M u h a m m a d S a l i h leader of the ERK Democratic Party of Uzbekistan

There is no doubt that the tragedy of the twin-towers in New York
is the tragedy of the entire humanity. Those who were involved in this
crime must pay and will pay for
their actions. There is a must to settle once and for all the root of
terror. I liked this expression " to settle once and for all". Recently
this expression has become a popular one.
That is true, the terrorism must be exterminated to prevent innocent
people fall a victim. But every one understands " the roots of
terrorism" by his/ her own. For instance, the
president Islam Karimov, the head of Uzbeks, understands this expression
as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. But every one, who has common
sense, knows that this is not the root but its product.

The root of terrorism in Uzbekistan is the political regime. The
gardener, who takes care of those roots, waters and raises them, is
Islam Abduganievich Karimov himself. It
won't be wrong, if we say that people died and are killed in the prisons
from his terror are not less than people died in the twin-towers in New
York. The difference is that there
is nobody to count those victims, to ask for responsibility and there is
nobody who is interested in to find out.

In the opinions of today's world society, the cost of the Uzbeks'
lives is cheaper; the Uzbeks' tears are more valueless. There was
nothing about Islamic Radicalism in 1991. Unlucky
and poor man Karimov spent 5 restless years on creation of radicalism.
Could you imagine - 5 years! During five years he patriotically
destroyed nongovernmental mosques in
people's eyes. During five years he arrested, made them suffer in
prisons, killed and banished those people who prayed.

He used governmental power to fight against people's religion
for five years. Muslims, especially young people, after 5-year
repression began to leave Uzbekistan and
one part of them joining Tajikistan oppositions moved into Afghanistan.
Consequently, the basis of so-called the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
and a list of the armed groups
of the US President George Bush consists of those young people.
Therefore, I addressed the following to the US while speaking on the BBC
last night Oct.7, 2001.

" Dear American friends, while you are looking for the basis of
terrorism in Central Asia do ask people of that region too. Ask people
where the root of terrorism is, what
will they say? Of course, Karimov will point to his enemies saying "
here is the root of terrorism you are looking for".

But, the basis of terrorism in Central Asia is the totalitarian
regime itself. Do not think, American friends, that you will end this by
bombing Afghanistan. You cannot
come to end by disarming " The Green Taliban", because there is another
one " The Red Taliban". "The Red Taliban" is the rest people of the
former Politburo. Do not forget them, please! "

You have promised to settle once and for all the roots of the
terrorism, let it be so.

We hope that we will cut the main root of terrorism out and never let
it appear again.

Muhammed SALIH

Dec. 23. 2001

There is no need to repeat the truism that both the East and West possess forces that have interests in maintaining a certain level of antagonistic tension between the two sides.

Some western statesmen's with a Kipling mentality found Samuel Huntington's theory about the “Clash of Civilizations” very much to their liking. Those radicals of the Orient who fight for justice clutching weapons in hand also liked Huntington. Especially after September 11, when they seemed to find confirmation of their idol's prediction, and when even one Western political leader (politician?) openly declared the superiority of “Western over Oriental civilization.”

I don't think that his declaration really offended anyone, since it was seemed forced/stilted and lumpen , and many people understood it in just the way it deserved to be received. But it was disturbing that it reflected the very mood of the majority of common people of the West. Perhaps Huntington really is right and we really stand at the threshold of a global war of civilizations?

I am an incorrigible optimist, but even I became disturbed by this question. I once took as the epigraph for my book the words of Andre Malraux which predicted the XXI Century would be one of high morality and spirituality. But the events that unfolded in the world after September 11 forced me to remove that epigraph from the Turkish translation of my book. It seemed Malraux had made a mistake. Instead, Huntington seemed to have won the competition of oracles. Now, though, I see that things are not so bad after all.

They talk about the globalization of the world (?), globalization of terrorism, gobalization of the struggle against terrorism, globalization of whatever. OK, that's fine. Why, then, in this world where we are all doomed to globalize, is there not a globalization of mutual understanding among peoples and races? Is there not a globalization through rapprochement of cultures and religions? Why [can't there be a globalization of the struggle against tyranny, oppression, and injustice in the Orient and the West?

In the West they consider that Western civilization is the best of all civilizations, and in the East they think that the best in Western civilization was borrowed from the East. The Orient considers that Democracy cannot serve as the justification of man's existence on earth, while the West is convinced that all of the Orient's misfortunes are rooted in the Shariat, which forbids the individual's free choice.

Meanwhile, the Orient does not hold to the Shariat to the degree that Allah commands; nor does the West observe the rules of Democracy as demanded by democratic principles. If the two sides were honest with each other, they would have long ago admitted that neither of them is at all the way it wishes to appear in the other's eyes. If they really wanted peace with each other, they would long ago have “discovered” an amazing similarity between Democracy and the Shariat. They would have delightfully discovered similarity between the Declaration of Human Rights and the rights of the individual in Islam. They would have seen that at the foundation of Democracy is nothing other than Christianity, i.e., the Shariat itself, only slightly distorted by the prejudices of scribes who came later. (??)

Not long ago, on the initiative of the American NGO “Common Ground,” (a group of) intellectuals began to seek ways of non-violent resolution of the conflicts in the Middle East. The method of resolving problems in non-violent fashion was also a priority in Islam. In this context, “Jihad” did not always mean an armed battle. The struggle against injustice is a natural (zakonnoe) right of every individual, group, or people. The question was merely a matter of how to use that right and cause the least harm to those living in that place?.

When I think about the so-called “Islamic terrorists,” I recall the words of one of the Prophet Mohammad's Sahabs (disciples). As is known, after the Prophet's death, arguments broke out over the Caliphate throne between Ali and Muaviya, both of whom were disciples of the Prophet. Someone came to another one of the sahabs who refused to take part in this argument and called on him to join the “jihad” of one side. And in this situation each side called the other a “criminal.” So the sahab responded, “I will not join your side or the other because my sword has no eyes capable of determining who in this war is a ‘criminal,' and who is not; I am afraid to kill an innocent person before Allah.”

So here you have that very Shariat that the West fears, and which the “Islamic terrorists” cite to their advantage or ignore. So I'm afraid that there is little Shariat remaining in the Orient. If there were, would they be crying out about the “need to reestablish the Shariat?” If there were, war, poverty, and hunger would not keep befalling the people of the Orient. There is no justice in the Orient, and where there is no justice the Shariat cannot exist. Violence reigns in the Orient, and there is no role for the Shariat where violence reigns.

In the Orient, bread is stolen from orphans, neighbors rob one another, and innocent people are killed; all of this is evidence that the Shariat has abandoned the Orient. It flees far away from your sins (and mine) in order to be further away from the evil deeds of our dictators who declare that they are the shadows of Allah on the earth, but govern the state with the methods of Satan. The Shariat cannot exist where the state encourages bribe-taking, graft, perjury, prostitution, drug addiction, violence and murder of the innocent.

In turn, the West must also look in both, so that its highly praised Democracy not run far away. From the duplicity of a policy of “developed” powers, from double standards and brutality to the weak in order to please “national interests,” and from the passion to be the richest, the very first, the greatest…

It's necessary to stop creating enemies in order to blame the enemy for all one's misfortunes, and always to see oneself as the victim.

After all, your enemy also sees himself as the victim. So who is right?

It's possible to simplify this very complex life. One can live as a human being .

Do you know how I make my life a bit easier in exile? With maxims that I made up for myself. For example, when I begin to rebel against my fate, I crush my rebellion with the help of a thought like this: “Evil against you will end only when you cease entirely to resemble the villain who is committing evil against you.”

This really is true: Destroy all the destructive evil qualities of your enemy inside you and you will make yourself secure from that evil.

We are concerned about Afghanistan

Muhammad Salih

Now Uzbekistan is the closest American ally in the Central Asia, where Afghanistan will be controlled from. This is an honourable status for Karimov's regime. But, before going to the main topic, in order the historians do not think wrong about us, we have to put correct punctuation where it is necessary.

It is already forgotten that the tragedy in America was hidden from Uzbek people by the official government in Tashkent. On the day of the tragedy, Uzbek television and radio kept showing and broadcasting petty films and joyful dancing music, only on the second day, after the permission was “granted” from the “up”, the Uzbek television finally gave some fragments taken from the Moscow television. Uzbek government did not know what to do, either cry or be glad about this terrible tragedy in America. For guidance, the government looked at Russians and, after having seen Putin's reaction to the tragedy, as well as the whole world's, Uzbek government decided then to send their condolences to the American President. But this message reached Washington even later than Iran's one, the country, which is considered as the ferocious enemy of America.
Yes, the foreign policy in Uzbekistan was so “clear”, their targets were so “exact”, and they “knew definitely” who were their friends. Therefore, they lost themselves not knowing how to behave towards America, either friendly or like an enemy. But after a while, Uzbek government understood that overflowing anger of this Super Power was the great means and opportunity to use this power against their enemies.

The authority might not have cried for the tragedy itself, but for the happiness to be close to this great power. In fact, saying without an irony, the tragedy of September 11 has become a good fortune for dictators in Central Asia. For instance, the impracticable for years dream of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs came true due to this tragic event. Everybody knows that this dream was to win America's indulgence. Even in their most optimistic dreams, the Uzbek government could never have expected that one day America would offer its collaboration to Uzbekistan. One other miracle thing of this is that America would, at its own cost, take the responsibility for destroying the armed forces of Uzbek Islamic militants in Afghanistan. In addition, it would not be a surprise, if the Uzbek government could consider this chaos as another “good excuse” to increase their repression on the political opposition and announce them the “ terrorists”. One more guess: in order to please critics, Uzbekistan made a reverence toward the Western countries, having included, before September 11 events, some members of political and religious oppositions in the list of prisoners who were to be released from jail under the president's amnesty. But after becoming an ally of the U.S., Uzbek authorities have dropped these poor people out of the list, and now these prisoners might be mentioning America in their prayers.

Probably, now America isn't anymore concerned with any of the previous problems, such as human rights violation and persecution of the political opposition in Uzbekistan. The evidence of the said came up in the recent court hearing in the country. This time the accused are charged not as members of Hizbut Tahrir but as supporters of Bin Laden.
We should not forget that so far American cooperation is only in the military field. However, after America overthrows the Taliban in this war affair, it would be natural if America will try to stay longer in the region, and thus, challenge the growing influence of China in the region.

One more thing: as some people may think, as there is an American military base, there will be a flow of investments and American investors will come to Uzbekistan. That's a delusion. No investor will come to Uzbekistan unless the legislature is liberalised, because everyone knows that investments must be guaranteed not by the American but by the Uzbek laws. There are many laws in Uzbekistan, but the investors do not trust them. These laws do not protect American investors. But Uzbekistan got lucky now, as it is known from Russian media, America committed itself to paying about $ 8 billion for the rent of a military base and for other support. This is a huge amount of money. In any case, this amount is enough for Uzbekistan to be one more step away from Russia.

As for democratisation, I do not think that American military bases will bring in democracy. If there had been such an ability of military bases, an American ally, Saudi Arabia, would already have been a democratic country. Every nation itself is responsible for its destiny.

Let's now turn to the main topic – Afghanistan. Russia is seriously concerned about possible American presence in the post-war Afghanistan. In the war against Taliban, the main opposing groups are becoming clear in Afghanistan. Russia supports ethnic Tajiks, while America and Uzbekistan support an Uzbek, Abdurashid Dostim. It will not be wrong, if we say that the competition between these two groups has already begun. Russians insist Tajiks to conquer as much territory as they can within a short period of time. Russian generals convince Putin that it is important to give a help to Tajiks.
Russians do not hide their desire to set their sovereignty on as large territory as it is possible and hand much important strategic regions to Tajiks. For example, it is as clear as a day that Russians do their best to have not ethnic Uzbeks, but Tajik population to be important in Northern Afghanistan. In fact, even though Taliban is still over there, the war has already started for the future Afghanistan. Nobody can predict which Afghanistan will be stabile, either the post-Taliban Afghanistan or Afghanistan of the further future.

European countries and America have found Zakhir Shakh for the further future Afghanistan.

I guess that Zakhir Shakh cannot be of any help to Afghanistan. Taking precedence, he has not any political platform in Afghanistan, and has less chance to take under the control many of the social groups as a leader. Of course, the help of America and other countries might enthrone him, but after America leaves the country, Zakhir Shakh will not be able to get down a tumult, as he has not any political authority. The fact is that not only Zakhir Shakh can union people, but also nobody in today Afghanistan can gather them as the whole one.

Twenty years of unceasing war disturbed peace of not only the country but factions, and not only parties but leaders too. People will trust any more none of the parties and their leaders. Especially if those parties are formed by other nations, and that leader belongs to another nation. Moreover, people cannot be treated (ruled by) with Government of National Coalition.
Uzbek, Hazara, Turkman and Beluj, world-known as “ethnical minorities”, will ever be yoked neither by Pashtun nor by somebody else. Because neither Pashtuns nor anybody else is able to give people desired rights. And these minorities will never be disarmed until they get their own rights. The very talk was said seven years before; unfortunately there is a need to repeat it one more time.

Somebody says pointing to their past that these people lived happily many years ago, and furthermore they will live such a way. But this is a very weak argument. With such logic the first half part of modern world should be handled to Turkey (the old Ottoman Empire) and the second half to Russia (Former Soviet Union). Because on the territory of these two empires more than hundred nations lived happily for more than hundred years as well as on the territory of Afghanistan, maybe they lived more happily.

The world is changing now, not only in “civilised” part of the world but in “non civilised” part too. 1989 became a turning point for Afghanistan at the time of changing.

That year the Russian army left Afghanistan. And that year all Afghan people understood the reality at once. This reality was news for Afghan people themselves. They understood at once that none of them could live anymore under somebody's control. This people fought for their freedom with Russians for ten years with such enthusiasm that now they are ready to fight for even with their relatives if those try to prevent to their freedom.

Of course, both Pashtun who governed the country and those countries that tried to make Afghanistan an approach for their political purposes didn't like an evolution for the people in Afghanistan. By the time of Russian army leaving the territory, the interior war had already started over there. This war was gorier, crueller and even less honourable than the war with Russians.
Now, there is a time to acknowledge the truth. The reason of the 12-year bloody war in Afghanistan is an ethnic problem. The other small problems came from this the main one. The war will continue until this main problem is solved. Pashtuns and Pakistani government are the first ones who refuse this truth. They think that Afghan people must live happily under Pashtuns and Pakistani artificial protection. Pashtuns say that there is no “ethnic minority “in Afghanistan, and they are all Muslims, they belong to the same religion, and the enemies of Afghanistan make up the ethnic problem themselves. But if they got the government into their hands they will never approach to the governmental post somebody of their religion but of their nation. And those who propagate themselves as “truly Muslims” turn into real nationalists at once.

They refuse the mother language and culture of their brothers of the same religion, they force them to forget their native language and learn to write and read in the language that governs in the country. All of these have been done in the name of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. The truth is that both Islam and the Prophet Muhammad forbade such force. Those who are against to this under Islam radicalism are blamed in being Muslim and radical. Unfortunately, this system of control not only in Afghanistan but also in other Muslim countries continues for many years.

Let's see, will the situation be changed if not Pashtuns but Tadjiks come to the government? Of course, it will not. Tadjiks came to the government too but it didn't change anything. They did the same what Pashtuns had done before, i.e. they fulfil (filled) government positions with those of their nation. Maybe, if Uzbeks had come to the government, it would have been the same. I do not want to say that one nation is worth than other, quite the reverse, I want to say that the war will never stop until there is a value for one nation than for another one. Should it prevent, that Afghan people want to live in freedom and do not be dependent even to their brothers? Imagine, at the end of 19 century as European people got their national identity at once so Afghan people are getting their identity now. What is the shame in this comparison? At last, all governments have their destinies as well as people have. They also have their certain period of life written onto the pages of the history. They will not exist a day or an hour more than it is determined. And if their existing is ended, there is nothing can hold them back. The whole world could see this example in collapse of the Soviet Union.

It seems that once written life in the destiny of created Afghanistan by the Great Britain and Russian Empire is to be ended.

omebody cannot like it, but I have to say that Afghanistan is “a sick man” of the Central Asia.

If you want to help to this illness, do not try to keep it standing by the military and economic doping.

It is clear that it cannot exist as a state in this unitary system. Once again I have to repeat my words that I had said 7 years ago, even though somebody may dislike it: there is time to build new state in these regions, it will be either Federative or a Confederative state.

Of course, the Western governments think to get oil, gas, and other energetic approaches to the sea easily, as Afghanistan is unitary state. But is it the reason to worry, if Afghanistan is Federative or Confederative it will lose its transit property? It is more reasonable to think that if there is a peace and stability in this country, there will be no transit problems at all. Moreover, will not it be right to look for the solutions at first, and then, to talk about benefits of other countries if it is true that we want peace in Afghanistan? We should do like this way, this is the true way of common sense, otherwise, we are worried that there will be a fight between Pashtuns, Tadjiks, Uzbeks, Hazara groups after America left the country as it was after Soviet Army's leaving Kabul.

It is not a metaphor but reality

By Muhammad Salih

(Speech at briefing - the 12th Annual Meeting of Parliament at OSCE in Rotterdam)

07.07.2003

When human rights activists compare Uzbekistan to a big prison foreigners think that it is a metaphor. But having visited this country they get convinced that it is a reality. Huge army of punishing organizations keeps vaunted stability, and yet, each citizen of this country actually is the potential prisoner. You may go out and get arrested. And if you are afraid to go out, do not leave your home; anyway you will be arrested at your house. Do not ask "why", otherwise you will get extra prison term.

Karimov constantly keeps saying that there is rest and peace in Uzbekistan, and there is no war. It is the truth. There are no wars in prisons, but of course there is dead silence in there. The only things that break this silence are groans of tortured prisoners. Karimov has been ruling Uzbekistan for more than 13 years. The new generation - generation of prison already has appeared. With this generation Karimov is going to build the great future. We constantly keep saying that it should not go on. However it is going on and on. The state terror against people is still continuing.

The Uzbek poets have been not writing poems for 13 years, they have been writing appeals to Bush, then to Clinton and again to Bush "to affect a course of events ". Nobody knows yet who has affected whom. But, Clinton has left, Daddy Bush has left, and it is obvious that son Bush will leave too, but not Karimov. In May of this year the European Bank had the annual forum in Tashkent. This forum was organized in spite of objections of human rights organizations and democratic principles. We were not shocked with it; the similar double standard in relations to our countries for us is not a new. We were shocked by another picture: when Jacque Lemmer's criticism addressed to the president of Uzbekistan sounded from a tribune of a forum; the president ripped off his headphones and hurled it aside as if it was a snake. He did it demonstratively and with confidence; with the confidence of the partner of the great power.

Then, the president of European Bank Lemmer who publicly criticized Karimov in Tashkent sent thank you letter to the dictator after the forum. Jacque Lemmer thanked him for his patience, as though apologizing for excesses in game of democracy. This fact is very symbolical; it shows impartial true, reproaches us optimists, who are restless to trust loyalties of the western democracy in relations to our countries. The west, especially the USA, criticizes the Central Asian regimes more to calm down the public than to have a desire to change position in the countries where they have their national interests. Here raises a question: does the policy of United States lead to the preservation of a totalitarian regime in Uzbekistan, and is it in national interests of USA?

United States of America, in the justification of its politics of dual nature in Uzbekistan, specify absence of democratic institutions, dissociation of opposition groups and “alternativeness” of the leader. In fact, the situation is so tragic, that absence of the leader in our country would be a minimum damage for people than a presence of today's president; and, the same situation with parliament. If parliament were replaced with a herd of horses it would be less harmful to people than today's one.

I want to tell, “Alternativeness of the leader” it is no more than demagogy of supporters to preserve this status in Uzbekistan. All help of the West provided till today in Uzbekistan has been used to strengthen the bases of the regime, but not democracy. Everything has been doing in this way to defer occurrence of alternatives to Karimov. And it is obvious, that for the sake of prolongation of his tyranny, he obeys everything that his patrons demand from him. In a word, Karimov got lucky. But fortune of dictators is unfortunate for peoples who are under the power of these lucky dictators.

Till September 11, 1999 Karimov was lonely in the world of politics and it was expected that he eventually would be compelled to concede the requirements of opposition forces of the country and would start democratic transformations. But there was a tragedy on September 11. It became the tragedy not only for Americans, but also for Uzbeks. September 11 provided Karimov with support of the USA, the greatest power of the world. In a shadow of this greatness it is possible to do anything you have in your mind. Anyhow, it seems so to our dictators.

Dear Comrades-at-arms, Honored comrades,

Thanks to the Creator for giving us the opportunity to meet again. In these ten years, the world is aware that a great deal of difficult conditions has been given for the opposition's liberty. It is not easy to be opposing totthe regime. Had it been easy, 90% of the population would have crossed to the opposition side. This 90% on the disagreeing part exists on strength. But disagreeing is one thing. Enduring suffering for lack of expression is another. Nobody wants to endure suffering.

Political narrow-mindedness is very harmful for societies such as ours. In this crisis, for the society's illumination, the masses' political activity is the way out. In the shortest time, we are waiting for the masses' political activation. Today, in Uzbekistan, we need urgent help for a wide public platform and assistance for the democratic side. Unfortunately, in the most needed moments, the opposition remains without help. We have not been able to receive the necessary help from the outside world. After the September 11 tragedy, we had hoped that the increased relations between The USA and Central Asian states would accelerate the democratic process. But this awaited process has still not come. There were certain natural shifts.

For example, for several months, the opposition's regional meetings began to take place. If not for support from the West, it would have been next to impossible for these meetings to be carried out. This should be sufficient to recognize injustice.

Essentially, there is no talk of curbing violence. Torture continues for the religious groups as well as political members of ERK party. On May 22 this year, Tanlov Organization member, Hasan Qambarov, who was one of Erk's youth leader, was taken away on the street by Uzbek police. He is now in Chirchiq prison under tight and terrible clutches. I hope that those Foreign diplomats and medical workers who are participating in releasing this Young man from torture do not spare their efforts. The West needs to Understand that the democratic process in Uzbekistan cannot be hastened with half-finished measures. Unfinished measure may tentatively freeze the terror of the state, but it will never be overcome. If the West had put the needed pressure on Uzbek government in the democracy process, this pressure would have been more effective, thereby increasing higher possibility of success.

Only this pressure was not shown. Government bans against opposition Groups continue. For the government, "constructive opposition" seems necessary. To satisfy the demand, the Uzbek president organized five puppet parties in Five years. The "constructiveness" of these parties is inconsequential. In The presidential elections, the leaders of these puppet parties are not Electors of themselves. They call to the president for giving voice. If these Parties want to criticize, they criticize, not the President, but themselves, Because they are part of the administration. If we say- what needs to be done for the government to take a constructive opposition's status? Their response - it is necessary to sit in silence in a corner and learn the praise of the government. Is this possible for us? ERK party disagreed with this, and was labeled the "Enemy of the People". The accuser is truthful, because the government does not represent the people. The government is the people, as it is known. Perhaps, for this reason, on television, the President, in his sincere voice, had stated, "We are prepared to do everything for the 'people'". In this situation, for the opposition's position in the country, there is no possibility of exerting influence. ERK Party and Birlik Movement were penalized for being in manner of conflict with the Constitution. They were penalized with decree by the Internal Affairs Ministry, not with a Constitutional decree by the legal court. If the government desires, it Is possible to correct this gross error. There is no legal basis for either Of these political organizations to be taken into government's hands, because in accordance with the Principal Law, these organizations are legal. The law has merely been downtrodden. For erecting the Internal Affair Ministry's anti constitution decree, abrogating this law is sufficient. For 12 years, the proving of its own constructiveness is burning. The government began to hold dialogues with the opposition when it is tired of the jailing and punishing of the opposition groups. As a matter of fact, these are not dialogues, but monologues. It has one cunning stipulation: The opposition does not know about state governance.

It seems that until now, the government still does not understand the function of the opposition in society. This function, if explained in a metaphor, would perhaps be understood:

When the turk sultan goes out, there is always one person with him on the side, with a loud voice, saying: Don't be conceited, my podishah. God is greater than you". In this same period, there were constructive oppositions.

It is also necessary to realize that the reasons for our tragedy is not just from the president's monopoly, but attained from characteristics from a servility climate. In normal conditions, microbes are not dangerous. But this immune system for organisms that have been destroyed is extremely threatened. In contemporary states, for government, the opposition's sequence of opinions as well as ideas is a society's immune system. Whether this system is not working or non-existent, societies will always, in stagnant condition, live on. This is the most shining example of our society.

Dear Comrades-

From the capacity of these problems, it is possible to get out with faith, intention and courage. Military force is not needed for one historical initiative, one auspicious attack. For that, it is enough in absolute faith in one small group. When we initially founded Birlik, we were 3 people. When Erk was founded, we were also a small group. In a short time, Erk was accepted to the communist parliament's Uzbekistan Independent Declaration. In a short time, Erk prepared the Uzbekistan Constitution. In a very short time, Erk prepared its own candidate for presidential elections, participated in elections and according to official indicators, it obtained 12.7% of the election. 1 million 200 thousand persons gave their votes to Erk. This is the official figure. As a matter of fact, Erk had won more than 4 times this figure, and there is information on the falsification of the results. In such a short time, Erk had enriched an entire country with its ideas, and raised the people's awareness of truths and laws.

What does "in a short time" mean? In all of its 4 and a half months of activity as a legal party, Erk showed: for official census, the party was taken on September 5, 1991. On January 16, 1992, the government opened fire at students. Starting from January 17, complete persecution against Erk began, and for ten years, it has entered a tunnel without seeing a ray of light. But during this very same comparatively free period of 4 and a half months, this young organization stamped Erk's name into our nation's awareness.

Honored comrades!

You are this nation's flowers, its intellectuals - you are its enlightenment. It enlightenment and thought standards are so high, its degree of danger of its fate will be higher. They live in maximum risks within their own activities. Their lives experience risky limits. Our beginning in Rebuilding Year began with exceptional people such as people's movement. You were these exceptional people, my dear comrades. You are not the majority, but you are a small community that is regarded with absolute and unconditional respect. As always, the majority is always on the watch of which strong side is coming. For this, do not be aggravated. This is normal. In war, those who stand behind the frontlines are few.

My dear and exceptional friends- With this strength in your hearts, come into the same hesitating majority. Be close to them and show concern. With Allah's permission, the spell of fear will be dispelled from them.

One more significant problem is the youth. This is our organization's weakest point. Whereas, in our national movement of the Rebuilding years, this was our strongest point. For movement, it is necessary to not delay their attraction. Free them from financial conscience's claws for the attainment of money and wealth. Benefit from their pure ideals.

I want to draw your attention to another point. In cities and provinces, we should not forget the national minorities in the frontiers who form societal representatives in our policies. They are also our comrades. We brought our national identity out to the forefront from Soviet colonialism. This impulse ended its own historical task. Today, "people" and "nation" does not mean one ethnic group, but rather, one entire population that lives in Uzbekistan, our motherland. Let us remain, in a sense, an entire people which will embrace. We, as a political movement, will be the principal enemy to any kind of racism and chauvinism. I want to separately emphasize in our Program for our future acceptance for this principle.

Honored Comrade-in-arms!

I do not like to speak so much, but apparently, this trip deserves more speech. I am counting for 11 years. As a matter of fact, this is not a count, but distress. For 45 minutes of speech, it is hard to accommodate these 10 years. It is like fitting a giant into a small glass. That is why, I ask you to please be patient.

Well, when will democracy come to Uzbekistan? In the past century, this question was loudly raised during the period of Perestroyka. But not after independence. The regime did not like to hear the question. This word, when sounded, brought threats that began. Then some were thrown into jail, then they were tortured. They learned to kill in silence. The hunt for democrats began. According to the Eastern Calendar, this oppression is exactly the length of the "muchal" - 12 year cycle, that is why 12 years continued. You are assembled here today so as to not allow the new cycle of this oppression to take place. You assembled for the word democracy to be said with a loud voice.

Uzbek democrats believe in the things that nobody else believes. They believe in the possibility of chances with democratic paths for Uzbekistan. Faith for the future and for results is worthy. In discussions on democratic changes in Uzbekistan, American congressman Kurt Weldon advised that stated that country's situation is similar to the situation when the American Constitution was being accepted in 18th century. We are pleased with this optimism. Because, those who believe that changes in Uzbekistan towards democratic path are few.

Western diplomats in interviews with "Financial Times" or "Washington Post" state that the regime's only possibility of change is state overthrowing or other radical ways. At the end of their interviews, they ask to remain anonymous. After all, when they return to Uzbekistan, they must socialize with smiles to the regime representatives at cocktails.

One factor for changes is always forgotten. The leader is the factor. This factor of most significance is not the owner in Europe, such as in the frontier of the Soviet Union. In Central Asia, as you see from the administration methods, the five leaders are unlike each other, but rather specific and suitable to oneself. In the time of separation from the Soviet Union, these countries' administration and management methods were entirely the same. As now, despite the constitutions being almost the same, these states operate under absolutely different legal conditions. These five types of administration portray the five leaders' differences from each other. They have albeit one similarity: their personalities are inclined to monopoly. But they differ in degrees of substitute on uninterrupted continuation of governance. For example, if it were requested that blood shedding is absolutely necessary for prolonging Askar Akaev's presidency, he would not agree to it. He would prefer to leave from the presidency. But if the same situation arose for the presidents of Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan, we worry that the request would not be sufficient for rejection of their power.

In the West, it is difficult to meet this kind of leader. There, the model of the state system will not maintain these leaders. It is possible for a leader who remains more distant in upper state matters, makes necessary reforms to benefit the state accordingly. But this kind of leaders is very rare. This kind of leader is created by the world's political conjunktura. There is a second type of leader - he operates like the first type, within the created political conjunktura. His courage is not sufficient for leaving his own limits. This kind of leader will form the majority of leaders. There is a third kind of leader, but he is, not in Europe, in Asia. We described this leader in the aforementioned. This Asian kind of leadership factor is taking process with negative aspects in Uzbekistan. Does he have any positive aspects? Yes. We see these positive aspects in the case of Kirghizstan and Kazakhstan. Let us introduce, and at least once, to have the chance for a democratic election. We will bring democracy to our beloved homeland in not 200 years, but 200 days, with God's permission. Even though if it is not Tony Blair's democracy, it will be better than Askar Akaev's democracy. Preferably, a democracy to come to Uzbekistan in 200 days.

In this difficult situation, nothing is able to free us. We need to resolve our own problems. Otherwise, even Allah cannot help us. Tne Koran ordered this: To be precise, until some kinsmen themselves change, Allah will not change their situation." Also, our prophet said: "you will be governed by your leaders as you see suitable", as stated in the hadiths. For this reason, the current President's remaining period on the throne will be of least torment.

Despite the entire oppression to my family and personal lineage, I have no enmity or contempt to Prezident of Uzbekistan. Because as the above expressed - the leader, if he does not fit your or my needs, he will not be able to govern one minute. I am not asking you not to battle against injustice. On the contrary, I ask you to fight. I want to say this: the sooner we arise to fight against injustice, in the shortest time, we shall have a just leader.

My dear Comrades, honored Comrades-in-arms!

You know better than I of the essence of current events taking place in the native land. But it appears that certain things are far from clear. For example, mountains. Or country. This country's place in the world, its political and economic weight, its greatness and grandness. It appears that they are far from clear. Our dear motherland Uzbekistan is a country, historically revered with ancient civilization, blessed with natural wealth, geographical prestige . Even during the era of Russian colonialism, our land was also the heart of Turkistan - politically, economically significant in these blessed soils. This country has never fallen into a disgraceful situation like today. Once a cradle of civilization, today, there is no trace of this famous country's early grandeur.

The internal impoverishment for our state's external image is also flawed. In these past 12 years, we are not able to remember cetrain successful matters that the Ministry of External Affairs has done for the defense of national interests in the outside world. Because, with tongues tied, there are no moral laws or rights. Because when the government vulgarly violated its own international agreement that it signed, it trampled on its own people's laws in the country. In 12 years, 5 Foreign

Affairs Ministry changed, but public external politics did not change. Yet internally, anti national, aggressive and repressive politics have not changed. After September 11, the world began to recognize Uzbekistan. After Uzbekistan entered the coalition for anti-terrorism, westerners found

Uzbekistan on a map. With the exception of Mr Bush, nobody else in the world accounts for us. Even Turkmenbashi Niyazov scrapes his nose in regards to Uzbekistan, and insults Uzbek President with irony. Believe me, i am perturbed for the Uzbek prezident. Because, after all that is absolutely being considered, this is our country's leader. But our land's surroundings have thorny wires, hungry officers wandering like predators at the borders. I am perturbed for the elderly who crosses the borders to the neighboring village to see his grandchild. Yesterday's relatives, kinsmen suddenly become foreigners. I am perturbed for the Turkmen, Tajik, Kazak, Kirghiz. What crimes have these people committed? Why this inconsideration and downright narrow-mindedness? Why this hostility among blood ties and kinsmen? Alas, in the spreading of this enmity, Uzbek government played the decisive role. From afar, we saw the reality: if a small country's leader is great, this country will appear great to the world. If a great country's Leader has a small personality, the great country will also appear small to
the world, its grandness will seem to diminish.

How can we escape from this impoverishment? Many journalists repeated: if you have the strength and capability, you can do the work regardless. 12 years ago, we started with haste from the economy because the people were desperate and hungry. Not only I, but basically, many political scientists said so. To be precise, the former communists brought it together from the populism's foundation stone. Our people's stone, that the populism had given the leaders, is still rolling. Only this stone has not become a bread . The earlier people were impoverished. But it is a rolling stone, exactly like legendary hero Sizif.

That is why, journalists today ask me "What is your priority?", to which I become tongue tied. I am afraid to say, "Let's not forget the popular stone for our people". And I will restrain my tongue. Even to say 'political' is not possible. Fear from prudence, disgrace from prudence.

For our land, the most tragic part is the economy. All who started work for economic and political reforms were convicted. If it were written that Allah is coming for us, we will not be the exception from this.

These reforms are tactical aims for us. We contended the tactical problems until today. We criticized the government on this subject. But, apart from saving the economy, nobody has any agenda or priority combined to address these problems. To overcome the factors that are causing our economic and political crisis, we need to focus on an area called "Reform area of Human materialism".

For 75 years, we were soaked in atheism and atheistic communism ideologies. Yet, despite 12 years of independence, we still do not have our own consciousness and ideals. In state affairs, there is no difference between legal and sinful matters. Dishonesty, injustice and bribery are encouraged. These are lack of ethics, or immorality. Of course, there are conscientious people, but these are few, unfortunately. Those who are ethical on the bottom are also few. This is the post-soviet states' national tragedy. Economic decline is the result of total lack of ethics. Until we make the factor disappear, it is unlikely to overcome the outcome. We are not composed of parasites, but rather, lawful, dignified and hardworking people for society's establishment. Bribery is the most terrible crime - the plundering of state property is worse and more disgraceful than death, and we need cadres who understand this. We want bureaucrats who give more respect to the law. We see in our home ethical and idealist youths. We see youths who would wish to perish in battle for motherland, give their service to the mafiozi for monetary rewards. We do not want to see people who fears opressive ruler, we want a society that fears God. We want to see a humanity of dignity and honor. Only such a humanity will can be the rung of our society's vertebrae. Only this type of people can be the guarantee of our safety, abundance and life. We will only be able to invest our state in this. In this area, not only complete reforms of upbringing rebuilding of state safekeeping, but rather, it is necessary to fortify the institute of family with wide platforms.

You see economic development in the example of western states. In the west, the family is an institute that has encountered decline. The western intellectuals know this bitter reality, but nothing is able to be done to rescue this important piece in humanity's social existence.

The educational upbringing that Eastern dictatorships utilize is in the ideology of slavery to an individual's personal self. They define that for monopoly is the suitable administration for eastern mentality. The liberal egimes of the West respect humanity. Every member of society will be regarded sacred. Youths are raised in the ideology of total freedom. This is one of the sources of "lack of ethics" in the West.

By depriving absolute rights to the family and granting absolute freedom for individuality is totalitarianism of freedom. "Complete and total freedom" is freedom's totalitarianism.

Only savage animals can be totally free. As for man, he is capable of self-supervision, with will-power to restrict himself if needed, with sovereign hand - this is the difference with animals.

Thus, every two society has members brought up in slavery-like upbringing, and total freedom. But of these two regimes, which of them that you were to prefer, for me, I choose the liberal regime.

In the aspect of social upbringing in eastern regimes, western intellectuals have analyzed and concluded the cause of a passive humanity: "there is no basis for democracy in the Islamic world".(this perspective is similar to that of our leaders). That is to say, the problem is placed against religion. Western scholars had profoundly researched on this. For example, in regards to Islam and democracy, American researcher Graham Fuller has said: "the problem, Islam and democracy must not be put together. The problem, Muslims and democracy should be put together." That is to say, Muslims also can want to live in democracy. The best example is Turkey. With the exception of its education system , Turkey is a comparatively suitable example for us as a state model. In this model, the relevant needs attained in religion and state affairs are incomparable in the Islamic world. For this reason, Uzbekistan is in great need for this custom- fit model.

Going back to our subject, I want to summarize my thoughts on ethics/morality. Of course, ethics cannot be established in one or two years. As said aforementioned: Erk Party is designated, in strategic standards, to conformed upbringing of ethical criterion for the young generation. For unraveling this problem:

1. Complete reformation of educational systems
2. Strengthening the institute of family
3. Overcoming poverty, which is the source of moral degradation
(increasing in practice - political and economic reforms)

Edcational upbringing reforms are important, and those such as political reforms are also important. Rescuing the young generation from the darkness of immorality, extracting the economy from the crisis is important. Impoverishment is the most terrible factor of immorality. Today Uzbekistan is one of the most impoverished countries in the world. This impoverishment has caused the once sacred cities of faith - Buxoro, Samarqand, Xorazm and Toshkent - become the crossroads of narcotic traffic and lair of human trafficking. As a result of impoverty, our innocent women are selling themselves for a slice of bread - they throw themselves into the embrace of men (such as Arab sheikhs) in Taiwan and Korea. Despite natural wealth, the potential for huge domestic production, highly skilled specialists and hard workers, Uzbekistan's economy has fallen and remained down. The majority of factories and plants have stopped operations or halved their production capability. The number of unemployed is rising every day. Prices and inflation are sky-rocketing. All governmental attempts to correct the economy are useless and wasted. The average monthly wage is 18 euros - this is lower than minimum to sustain a living.

The economic recession will destroy the people's belief in changing for the positive. It will strengthen the enmity and contempt among the social layers.

There are other factors in this tragic picture: corruption, clanship and mafia. That is to say, the 3 columns of the shadow economy.

There are separate statistics produced for Uzbek government's own administration and for the outside world. For the president and ministers, "Dlya Slujebnogo Polzovaiya" - once every 3 years, in "Statsbornik"'s 2001 figures, it showed the shadow economy's share of Common National Products 37-40 %. But today, this percentage, according to inofficial sources, it has risen from 40-60 %.

The clans and their own representatives are found in the ranks of state. These terrible representatives are everywhere - in the president's apparatus, in the ministries, in the organs of the courts, the militsia, the national security defense, finance ministry, taxation agencies, customs, joint-ventures, and state's strategic reserves. In short, they are everywhere. They reside in these places, ensuring that millions of dollars firmly flow into the pool of the clan. They strive that not one penny from this magnanimous amount falls into the country's economy. The mafia is a part of the clan. Today, the mafia steps into the political entrance hall, unrestrained and unhindered. And it is beating the country's economy.

Today, mafia patriarchs and ministers embrace each other and take pictures together, while speakers dedicate songs to them. In the past, those who acquaint with mafias become red with shame. Today, they become red with pride.

In 12 years, the criterion for ethics has changed so much.

It cannot be exaggerated that bribery has ill effects. Even the president has stated anecdotes about bribery. This amount has become "nationalized". This illness is again devastating the weak foundation of the state.

Today, the Russian economy is one of the most dynamic economies in the world. And Kazakhstan is also on its feet.

On the other hand, Uzbeks in the region, who once were the most developed people in market economy, have fallen behind. What can they say if the government does not permit the opportunity for those who want to work hard?

Now, I want to make a statement about my thoughts on our relations to religion and terror. On February 16, 1999, several bombings happened in Tashkent. The government showed that this event was caused by Uzbekistan Islamic movement. Before appraising this incident, I want to remind one thing: the Uzbek government, for the removal of democratic opponents from political process, always played games before elections. In 1993, for parliament elections, when a year was remaining, it accused us for organizing national assembly. Several Erk and Birlik leaders were thrown into jail. The government attained its goal - a parliament election without opposition was carried out. But despite pressure and persecution, imprisonment and torture, the opposition continued its path. Presidential elections came in 1996. This time, the government accused Erk Party's 19 young men in Turkey of preparing for state revolution. This was not a presidential election without opposition, it created the chance for its continuation through a referendum. Finally, towards the end of 1999, in early 2000 that is, the presidential elections were back the agenda. The opposition was still alive. If it was weak, it still had a voice. International organizations began discussion with Erk and Birlik representatives about the possibility of their participation in the elections. This made the fearful government increase practise its next act of precaution. And, on February 16, the bombs exploded. Take a look at the incidents, these explosions thundered at the moment when Erk and Birlik representatives conducted their discussions about future elections with leaders of OSCE in Hotel Intercontinental. Once more, the coincidence of these two incidents demonstrate what has never happened in history. The defense legal office of the accused has said this fact: Uzbek government knew about the intention/preparation of explosion beforehand. This is a very important factor. If they knew beforehand, why were precautions/measures not taken? - this is the inevitable question. Having not taken measures, on the contrary, the National Security officers and Internal Affairs ministers observed the steps until February 16, making arrest one after another when the bombs exploded. According to known unofficial sources: in April 1998, Uzbek government arrested two people Nazarbek Umarov and Abdunabi Nishonboev, members of a radical group. Under instructions, this group clarifies internal and external active members, establishing supervision from above. Then in November 1998, in Turkmenistan, the group's leader, Bahrom Abdullayev, well-informed of the organization's plans, was taken. From Abdullayev, the organization's plans and potential were learned and recorded.

This notion will be delivered to the outside with consultation from Umarov, Nishonboev and Abdullaev, who were placed in a basement.

A register of names was arranged for those to be arrested, and political opposition member are on the top of this list. In Tashkent, beginning on February 3, observation officers were placed outside of my daughter's home. Everyday, the militsia came to check documents. A day after the explosions, my brother Rashid Bekjon was seized and taken away. That same day, the same observation officers were placed around the homes of Mamadali Mahmud, Otanazar Orif and Mutabar Axmedova. Likewise, opposition members who were in the border areas were taken under control, and MXX agents were sent to all those town and border areas that opposition members came and went. An example manifested in Istanbul. In the beginning of February 1999, when Birlik People Movement's member Aliboy Yo'lyashiyev and his family were on their way to leave for Canada from Istanbul airport, Turk and Uzbek police detained them and wanted to deport them to Uzbekistan. With their refugee status from the United Nations, they were ultimately released.

On February 13, National Security Service chairman polkovnik Anvar Solibboev, a committee leadership member, came to Ankara to request help from Turkey Secret Service for ending terrorism in the borders. On February 14, he went from Ankara to Moscow, and repeatedly sought the same help from the Russians.

After February 16, the majority of the culprits related to the bombings were seized without any difficulty from Kazakhstan and Kirghizstan. Certain "retired" officers from the Internal Affairs Ministry who participated in this operation left for Russia - many things can be learned from them.

There is one thing that can be said about me: the certain thing that I was accused of, was not confirmed in legal courts.

No slander is permanent, the truth will inevitably surface in the future. The original performer of this murder will ultimately sit in the black chair. As a party, we have always said that we sharply denounce any kind of terrorism. Nothing can justify terrorism - not with any notion, neither national nor religious, because terrorism is anti-humanity. Terrorism has no relations to the religion of Islam. Because terrorism is anti-morality, Islam on the other hand is morality, high morality. For this reason, it is wrong to say that "Islam" is the post-script to terrorism.

My honored friends,

Our country is standing at a crossroad. Nothing has come out of this crossroad today. It chose the path two years earlier, yet it has not taken the step. Uzbekistan has not been able to designate its own future like a state. Its progress cannot be found or measures, it is still standing at this crossroad - without plans, without hopes or dreams. The shortcoming of our leaders, their imaginations and their insights is apparent - as can be seen in their exaggerated discussions of "Turkish model", "Korean model", even "Pinochet" model. This demonstrates their lack of courage and resolution. In that, there is no "illness" in the opposition's model. Our aim has always been open and transparent in the political arena.

Our aim is to build a democratic and lawful state in Uzbekistan. There will be no place for dictatorship or any kind of monopoly. Certain aspects may need to be disputed and contended for the future state, but we will not contend the principles.

The people's basic rights and liberties and the state's silhouette placed by columns of justice were already drawn. We are prepared to cooperate with every group and organization, free the people from oppression and we hope to serve our people with impartiality. Enough of that, let our intentions be pure.

In a resolute state, there are no police officers who stand above the citizen, documents are not checked at every pace, streets are not sealed with "blokpost", soldiers do not wander and search around the streets with "kalashnikovs" over their shoulders. This particular situation is possible. In Uzbekistan, 12 years unofficial particular conditions have been published.

For real resolution, national consensus needs National Reconciliation. The first step in this job is the need for PUBLIC REHABILITATION (reablitatsiya) of political detainees. This is not amnesty. This rehabilitation (reablitatsiya) should pursue the freedom of ideas and opinions - political or religious - and embrace those citizens who have been arrested and sentenced.

In this reabilitatsiya, the future people who form a large part of the population are intellectuals and moderate religious groups. In the aspect of politics, this is the most active part and dynamic part of our society.

If the National Reconciliation implements a little of its authority in practice, victory is possible. With your permission, I am inviting the acceptance of appeal to all political groups and government towards establishing "National Reconciliation Committee" as the day's agenda of our Congress.

My honored comrades, dear brothers and sisters!

Like your comrades in exile, please accept my sentiments of longing and missing for my motherland and to be with you all. May Allah and fate allow us to see each other in the near future on the mother soil.

Muhammmad Salih

Chairman, ERK Party

''I Have Not Refused Struggle...''

www.ozodovoz.org , 10.04.2003

Interview to the organization "OZOD OVOZ" (Uzbekistan)

As is known, in November of this year in capital Norway city of Oslo the seminar on a theme "Regional development in the Central Asia was held: an Islam, safety and human rights" on which political scientists and experts from the West have taken part, leaders of political opposition, human rights activists and journalists from Central Asia republics. The leader who has taken part at this seminar of the Uzbek political opposition, the chairman of democratic party "ЭРК" ("WILL") Mohammed Salih has given interview of the organization on protection of a freedom of speech "OZOD OVOZ"("FREE VOICE"), recently created in Uzbekistan. Talked the director "OZOD OVOZ" Bobomurod Abdullaev also taken part on the given seminar. We give your attention this conversation.

- "OZOD OVOZ": Today, making with speech at a seminar, you once again have criticized a policy of the government of Uzbekistan, have named it dictatorial. After such criticism of authority of Uzbekistan and even some experts living and working in republic, usually accuse you, that you and your party are engaged only in faultfinding and any constructive offer on improvement of position in the country do not give. What you can tell in reply to such accusations?

- MOHAMMED SALIH: Both authorities, and the governmental experts who accuse me and party "ERK" of faultfinding, perfectly know, that party "ERK" gave to the government of the country the offers. They also perfectly know, that today these offers of a party take root into life and are used by authorities of the country. I shall bring to you examples.

In the beginning of 1992, right after presidential elections, despite of the begun prosecutions, "ERK" has offered to parliament alternative variant of the Constitution of independent Uzbekistan. I have told Islam Karimov, that I would want, this variant would as governmental variant, that we are ready to refuse authorship. Only acceptance of this variant of the Constitution in parliament was important for us.

But Karimov has not accepted our offer: he has not liked two cameral parliament that was stipulated in our variant of the Constitution. Apparently, now, in 10 years, mister Karimov has overcome this "barrier", has guessed, that all the same the two-chamber parliament is better offered then him unicameral. Or other example. In same 1992 "ERK" has collected the Forum of economists and has charged them to prepare the Economic program of Uzbekistan. It should be the program not party "ERK", and the program of our state. Instead of supporting this initiative, president Karimov at once began unhealthy rivalry: has created same "a forum of economists" which "sessions" began to be broadcast on republican TV. As you can see, regarding ideas and offers Karimov went for us, repeated our initiatives, however repeated in own way and in the direction.

Despite of it, we continued to search for constructive forms of co-operation with the government. In March, 1992 we have created the Forum of democratic forces of Uzbekistan where have come almost more and more or less appreciable public organizations. It has frightened the government. In the beginning of May of the same year president Karimov has invited me to itself and has offered me enter the government in an exchange of dissolution of the Democratic forum. I have not accepted his offer not only on political, but also for the moral reasons. Then many criticized me and have named my act "romantic", but the next years have shown, that I have acted correctly. I have told Karimov, that we as opposition are ready to cooperate with the government for a way of democratization of the country. I have told: "But we shall cooperate as OPPOSITION, instead of as a part of the coalition government. We shall criticize you and your government if such criticism will be necessary". I then have told him, that it will be his authority as this act of his tolerance, he will show himself as the leader-democrat will raise not only authority of opposition, but also it, maybe, most of all. Such beginning would excite hope for the prompt improvement of life in people, would inspire foreign investors, would add friends on international scene. But also here Karimov you have acted by a principle "or you are with me, or you are my enemy". So, accusations that I and party "ERK", ostensibly, are engaged only in criticism of authorities, naked.

- "OZOD OVOZ": You have told, that the president Islam Karimov has not wanted be tolerant to opposition. However, Karimov some times during sessions of parliament of the country invited opposition to return to the country, spoke, that he is ready to work with it. May be, the Uzbek opposition really should return to the country and to begin work?

MOHAMMED SALIH: Personally I do not believe these words. May be, there will be a nursery boy who will believe such promises of president Karimov. Yes, he not once invited leaders of national movement "BIRLIK"("UNITY") Pulatovs to return, but they have not returned and not going to return. May be, they too do not trust these promises. Karimov calls to home not members of «ERK», but only “Birlik” members, probably, because them does not count dangerous to the mode.

"OZOD OVOZ": Why your way such offer is not provided to party "ERK"?

MOHAMMED SALIH: Because Karimov mode does not want registration "ERK" as always saw in his , and in particular, in me, its chairman, the main enemy. If to register "ERK" it is necessary to authorize and for my returning in republic as the chairman of this party. Present authorities of Uzbekistan never will want, that I have returned to home. Look, how many they have made against me. For ten years of my absence on the native land of authority of Uzbekistan have thought up against me about ten criminal charges. On in absentia court of 2000 the public prosecutor of republic demanded for me the fivefold death sentence, but the court has taken out more "soft", having sentenced me on 15 and a half of years of prison of a strict mode.

However, authorities were not limited to it: they have put in prison my three brothers only that my brothers. Also have put in prison of my friends, even my schoolmates who sympathized with me. And all of them tortured to receive indications against me but "to show" them there is nothing was. This litigation was observed by representatives of the international human rights organizations and foreign embassies in Tashkent. They witness that the court could not result the uniform fact in the proof of accusations against me. Besides for these years the president of Uzbekistan through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs continuously conducted a policy of pressure upon those countries where I was. In current almost ten years were not any day that the presidential device has overlooked about us, some times tried even to kill me. Also the propaganda machine of authorities actively worked: to discredit me and party(set) "ERK", on struggle all news media of republic were thrown. Propagandists carried out assemblies in areas, schools and high schools to finish up to people, that Mohammed Salih is a traitor of the native land, and party "ERK" is a danger to light future Uzbekistan. Also it would be absurd, if after all it authorities would propose party "ERK" officially to begin work in Uzbekistan.

- "OZOD OVOZ": You have told, that Karimov mode pursued you for ten years of independence, has put in prison your native, close and friends. Today, after all this, do you not regret what in the beginning of 90th years on one of sessions of parliament of the country you have protected Islam Karimov from the then prime minister of country Shukrullah Mirsaidov who has left with the offer to send Karimova in resignation from a post of the president?

MOHAMMED SALIH: No, I do not regret, because, having acted against Mirsaidov's offer, I have acted against clans in our policy: behind this offer there were certain clans which wanted to grasp political authority in the country. I always hated clans in a policy as clans are illness ruining our people, strongly braking formation of our nation. I did not protect Karimov, I have simply acted against hypocrisy and lie of mister Mirsaidov. It occured any way, I not knew about preparing plot against Karimov. I, as always, intended to criticize Karimova. On a tribune the person who at each session stamped legs suddenly rises, protesting against my criticism to address of the president, and starts to criticize... the president! I was struck. I have acted against this metamorphosis, against this hypocrisy. And my statement appeared strong impact on antikarimov coalitions, it has helped Karimov to remain with authority.

- "OZOD OVOZ": At the end of 80th and the beginning of 90th years when you and party "ERK" struggled for independence of Uzbekistan, leaders of national movement "BIRLIK" asserted, all over again it is need establish positions of democracy in republic and then positions of independence. If you remember, they explained it that without democracy independence "will present" Uzbekistan a dictatorial mode. Whether it seems to you, what then “Birlik” leaders were right?

MOHAMMED SALIH: No, I so do not think, though today in Uzbekistan really dictatorial mode. Never regretted and now I do not regret, that I was the supporter first of all independence, then already democracies. For us, for those who struggled for freedom in Soviet Union at the end of 80-years, freedom meant not only freedom of our peoples from the Soviet empire, it meant as freedom of each person in a society, a personal freedom. I think, that it is impossible to strengthen positions of democracy when this state is politically dependent on not democratic empire in any state. In a today's dictatorial mode isn't result of independence, on the contrary, it's result of our passivity in struggle preservation of this independence. In the proof of the ideas I can result and that fact, that three Baltic countries which today by way of political arrangement, democracies and observance of human rights have far gone forward from Uzbekistan and the others Central Asia republics, then, to Soviet time, as well as we, struggled first of all for independence, instead of for democracy in structure of former Soviet Union.

- "OZOD OVOZ": What is a place occupies Uzbekistan among other republics of the Central Asia by way of democracy, observance of human rights, a freedom of speech?

MOHAMMED SALIH: Penultimate. You know, that last place confidently occupies Turkmenistan. However, today in work of authorities of Uzbekistan it is possible to see much more absurd things, than in work Turkmen authorities. For example, attempt of authorities of Uzbekistan is ridiculous to criticize former Soviet Union and all failures to dump on it. Even more comically, when newly appeared Uzbek "nationalists" warn us of Russian danger. This antinational mode and its worthless officials, not seeing an output from impasse, foredoomed itself on constant inventing "enemies of independence, the country with the great future". The probability of sudden falling of this mode today as is high, as was, say, five years back. It is paradoxical, but is explained: the mode keeps exclusively on power structures, somehow it is necessary to explain to people why the impoverishment of people proceeds. And, when the basic part of broad masses of the beginning to test nostalgia on the Soviet empire when by it was guaranteed even daily bread, this number with the former USSR is started up.

- "OZOD OVOZ": However, today Uzbekistan has also achievements: political stability, new buildings. In particular, today the city of Tashkent much more has changed in comparison with the beginning of 90th years. Unless is it not achievements?

MOHAMMED SALIH: As to stability about which you speak, in the beginning of 90th years I was against burial-ground stability which is achieved by force, dictatorship, arbitrariness and infringement of rights of people. It is artificial stability which can fail any minute. The genuine stability happens natural, it is achieved by observance of human rights, true democracy.

Concerning new buildings, I shall tell, that authorities of Uzbekistan have got used to declare any new building achievement of independence. Usually, such applications are done by chiefs of any building trusts, but not presidents of the states, especially "the countries with the great future". And Tashkent has changed the shape, does not mean, that all country has changed the shape. The set of buildings, type of Tashkent city municipality building is under construction, however to people of the country from it at all it is better. By the way, about a building Tashkent city municipality. Simple people hate this building with its inhabitants because it the luxury symbolizes authority of the vampire which sucks blood of simple people.

- "OZOD OVOZ": What have made you today for improvement of life in Uzbekistan if you were the president of republic?

MOHAMMED SALIH: First, I such have not made anything for deterioration of life of my country. Certainly, I suffer, looking where our state is gradually rolled. But I feel strange simplification because, that I do not carry the responsibility for the tragical position created in the country. If I was the president, I have returned to my people freedom which has been taken away by a totalitarian mode. Freedom original, instead of paper. Freedom both in political, and in economic life. The state would serve people, rather the reverse. Rights of the person would have a priority above rights of the state, and the Law, only the Law accepted by people, decrees and decisions of the dictator, not ambitions of one person would be the main rudder in government, instead of.

- "OZOD OVOZ": The last year, it is remembered, the press-secretary of the president of Uzbekistan Rustam Dzhumaev spoke, that you are of political strike of nothing do, has named you even a political corpse. What do you can tell in a refutation of such applications?

MOHAMMED SALIH: Well know, similar applications are small stepping-stones of small peoples. I do not pay to them at all attention. If something similar would be told by president Karimov, I has proved the opposite. Let's think, if authorities of Uzbekistan count me a political corpse, why they do not stop the attempts to arrest or simply to kill me. What for to hunt on "a political corpse"?! By the way, unsuccessful and ridiculous attempt of the Uzbek authorities to arrest in Prague through the Interpol and to deliver me to Uzbekistan has happened after that applications. In the beginning of our conversation I spoke you, that till now authorities of republic have not overlooked about me, at the slightest opportunity want or to arrest and deliver to Uzbekistan or to kill. These actions Karimov mode are also the answer to his applications, Muhammad Salih, ostensibly, has turned in a political corpse.

Such applications mode of Karimov wants to spread to people an idea that Muhammad Salih as the political figure, ostensibly, does not exist any more that for ten years of persecutions he has refused political strike. I have not refused political strike, struggle for freedom. Inshaallah (the God will give), I shall not refuse, while my people be not unyoked. I have refused only blasphemous idea, that I unique, who has right on authorities in Uzbekistan. Today in this question I am more modest, than ten years back: my task is to work, the result is will of Allah.

- "OZOD OVOZ": In political strike it is necessary to lean on any force. On whom you lean in the struggle?

MUHAMMAD SALIH: I shall lean on force on which in totalitarian modes it is not accepted to lean, namely - on people.

"OZOD OVOZ": Thank you for conversation!

November, 7, 2003, Oslo, Norway

That Bitter Word “Freedom”

(Problems of the Opposition and the Government)

Freedom is a severe test.

Freedom is a test which elevates the nobility and debases the slave. The nobleman understands that it is a test and acts appropriately: he does not overstep a strict line beyond which another person's freedom begins.

A slave, however, feeling a bit dizzy from the sense of open space, begins to turn impudent and disregards all boundaries, thus threatening the freedom of others.

This is how the tragedy of mankind always begins. When a slave does not recognize his place, when a slave receives freedom. When a dictator rejoices that he and no one else is worthy of this blessing (freedom). The dictator points his finger to the slave to justify his actions. It is as if the slave becomes the object legitimizing the dictator's usurpation of power. The dictator says: “If it were not for my firm hand, you would be taken over by the Slave, who would be a hundred times worse than I am. He would destroy you in a more brutal way than I do. He would burn you over a slow flame of chaos, whereas I treat your death with great respect.

For the most part dictators are created from slaves in the same way that idealists are created out of nobility. Despite the immeasurably smaller number of noblemen, their influence on society is approximately the same as slaves. These two forces, unequal in number, preserve a balance in society that keeps society from falling into some ravine of anarchy.

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and Uzbekistan received its freedom, the balance of influence of the nobility and slaves was standard for the Soviet Union. But over time the proportion has shifted in favor of the slaves. Slaves turned up everywhere, from the government through to
the opposition. That middle class, those who embodied the link between slaves and idealists, has disappeared. Most of this class has now also joined the slaves. Meanwhile, a small part of this class has entered the circle of the nobility, and in so doing has suffered the great humiliation that befits such a transformation.

And in this debased position they have begun to tear freedom apart.

The former Slave, who has become the dictator, humiliates his fellow slaves. And the latter, instead of coming to their senses, have begun to gnaw and bite at one and other, thus benefiting the Primary Slave.

And the balance has been destroyed. There remain a handful of gloomy hermits and hordes of slaves bewitched by the whizzing sound of the dictator's whip.

Freedom, a severe test.

Once again, as in former times, no one except the nobility has passed it.

Once again – as so many times over the millennia!—everyone has seen that only the nobility merit freedom.

Muhammad Salikh

23.07.2002

New York Times, 11 march 2002

America's Shady Ally Against Terror

March 11, 2002

By MUHAMMAD SALIH

OSLO

When the Soviet Union fell apart, most of its provincial
Communist dictators did not. Instead, they jumped to join
those who had been, moments before, their "nationalist
enemies" - and adopted nationalist slogans as their own.
These former first secretaries of their regional Communist
parties became presidents and set about denigrating their
once dear party. I watched this happen in Uzbekistan with
Islam Karimov, who is still, remarkably, the Uzbek
president, and will be visiting Washington this week. He
just secured an extra two years on his term - it will now
stretch to 2007.

Initially, the Western powers must have been a bit
astonished by the transformation of first secretaries into
presidents. But they supported these "newly independent
states," as they were called, and the dictators who ruled
in them. Twelve years have passed, but the undemocratic,
human-rights-abusing, one-party states have not changed
much at all, and neither has Western support for them.
Something has always happened - worries over the security
of ex-Soviet nuclear materials, a desire to avoid
antagonizing Russia, China or another power - that somehow
justifies this situation. Western politicians have always
had convenient excuses for supporting these governments.
The dictators of the independent states have been lucky.

Their last case of luck came on Sept. 11. On that day, in
an instant, something happened that the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Uzbekistan had been unable to accomplish in over
a decade. Just 15 days before this tragedy, Mr. Karimov had
promised that he would grant an amnesty that would have
released thousands of citizens who had been convicted of
various crimes. Among those eligible were at least 1,000
political prisoners, promised amnesty in exchange for
repentance. This was an effort by Mr. Karimov to win the
good will of the United States, which otherwise tended to
issue reports condemning his government's repression.
America did not appear to notice this gesture of mercy.

But by late September such promises of freedom became
unnecessary. The superpower had arrived in Tashkent with
good will and much else. This last case of luck was so
great that Mr. Karimov, being singled out by the United
States as an ally in the war against terrorism, began to
feel that he was the leader not only of Uzbekistan but of
all Central Asia. Today the Kazakh, Kyrgyz and Tajik
leaders look at him with envy.

The Russian political elite is watching the Uzbek leader
with alarm, warning Vladimir Putin, the Russian president,
that Mr. Karimov, always somewhat querulous in his dealings
with Moscow, is drifting toward a pro-American stance.
Perhaps even the Americans think this is true.

But in fact, the opposite is occurring. Uzbekistan is
drifting toward an anti-American stance, if one understands
"American" as implying democracy, human rights and the
struggle against state-sponsored terror.

After Sept. 11, Mr. Karimov reversed his amnesty for some
political prisoners who had originally been scheduled for
release. (About 800 members of a Muslim organization,
Hizb-ut-Tahrir, were freed, only to be put under constant
surveillance. Secular dissidents remain in prison.) He
understood that the political impetus for amnesty had
diminished greatly. America's warm relations with Karimov
have, in a way, increased repression in Uzbekistan, there
being no need now to conform to international human rights
standards.

The authorities in Uzbekistan have essentially untied the
militia's hands. If militiamen kill citizens, they can
simply fill out documents claiming the victim was a
terrorist, or even a follower of Osama bin Laden. No
civilian has any ability to question this characterization.

As for Uzbekistan's efforts on the democracy front, Mr.
Karimov held a referendum, in 1995, to avoid an election.
According to official results 99.8 percent of voters
endorsed this nonelection idea wholeheartedly. Mr. Karimov
won re-election in 2000 with a 92 percent favorable vote.
(Even his leading opponent voted for him, and said so.) Now
he has secured by referendum an extra two years after his
term ends in 2005, just for asking. The positive vote was
91.8 percent. The State Department wisely decided not to
monitor this last referendum, because the mere act of
monitoring might confer on it some legitimacy.

More than once, America has had to tear down what it has
helped create. That was recently the case, to a degree, in
Afghanistan - America helped sustain a Muslim insurgency,
and now has crushed a Muslim insurgency, the Taliban, that
turned into a government. It may prove to be the case in
Uzbekistan, which has been raised by its antiterror
alliance with America into the pre-eminent Central Asian
power.

Uzbekistan is located in the very center of a highly
explosive and densely populated region where almost 60
million people live, more than a third of them in
Uzbekistan itself. The Karimov government's example of
repression is likely to be infectious in a neighborhood of
states that have little tradition of democracy or human
rights. Mr. Karimov shows them that it is possible to gain
prestige and money and extend your rule on a whim - and
still gain American support in the post-terrorism world.

Muhammad Salih is the leader of the Erk (Freedom) Party of
Uzbekistan. He lives in exile.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/11/opinion/11SALI.html?ex=1016841634&ei=1&en=
da33a8727de8d953

"Turkish Daily News"
26. 12. 2002

Muhammad Salikh

There is no need to repeat the truism that both the East and West possess
forces that have interests in maintaining a certain level of antagonistic
tension between the two sides.

Some western statesmen with a Kipling mentality found Samuel Huntington's
theory about the "Clash of Civilizations" very much to their liking. Those
radicals of the Orient who fight for justice clutching weapons in hand also
liked Huntington. Especially after Sept. 11, when they seemed to find
confirmation of their idol's prediction, and when one Western political
leader (politician?) even openly declared the superiority of "Western over
Oriental civilization."

I don't think that his declaration really offended anyone, since it was
seemed forced/stilted and lumpen), and many people understood it in just
the way it deserved to be received. But it was disturbing that it reflected
the very mood of the majority of common people of the West. Perhaps
Huntington really is right and we really stand at the threshold of a global
war of civilizations?

I am an incorrigible optimist, but even I became disturbed by this
question. I once took as the epigraph for my book the words of Andre
Malraux, which predicted that the 21st Century would be one of high
morality and spirituality. But the events that unfolded in the world after
Sept. 11 forced me to remove that epigraph from the Turkish translation of
my book. It seemed Malraux had made a mistake. Instead, Huntington seemed
to have won the competition of oracles. Now, though, I see that things are
not so bad after all.

They talk about the globalization of terrorism, globalization of the
struggle against terrorism, globalization of whatever. OK, that's fine.
Why, then, in this world where we are all doomed to globalize, is there not
a globalization of mutual understanding among peoples and races? Is there
not a globalization through a rapprochement of cultures and religions? Why
can't there be a globalization of the struggle against tyranny, oppression,
and injustice in the Orient and the West?

In the West they consider that Western civilization is the best of all
civilizations, and in the East they think that the best in Western
civilization was borrowed from the East. The Orient considers that
democracy cannot serve as the justification of man's existence on earth,
while the West is convinced that all of the Orient's misfortunes are rooted
in the Shariah, which forbids the individual's free choice.

Meanwhile, the Orient does not hold to the Shariah to the degree that Allah
commands; nor does the West observe the rules of democracy as demanded by
democratic principles. If the two sides were honest with each other, they
would have long ago admitted that neither of them is at all the way it
wishes to appear in the other's eyes. If they really wanted peace with each
other, they would long ago have "discovered" an amazing similarity between
democracy and the Shariah. They would have delightfully discovered a
similarity between the Declaration of Human Rights and the rights of the
individual in Islam. They would have seen that at the foundation of
democracy is nothing other than Christianity, i.e., the Shariah itself,
only slightly distorted by the prejudices of scribes who came later.

On the initiative of the American NGO "Common Ground," a group of
intellectuals began to seek ways of non-violent resolution of the conflicts
in the Middle East....

When I think about the so-called "Islamic terrorists," I recall the words
of one of the Prophet Mohammad's Sahabs (disciples). As is known, after the
Prophet's death, arguments broke out over the Caliphate throne between Ali
and Muaviya, both of whom were disciples of the Prophet. Someone came to
another one of the sahabs who refused to take part in this argument and
called on him to join the "jihad" of one side. And in this situation each
side called the other a "criminal." So the sahab responded, "I will not
join your side or the other because my sword has no eyes capable of
determining who in this war is a 'criminal,' and who is not; I am afraid to
kill an innocent person before Allah."

So here you have that very Shariah that the West fears, and which the
"Islamic terrorists" cite to their advantage or ignore. So I'm afraid that
there is little Shariah remaining in the Orient. If there were, would they
be crying out about the "need to reestablish the Shariah?" If there were,
war, poverty, and hunger would not keep befalling the people of the Orient.
There is no justice in the Orient, and where there is no justice the
Shariah cannot exist. Violence reigns in the Orient, and there is no role
for the Shariah where violence reigns.

In the Orient, bread is stolen from orphans, neighbors rob one another, and
innocent people are killed; all of this is evidence that the Shariah has
abandoned the Orient. It flees far away from your sins (and mine) in order
to be further away from the evil deeds of our dictators who declare that
they are the shadows of Allah on the earth, but govern the state with the
methods of Satan. The Shariah cannot exist where the state encourages
bribe-taking, graft, perjury, prostitution, drug addiction, violence and
murder of the innocent.

In turn, the West must also look in both directions, so that its highly
praised democracy does not run far away. From the duplicity of a policy of
"developed" powers, from double standards and brutality, to the weak in
order to appease "national interests," and from the passion to be the
richest, the very first, the greatest...

It's necessary to stop creating enemies in order to blame the enemy for all
one's misfortunes, and always to see oneself as the victim.

After all, your enemy also sees himself as the victim. So who is right?
It's possible to simplify this very complex life. One can live as a human
being.

Do you know how I make my life a bit easier in exile? With maxims that I
made up for myself. For example, when I begin to rebel against my fate, I
crush my rebellion with the help of a thought like this: "Evil against you
will end only when you cease entirely to resemble the villain who is
committing evil against you."

This really is true: Destroy all the destructive qualities of your enemy
inside you, and you will make yourself secure from that evil.

After announced in advance triumph of the Dictator .

The United States of America didn't send their representatives to Tashkent to observe the Referendum of prolonging President Karimov's authority. Most of supporters of democracy accepted this decision of the parliament with satisfaction, however all did understand that at other time the reaction of America would have been rather abruptly to this next show of the Dictator of Uzbekistan. Even here we can find the answer to the question why did Karimov decide to make this farce this year but not in a year or two? Uzbek President considered this year most suitable for Referendum because nobody would guarantee him friendship with America in a year or two. America cannot send its observers to Referendum, but it is not impossible not to send its senators to thank Karimov for his corporation in antiterroristic company. Karimov wasn't offended at all; on the contrary, he accepted this with the same satisfaction as the supporters.

I know Karimov very well not because I was his opponent at the President's election, I know him as a character of a communistic leader. This character has very strong sense of precaution. We have a saying about a person like him: " He scratches in advance that place which is not itching yet."

Fear before general elections.

President Karimov touching upon the theme of the Referendum acknowledged, "Elections in every five years can result the destabilization of society while the elections in seven years can decrease this risk." Exactly, general elections were always dangerous for Karimov. Having all control over electors and over the process of voting, having all opportunities to fake results of election - Karimov is still afraid of them. Within 13 years of his governing he held the only general election for the presidential position in 1991. This election was the first and the last mistake of Karimov and after that he didn't permit Opposition either to the Presidential or Parliament elections. Because he saw clearly, that even though during elections that were under the control of the government the Opposition could penetrate into the authority, and this presented serious threat to his monopolistic dictatorship. In 1992 there were only 5 percents of the Opposition in the Parliament and this number of people made such propaganda among deputies that in fall session the Parliament was about overthrowing Karimov in a kind way. Karimov did not forget this cruel lesson and still he is alive he will never allow a secular Opposition to participate in elections. He will deliberately promote drifting of Islamic Opposition in order to have constant help of the USA , and to justify his repressive policy against secular opposition.

At general elections the Islamic Opposition doesn't threaten his governing, the only Democratic Opposition can threaten his power, he could see it in 1991. That's way, Karimov is panicky afraid of any election - so much he doesn't believe in his power, so much the potential of The Democratic Opposition frightens him.

What is there under the cover of " two dates of seven years"?

Another question that appears because of Karimov's Referendum is a question about the continuing the date of presidential position. People are wondering and asking, why does Karimov need at once so many dates which each of them is seven years total? Can anybody prevent Karimov under such monopolistic governing to change any law, and Parliament, and even Constitution at any time he wants? Was it worth hurrying? The only answer to this question can be the following: Karimov had to hurry so that nobody could manage to prosecute him while he is alive for crimes committed by him. These " two dates of seven years each" will be enough even for his hypothetic "successor" in a case of his obliged resignation. Not to understand this situation is impossible. That's way, questions asked for this case sound like sly. Both America and European Union know very well what is covered under this Referendum.

War Against Different "Perspectives": Next Move By Karimov

By Muhammad Salih.

Recently American general Tommy Franks reported that Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan totally lost its effectiveness after the death of Uzbek leader Juma Namangany. It is very important report. It is very important not only for the problem researchers in the Central Asia , but for the peaceful religious societies too. This statement takes the important card of Karimov in the war on this part of the population who are turn against of Karimov's policy.

Within last ten years Karimov has justified his repressive policy against different viewers and Opposition as " a danger of Islamic Extremism". Almost non rhetorical question comes up in this new situation: What tactic will Karimov choose in the war on Democratic opposition? It is clear, that tactic should be changed, but how? Here is a dilemma over which Uzbek Dictator racks his brains.

Before to force people to admit their participation in the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) they were put narcotics secretly in their pockets, or proclamations, or any weapon in their houses. Now, when IMU is not exist any more government will have to refuse this primitive method of prosecuting people. But Karimov has one more card - card of "Hizbut Tahrir". To tell the truth, this card is not so strong as President of Uzbekistan would like it to be. At first, "Hizbut Tahrir" openly reported about its peaceful intention. It will not be easy for Karimov to improve to the West that " new enemy" is as dangerous as IMU. Yet, because almost all members of this group are already arrested, it can be said that this group is totally liquidated as non-able structure. And, the leaflets signed "Hizbut Tahrir" appearing here and there, are spread by the people of special organizations in order to keep a heat of " anti-terrorist company " on a desired level.

However, there is one privilege in "Hizbut Tahrir" that gives Karimov the manifest advantage in the war on Opposition. This is anti-Americanism and anti-democratizm of "Hizbut Tahrir".

Yes, human rights organizations and democratic Opposition of Uzbekistan strongly blame repressions against religious groups including "Hizbut Tahrir". But when Hizbut Tahrir puts Democracy and totalitarian regime of Karimov together on one table, and begins clearly to discuss necessity of building " Islamic government in the Central Asia " everybody but Karimov looses his heart. Karimov is only glad for this, because he knows that even though Americans are " democrats and adherents of human rights", they are not able to tolerate such frantic anti-Americanism.

It should be mentioned that anti-Americanism is not local at all, but it is exported from Arabic Peninsula as the party "Hizbut Tahrir" itself. It is a product of ARABIC NASIONALISM, but not the " reaction of ISLAMIC WORLD on the injustice of world imperialism", as Pan-Arabs want to represent it. Such anti-Americanism doesn't meet long lasting interests of Central Asian people. It is not only cannot serve to strengthen Islam as religious in our country, but on the contrary, it can further strengthening the totalitarian regime - of enemies not only religious but of any freedom. Unfortunately, those simple-hearted young people, who go against to this regime under the exported slogan " Hizbut Tahrir", are not able to understand this truth yet.

Karimov's regime uses this fact very skillfully. He deliberately strengthens antagonism between Democratic Opposition and religious groups as "Hizbut Tahrir". The agents of Uzbek Service of National Security (SNS) poke about in websites of Opposition groups sending provocative letters to one group on behalf of other group. There is no doubt, that Karimov has no more cards except one " Hizbut Tahrir", and for now, he is going to play only with this card only. Yet, he will depress the different points of view using this card. But the fact that "Hizbut Tahrir" is almost liquidated, as it was mentioned above, can put Karimov in an awkward situation in front of Americans. They simply can require weighty arguments of danger of Hizbut Tahrir or, generally, danger of radicalism in Uzbekistan .

We will see, how easy it will be from the US to require such arguments from Karimov, and if they can require these arguments, will it effect a change of course in the internal political regime? !

2002.

The most expensive stability in the world.

By Muhammad Salih.

When big countries start some movements in their "strategic regions", a string of propaganda guides these countries to which as shells stick to the body of the ship so propagandist expenses stick to it. These expenses more prevent to this propaganda than do help. There are a lot of such expenses in partnership between America and Uzbekistan . For example, recently during one of the broadcasts on the radio " Liberty " two " public figures" - one is Moscow and another is Uzbek - after certain dose of " intellectual ecstasy" came to the point that Referendum recently held in Uzbekistan was exactly what Uzbekistani people is worth. This people is worth the regime of Karimov, because people has such mentality and there is no need to worry about abuse of human rights, Uzbekistan is not the last hole on the democratic map and so on.

There is no doubt that Karimov after had heard these " conclusions" satisfied in his own wisdom, because this is exactly what he has been talking about since 1989. " Mentality" of Uzbek people does not stand such things as democracy and human rights, people hates western nonsense such as speech freedom and opposition. Karimov, as he said himself, told "directly, like a gentleman" about above to representatives of the States who are antiterroristic partners of Karimov. Karimov is so much sure in stable and forgivable friendship of the States that during the day of Referendum before leaving an electoral district he told openly: "The process of transition of Uzbekistan from totalitarian, administrative-commanding system to democracy will be lasting long, it is unknown how long it will take and, in general, if this process will finish at all."

Karimov knew what he was talking about. Very soon after a week after his statement the sources of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of America reported to the press that the USA was not going to support dissidents. However, nobody asked the USA for support of dissidents. The only discussed thing was the conditions of economical support. The public was worried about possible double standards in Central Asian policy of the USA . In Balkans the economical and the political pressure of West gave is immediate results and democratic process became its developing very quickly. Well, but there was a war and the situation was much worse than in Central Asia . Why is it impossible to use this policy of the pressure to the dictatorial regime in Central Asia ?

Didn't Uzbekistan sign document of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) as it did Serbia and Croatia ? Or does West also think that "mentality " of Uzbek is not ready to admit a Democratic reform? If it is so, why then Uzbekistan was given to sign international documents that require exactly " democratic mentality"?

It is not logical, gentlemen. It is double standards applied to us, and it deeply hurts us. I assume you that the "mentality " of Uzbek people is ready to democracy, the "mentality" of Karimov and his supporters are not ready for that.

Aphorisms such as " every people are worth its governor" must not determine governmental policy of West in Central Asia . Are people responsible for all crimes of tyrant against people? It sounds originally, but not justice. All tyrants in the world, even Saddam, can be justified by this excuse.

In 1993 Adolph Hitler became a governor in Germany . Tell me, lovers of "mentality", did Hitler become a governor just because the mentality of German people was ready to fascism? Or did German people have not as enough traditions as Uzbek people? And were not they "ready to democracy"?

Well, what do you say about Mussolini, then? Were Italian people ready for this dictator? Did Italian people have not democratic traditions to prevent coming this dictator?

Intellectual bootlickers (from Russia and Western countries) of Karimov happily describe how Uzbeks friendly elected their Dictator.

However, according to the true sources, at referendum only one person from the whole family voted for, yet there are at least three voters in each Uzbek family. It means that from 90 percent of votes only 30 percent are valid. It is true, of course, if does not take into consideration a garbled version of counted votes.

Without exaggeration we can say that Uzbek Referendum was an exam not only for Karimov but also for the democratic West. The time will show us whether the West passed this exam successfully or did it fail. One thing is clear, the aspiration of the USA will be limited in the Central Asia only within military-economical limits, not require political reforms from local dictators that will lead to a good possibility of strengthening authorial regimes. Moreover, it will lead to a greatest hatred of people to these regimes, therefore, it will result the destabilization in regions.

Of course, this stability can be suppressed by force as it has been doing by now in our country. But this stability in Uzbekistan is very expensive, more expensive than ever in the world. I don't know how much of national budget is used for keeping social stability; let's say in America . But it is known that Uzbekistan spends for that almost half of its budget. During last ten years Karimov has increased regular staff of military. This military staff is considered as the most comfortably off, the most satisfied class in our society. Besides that, in big cities every fifth person gets certain amount of money for denunciation against a neighbor or even neighbors. Nobody without consent of local community can come to " mahalla" (neighborhood) to visit someone. If even one comes, after his/her leaving people who meet him/her are asked for summons. Telling in one word, the enormous resources are spent for keeping cemetery like silent in the society.

I am asking: wouldn't it be better to spend these resources for welfare of country - for nongovernmental section of economy, for radical rebuilding of agriculture, industry and for building democratic institutes? We need this so that the real stability finally will be placed in our country. The stability, which Uzbek people has been missing for a long time. The stability of the life but not of a cemetery. I am asking my western friends: why are you afraid to frighten away Karimov and you are not afraid of being a reason for a deepening social-economical and political crisis in our region? Why do think that Karimov in Uzbekistan is everything , and nothing is all the rest ? Don't you see that these dictators need you more than you need them?

I am sure that everything will be changed only than when the West considers these totalitarian leaders as everything.

WHY IS IT TOO HARD TO ESTABLISH THE CALIPHATE IN CENTRAL ASIA ?

By Muhammad Salih

The following goals are in the program of ERK party: to abolish a dictatorship of one person, to place constitutional order in the country, to make changes in current constitution, to provide a division of government branches, to start creating democratic institutions, i.e. to start creating a new government, that will be called - State of Law . In economy, we have objectives in our program such as to establish a basis for creating middle class in a society without which there is no democracy, to encourage middle and small business, to send the economical recourses into this channel, and finally to pursue agricultural reform which includes partial denationalization of the land.

Regional policy of the party " ERK" foresees the future of the Central Asian Republics ' integration as in economical so in cultural meaning. Necessity of integration does not mean either political or ideological purpose, yet it dictates by the history of the region, which exists within the ethnical-cultural-economical similarity of people living here.

Under the entire propaganda of atheism, the Soviet Union , nevertheless, was trying to present to the world as if Soviet citizens were free to choose either atheism or religion. That is why this so-called pursuit gave people of Soviets minimum possibilities to have their religious needs come true, i.e., to go to the churches and mosques. Needless to say, it was impossible for highly religious soviet people to realize their religious practices. Accordingly, the repressions against people were on the political basis, not on the religious grounds. After "Khrushchev's less oppressive times (thaw) (end of 60s and beginning of 70s), the religious understanding was increased noticeably in the Central Asia , especially in the small towns of Uzbekistan where the religions were historically strong. Dozens of young men who were studied Koran and rules of Shariat (Knowledge of Islamic Law) at home secretly (by their parents) began to organize their own secret mini- schools - " cells", where they started to teach their knowledge to their children, to the children of their relatives and friends. They only taught to the children that they know their families were known because they were afraid of the possibility of outflow of information about secret activities of religious movement. Even though they attempted to keep things under control and secretive " the outflow " took place. In particular, many young teachers of Koran found themselves in dead weight of a quite repression " stagnation era" in the end of 70s. These people leaving the prison and not young anymore found out Perestroika and Glasnost in their neighborhood, which were giving a noticeable freedom to the religious activity.

The process of Perestroika and Glasnost bought out these so-called underground peo