring mechanism in disputes:
"In Lakkon jamoat (TJ), law enforcement authorities of Isfara district arrested a Kyrgyz
citizen with 3,25 kg of mercury. The next day, approximately 100 residents of the
neighbouring Batken district blocked a road and began to demand release of the man.
Military forces of Kyrgyzstan, upon arrival to the site, began to put pressure on local
officials and law enforcement authorities. The man had to be released from custody, due
29
Interview with a journalist from Imruz newspaper in Isfara. June, 2011. 30
Rakhmattulina, Gulnur. “Серьезный конфликт между Кыргызстаном и Таджикистаном ‐ вопрос лишь времени”, Analytical Information Centre for Political Developments in Post‐Soviet States, January, 2009. http://www.ia‐centr.ru/expert/3436/ 31
to the military pressure."
In this particular case, decision to extradite or release the captive was under the jurisdiction of
the law enforcement agencies of two sides, and not of border authorities (military). Senior
border authorities of both sides need to understand that these types of actions have an
antagonizing effect on the already overwrought relations of the interethnic communities.
5.3
Competency and mandate of border guards
The absence of clear borders gives rise to the unlawfulness of border guard actions. The
prolonged process of demarcation and delimitation of borders means that the border problems
will remain indefinitely. Detention of citizens by border guards, usually on the pretext of illegal
cultivation or occupation of disputed territories, is becoming routine. For example, in 2010, three
Tajik citizens were detained in Chorkuh (Tajik jamoat which borders Kyrgyz village of Koktash)
by security forces of Kyrgyzstan and transported to the police headquarters of Batken region.
Two of the arrested men were local land surveyors who were carrying out their duties at the
junction of Chorkuh and Koktash. In their interviews with the researchers, the surveyors
explained that even according to Kyrgyz maps, they were detained on Tajik territory. The
controversial incident is depicted and described in a different way by both sides. Regardless of
which version is most likely, the reality is that such incidents are happening more often. In most
cases, events are not properly investigated. This, in itself, gives rise to various speculation and
elevates tensions amongst the local populations.
5.4
Actions of security forces against “creeping migration”
Under the pretext of fighting the so-called "creeping migration" of Tajik residents onto Kyrgyz
territories, Kyrgyz security forces carry out regular passport checks in Kyrgyz villages.
According to Tajik respondents, these operations create a feeling of insecurity and are
perceived as an intimidation tactic. The presence of armed men in uniform within communities,
create a climate of tension, suspicion, and fear. According to reports, the behaviour and
attitudes of law enforcement agencies towards civilians are not always professional. Thus, the
incompetence, lawlessness, and abuse of authority by the security forces can be perceived as
provocative and cause aggravation of already strained relations between the two sides.
Many experts have stated that currently, unlike in the past (when most of the tensions were
resource-related), the current deterioration of cross-border relations is increasingly due to
negative relations between the authorities and people. This has also been noted by numerous
NGOs which operate in the region.
The use of firearm by law enforcement officers and border guards, even for warning shots, is
strictly regulated. An unauthorized or illegal use of weapons, regardless of the case, is
punishable under the law. Yet, there have been numerous cases with excessive use of
weapons (i.e. firing into the air) by the military in cross-border disputes. This behaviour acts a
source of resentment and suspicion between the communities. In recent years, a Chorkuh
resident (Tajik citizen) was shot and several people wounded by the border guards.
Between April - May of 2011 alone, four large incidents occurred in the target region. In each
case, representatives of security forces played a central role. Participants of an incident, which
occurred on 16 May in Siehkuh (Kara) district of Chorkuh jamoat, noted that:
"Inflamed emotions resembled a pre-war situation. The incident started when Kyrgyz
road constructors began installation of three high-voltage electric poles along AigultashIsfara highway. According to the original draft, which was agreed upon by both sides, the
poles were to be installed along the Tortgul canal, alongside a new Osh-Isfara highway.
Tajik residents of Chorkuh jamoat, which are not allowed to exploit lands in disputed
territories, were upset by the fact that Kyrgyz are constructing electric poles in the
disputed territories. Confrontation went on for several days and culminated by the arrival
of Kyrgyz border guards to the scene.”
The original justification for locating border guards in this part of the region was the following:
“The border guard base in Kara is aimed at curving illegal seizure of disputed territories by
Tajiks as well as for avoiding general destabilization in the region. The post is located on
disputed territories in order to allow patrolling the territory in-between strategically important site
of Tortgul canal and Kara.”32
At the time of the incident, leaders of the two sides were taking part at a joint meeting in
Dushanbe. Given the complexity of the situation, they had no choice but to fly to the scene of
the incident. Only upon the arrival of the leaders did the situation calm down and people were
willing to disperse. A full-out armed conflict was only just averted.
According to the Chairman of Isfara town, S. Ashurov, in order to find immediate solutions for
the problem, he insisted that the event was fully reflected in the report of the Intergovernmental
32
Early Warning System Report of UNDP Kyrgyzstan. Batken, 2004 56 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Commission, which had gathered in Dushanbe. The minutes of the meeting of the Commission
documented the incident with the following words: "The Commission received information from
the Chairman of Isfara town, the Deputy Chairman of Sughd region, and the Deputy Governor
of Batken region about the current situation in the border areas of these districts."33 Interviews
with respondents indicated that people are not aware whether any types of measures have
been enacted in relation to this specific incident.
Furthermore, authorities should note that two of the largest incident occurred at the time of
official meetings between the two sides. The first incident took place on 8April 2011 between
Kyrgyz border guards and residents of Khojai Ailo. At the time of the incident, leaders of Isfara
and Batken regions were meeting in Minguruk village. During the second episode, which is
depicted above, Dushanbe was hosting the Tajik-Kyrgyz Intergovernmental Commission.
The existence of some of the border checkpoint should be revised. A good example of such a
checkpoint is the so-called “environmental checkpoint”, located in the zone of "Bedak."
According to locals, the Kyrgyz checkpoint does not function for its intended purposes i.e.
protection of natural recourses and environment. Further, the post is located on the territory of
the Republic of Tajikistan with 2ha of Tajik land separating the post from Kyrgyzstan. If Kyrgyz
authorities consider it necessary to maintain the post, it would be recommended to move the
post to the Kyrgyz side, clarify the status of its functions, and determine the mandate of its
personnel.
5.5
Dislocation and competence of Tajik border guards
Amongst those most likely to suffer as a consequence of actions of border guards are residents
of communities that are in direct contact with villages of another country. During the research, it
became evident that regardless of the presence of Tajik border guard in Vorukh, Chorkuh, and
Surkh, Tajik residents feel insecure.
The following is a comparative analysis of Tajik respondents:
- Instead of patrolling jointly (with Kyrgyz military) alongside disputed territories, as was
mandated by intergovernmental agreements, Tajik border guards have retreated away
from borders. Thereby accepting the borderline as defined by Kyrgyz border guards;
- Tajik border guards comprise of young recruits, while Kyrgyz guards are experienced
contractors;
33
Minutes of Tajik‐Kyrgyz Intergovernmental Commission, Dushanbe. 19 May, 2011. 57 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
- Tajik security forces and government authorities do not protect the rights of their citizens,
while Kyrgyz authorities and especially border guards always protect their own;
- Kyrgyz border guard personnel exceed two to three times the number of Tajik guards. In
addition, the Kyrgyz government is negotiating with the US for establishment of a border
guard training centre in Batken;
Tajik respondents are puzzled by the fact that Tajik border guards are stationed in the centres
of Tajik villages, while Kyrgyz guards are located near the disputed borders. While some see
this as a lack of determination to protect the borders and the population, other regard it as a
rational way of avoiding clashes. According to the Chief of Vorukh border guard post, Lt.
Sukhrob Rakhimov, the overall situation in the region is stable. However, the guards feel that
the Kyrgyz side is continuously increasing its personnel and equipment on the border.
The insecurity of people and inability of authorities to guarantee security, lowers people’s
confidence in authorities and security forces, and could cause mass disobedience and violence.
Several years ago, the community of Todzhikon (in jamoat of Vorukh) experienced a series of
robberies and nightly clashes between Tajik and Kyrgyz youth. Frustrated by the impotence of
law enforcement agencies to improve the situation, a young group of local vigilantes was
formed to carry out nightly patrols in the village. As a result of this initiative, the amount of
violations dropped significantly.
The aggravated situation in the border villages has been noticed also by the Defence Ministries
of both countries. On 4 May, the Defence Ministers of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan (the Defence
Minister of the Republic of Tajikistan, Sherali Khairulloyev, and the Defence Minister of Kyrgyz
Republis, Abibuly Kudaiberdiev) met in Isfara. The local population had no information about the
results of the meeting, while a newspaper article in Asia Plus only caused confusion within the
communities. Information in the article was limited to the following:
"The two discussed a broad range of issues related to current military and political
situation in the region and reviewed factors that could destabilize of the region...Both
sides vowed to increase efforts to jointly provide security in the regional. The two
ministers also pointed out the necessity of expanding cooperation between the Defence
Ministries of the two countries in order to develop measures and mechanism for efficient
emergency response in the region."34
34
Kurbanov, Sakhbon. “Министры обороны Таджикистана и Кыргызстана встретились в Исфаре”, Asia Plus, 04 May, 2011. http://news.tj/ru/news/ministry‐oborony‐tadzhikistana‐i‐kyrgyzstana‐vstretilis‐v‐isfare 58 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
The information, which contained no reference to any of the cross-border incidents, caused
negative reactions in the communities.
In June 2011, as an expression of his concern about the frequency and severity of incidents, the
Tajik Defence Minister visited Vorukh and Chorkuh jamoats. The Minister carried out meetings
with Tajik residents of the region and was also updated by Tajik border authorities on recent
border incidents. According to the Minister, the President has received information about the
cross-border disturbances and had personally authorised him to conduct explanatory meetings
with local population. The Minister also noted that during his recent meeting with the Kyrgyz
counterpart, he had raised and discussed border issues as well as pointed out the importance
of reviving the work of the Joint Commission for Demarcation and Delimitation of Borders.
Speaking about the border security, the Minister accentuated the need to have a more
competent and efficient border security personnel, which would be able to deal with borderrelated problems more effectively.
For comparison, during her March visit to Batken district, President Otunbayeva talked about a
plan not only to increase personnel of two border guard post (in Samarkandek and Aksai), but
also to strengthen and update their military arsenal. Reportedly, the human and technical
resources of Kyrgyz border guards are already more than double those of Tajik side.
Thus, it seems that both sides are prepared to strengthen their military contingent on each
other’s borders. Taking into the account the tense environment and great mistrust towards the
armed forces, it is difficult to imagine how the troop increase may improve interethnic relations.
Local residents are not alone with their misapprehensions about the role of security forces.
Isfara-Batken district leaders also have their fears about the involvement of border guards in
cross-border disputes. Thus, the Chairman of Isfara town, S. Ashurov, and the Mayor of Batken
district, H. Aksynov, together with security officials, dedicated an entire meeting to the role of
security forces in cross-border territories. The meeting was held in the village of Mingruk.
Representatives of border agencies were instructed to unconditionally comply with paragraph 6
from a protocol, which was developed by an Intergovernmental Delegation on 26 October 2008,
and was signed by the leaders of Batken and Isfara districts. Border security authorities and
Departments of Internal Affairs of both sides were ordered to take specific steps to eliminate
illegitimate and illegal behaviour/actions of their personnel (such as extraction of money from
drivers andformation of unauthorized roadblock) as well as enhance awareness-raising activities
within their units. When carrying out regional counterterrorist operations, in order to avoid
confusions within local communities, law enforcement agencies and Special Forces were also
encouraged to have an apt exchange of information with each other.
An increase of complaints about border guard actions serves as evidence of their enlarged
involvement in the day to day lives of people, as well as indicating their unprofessional
behaviour towards the population. From 2009 to 2010, Tajik authorities documented altogether
12 complaints concerning actions of Kyrgyz border guards. In the first half of the year 2011,
already 18 complaints were made, 12 of them in regards to the delinquency of border guards.
Six of the complainants were physically harmed by Kyrgyz border security personnel.
According to the Deputy Chief of Regional Police Force of Isfara district, A. Akhmedov, all the
documented complaints have been sent for investigation to the Military Prosecutor's Office in
Batken region. "Unfortunately," added Akhmedov, "we have not received any official information
concerning the investigation of the cases or the measures against the offenders. Furthermore,
under the pretext that some of the documents had not been approved by the Attorney General
or the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Tajikistan, some cases were not accepted
and were immediately sent back."35
5.6
Actions of law enforcement officials and cross-border roads
In general, the actions of law enforcement authorities are regarded as less aggravating in
comparison to those of border security officers. Nevertheless, the actions of police are still
regarded as a conflict risk factor. Even though Kyrgyz communities have fewer complaints
about Tajik border guards, they have plenty of grievances with Tajik law enforcement officials,
especially with traffic police (GAI). Batken district authorities are concerned about unwarranted
security checks by Tajik border guards and police at the official border crossing-points. Batken
district police has also often received complaints about cases of racketeering and money
extortion on roads and in market places by Tajik police officers. For example, at the entrance to
Surkh jamoat, a Tajik police checkpoint creates problems for freedom of movement of Kyrgyz
villagers from Ak-Sai, Ak-Tatyr, and Somarkandek. (On a positive note, with the abolition of a
Kyrgyz border checkpoint no. 6 on the Osh-Isfara road the tension in the region has slightly
decreased.)
35
Interview with the Deputy Chief of Regional Police Force of Isfara district, A. Akhmedov. July, 2011. 60 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
According to locals, conflicts are caused by unauthorized checkpoints and restrictions on the
movement from one village to another. Residents of Kyrgyz villages are unhappy about the fact
that Tajik police forces are made up of officers from Southern regions of the country - people
who have no experience of dealing with local residents and local problems.
Tajik and Kyrgyz settlements, situated upstream of Isfarinka River, are frequent users of the
Isfara-Vorukh highway. The highway is 40km long and crosses territories of Kyrgyzstan several
times. All costs, associated with the repair of the road, are covered by the Tajik side, which also
provides traffic police on the rout. Police officers who abuse their authority on this highway have
an equally negative influence on Tajik and Kyrgyz users of the road.
Cross-border roads, particularly entrances and exits from one territory to another, are used as
arbitrary borders between Tajik-Kyrgyz communities. On the one hand, the geographical
location of checkpoints facilitates extortion activities. On the other hand, police checkpoints are
used as leverage during disputes and negotiation processes. In the beginning of 2000 and
2003, residents of border communities witnessed a so-called "war of roadblocks”. Both sides
erected unauthorized military and police checkpoint on the same strip of a road. Both sides
reciprocated and countered actions of the other side by installing their roadblocks on the same
roads. As a result, ordinary residents of Tajik and Kyrgyz communities suffered the
consequences.
Adoption of bilateral agreements, which prohibit the establishment of unauthorized checkpoints
and roadblocks, have brought a relative calm to the region and facilitated free movement of
people. However, as a result of recent violations of the agreement, checkpoints are yet again
causing discontentment. This year alone, there have been several incidents, which were caused
by unauthorized checkpoints. For example, in March 2011, on the road from Chorkuh to
Shurab, on the Kyrgyz part of the road (the road crosses Kyrgyz territory of Samarkandek), the
Kyrgyz police detained a Tajik truck driver. Security forces accused him of having no certificate
for the cargo and tried to intimidate the driver and extort money for four hours.
On 6 April 2011, a bigger incident occurred on the Osh-Isfara cross-border highway. The events
developed on a stretch of the road, which has been rented to the Kyrgyz side and crosses the
Isfarinka river. (Both sides are dissatisfied with the renting of the territory). Information services
provided extremely varying depictions of the incident, which blurred the chain of events.
Through a comparative analysis of information, the researchers managed to reconstruct a most
realistic description of the events.
In the morning of the 6 April, a businessman from the Tajik village of Somoniyon (part of
Chorkuh jamoat) was driving to a market place in the Vorukh enclave. The highway passes
through the Kyrgyz village of Yakkauruk. On this part of the road, the businessman was stopped
by Kyrgyz policeman, who demanded a bribe of 30TJS. Having refused to pay, the
businessman was threatened with a weapon and was forced to drive into the Kyrgyz village
where he was beaten up. In the meantime, Kyrgyz border guards and hundreds of people from
Tajik and Kyrgyz communities gathered at the scene. In response to the actions of the Kyrgyz
police officer, a Kyrgyz driver was detained on a Tajik territory. The situation had reached its
boiling point and could have turned into an armed conflict, if not for intervention by district
leaders, law enforcement agencies, and village elders from the two border regions.
5.7
Security forces and cross-border trade
Extortion activities by the police are especially prevalent during the so-called "bazaar" days
(market days in border villages). Demand of bribes and extortion of money have a negative
effect on the cross-border trade, as to compensate for losses (paid bribes), traders are forced to
raise prices on their goods. According to Tajik respondents, they are discriminated against when
accessing markets. One of the respondents argued that when entering Kyrgyz markets, Tajiks
are always asked for passports, while Kyrgyz are never required to present their documentation
in Tajik bazaars. If Tajik traders fail to present their passports, they can be detained for several
hours. In turn, the Deputy Chairman of Aksay village (KR) complained about the actions of Tajik
law enforcement authorities. He noted that the extortion of money by Tajik police officers
creates problems for Aksai villagers when entering Tajik bazaars. Recently, residents of Kyrgyz
villages were forced to leave the bazaar due to police extortion and verbal abuse by Tajiks.
Respondents on both sides acknowledge that trade is equally beneficial for both sides. "Kyrgyz
trade their goods and buy our products. This facilitates good relations between the two nations.
However, from time to time, police and customs officials create artificial barriers for these
activities. Last year, for example, Kyrgyz were restricted to transport their coal to the Tajik side.
Thus, many residents of Tajik villages had to manage without the coal during very cold winter
period."36
36
From focus‐group meeting with residents of Chorkuh. June, 2011. 62 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Tajik officials from Chorkuh, Surh, and Vorukh, together with local NGOs, conducted a factfinding missions in local markets. The purpose was to identify individuals, who have been
extorting money from Kyrgyz traders. The missions were limited to interviews with bazaar
traders. The main questions regarded general conditions of bazaars and extortion of money by
law enforcement officials. Following the mission, the situation in local markets has improved and
become more secure. The need to continue such initiatives still exists. Tajik-Kyrgyz joint
missions would have an even greater effect.
The Head of Regional Administration of Batken distrcit, Chait Aksynov, noted that "in most of
the cases, a minor incident with security officers generated a wide and negative popular
response." He also blamed Tajik and Kyrgyz law enforcement authorities for abusing their
power37
On 21June 2011, the town of Isfara hosed a meeting of the Interior Affairs officials from Sughd
and Batken regions. The purpose of the meeting was to identify core causes of cross-border
incidents as well as to seek a better inter-regional coordination of activities. According to a
political analyst and journalist, S. Kurbonov, participants of the meeting had detailed
discussions on advancing joint efforts for conflict prevention, fighting crime, and protecting their
citizens. They also tried to find ways to maintain peace and stability in cross-border areas.38
The Head of Interior Affairs of the Sughd region, S. Nazarov, when talking about the purposes
of the meeting, explained that local law enforcement officials and village wardens were also
invited to take part in the meeting. According to Nazarov, due to the seriousness of resourcerelated tensions and an increase of cross-border incidents, the role of village wardens
(uchastkovyj) is an important one. Thus, it would be desirable, added Nazarov, that every police
officer in border territories of Sughd region is acquainted with his Kyrgyz colleague. This would
also guarantee a better coordination when fighting cross-border crime.39
One of the results of the meeting was the establishment of a Joint Council for addressing border
related issues and problem. According to the Press Secretary of Internal Affairs of Sughd
region, Firouz Bok, "the task of the Council will be to deal with problems related to lack of
37
Shorthand record of a meeting between state officials and security authorities of Batken and Isfara districts. Batken, 8th of April, 2011. 38
Interview with a political analyst and journalist, S. Kurbanov. June, 2011. 39
Makhammadjanov, Masum. “Создание приграничного совета в Баткене и Согде”, Radio Liberty,22nd June, 2011. http://www.toptj.com/News/2011/06/22/sozdanie_prigranichnogo_soveta_v_batkene_i_sogde 63 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
demarcated borders, as well as with illegal acquisition of disputed land. The authorities and
people are hoping that these measures will change things for better, and that land and water
related conflicts could be prevented more effectively."40
In the meantime, the reality is that the law enforcement agencies’ participation in disputes
continues to exacerbate the tensions and Tajik-Kyrgyz police officers are themselves a source
of cross-border conflicts. Recent incidents in the border communities of Batken and Isfara
regions have clearly demonstrated that the presence of armed security forces has a potential for
provoking interethnic clashes. In this regard, the competence of border guards should be strictly
regulated, and their presence in disputes should be limited.
5.8
Cross-border crime
Although cross-border crime presents itself as a permanent conflict risk factor in the region,
cross-border crime was not a direct topic of study in this research. In short, cross-border crime
is associated with theft of cattle, robberies, hooliganism, and stealing of harvest i.e. dry fruits
(during the harvest season).
Theft and loss of livestock are considered by locals as the main problem. Every year,
approximately 50-80 head of cattle go missing. When reporting the missing livestock, the
parties, more often than not, accuse each other of theft. The rate of solving such crimes is very
low, which gives rise to various speculations about criminal involvement of law enforcement
officials. Due to a sharp rise of prices on meat, cross-border communities are concerned about
a potential increase of thefts of the valuable “commodity”. Inefficiency in dealing with crossborder crime is a result of uncoordinated and uncooperative relations of regional law
enforcement officials of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.
Fights and rowdy behaviour are also becoming a widespread trend amongst the cross-border
youth. The Tajik side is troubled by hooliganism of drunken Kyrgyz youth, while Kyrgyz are
worried about physical harassment of shepherds and forestry workers by Tajik groups of youths.
In addition, recent cross-border confrontations have been marked with increased occurrences of
incitement for ethnic hatred, provocations, damage to private and public vehicles, as well as
physical assaults. It is of concern that the public has no information about the official measures
against these crimes.
40
Organized crime groups have also been witnessed on both sides of the border. The groups are
mainly formed by drug traffickers. Gaining access to official information about these groups has
been made impossible by local law enforcement agencies, which allude to confidentiality of the
cases. On a positive note, in the fight against organized crime, drug trafficking, and religious
extremism, law enforcement agencies of the two countries have reached a certain level of
cooperation.
The unmarked and almost nonexistent border lines cause confusion even amongst the law
enforcement agencies themselves. Apprehension of a criminal becomes a complex and
problematic issues if the arrest is carried out on the territory of a neighbouring sovereign state
(the arrest of a Kyrgyz trafficker of 3.25kg of mercury in Lakkon village is a good example of
such a problem).
6. Role of women in cross-border conflicts
The role of women is becoming exponentially prominent in cross-border conflicts. In 2011,
women took part in one of the most serious conflicts of the year. The incident relates to the
cutting down of fruit trees by Kyrgyz border security authorities. Kyrgyz authorities believe that
residents of Chorkuh planed the trees on disputed territories and, therefore, needed to be
destroyed. According to eyewitnesses, the resulted confrontation between Kyrgyz border
guards and Chorkuh residents nearly led to an armed conflict. During the incident, Kyrgyz
border guards were confronted mainly by Tajik women and children.
Although women have become more active participants of cross-border disputes, their political
or societal status has remained unchanged. Just as before, women of border communities,
particularly on the Tajik side, have practically no involvement in decision-making processes
within their communities.
During twenty years of independence, noTajik woman has ever served as the head of local
government in the target communities of the research. Although the situation on the Kyrgyz side
is more or less the same, two years ago, for a brief period of time, the Ak-Tatyr rural district was
headed by a woman.
The elevation of women into the “forefronts" of conflicts is related to societal effects of increased
labour migration of men. The presence of fewer men has altered and transformed women’s role
in the societies. As a result, women are occupied with activities which are traditionally carried
out by men, including participation in interethnic disputes. A focus-group participant from the
jamoat of Chorkuh, elucidated the situation with a simple answer: "Our husbands and male
youth are working in Russia. There is no one who could defend our interests. Thus, we, the
women, have the duty to protect our interests."41
On the one hand, labour migration is considered a positive factor. It reduces social tension and
helps communities to survive financially. On the other hand, the entire burden of domestic
problems has fallen on women’s shoulders and has increased, not only their involvement, but
also their vulnerability in conflicts. Typically, men leave the villages in the beginning of spring
and return in October. The period is regarded as a “conflict season”. Therefore, it is the women,
who are at a greatest risk of becoming involved in cross-border conflicts.
41
From focus‐group meeting with residents of Chorkuh. June, 2011. 66 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Annually (from March to October), in the jamoat of Chorkuh alone, one-third of households are
managed mainly by women. These are single, divorced, or widowed women who end up
independently protecting their interests.
Since the Soviet times, most of the agricultural work is carried out by women. Household
drinking water is also transported by women (usually by carrying water buckets). Therefore,
inevitably, women play their own role in water related disputes in the cross-border communities.
The role and behaviour of women in conflicts, as well as their attitudes and perceptions of other
ethnic groups, depends on their place of residence. Women whose households are in direct
contact with villages of a neighbouring state, are less objective in their interpretations of events,
and more dogmatic and aggressive during disputes. Women from central villages, living at a
distance from the borders, are more open minded and flexible towards their cross-border
neighbours. They have a greater capacity for discourse and regard the strengthening of
neighbourly inter-ethnic relations as a way forward.
Although, in general women have great potential for conflict resolution, they also have an ability
to provoke conflict. This has been most evident in the in the jamoat of Chorkuh (jamoat
communities of Somonion and Khojai-Ailo).
With experience of daily water and land-related disputes, women of the village are extremely
aggravated by actions of their Kyrgyz neighbours. According to some respondents, a women’s
group from Khoji-Ailo, when dissatisfied with actions of Kyrgyz security forces, agitate the Tajik
youth for street fights with their Kyrgyz neighbours.
Arguably, women's activism in Kyrgyz villages is more visible and more active than on the Tajik
side. Kyrgyz women of border villages are also becoming increasingly involved in decision
making processes. Thus, a group of women from Ak-Sai rural district, dissatisfied with the
passivity of their village council in addressing social, economic, and border issues, organized a
protest movement. A standoff between the movement and authorities lasted for several months.
In the end, the district authorities were forced to meet women’s demands, and appointed a new
person as the head of the rural district.
Tajik and Kyrgyz respondents fear that women’s activism could be exploited by extreme
nationalist groups to advance their private interests in Tajik-Kyrgyz relations. According to
respondents, a group of Ak-Sai women is headed by a woman leader who is famous for
instigating cross-border clashes. Respondents would argue that it was due to her actions that a
water project by Saferworld was curtailed in the past.
According to the project draft, a water pipeline, the source of which is located on the Kyrgyz
side, was to pass through two Tajik villages and supply their residents with clean drinking water.
Between April-May 2011, the women’s leader categorically opposed any type of cooperation
with the Tajik side and acted as an instigator of a number of clashes during the above
mentioned period (the period is famous for a high number of cross-border incidents as well as
for their severity).
Nevertheless, such a destructive and uncompromising attitude amongst women is extremely
exceptional. The results of the research show that most women tend to believe that
manifestation of extreme attitudes amongst women is directly related to the increased number
of cross-border disputes and conflicts. Most women, however, are not inclined to blame the
other side, and are willing to restore intercommunity relations. Woman respondents have stated
that one of the major causes for deteriorating interethnic relations is the inadequate education of
youth in inter-ethnic tolerance.
Previous projects of international organizations had brought about a positive link between the
Tajik-Kyrgyz youth. The network of cross-border school clubs - "the Good Neighbours"-, and
donor-funded joint interethnic teenager groups, such as "the Green Patrols", have had some
positive effect on raising tolerance amongst the young people of the region. Through such
initiatives, the cross-border youth have permanent contact with each other. Unfortunately, links
between cross-border schools have been promoted only by international organizations. A
school principal from a border village remarked that, in recent years, the regional education
authorities have totally neglected the issue of cross-border co-operation of schools.
Women respondents who believe in positive results of joint youth initiatives and would like to
see a greater amount of inter-school links between Tajik and Kyrgyz, believe that such means
could advance peace, understanding, and cooperation amongst the interethnic residents of the
region.
7. Interethnic relations
An increase in amount and intensity of disputes has a direct impact on interethnic relations of
cross-border communities of Isfara and Batken districts. Resource-related disputes and other
conflict risk factors generate continuous suspicions and prejudice amongst the people. While
only a few years ago people were inclined to treat an occasional incident as a problem which
can and must be addressed together, currently, disputes are being regarded as a direct threat
against one’s interests.
Experts tend to believe that conflicts are not caused by interethnic factors per se, but rather by
such factors as weak economies, social inequality and political realities, which are interwoven
with the ethnic factor. Nevertheless, interethnic hatred, as a "secondary source factor", should
not be played down. The danger of ethnic tensions, regardless of the causes, is that they are an
exploitable force. In other words, ethnic division can be used for political purposes, for ignition of
a conflict, or for discriminating against an ethnic group. A conflict which is powered by ethnic
division is much harder to manage and resolve.42
If steps are not taken to eliminate existing conflict risk factors, negative stereotypes, which have
resulted from the factors, will only deteriorate ethnic tensions even further.
According to the Chairman of Isfara town, S. Ashurov, "the April and May incidents have
demonstrated the dangerous level of hostility amongst cross-border communities. This is a very
unfortunate reality. Therefore, in order to try to somehow dispel the dangerous potential for
conflicts, [the authorities] have decided to create three joint councils: One for village elders, one
for women, and one for the youth. Already a month ago, the first meeting of the Council of
Elders took place in the jamoat of Chorkuh. These initiatives require bilateral efforts- unilateral
actions are useless. The necessity of public information campaign and the need to have explicit
efforts for solving cross-border problems is high."43
The research interviews, focus group meetings, and the survey show that the level of negative
perceptions between Kyrgyz and Tajik is extremely high. However, it should be also noted that
42
Matveeva, Anna. Центральная Азия – Стратегический подход к построению мира. International Alert Report. www.international‐alert.org 43
Interview with the Chairman of the Isfara town, S. Ashurov. June, 2011. 69 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
the perceptions vary by location. Most negative attitudes were observed amongst communities
of Chorkuh and Ak-Sai- less negative in their perception of others were residents of
Samarkandek and Surkh. Residents of Shurab were least hostile in their attitudes towards their
Kyrgyz neighbours. The level of negative perceptions and antipathies is tied to the quantity of
incidents and quality of cross-border relations. The interethnic tolerance depends on the level of
tensions as well as on the presence/absence of interaction between the communities.
In Soviet times, intercommunity relations were generally regarded as positive. The deterioration
of relations became evident in post-Soviet era, when the sharing of resources began to pose
problems. Since independence, all of the Central Asian countries have been facing numerous
economic and social challenges. Under such conditions, intergovernmental cooperation has lost
its substance. As a result of resource-related disputes and other societal problems, the culture
of suspicion and alienation started to gradually inflate. The absence of regular social and
cultural links is also a major reason behind the ethnic divisions in the region.
An elder from the jamoat of Vorukh, A. Gafurov, illustrates the interethnic relations with his own
words:
"In Soviet times, we were basically one big family. We relied on each other. Kyrgyz people
enjoyed our social welfare facilities and there was even a time when their children went to Tajik
schools. Yes, there were stereotyping, but no one took them seriously. Now, due to the
constant disputes over water and land, as well as owing to actions of security forces, the word
‘Kyrgyz’ has become offensive for Tajiks and vice versa.”44
The older generation often likes to compare the time during and after the Soviet era. For
example, they remember the countless interethnic marriages, how they communicating in each
other’s languages, and the way they shared each other’s joys and sorrow. After 20 years of
living in independent states, even the elderly, who used to have close ties with their ethnically
different neighbours, do not participate in funerals or wedding ceremonies of their former
“comrades” and “countrymen”. As an example, a funeral of an old woman from Vorukh, who
was married to a Kyrgyz for a long time and had many descendants, was attended only by a
brother of her husband. None of the Kyrgyz relatives, some of whom live in the same village of
Vorukh, were present.
In addition, the following negative factors have influenced Tajik-Kyrgyz relations in the region:
44
Interview with an elder from the jamoat of Vorukh, A. Gafurov. June, 2011. 70 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
- The Soviet spirit of internationalism and values of ethnic diversity are gradually fading.
Traditions of neighbourly relations have gradually disappeared. The absence of
cooperation and positive interaction creates divisions of "us" against "them";
- Russian language is losing its value as a tool of communication between different
ethnicities. (In 2009, by UNDP initiative, a group of Tajik and Kyrgyz children were
brought together to a camp to build mutual trust. The problem of communication was
apparent, as most of the campers lacked a common language, i.e., Russian);
- Ethnic stereotyping is also becoming a problem. Myths and stereotypes, which were
previously used mainly as friendly jokes, have developed into insults;
- Worsened quality of education has resulted not only in greater economic instability, but
has also lowered cultural tolerance and revived religious mind-sets.
All of these factors play an influencing role in interethnic relations.
7.1
Potential for peace and development
The history of conflicts between the cross-border communities of the region is not limited to the
post-Soviet era. There were several incidents prior to the collapse of the USSR, which resulted
even with the loss of life. However, conflict resolution in the Soviet period was much more
sustainable. Such institutions as the Council of Elders (Elders), youth leagues, and school
pioneers, were able to soften and alleviate the feelings of hostility and bitterness, which were
brought about by conflicts. Values and tradition of honouring adults and respecting their
recommendations have changed for the worse. Morality has been replaced by materialism.
Nevertheless, community-based mediation work of elders still plays a role in resolving debates
and disputes. In order to build trust between cross-border communities, some international
organizations (including UNDP) have attempted to revive traditional institutions in order to
create a network of moderators and mediators of conflicts in the villages. Regrettably, these
mechanisms have been unsustainable without direct involvement of INGOs and donor-support.
Time will show whether the three new Councils can be more sustainable and effective with the
support of state authorities of Isfara and Batken districts.
7.2
Potential for conflicts: The factors of youth, unemployment,
and religion.
A dangerous tendency for rapid mobilization of communities, especially of youth, has been
evident in nearly every cross-border incident. Youth and religion play their own roles in
interethnic relations and can be regarded as significant conflict risk factors. Young people who
have access to quality education, employment opportunities, and are incorporated into various
youth development programmes, will have a greater chance of becoming involved in decisionmaking processes, thus increasing their positive role in advancing peace and development of
the communities. The absence of opportunities, on the other hand, alienates the youth and
serves as a potential catalyst for conflicts. Frustrated young people become more aggressive
and irritable, often expressing their anger and frustration through violence.
Given the severity of societal problems of youth, the potential peacemakers have become a
conflict risk factor in cross-border relations. In general, young people are considered to be one
of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups within the cross-border communities. Poverty
and unemployment, damaged social and cultural infrastructure, poor education, as well as the
lack of quality information, deepen the marginalization of youth and create conditions for
destructive behaviours (such as bullying and street fighting). The research discovered that
young people often act as instigators of various confrontations and fights in the border villages.
Respondents attribute this tendency to excessive use of alcohol or lack of prospects for
individual development.
In terms of practical implementation of governmental youth policies, the Tajik authorities have
been less active than their Kyrgyz colleagues. One of the initiatives of the Kyrgyz Government
was the establishment of the Ministry of Youth Affairs. Even though some adjustments were
made to the youth policies (following the ethnic clashes in the South of Kyrgyzstan), the Kyrgyz
Government has made concrete steps for increasing the inclusion of youth in decision-making
processes. For example, Kyrgyz authorities have established special quotas for young people in
parliamentary elections.
In terms of youth policies, Tajikistan is still lagging behind its neighbour. Disappointed, and
neglected, the younger generation is becoming increasingly self-reliant in seeking ways of
empowerment. Many have migrated to neighbouring countries as labour-migrants, while those
that have stayed, direct their negative attitudes and aggravated emotions toward their
neighbours. Most importantly, the disenfranchised youth becomes an easy target for extreme
nationalists and Islamic groups, which expand their support by recruiting the youth.
Youth affairs and employment officials have failed to organize a single job fair in jamoats which
have the largest rate of youth unemployment (Chorkuh, Vorukh, Shurab). In this regard, the
Committee of Youth Affairs and the Youth Union of Isfara should reconsider their approaches.
Short-term vocational courses and facilitation of job-seeking for youth should be a priority. The
current programme for "social development of youth in Isfara district for 2010-2012 years",
should also be advertised more widely, so that people have an idea of what is planned and what
is being done.
In addressing the youth and societal dynamics, religious factors should not be ignored. Although
both Kyrgyz and Tajik are Hanafi Sunni Muslims, experts point to a fairly high level of
intolerance by more religious Tajiks towards more secular Kyrgyz neighbours. Even if religious
differences cannot serve as a direct cause of a conflict, they can increase ethnic division and
contribute to intolerance.
The divide between the more "secular" Kyrgyz and "religious" Tajiks, has existed since the
Soviet time. However, due to the popularization of Islam in Kyrgyzstan, the division has
become less striking in the years after independence. Due to socio-economic constraints,
people are progressively turning to Islam.
Although there are no fundamental religious differences between Tajik and Kyrgyz, variations of
religious-rituals are, nevertheless, present. For example, there are ceremonial differences in
funeral and wedding rituals. During funerals, more often than not, Tajiks abide by "conservative"
rules of Islam, while the Kyrgyz stick to more secular ceremonies. Wedding ceremonies in Tajik
villages are limited to registration in the registry office, while festivities are carried out in
accordance with religious rules. Kyrgyz border communities have a more secular approach,
accompanying the ceremony with wide celebrations. It is important to note that most of the
confrontations and fights between the cross-border youth were recorded after wedding
celebrations and other festivities.45
These differences might be regarded as insignificant at first. However, under specific conditions,
as a result of these differences, there is a likelihood of further deterioration of interethnic
relations between the two communities. Under the influence of cross-border problems, different
approaches to rituals and ceremonies have and will continue to cause future confrontations and
fights.
45
Interview with an official from the Interior Affairs Office of Isfara. June, 2011. 73 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
As Islam and Islamic groups have less influence on social and political life of Kyrgyz people,
religion is not regarded as an important conflict risk factor by the Kyrgyz respondents. However,
they were worried about security operations in nearby Tajik villages, which are carried out by
Tajik security forces against banned Islamist movements. Kyrgyz respondents were worried
about these operations and have started to become increasingly suspicious of religious leaders,
as well as of fairly "zealous” youth from neighbouring Tajik villages.
The increasing attractiveness of religion is becoming clearly evident. By joining informal
religious groups, Tajik and Kyrgyz youth seek ways of replacing the failing traditional social
institutions.”46 Governments of Central Asian states are concerned about the dangers of Islamist
militants and terrorists. According to officials, Islamist terrorists, who made an attempt to blow
up car bombs in Khujand (in 2011), were seeking to destabilize the political situation in the
country. According to an expert, "Islam is gradually becoming intertwined with overall economic,
social, and political discontent. Unpopular contemporary governmental policies towards religion,
could well ignite wide range of protests and further increase tensions within the society."47
Regardless of the radical factions, Islam continues to also play a positive role in daily lives of
cross-border communities. If properly applied, Islam can serve as a tool for advocating
education, tolerance, and peaceful coexistence amongst the neighbouring communities.
The spread of ethno-nationalism on the Kyrgyz side, as well as the existence of some
nationalistically inclined groups on the Tajik side, can be regarded as a recent trend which could
well contribute to the severity of cross-border disputes.
When speaking about the rise of ethno-nationalism in the early years of Kyrgyz independence,
a Kyrgyz sociologist, E. Omarov argues that "a characteristic feature of former Soviet Union
states’, on their way to independence was nationalism. Newly emerged nationalist movements
were a noteworthy force. On the one hand, Kyrgyz nationalists had some progressive and
positive ideas for reviving their language and culture. On the other hand, the movement was
used to secure the privileges only for the principal ethnic group, the Kyrgyz."48
46
UNIFEM. Ферганская долина: вызовы времени. Бишкек, 2005. 47
Interview with a journalist from Varorud newspaper, C. Jusifi. June, 2011. 48
Omarov, Erzhan. “Этнонационализм против гражданской нации: что победит?”, APN Kazakhstan, 24 August, 2006. 74 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
An academic scholar, A. Tishkov, compares the Soviet and post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan to each
other with following words: "It is, above all, the expansion of ethno-nationalism that is the most
visible difference between the two. And while the scene is ruled by ethno-nationalism, there will
be no stability or interethnic harmony in the Kyrgyz Republic."49
These concerns and trends were also confirmed by the Deputy Chief of Internal Affairs Office of
Isfara district, Abdurahmonov Akhmedov, and N. Khodzhaev, an analyst of the Internal Affairs
Office of Isfara district. According to the interviewees, "two groups from the villages of Ak-Sai
and Khoji-Ailo are currently spreading nationalistic ideology and are inciting ethnic strife in the
region. All of the security forces of the region have been informed about the presence of such
groups and law enforcement agencies continue to monitor their activities.”50
8. Access to information
Access to reliable and up-to-date information in Tajik-Kyrgyz cross-border communities is
extremely inadequate.
On the Tajik side, independent print media is non-existent and inaccessible mainly due to the
high printing costs and the lack of distribution networks. There is, however, a well-established
distribution network of state-owned print media, which is based on a mandatory subscription to
a specific list of governmental publications. Unfortunately, however,the existing government
press, does not provide adequate and necessary information about cross-border relations,
problems, or developments, which is very much needed by the residents of the border
communities.
Regional coverage by electronic media - television and radio -, has also a lot of space for
improvement. Residents of the region rely heavily on television programmes and news as a
primary source of information. As a result of some governmental initiatives, the scope of TV
broadcasting has been significantly improved in Isafara district (TBT, TV Safina, Dzhahonnamo,
as well as regional and local TV channels being broadcasted in the region). However, as noted
by most of the respondents, the state and local TV channels do not contain information or
analytical programmes pertaining to the problems of cross-border problems.
49
Tishkov, Valery. ”Киргизия или Кыргызстан”, valerytishkov.livejournal.com 50
Interview with by the Deputy Chief of Internal Affairs Office of Isfara district, Abdurahmonov Akhmedov, and N. Khodzhaev, an analyst of the Internal Affairs Office of Isfara district. June, 2011. 75 Project: “Conflict Prevention and Mitigation in the Ferghana Valley”
Soviet-time local radio channels have ceased to exist. The internet is available for only a very
limited group of people. Satellite TV is expensive and exceptionally uncommon. According to
focus group interviewees, the only relatively neutral and informative channel is the K+. It is a
satellite channel, which can be viewed only by those who own a satellite dish and can afford the
payments.
Due to limited access to reliable information, people build their perceptions of reality around
circulating rumours. Lack of vital information creates misperceptions, gives ground to
unwarranted accusation against the others, as well as intensifying stereotyping amongst ethnic
groups.
Media analysis revealed that two of the biggest regional newspapers, Nasimi Isfara and Imruz,
hav not published a single piece with reference to cross-border incidents this year, let alone
analyzed or evaluated conflicts.
Occasional analytical articles about cross-border tensions have been published in independent
weekly newspapers of Varorud and Asia Plus. However, for the aforementioned reasons, the
newspapers have a limited audience in the cross-border communities.
Unfortunately, official information about state polices, decisions, or intergovernmental actions
against cross-border problems are limited to very short and uninformative comments of
authorities and officials. Consequently, for example, communities have no information about
disciplinary procedures and measures against regional security forces or law enforcement
personnel, who have been accused of misconduct. The situation results in lack of trust towards
the authorities, as well as the absence of government accountability towards the public.
Cross-border communities are entitled to updated and reliable information regarding their
community life. For instance, lack of information about the ongoing process of demarcation and
delimitation of borders not only feeds rumours within the communities, but also weakens
people’s ability to prepare themselves for the final results of the border demarcation process. In
the context of recent cross-border incidents and tensions, timely and accurate information plays
a crucial role, while the lack of such information increases the level of vulnerability of people.
The researchers came to a conclusion that such imperative documents as intergovernmental
agreements, Kyrgyz laws (regarding use of land, water, and other resources), bilateral
agreements for water management, and even maps of disputed territories, cannot be found in
offices of Tajik jamoat authorities. The absence of document records leads to misinterpretation
of laws and bilateral agreements.
Actions of donor organizations have played a positive role in raising public awareness in border
communities. With the assistance of international organizations, local NGOs have been
implementing several awareness-raising projects in the region.
The following sources of information have been sponsored by international organization:
- The Radio Salam (which also publishes newsletters) has been broadcasting and
publishing in three languages.
- A Tajik-Kyrgyz informational and educational newsletter, The Mediator, has been
providing the locals with updated information about current events (sponsored by the
Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation).
- The Radio Tyroz is aimed at raising interethnic tolerance in the region (funded jointly by
the OSCE and Mercy Corps)
- The Jamoat Resource Centres works to overcome the information vacuum by expanding
communities’ access to information (funded by UNDP Tajikistan).
- A UNDP project - "Conflict prevention and mitigation in the Ferghana Valley” -, continues
to raise capacity of local residents in managing and preventing conflicts, as well as
aiming to increase confidence and tolerance amongst Tajik-Kyrgyz communities.
The support of local authorities plays a vital role in securing the sustainability of such initiatives.
In recent years, Tajik and Kyrgyz mass media has had a big role in shaping people’s attitudes,
thus directly influencing cross-border relations. The content and dynamics of information have
an emotional effect on local residents and their perceptions of reality. The media has had a
powerful role in shaping people’s attitudes, deepening the stereotypes, and affecting people’s
behaviour in conflicts. In short, state media has been facilitating the destructive behaviour
amongst cross-border communities.
In early June 2011, (during the one year anniversary of the infamous Osh and Jalalabad events
in Kyrgyzstan) the State Committee of National Security of Kyrgyzstan reinforced Kyrgyz state
borders with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan with extra military personnel. On 9 June, a Kyrgyz
border security official, Zakir Taliponov, during a press conference in Osh, stated that the
Kyrgyz border security authorities, in cooperation with the Ministry of Defence, had been
carrying out an exchange of information with state officials and border security agencies of the
neighbouring states about the plans to reinforce the borders. Nevertheless, the Kyrgyz mass
media failed to inform the audience that reinforcement of borders was related to the one year
anniversary of infamous events in the South of Kyrgyzstan and that the reinforcement of
borders was aimed at averting potential destabilizing actions of Islamist radicals (as well as
circumventing potential interethnic clashes).
Thus, the emergence of Kyrgyz armoured vehicles in the proximity of Tajik border villages
caused panic and confusion amongst the local residents. A popular view was that, due to the
recent cross-border tensions and incidents, the Kyrgyz side was planning to carry out a military
operation against the Tajik villages.
Fortunately, none of these fears came true. Most unfounded was the fear that opening of
mountain roads could activate guerrilla groups, especially those that had admitted Uzbek youth,
the victims of June events, into their ranks.
It is recommended that journalists, who report on topics of cross-border relations, should adhere
to the "do-no-harm principle”. For example, coverage of cross-border incidents by a Kyrgyz
radio channel, Azattyk (Freedom), and Tajik radio channel, Ozodi (Freedom), are lacking in
objectivity, impartiality, and informativeness, thus creating a space for speculation amongst their
listeners. Surprisingly, neither local authorities nor cross-border communities have had any
reaction against unconstructive news coverage of their region.
International journalists, by adhering to international journalistic principles, try to project wideranging views of conflict participants from both sides. Unfortunately, most of the presented
views and facts have not been verified by the journalists themselves. A deeper analysis of
cross-border incidents suggests that, facts, which have been reflected in international media,
are often false and confusing. Journalists, in pursuit of "sensational news", should shun away
from such derogatory activities. Instead, efforts should be made to facilitate a healthy and factbased journalistic discourse on current developments in Tajik-Kyrgyz cross-border relations.
Recommendation
Access to Land
The research indentified access to land to be the most significant resource-related conflict risk
factor amongst cross-border communities. The problem relates to disputed territories, illegal
acquisition and cultivation of disputed areas, illegal sales and purchase of land, as well as the
stagnating process of demarcation and delimitation of borders. In view of these issues, the
following recommendations have been produced:
‐
Both sides should act strictly in compliance with joint agreements on settlement of landrelated disputes in cross-border territories. (Joint statements of the Presidents of the two
states, which were made on 16May 2008, in Khujand; intergovernmental agreement on
mutually-agreed division of land, signed on 18f May 2005; and directives of
intergovernmental commissions have all produced positive directive for managing land
disputes.)’
‐
Develop effective mechanisms for controlling compliance with intergovernmental
agreements on the ban of cultivation and construction on disputed territories. (The ban is
in force until the end of border demarcation and delimitation process. Special attention
should be paid to construction work around Mastcho canal, alteration of the rout of the
Isfara River, and construction of drainage facilities on the Vorukh-Shurob water pipeline.)
‐
Utilize the potential of the Batken-Isfara Inter-District Committee, which was established
for finding joint solutions and advancing discipline against exploitation of cross-border
territories.
‐
Establish cooperative relations between land authorities of the two sides, which, with
clear mandate and term of references, would apply joint analysis of disputes during
conflict resolution processes.
‐
Given the increased involvement of border and law enforcement authorities in land
related disputes, strict adherence to paragraph 6 of the Intergovernmental Delegation’s
protocol, which was signed in Batken by Tajik and Kyrgyz representatives on 26October
2008, should be guaranteed (The Protocol strictly forbids border security authorities to
act outside of their jurisdiction.)
‐
Special attention should be paid to the illegal exploitation of disputed lands by both
sides. Special attention should be paid to illegal transactions of Kyrgyz real estate (sold
by Kyrgyz, purchased by Tajiks).
‐
The optimal solution until the final demarcation of Tajik-Kyrgyzs border would be to
concentrate efforts for a joint in-depth analysis of conflicts on all levels of governance.
‐
Attempts to use force (by law enforcement authorities and border guards) when
resolving disputes should be circumvented at all times.
‐
Efforts should be made to intensify awareness-raising campaigns amongst residents of
the region on the consequences of illegal land transaction and acquisition of disputed
territories. (Authorities of the two sides need to carefully coordinate each other’s actions,
when curbing illegal exploitation of land).
‐
Lobby the Joint Commission for Demarcation and Delimitation of Borders to expedite
their decision making process and increase their procedural transparency by sharing
more information about the demarcation process.
‐
Based on recommendation of local experts and residents, the land management
authorities and other relevant state agencies should develop a package of proposals and
recommendations for the consideration by the Joint Commission for Demarcation and
Delimitation of Borders. This could accelerate the pace of the demarcation and
delimitation process.
‐
Local and international experts recommend that the most contention territories should
receive the status of dual sovereignty, be managed by both states, and be regarded as
free economic zones.
‐
Oral agreements on land use between Tajik farmers and Kyrgyz land owners often lead
to conflicts between the two sides. Thus, it is recommended to introduce a system of
contracting and documenting the land agreements. The system would specify the fee
and timeframe of rent, thus guaranteeing that agreements on renting the land are more
official and less debatable. Such an initiative should be instigated by local
administrations and land management authorities.
‐
Given the severe land shortage, local dehkan farms should start implementing intensive
agricultural methods, instead of extensive methods. Optimal use of land produces
significantly greater crop yields per unit of land than extensive agriculture. Implementing
intensive agricultural methods would require less land than an extensive agriculture farm
to produce a similar profit.
‐
With the assistance of civil society institutions, local authorities need to carry out
explanatory work amongst the population about the status of disputed territories and
agreements of their use. Information campaigns and events have to be organized in
order to raise public awareness on these issues. Information booklets, juridical material,
maps of disputed areas, as well as agreements on land use, should be developed,
published, and made available for local residents and authorities in cross-border
communities. Active involvement of donor organizations and local media plays a
significant role in advancing awareness-raising campaigns in the region.
‐
Issues of population growth and lack of living space in Tajik border villages will continue
to be a problem even after successful demarcation of the border. Therefore, it is
recommended that Tajik authorities should accelerate the pace of the governmental
internal resettlement programme and, in order to combat unlawful distribution of lands,
apply extra efforts for increasing transparency and accountability of land management
authorities in the region.
Access to Pastures and Forests
- Improvements should be made in the legal framework of forestry and environmental
services. Experience has confirmed that the existing regulations, governing the use of
pastures and forests, require careful analysis and modification.
- Lobby for immediate signing of a joint agreement (between the Republic of Tajikistan
and the Kyrgyz Republic) on the lease of pastures on the territory of the Kyrgyz
Republic. Lack of intergovernmental agreements on the use of pastures cause confusion
and complicate land management of cross-border pastures and forests.
- Develop and advance mechanisms for managing compliance with agreements,
environmental laws, and governing regulations for the use of pastures and forests.
- Develop effective and least contentious ways for joint use of pastures and forests. At the
district level, environmental services should develop a binding document on shared
exploitation of cross-border pastures.
- Eradicate the use of firearms by security officers in any type of cross-border dispute.
-
Prevent unauthorized involvement of border security personnel in cross-border disputes.
- Increase the effectiveness of law enforcement officials in detecting and solving thefts of
livestock and their ability to carry out their immediate tasks of law enforcement. (In the
early years of the century, a Tajik-Kyrgyz bilateral agreement was signed for joint
management of ‘environmental checkpoints’. Joint management and manning of such
checkpoints would decrease their contentiousness).
- The Kyrgyz side should consider either lowering tariffs on grazing land permissions for
residents of Tajik villages, or ensure the transparency during pricing and payments.
- Improve cooperation and exchange of information between environmental authorities of
Batken and Israfa district.
- Establish and put in place legal regulations on the lease and use of pastures.
-
Establish and put in place legally binding agreements between Tajik owners of livestock
and Kyrgyz shepherds. Develop and implement mechanisms for effectively insuring
livestock (this action would reduce the potential for conflicts during compensation
demands for the loss of animals).
- Authorities should provide simplified procedures for issuing various permits and
documents.
- Develop a set of common standards and requirements amongst the veterinary services
of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, in order to create a universal vaccination approach
between the two sides.
- Unsupervised and unlawful removal of pebbles, gravel, and sand gravel from the Isfara
river should be the subject of bilateral discussions between environmental agencies of
the two district. A joint solution is necessary to safeguard against illegal exploitation of
these resources, which often leads to disputes.
- Jamoat officials should create and apply clear guidelines for cooperation with each other.
They should also consider providing assistance to local farmers (owners of livestock) for
carrying out negotiations with representatives of land management authorities of a
neighbouring state.
- Local authorities, together with community leaders, should provide the population with
clear information about intergovernmental agreements on exploitation of forests and
pastures in cross-border territories.
- In order to safeguard against illegal logging of forests during the autumn-winter period
(when supply of electricity is lowest), authorities should take early steps for supplying
their residents with coal, guza-paya, and firewood. If necessary, carry out lobbying
activities for increasing the quota of coal supply.
- International organizations should assist in organizing awareness-raising campaigns on
the rules, regulations, and legislations on the use of pastures and forests in the region.
(OSCE’s environmental programme could play an important role in this endeavour).
- UNDP and other international organizations should incorporate into their environmental
programmes measures including against illegal use of pastures and forest, degradation
and destruction of pastures and environmentally damaging exploitation of forest
resources.
- The potential of the Green Patrols, joint (Tajik-Kyrgyz) environmental school groups,
should be fully exploited and developed further. Through such initiatives, it is possible
and necessary to advance public awareness on issues of environmental protection.
Access to drinking and irrigation water
It is widely recognized that cross-border water disputes and conflicts are not related to water
shortage per se, but rather to ineffective distribution and management of water resources. This
section provides recommendations which are based on various bilateral decisions and findings
of this research.
- The framework for joint management of cross-border water resources must be based on
principles of international laws on the use of water and hydropower resources in
disputed territories. (The framework should be in line with existing international
conventions and declarations on the use and protection of transboundary water
resource).
- Implementation of bilateral intergovernmental agreements governing the use of water
resources should be better regulated. (Agreements have been achieved through a
number of intergovernmental meetings including of state authorities, industry workers
and experts).
- All parties involved (especially state authorties) should improve implementation of
bilateral agreements, guarantee better compliance with existing water-related
regulations, and safeguard effective water exploitation and distribution in the region.
- Water agreements would be more stable if they included from the outset sanctions for
breaching the contracts. In this regard, government authorities of the two sides need to
develop joint mechanisms for sanctioning penalties for violations of water management
agreements. (The experience of implementing existing treaties and agreements has
demonstrated the absence of any type of sanctioning mechanism for violations of
agreements, thus rendering them ineffective).
- Local authorities and law enforcement officials should take appropriate actions against
residents and communities, who deliberately cut-off water supplies to the other side.
- Senior water management officials and regional authorities should also be made
responsible for case of illegal management of water resources.
Water management: Joint resolution of problems of water distribution.
- Water management authorities of the two sides should use the potential of the newly
established Isafa-Batken Inter-District Committee for building consensus amongst
regional stakeholders for the use of cross-border water resources. The Joint Working
Group on Water and Land Affairs, created under the Committee, should act as a
platform for the cooperation of water management authorities and should provide
comprehensive analysis-based resolutions for water-related disputes. Consensus can be
reached only through clear definition of responsibilities amongst the involved parties.
- In order to facilitate the rapid response of authorities in cases of water mismanagement,
it is recommended to create mixed mobile groups of water management officials and
community representatives. The groups will report and be accountable to the IsfaraBatken Inter-District Committee’s working group on water and land affairs. International
organizations, with assistance of local NGOs, can provide advisory and technical
assistance to the inter-district working groups, as well as enhance their negotiation and
conflict resolution/prevention skills.
- Based on annual conditions (such as weather, water scarcity and drought), schedules for
water distribution should be adjusted to the existing circumstances. (Water management
groups should also include heads of local governments).
- A bilateral working group should be created as part of the Isfara-Batken Inter-Regional
Committee. The group should be comprised of water experts and specialist, and should
review and address the following issues:
o Review the proposals for rehabilitation and reconstruction of cross-border canals
and aqueducts (such as "Vorukh-Shurab", "Mehnatabad", "Mastchoi - Ak-Tatyr,"
"Tortgul", "Dzui-Dam") ;
o Develop draft treaties for inter-district water management of small, medium, and
large cross-border canals. (There are approximately 40 shared canals and water
resources in the region.)
o Develop mechanisms for effective water distribution and prepare proposals for
increasing transparency and accountability of water management authorities.
o With consideration for existing UN treaties on transboundary water management,
carry out bilateral assessment and provide joint recommendations for future
hydro-technical projects for the Isfarinka River. (The initial recommendation to
refrain from construction activities in the proximity of the Isafarinka River until the
border demarcation process has been completed, has proven to be unfeasible
and unpractical.)
o The members of the working group should draft a new water allocation strategy
for the cross-border Isfarinka River. The document should be forwarded to the
central water authorities of the two states for their consideration. (The agreement
for joint exploitation of the Isfarinka River was produced in the mid-1950s and
does not meet current social, economic, and political conditions of the region).
- A methodology for water conservation and economic exploitation of water resources,
and trainings for efficient water management, should be provided to local residents and
communities. (Modernize irrigation water technologies on both sides of the border).
- Both sides should clearly comprehend that regardless of the effectiveness of (future)
independent water sources, they will always continue to have to share the water
resources in the region.
- Parts of water canals and aqueducts, which are passing through disputed territories,
should be maintained with joint efforts and funds.
- Water management authorities should find effective ways for addressing neglected
payments for water (by farmers, residents, and communities).
Local authorities: Culture of water management - Local state authorities should focus their efforts on the revival of previous practices of
collaboration and cooperation amongst cross-border communities in preparing for
annual agricultural field activities. The parties must come to understand that
maintenance and use of water infrastructure need effective collaboration amongst the
communities.
- Local authorities should involve village elders in development of annual joint plans for
activities such as clean-ups of canals and reservoirs..
- In order to have an access to canals during maintenance work, jamoat and village
authorities, with assistance of senior water management officials, should implement
monitoring activities for general compliance with the ban on planting of trees and
construction of facilities in the vicinity of cross-border canals. (Each year, prior to
agricultural season, there is a need to clean the canals from accumulated silt and sand).
- Local state authorities should organize and implement joint inter-district actions for
rehabilitation of poorly maintained water infrastructure (drinking and irrigation water).
Parties may consider joint funding for rehabilitation activities.
Water and security forces
- Interference of law enforcement and border security officials in water-related disputed
should be strictly prohibited. In cases of their involvement in incidents, it is necessary to
clearly define their jurisdiction and prevent their participation in direct dispute
management activities.
- Authorities should expedite their deliberation on the necessity of Kyrgyz border guards
around the water facilities of the Isfarinka River, as well as at the Bedaki environmental
checkpoint. Protection of environmentally important sites should be carried out jointly by
Tajik and Kyrgyz border security authorities. (Border guards have the tendency to
interfere with the work of joint water management organizations of Uzbekistan,
Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan. Border guards have been preventing rehabilitation and repair
efforts on a overflow tower on Mehnatabad canal) .
- The parties must clearly understand that under no circumstances should security
authorities act outside of their jurisdiction and substitute the work of water management
officials.
Water and international organizations
- International organizations should assist in the creation of regional and local Water User
Associations, which would promote and oversee efficient water management in the
region.
- Some of the past initiatives of international organizations for fostering trust and tolerance
amongst the cross-border communities have been discontinued due to the
unsustainability of the efforts. In the future, similar activities should be reintroduced with
better guarantees for sustainability.
- International organizations should support and provide regional awareness-raising
activities and offer advisory services to local residents on the issues of peaceful,
effective, and joint management of regional water resources.
Actions of state authorities
Local executive authorities, when carrying out their functions, need to focus special attention to
the following issues:
- Resolution and management of resource-related disputed;
- Building capacity for effective prevention and mitigation of conflicts;
- Incorporation of conflict prevention policies into regional development strategies;
- Strengthening the role of local government;
- Increase of transparency and accountability of local authorities,
- Implementation of awareness-raising activities and effective information sharing;
- Development of a sustainable inter-district dialogue for addressing local cross-border
problems;
Authorities and access to land: Actions to reduce the potential for conflicts
- Government authorities must exert every effort to resolve complex problems associated
with access to land. (At the present time, access to land is regarded as the main conflict
risk factor in region). Authorities should develop and promote coordination amongst all
governmental agencies on all levels of governance. Authorities must avoid
uncoordinated actions, when resolving disputes. (By ignoring or disregarding landrelated disputes, authorities facilitate aggravation of tensions and give rise to new
disputes and conflicts).
- Regardless of a number of legally binding agreements between the Republic of
Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic, cross-border interaction and cooperation continues
to present problems. Continuous bilateral intervention is required, as well as constant
cooperation and coordination of actions between Tajik and Kyrgyz authorities. In this
regard, local authorities are encouraged to develop a joint regulatory document, which
would reflect the basic tenets of all of the existing bilateral treaties, agreements, and
decisions relating to the status of disputed territories. Local authorities on both sides
should consider the creation of joint mechanisms for implementing and monitoring
compliance with such a document.
- The document should clearly indentify all permissible and restricted actions, in
accordance with all the main points of existing treaties, agreements, and decision. The
document should clearly identify actions which can be executed unilaterally and actions
which can be carried out only bilaterally.
- UNDP, OSCE, and other organization could provide their legal expertise in support of
formulating such a document.
- The Tajik side is experiencing an acute shortage of land in border territories. The
governmental programme for resettlement is based primarily on voluntary resettlement
of people from densely populated areas to less populated areas of the country/region. In
the future, there is a need to develop a more transparent selection mechanism for
identification of future resettlers (those in acute need for resettlement should be made a
priority) and speed up execution of the resettlement programme.
- It is necessary to strengthen the role and effectiveness of the Resettlement Coordinating
Committee (RCC), created under UNDP’s auspices, as well as to increase its jurisdiction
to implement actions under the wider governmental resettlement programme (currently
the Committee’s mandate is limited to cooperation with UNDP’s “Conflict prevention and
mitigation in the Ferghana Valley” project, which is regarded as a pilot project for the
governmental resettlement programme). Develop a regulatory document for the RCC,
clarifying its mandate, duties, and responsibilities.
Rapid response to conflict situations and local capacity to prevent conflicts
- (For Tajik side) Establishing a permanent institute, which would be responsible for
researching, analysing, coordinating, and addressing cross-border issues, is highly
recommended. The institute should be incorporated into local covenantal structures of
Isfara district. The Kyrgyz experience of having development councils for ethnic
minorities on various levels of state administration could serve as a practical example for
the institute on the Tajik side.
- Due to the absence of a systematic approach to conflict prevention and conflict
transformation, it is recommended to create training centres for local officials and
communities on managing disputes and mitigating potential conflicts. In Isfara district,
leadership is already taking steps to organize such initiatives within the framework of the
Department of Foreign Economic Relations. It is recommended to use the potential of
the personnel from the Council for Regional Development, who have past experience of
working in conflict prevention projects and programmes.
The institute (for dispute resolution and conflict prevention) would address the following issues:
o
Establish expert and specialist groups, comprised of members from all those
state agencies that are dealing with cross-border issues. Group members
should not only know the details and complexities of cross-border relations,
but should also be well versed in conflict prevention theories and practices. It
is important to involve civil society representatives from border communities,
who have rich experience in traditional negotiations, have worked in joint
commissions, and are well acquainted with the local context.
o
Create and streamline database of available documents, including on crossborder agreements and incidents (such as reports, legal documents, bilateral
treaties, and protocols).
o
Research and analyse incidents, disputes, and conflict. (Produce quarterly
situation reports and recommendations for future actions).
o
Coordinate actions of all bilateral institutions (including bilateral commissions,
working groups and joint councils).
o
Develop and implement mechanisms for bilateral monitoring of agreements
and treaties. Currently, implementation of decisions or agreements is
monitored separately by each side.
o
Increase operational capacity of all authorities in areas such as conflict
prevention, conflict analysis, negotiation skills and ethnic tolerance.
(Frequency of cross-border incidents indicate the weakness of district and
jamoat authorities in detecting early symptoms of conflicts and preventing
escalation of events).
- Due to frequent changes of personnel within governmental institutions, joint working
groups, commission, and committees should develop a mechanism of "succession",
which would allow a new member to base his/her future decisions on previously agreedupon measures and decisions of his/her predecessor. (This would increase
effectiveness of decision-making).
- In order to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of joint commission, regional state
representatives should be present in the meetings. The complexity and sensitivity of
border issues requires the participation of government representatives from all levels.
Local Development plans and conflict prevention approaches
- State authorities on both sides should make effort for integrating conflict prevention and
mitigation strategies into socio-economic development plans on regional and community
levels. In the course of this study, it became evident that despite high numbers of joint
projects and initiatives, in almost all sectors of socio-economic development of the two
regions (such as agriculture trade, communications and water infrastructure), both sides
lack strategic plans for preventing, managing, or mitigating cross-border disputes and
conflicts.
- For addressing existing conflict risk factors, authorities should develop and implement
comprehensive development strategies, aimed at addressing fundamental social and
economic causes of conflicts. Strategies need to be developed bilaterally, in cooperation
with authorities from neighbouring regions.
- Advocate and promote inclusion of border community development projects into
governmental development plans.
Village/jamoat state officials
- Local government authorities and NGOs must develop the capacities of village officials
in identifying and preventing conflicts at their earliest stage. Special training programmes
should be organized for local government authorities and village committee leaders for
managing and resolving disputes (such as negotiation training and communication)
- Reintroduction of the Early Warning System (EWS), which was previously created with
assistance of UNDP. The EWS includes a package of measures for identifying and
preventing potential conflict situations. EWS monitors, mediators, and moderators could
act as “peacekeepers” in disputes and during cross-border incidents.
- Village authorities must avoid oral agreements. (Agreements and documents must
become binding by signatures). All stakeholders in cross-border relations must be
informed by the officials on possible amendments to past agreements.
Transparency and accountability of state officials
- Local state authorities should maintain exchanges of information with residents and
inform cross-border communities on concrete measures and solutions for resolving or
managing incidents and existing disputes. (Village committees or mosques could serve
as unofficial “information centres”).
- Local authorities should introduce the practice of public discourse on the most
contentious and important issues. In this regard, there is a need to carry out explanatory
work with local populations, as well as to encourage the trade-off of information between
the people and the authorities. In order to safeguard state authorities from demands
which cannot be realized, people need to know the reasons behind actions or lack of
actions in each specific case.
Dialogue between state authorities
- Sustainable dialogue should be developed and maintained amongst cross-border
authorities. (This is an important factor for building trust between cross-border
communities and preventing conflicts).
- Bilateral meetings of senior officials should take place on a regular basis. In addition,
various joint commissions, councils of elders, women, and youth, as well as traditional
monthly meetings of regional leaders. should act as mechanisms for effective joint
decision-making.
- The Tajik side should establish a parliamentary commission on border issues, which will
interact with the analogous commission on the Kyrgyz side.
- Authorities should promote inter-institutional and inter-agency cross-border cooperation.
Creation of networks of sector employees (such as culture, education, health, business
and media) should also be encouraged .
State authorities and International Organizations - Local authorities should take responsibility for coordinating external development
projects and integrating them into regional development plans. (This would guarantee
that NGO and INGO projects reflect priorities of regional development plans. It also
guards against duplication of NGO/INGO activities in the region).
- Local authorities should play a central role at the earliest stages of international projects,
i.e., needs assessment stage.
- Local authorities should not be passive observers of external donor projects. Donor
funds and state funds should be regarded equally important.
- To avoid uncoordinated actions of donors from both sides (Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan), a
cross-border advisory board for coordination of NGO/INGO activities should be
established.
Actions of security officials
- Local state authorities and military officials, on both sides, should monitor and prevent
undisciplined and unauthorized (acting outside of their mandate) actions of their security
forces personnel (law enforcement, border patrols).
- Law enforcement agencies should establish a Tajik-Kyrgyz joint mandate, governing the
actions of border guards and security forces in border areas. The mandate should
specify jurisdiction, rights, and responsibilities. They should also produce specific
measures against undisciplined and unauthorized actions. Both sides should either limit
or strictly regulate use of firearms against civilian population, even for warning shots.
- Border guards should have a clear understanding that they are forbidden to act as water
and forestry officials, law enforcers, environmental authorities, or land surveyors during
cross-border disputes.
- Military officials and local authorities must understand the using of border guards as a
tool of intimidation or demonstration of power could have extremely unconstructive and
unpredictable consequences.
- Border security and law enforcement authorities of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan must abide
by bilateral decisions to eradicate adverse elements of the behaviour of their personnel
(such as extortion of money from drivers and setting unauthorised checkpoints on crossborder roads). Law enforcement agencies of the two sides are also encouraged to
inform each other on forthcoming anti-terrorism operations, in order to avoid confusion
and panic within border communities.
Interethnic relations
- District and regional development plans should include measures for preserving ethnic
diversity of the region and extending interactions between Tajik and Kyrgyz sides. Local
authorities should encourage inter-district cultural, educational, and technical crossborder projects, which would increase positive interactions and improve interrelations of
the two groups. (Interaction can be based on the existing cultural and educational links
between the two sides)
- Special attention should be paid to the revival of neighbourly interrelations, social
integration and cooperation, as well as to the establishment of permanent social and
cultural links between the two sides. In this regard, it is necessary to develop and revive
previously established mechanisms for enhancing and safeguarding the values of ethnic
diversity.
- Based on Kyrgyz experience with municipal Committees for Ethnic Development, the
Tajik side should consider creations of similar groups within the framework of jamoat
administrations. The groups would operate as a public institutes, consolidating local
communities and developing inter-ethnic relations.
- Newly established cross-border councils of elders, women, and youth should be
activated and encouraged by state authorities. The state agencies of youth, women, and
cultural affairs should provide technical and advisory support to the councils in joint
planning and joint actions, as well as in securing their effectiveness and sustainability.
- Improvement of interethnic relations and interethnic tolerance must be advanced on
previously created foundations. Previously established potential for cooperation should
be exploited and revived. (The Cross-Border Cooperation Project of UNDP Tajikistan
and UNDP Kyrgyzstan facilitated establishment of joint Youth Centres in Ak-Sai rural
council for cross-cultural exchange and joint sports activities; the Good Neighbours
school clubs, established by the Swiss Cooperation Office, served as a link for
interaction between cross-border schools; in cooperation with UNDP Tajikistan, a
women’s NGO – Woman Leaders of Border Villages – was established in the jamoat of
Chorkuh (the NGO seeks to increase the role of women and facilitates resolution of
cross-border problems in Tajik border villages); natural disasters response teams in
schools and environmental youth groups – Green Patrol -; Chorkuh school teachers
have a good experience of organizing joint forums and events for women of cross-border
communities. These are all good examples of previous achievements of international
and local organizations.)
- Local government officials should involve and make use of the potential of local elders,
religious leaders, and unofficial jamoat leaders for peaceful resolution and settlement of
disputes.
- In order to revive neighbourly relations, it is necessary to continue the practice of joint
cultural activities on all levels. Peaceful interaction should be promoted through a variety
of joint festivals, sports events, and youth forums.
- Advocate for development and integration of ethnic tolerance-raising classes into the
state/regional school programmes. Previously created skills (under EWS) of local
residents in monitoring, mediation, and moderation should be exploited for the teaching
of classes on tolerance and ethnic diversity. A positive practice could be the introduction
of series of language lessons of children (Kyrgyz language for Tajik children and vice
versa).
- Tajik-Kyrgyz Departments of Education should improve teaching of Russian, as a
language of interethnic communication.
- Teachings of Islam should be exploited in advancing tolerance and overcoming
prejudices. (Both cross-border communities adhere to the same religion and religious
leaders are well respected on both sides. Thus, it is recommended that Friday prayers
would include teachings of tolerance and peaceful coexistence).
Women and cross-border relations
- Local officials should pay extra attention to the increased role of women in cross-border
disputes and conflicts. Committees for women and family affairs should seek to reduce
women's vulnerability in the region. (Due to labour migration of men, women are more
actively involved in cross-border incidents.)
- Committees for women and family affairs should create favourable conditions for
women’s empowerment, as well as facilitate expansion of women’s rights for political
expression and political participation. Women empowerment plans should be developed
and integrated into national and regional development plans of both countries.
- Cross-border women forums should become a common practice. Such activities would
enable women to express their opinions on current border problems, identify their needs
and aspirations, as well as improve their relationships and strengthen cooperation.
- Local authorities, with assistance of international organizations and NGOs, should
organize and conduct conflict prevention and negotiation trainings and seminars for
single, widowed, and divorced women. Being the most vulnerable groups, they should
gain skills in peaceful conflict resolution and promotion of a culture of tolerance.
Youth and cross-border relations
- Destructive behaviours of disenfranchised and frustrated Tajik and Kyrgyz youth are
considered a major conflict risk factor in interethnic relations of cross-border
communities. Local authorities need to focus their attention on practical implementation
of youth policies in the region. Efforts should be made to create appropriate conditions
for political pacification and empowerment of youth. Opportunities for education,
employment, and political participation (ability to influence their own lives) should be
included and made a priority in government initiatives and plans.
- Lack of quality education (or education itself) is directly related to the deterioration of
relationships and decline in cultural tolerance amongst the Tajik-Kyrgyz youth. The
Department of Education and the Committee for Youth, Sports, and Tourism should pay
attention to the fact that jamoats with the lowest school attendance rates have had the
highest rates of youth related incidents in the region.
- Local authorities should create and advance equal opportunities in access to quality
education and employment.
- Advocate for increase of Presidential quotas for admissions into central universities
(especially for teenagers from village communities).
- Department of Youth Affairs and employment services should conduct short-term
vocational courses and job fairs for the youth. (Especially in villages of Chorkuh, Vorukh,
and Shurab) .
- State authorities should improve practical realization of national youth policies on
regional levels. During strategic planning of youth development plans, special attention
should be paid to the specificity of youth problems in border communities (such as
poverty, absence of opportunities for personal development and growth and crossborder conflicts). Protection of interests and empowerment of vulnerable youth should be
lobbied for and supported.
- It is necessary to increase the work of the Committee on Youth Affairs and the Youth
League, as well as to follow practical steps for improving their image. One-third of the
population of the Isfara region (71,300 people) are young people between 14 and 30
years old. Only 3,600 are members of the Youth League. Such a low participation might
be a sign of youth’s mistrust in these structures or their powerlessness in reaching and
supporting young people.
- Regional youth-affairs authorities of Isfara and Batken regions should develop a joint
action plan for reducing the potential for conflicts amongst young people in cross-border
villages. In order to improve relations between the cross-border youth, special education
programmes should be introduced to foster their potential for peaceful coexistence and
ethnic tolerance.
- The role of young people in community development should be expanded and
encouraged. (Recreational youth-oriented activities could encourage the youth to
participate in the process of community development). In 2010, a new Youth Centre was
established in Chorkuh jamoat. The Centre was created with assistance of the
Committee for Youth, Sport, and Tourism (Tajikistan) and was funded by the World
Bank. In the Ak-Sai village (Kyrgyzstan) a Youth Centre has already been operational for
several years (created in collaboration with UNDP). Tajik and Kyrgyz youth development
committees and officials should create links between existing youth centres, thus
facilitating interaction and cooperation of cross-border youth.
- In Sughd region (Isfara is part of the Sughd region), the year 2011 has been declared as
the "Year of revival of cultural institutions". Therefore, authorities should pay extra
attention to improving organizational and physical infrastructure for cultural events and
leisure activities. Local entrepreneurs could assist in creation of computer and Internet
centres, sports clubs, and other leisure facilities for cross-border villages.
- Young people should be made aware of existing regional youth
development/empowerment programmes (especially the programme for "Social
development of Isfara's youth, 2010 - 2012 ").
Awareness-raising and information sharing
Local authorities should improve access to information and increase awareness-raising
activities in cross-border villages. For these purposes, the following recommendations have
been produced:
- Enhance/restore the role of the press department of Isfara town for organizing press
conferences for local media representatives.
- Press departments should organize monthly press conferences in local jamoats, with
participation of village residents and pertinent state authorities.
- The Press Office of the Chairman of Isafar town should assist local media (TV, printing
press) in preparing analytical programmes and articles on cross-border developments
and challenges. (UNDP has a past experience of assisting in facilitating such practices).
Inclusion of opinions of local specialists and experts from different sectors (such as
natural resources, ecology and economics) is extremely important.
- Consider the possibilities for restoration and revival of local radio networks and radio
station facilities in border jamoats (some of the technical equipment is relatively well
preserved).
- Set up magazine kiosks, that would provide rural residents with newspapers and
journals, both governmental and independent. Local government officials should
regularly update the "bulletin boards", created with the assistance of OSCE, UNDP and
other international organizations.
- To increase public awareness, both sides should facilitate prompt dissemination of press
releases on the following issues: Progress and decisions of the Joint Commission for
Demarcation and Delimitation of Borders, results of meetings of Tajik-Kyrgyz
Intergovernmental Commissions, results and conclusions of bilateral meetings of local
authorities, as well as on governmental measures/plans for resolving existing conflicts
and disputes (ongoing incidents).
- Press officers and public relations officials of Isfara and Batken authorities should be in
continuous interaction with each other, ensure regular exchange of information, and
organize joint press conference.
- With assistance and support from UNDP Tajikistan and UNDP Kyrgyzstan, mass media
representatives should be encouraged to visit cross-border communities and report on
issues such as the existing challenges, developments and incidents.
- Local state authorities and NGOs should consider creation of press clubs in the crossborder villages. UNDP Tajikistan, which has a past experience of organizing press clubs
in Sughd region, should consult and assist in producing cross-border press clubs in the
region.
- The press club meetings should attract representatives of mass media, state officials,
experts, NGOs, and international organizations into various forums and discussion
groups. Topics of the meetings could cover the most acute socio-economic challenges in
cross-border relations. Results and recommendations would be publicised through
television programmes and analytical articles, thus disseminating information faster and
covering wider audiences. Furthermore, such an approach would contribute to a wider
public awareness of joint initiatives of local authorities and could accelerate
implementation of future bilateral initiatives.
- The local media community should initiate cross-border forums for journalists on the
topics of inter-ethnic relations. Given the sensitivity of these issues, media forums should
develop common approaches, principles, and codes of conduct when covering conflicts
and cross-border relations.
- UNDP and other donor organizations, in close collaboration with local authorities, should
continue to increase proficiency and capacity of key groups such as (governmental and
independent) media representatives, researchers and local NGOs, for dealing with
problematic cross-border relations in professional and effective ways.
Bibliography
Abdulajev, K. And Freiser, S., Насколько прочен мир в Таджикистане пять лет спустя
после подписания мирного соглашения? Стратегическая оценка конфликтов и
основные направления миростроительства, The UK Government Global Conflict
Prevention Pool, London, March 2003.
Alamanov S., "Об истории, современном состоянии и перспективах юридического
оформления кыргызско-таджикской государственной границы". From “КыргызстанТаджикистан: курс на укрепление парнтерства в контексте региональных связей”, Т.
Usubalyev Foundation and F. Abert Foundation in Kyrgyzstan, Bishkek, 2010.
http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/bischkek/08172.pdf
Alamanov S., Краткая история и опыт решения пограничных проблем Кыргызстана.
Bishkek, 2005.
Batken District Development Plan, 2007.
Centra Asia Conference. Гражданское общество за партнерство по построению мира и
предотвращению конфликтов в Центральной Азии. Conference Material, 26-27 May,
2005, Bishkek.
Churkuh Jamoat Development Plan, Isfara, 2011.
Early Warning System Report of UNDP Kyrgyzstan. Batken, 2004.
ENVSEC. “Environment and Security - Transforming Risks into cooperation: Central Asia Ferghana / Osh / Khujand Area”. http://www.osce.org/eea/item_11_16671.html
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, “Кыргызстан-Таджикистан: курс на укрепление партнерства в
контексте региональных связей”, Bishkek, 2010. http://library.fes.de/pdffiles/bueros/bischkek/08172.pdf
Institute for War and Peace Reporting. “Kyrgyz, Tajik border shooting rings alarm bells”. RCA
No. 387, 15 June, 2005. http://reliefweb.int/node/176790
International Crisis Group. “Таджикистан: Стратегия Развития”, Asia Report 51, 24 April,
2003. www.crisisgroup.org
International Crisis Group. “Центральная Азия: ислам и государство”, Asia Report 59, 10
July, 2003. www.crisisgroup.org Isfara Town Development Plan, Isfara, 2011.
Kurbanov, Sakhbon. “Министры обороны Таджикистана и Кыргызстана встретились в
Исфаре”, Asia Plus, 04 May, 2011. http://news.tj/ru/news/ministry-oborony-tadzhikistana-ikyrgyzstana-vstretilis-v-isfare
Maitdinova, G. M. “Пограничные проблемы Таджикистана: реалии и международное
сотрудничество по обеспечению безопасности границ”, Russian-Tajik Slavonic University.
http://tsgi.rtsu-slavist.tj/index-6.html
Makhammadjanov, Masum. “Создание приграничного совета в Баткене и Согде”, Radio
Liberty, 22 June, 2011.
http://www.toptj.com/News/2011/06/22/sozdanie_prigranichnogo_soveta_v_batkene_i_sogde
Meeting Protocol of a Tajik-Kyrgyz Intergovernmental Commission. Dushanbe, 19 May, 2011.
Minutes of Tajik-Kyrgyz Intergovernmental Commission, Dushanbe. 19 May, 2011.
Matveeva, Anna. “Центральная Азия – Стратегический подход к построению мира”.
International Alert Report. www.international-alert.org
Olimova, Saodat and Bisk, Igor. Миграция рабочей силы из Таджикистана. IOM, Dushanbe,
June 2003.
Omarov, Erzhan. “Этнонационализм против гражданской нации: что победит?”, APN
Kazakhstan, 24 August, 2006.
Otumbajeva, R. “Розы Отунбаевa на совещании с активом Баткенской области,
которое прошло 7 февраля в Баткене.” CentrAsia, 7 February, 2011
http://www.centrasia.ru/newsA.php?st=1297167300
Otumbajeva, R. “Информация о визите Р.Отунбаевой в Баткенскую область на сайте.”
Information about President Otumbajeva’s visit to Batken region.
http://fergana.akipress.org/news:125431/
Safar, Tokhir. “Весна тревоги на кыргызско-таджикской границе”, Radio Azattyk, March,
2011. http://rus.azattyk.kg/content/kyrgyzstan_tajikistan_conflict/4726510.html
Rakhmattulina, Gulnur. “Серьезный конфликт между Кыргызстаном и Таджикистаном вопрос лишь времени”, Analytical Information Centre for Political Developments in Post-Soviet
States, January, 2009. http://www.ia-centr.ru/expert/3436/
Shorthand record of a meeting between state officials and security authorities of Batken and
Isfara districts. Batken, 8 April, 2011.
State Committee of National Security of the Kyrgyz Republic.
http://www.granica.kg/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1&limit=10&limitstart=20
Shurab Jamoat Development Plan, Isfara, 2011.
Surkh Jamoat Development Plan, Isfara, 2011.
Tishkov, Valery. ”Киргизия или Кыргызстан”, Live Journal of Valery Tishkov.
valerytishkov.livejournal.com
UNDP Kyrgyzstan. “Friendship Bridge: Aigul and Guli Surkh (Lola)”. UNDP Press Release,
June, 2010. http://www.undp.kg/en/media-room/news/article/3-news-list/1496-ajgul-i-guli-surmost-drujby
UNDP Kyrgyzstan. Second Periodic Report on the Millennium Development Goals in the Kyrgyz
Republic, Bishkek 2010. http://www.un.org.kg/en/component/resource/article/Publications/
UNDP Tajikistan and UNDP Kyrgyzstan. “Access to Resources: Water and Land”, Thematic
Report of Early Warning System, Osh/Khujand, 2006.
UNDP Tajikistan and UNDP Kyrgyzstan. “Social Conditions of Youth in Border Communities of
Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan”, Thematic Report of Early Warning System, Osh/Khujand, 2006
UNDP Tajikistan and UNDP Kyrgyzstan. “Coexistence”, Early Warning System Report,
Khujand, 2004.
UNDP Kyrgyzstan. “Batken Region Early Warning System Report”, Batken, 2004.
UNIFEM. Ферганская долина: вызовы времени. Бишкек, 2005.
www.un.org.kg/index2.php?option=com_resource&task=show

Potential for Peace and Threats of Conflict

Transcription

Documents pareils

Bio for - McMillan

Flood Awareness and Prevention Policy in border areas

Semiotic pattern and functions of omens with the cultural exponents of

here - ecdpm

Art. IV Konsultation

France

Lithuania - ACA

Cross-border banking flows spillovers in the Eurozone

Annual report 2005