PUBLICATIONS OF THE LAST YEARS

Will Czar Cotton Still Reign Across
Soviet Central Asia?

06.11. 1988, The New York Times
By BILL KELLER

A Fantastic Dream

...I would not be surprised if in 10 or 15 years, there would be no cotton in this region," Mr. Nurmetov mused to a visitor. "Just fruits, grapes, tourism. Anyway, that is what I dream of..."
In Uzbekistan, which since Stalin's day has been pressed to make the Soviet Union self sufficient in cotton and to provide a source of foreign currency, Mr. Nurmetov's dream seems fantastic, even blasphemous.
But it is no longer his alone. A small group of Uzbek writers, economists and officials have begun to openly question the republic's role as Moscow's cotton plantation, and also to question the basic relationship between Moscow and the fastest-growing region of its domain, Soviet Central Asia.
Uzbek intellectuals say that if anything is likely to provide a focal point for a nationalist movement here, it is not Islamic fundamentalism - Moscow and modernization seem largely to have tamed Islam in this region - but the resentment of the cotton economy.
"Everything comes down to the Stalinist demand for self-sufficiency in cotton," said Mukhamed Salikh, a poet and secretary of the official writers union. "The country's independence has been Uzbekistan's enslavement."
The authorities are taking steps to alleviate the harmful effects of the cotton monoculture, as the crop's domination is called. The annual quota was cut by about 10 percent this year, although critics point out that this only eliminated the padding in previous harvest reports. A new law has restricted the use of child labor in the fields. One of the most toxic pesticides has been banned. There is a committee to save the Aral Sea. Special medical teams will try to combat infant mortality.
But critics say these measures are far too little to remedy the complex of problems connected with cotton...
...The unemployment problem is growing because of high birth rates and because Uzbek villagers firmly resist Government entreaties to relocate to other, labor-short areas of the country.
Critics say one solution is to create more jobs in Uzbekistan by processing cotton here, instead of shipping it to mills in other republics.
"We sell our cotton as raw material," said Mr. Salikh, voicing a complaint widely heard. "Ninety-two percent of it leaves the republic. And then we buy our shirts from Russia..."

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

28.06. 1989
By Peter GUMBEL
Staff Reporter of The W.S.J.

TASHKENT, U.S.S.R. -- In a courtyard near the old bazaar, sipping tea, Kakhar Uzmanov, a 45-year-old janitor, talks bluntly about how the standard of living has deteriorated in Uzbekistan. "My grandfather, who lived to be 101, used to say we have everything," he says. But times have changed. Few people now have gardens in which to grow their own fruit and vegetables. Prices in the bazaar have risen sharply. And with four young children to feed, his monthly pay of $120 is barely enough to live on.
"If we don't solve our economic problems very quickly, I fear that civil war might break out in Uzbekistan," says Muhammad Solih, a poet who visited the valley of Fergana soon after the clashes there. "Ninety Per cent of the people live very badly. They have nothing."
One sign of change is the recent formation of a mass movement for reform named Birlik. Loosely based on the popular front organizations that have become powerful voices for more home-rule in the Soviet Baltic republics, it is campaigning to end Uzbekistan's overreliance on cotton and to clean up the environment. "We need to help the Party apparatus find a way out of this crisis," says Abdurakhim Pulatov, himself a Communist Party member.
The argument is dismissed out of hand by both conservatives and liberals in Tashkent, who point out that Uzbeks and Meskhetians generally belong to the same Sunni branch of the Moslem faith. Mr. Solih, the poet, says interest in Islam has increased, as have feelings about national identity. "But these are just pretexts" for the deeper disgruntlement over living standards, he says.

THE NEW YORK TIMES

03.09. 1989
By Bill KELLER, Special to The New York Times
Turkic Republics Press Soviets to Loosen Reins

In the republics that stretch from the Caucasus Mountains to the central Asian Steppes, Turkic peoples are also beginning to channel their grievances into mass political movements under the banners of democracy and sovereignty.
"We want what the Baltics want, an end to colonialism and the freedom to run our own affairs," said Ekhtibar Mamedov, a Baku historian and a leader of the new Azerbaijani Popular Front, which has shown unexpected public support by holding mass demonstrations and a large-scale protest strike in the city's factories...
Although the republics of the south are predominantly Muslim, the movements Leaders of the groups say their movements were invigorated this spring and summer by televised proceedings of the new Soviet Parliament, which gave Turkic peoples a chance to compare their own, machine-elected deputies with the more aggressively independent political figures elected from the Baltics, Moscow and other regions.
Rural Poverty and Degradation

"The Congress showed people who was who, and what was possible," agreed Muhamed Salikh, a poet who is active in Uzbekistan's popular movement, called Birlik, or unity.
Although the southern Soviet Union has experienced bloody outbreaks of ethnic conflict - most notably Azerbaijan's clash with neighboring Armenia over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, murderous Uzbek assaults on the Meskhetian minority, and economic riots in Kazakhstan - the Turkic republics have lagged far behind in the formation of organized political movements.
Local leaders attribute that to a lack of political sophistication and the feudal domination of local Communist Party bosses.
In Uzbekistan, the political movement has been stimulated by the rural poverty and environmental degradation associated with the republic's role as Russia's cotton-growing colony.

UPHEAVAL IN THE EAST

25.01.1990
The New York Times
By Bill KELLER

Leaders of nationalist independence movements from the Baltic Sea to the Ukraine to Soviet Central Asia say their campaigns for greater liberty from Moscow will continue undeterred by upheavals in Azerbaijan, where Soviet troops are struggling to contain an insurgency.
While the political independents said they were concerned about the use of military force against domestic unrest, many expressed at least a grudging sympathy for the sending of troops in that case. The nationalists agreed that hard-liners in the Kremlin would try to use the unrest in the south as an excuse to slow the decentralization of power. But they also agreed the pressure for self-determination has now grown to the point that it cannot be stopped.
Nationalist leaders were interviewed Tuesday and today by telephone from Georgia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Moldavia, the Ukraine, Armenia and the Baltic republics of Latvia and Lithuania. They stressed that they were speaking personally, not on behalf of their organizations, and they said they were hampered by a shortage of reliable information on events in Baku.
The nationalist groups vary widely in their aims and level of sophistication. Those in Georgia and the Baltics advocate eventual secession from the Soviet Union, while the Ukrainian and Moldavian popular fronts stop short of that. In Lithuania, the popular front group Sajudis sets the pace of political activity for the republican government. In Uzbekistan the aspiring nationalist movement, called Birlyk, is just finding its legs.
Mukhamed Salikh, a poet and member of the Birlyk movement in Uzbekistan, said Uzbeks "to some extent" felt Moscow may have been quicker to send troops against Azerbaijan because of an exaggerated fear of Islamic fundamentalism.
"At the beginning, I thought it was necessary." Mr. Salikh said of the military intervention. "But what happened then - so much blood flowed - that, of course, puts one on one's guard."
But there was no sign of an organized solidarity campaign in the other Islamic republics, where independent political groups have not acquired nearly the commanding force of the Azerbaijani front.

Defiance of Kremlin's Control Is Accelerating in Soviet Asia

01.07.1990, The New York Times
By Francis X. CLINES, Tashkent, U.S.S.R., June 28

While Moscow tries to find an accommodation with the rebellious Baltic republics, the shift of political authority from the Gorbachev Government to the provinces is accelerating here in the Islamic heartland of Central Asia.
Searing summer heat is bringing along another crop of prime Uzbek cotton, nurturing with it this republic's insurgent plan to pluck economic sovereignty with the September harvest by keeping part of the crop from Moscow to sell for itself in the world market.
Uzbekistan is demanding that it keep a third of its cotton this year and all of it in 1991.
Just as threatening to the central Government of President Mikhail S. Gorbachev is a new economic alliance signed this week by the five republics of Soviet Central Asia. It provides for circumventing the decrepit Soviet economic-planning system by retaining and bartering local consumer goods that planners in Moscow normally send elsewhere.
One example of the plan is for Uzbekistan henceforth to trade from its cornucopia of melons and vegetables for a better deal in grain from neighboring Kazakhstan instead of from the Russian republic, as at present under Moscow's central planning.
Other deals are being planned within Soviet Central Asia, which also includes Turkmenia, Tadzhikistan and Kirghizia. The new alliance is of key regions of former Turkestan, which the czars and Bolsheviks alike took care to keep fragmented, the better for colonizing.

No 'Pan-Turkic' Challenge

Uzbekis who led the move to an alliance say their strategy has nothing to do with decades-old notions about a "pan-Turkic" challenge to Moscow but rather with the far more realistic goal of a regional economic federation rooted in true sovereignty.
Juggling an agenda of emergencies, Moscow has not yet reacted to these Central Asian plans. The most likely time for confrontation will be the fall, when the cotton is harvested. ''We are doing all this without dramatizing the process, without playing to the crowds,'' said Mohammed Salikh, a founder of the New Democratic Party, part of the insurgent vanguard
The local Communist Party has cooperated in Parliament's challenges to Moscow's rule.
The republic's new Prime Minister, Shukrulla R. Mirsaidov, an adaptive party stalwart who drives around without the motorcades of his predecessors, has been in the forefront of the recent tough oratory directed at Moscow's traditional exploitation of the republic's resources.
His pronouncement of "economic independence" was followed two weeks ago by Parliament's declaration of political sovereignty, tailored to stop short of outright secession but focus on the cotton, gold, farm produce and other Uzbek riches.
"We're in a much worse situation than the Baltics, which have many defenders while we are our only defender," Mr. Salikh said.
While Western attention has been riveted on Lithuania's rebellion, he added, observers may be missing the point of how general the nation's de facto decentralization is becoming.
The Uzbek Communist leadership has not openly split with the national party, but the republic's party congress chose to recess and keep its options open should the 28th Congress in Moscow next week result in a split.
Uzbek Communists have been politic lately in adjusting to the fact that the republic's increasingly separatist agenda is driven by such popular front movements as Birlik and the Erk group, which gave birth to the New Democratic Party.
These movements, aiming for full independence and pluralism, have seen such intellectuals as Mr. Salikh and Erkin Wahidov, both poets, elected to Parliament.

THE BALTIMORE SUN

30.09.1990
Scott SHANE (Chief of The Sun's Moscow Bureau)

Nervousness infuses the politics of Uzbekistan today, as unmistakable as the scent of lemon trees in the courtyards of the clay houses in this capital's old quarter. The troubled giant of Soviet Central Asia declared its political sovereignty in June, and people agree that it is on the brink of dramatic change. But what kind of change?
Nationalist dictatorship or Western-style democracy? Islamic revolution or ethnic civil war? Intellectuals debate the probabilities over shish kebab in the private cafes that abound in the one-story neighborhoods that survived the 1966 earthquake.
"There's a feeling of uneasiness, of uncertainty about what tomorrow may bring," said Mirzaakhmed Alimov, Uzbekistan correspondent for Komsomolskaya Pravda. "The genie of nationalism is out of the bottle, and no one's going to get it back in."
Mr. Alimov, who is close to the Communist Party leadership, scoffs at the idea of such a rapid transition to democracy.
"Our people were enslaved on the cotton plantation," said poet Mohammad Salikh, chairman of the new political party known as Erk - "Will" in Uzbek. "That's what socialism has given us," he said....
That is precisely the point, says Mr. Salikh.
"We say to the Russians, `Stay here, but on equal terms.' We have to work on a percentage basis. Now, most of the good jobs are held by Russians, while our national cadres {of Uzbeks} are unemployed," Mr. Salikh said...

FINAL

24.10.1990, The Washington Post
Michael DOBBS
Washington Post Foreign Service

...A few years ago, such religious fraternization would probably have alarmed the Kremlin. But the Soviet authorities have encouraged the Islamic revival in Central Asia, granting permits for the opening of new mosques with little difficulty. At a time when Communist ideology is rapidly breaking down, the party seems to see the mufti and other Moslem leaders as important political allies in the fight against crime and moral decay.
"The rise in crime is directly due to the lack of religion," said Shukrullo Yusupov, a prominent Uzbek writer and member of the republic's presidential council. "For years, we taught our people to believe only in what they saw directly. People assume that it's all right to steal something as long as the boss isn't looking. A religious person, on the other hand, believes that God sees everything-and he will punish you even if your boss doesn't."
"We are forced to rediscover our roots because we have been betrayed by our political ideals," said Mohammed Salikh, an Uzbek playwright and opposition member of parliament. "Communism turned out to be a mirage, but people must have faith in something. The moral code by which we lived for all these years has suffered a collapse."

THE HIDDEN NATIONS

The People Challenge the Soviet Union
Nadia DIUK and Adrian KARATNYCKY
William Morrow and Comp, INC. New York, 1990, p. 174

"...Mohammed Salih, a secretary of the Uzbek Writers Union, has emerged as a leading spokesman for the Uzbek people. He is concerned about Uzbekistan's economic problems, and has spoken out on the subject on many occasions, despite the Uzbek authorities' disapproval: "There is a direct link between the deteriorating ecological situation in Uzbekistan and the cotton monoculture", he tells us, "We have lost not only our lands and waters, we have forfeited the health of our people. The land is ailing and also the people who work on it. Around eighty percent of Uzbeks live in kishlaks, traditional rural Uzbek settlements, where they work the fields. This part of the population is basically in a state of ill health".
Salih runs down the list of Uzbekistan's grievances in a matter-of-fact way. He is not pleading for special consideration for the Uzbeks, merely stating facts and statistics that are well known among the increasingly active Uzbek intelligentsia. Threatened with reprisals by the authorities for his outspokenness, he was vigorously defended by student demonstrators and all charges against him were dropped. He was on the record as speaking out against corruption in the ranks of Uzbekistan's Communist leaders, Rashidov and Usmankhodjayev, long before glasnost made it fashionable to do so. Asked about Uzbekistan's new first secretary, Islam Karimov, Salih adopts a tone of determined resignation: "he is said to have very democratic views, so we have hope for him. We'll see. We can only hope. Apart from hope, we have very little else". Salih is also a member of the presidium of Birlik, the Uzbek Popular Front, which has based its program on relieving the social and economic injustices resulting from the imposition of the cotton monoculture."

THE NATIONALITIES QUESTION IN
THE SOVIET UNION

Graham SMITH
Longman Publishing, London and New York, 1990, p. 223

...Birlik (Unity), the largest of the co Conntemporary political movements in Central Asia, founded in Tashkent in November 1988 by a group of Uzbek intellectuals, was closely modeled on popular front movements in other parts of the Soviet Union, in particular, that of Lithuania's Sajudis. The movementgrew rapidly,
...it succeeded in attracting supporters from all walks of life; at its height it numbered some 500,000 members. It put forward a candidate, the poet Muhammad Salih,in the elections of March 1989 for the Congress of People's Deputies. Despite Birli'k'popularity, however, and despite Salih''s own very considerable folloergs, hewas unsuccessful,defeated by the underhand and highly unconstitutional tactics of the Local Party and government representatives... (p.223)

RED ODYSSEY

Marat AKCHURIN
RED ODYSSEY. A Journey Through the Soviet Republics
Haper Collins Publishers, New York,1992

...I was going to meet an old acquaintance of mine in Tashkent, the poet Mohammed Solikh, who like many other intellectuals preferred active involvement in politics to literary activities in the years of perestroika.But unlike many others who do not go beyond idle talk, he had founded a democratic party, called ERK (Freedom)." (p.231)
...The next day I called the Writers' Union of Uzbekistan and arranged a meeting with Mohammed Solikh. He is young, tall, and slim. But the _expression of his intelligent eyes is always sullen, and his face is stern. It has nothing to do with the fact of his being a very important person, since he was the same before, about nine years ego, when my close friend Yura Lassky, who was also a friend of Mohammed Solikh's, introduced us to each other. Yes, Mohammed Solilkh had gone far in these years-both as a person and as a political figure. In the first years of perestroika there was a coup in the Writers' Union of Uzbekistan.Brezhnev's old guard faltered and retreated, leaving the battlefield to the generation of thirty- and fourty-year-olds. Then Solikh became one of the secretaries of the nomenklatura for the formation of the first legal political opposition in the Soviet period of Uzbekistan's history.On the base of the popular front movement Birlik (Unity), and with the help of political camrades-in-arms and allies, Solikh managed to organize the group Erk, which became the foundation of a new democratic party of Uzbekistan." (p.232)

THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE

19.02.1993

...This is the second in a series that examines the obstacles hindering the transition to democracy in the former republics of Soviet Central Asia. Uzbekistan declared its independence from the former Soviet Union on Aug. 31, 1991, but democracy remains stillborn in this agricultural giant of Central Asia.
Police set the tone on the very day of independence by forcibly dispersing a rally of democratic forces in Tashkent. More than 17 months later, things have gone from bad to worse, as opponents of the governing regime of former communists try to weather an unrelenting wave of persecution. Uzbekistan held a presidential election in late December 1991. But the former communists took no chances, banning the participation of the Birlik (Unity) People's Movement, one of two important democratic organizations, allowing President Islam Karimov to steamroller over Muhammad Salikh, leader of the Erk (Freedom) Democratic Party.
Several months later, a civil war pitting Islamists and democrats against a pro-communist establishment erupted in neighboring Tajikistan. Mindful of similar conditions at home, the Uzbek government intensified its panicky clampdown.
Many Uzbeks eager for a change had pinned their hopes on Salikh, a tall man of 43 who generated euphoria with his calls for free Islamic worship and free enterprise.
Today, Karimov's regime has shut off the power at Erk headquarters, banned its newspaper and imprisoned several leaders. Members of opposition parties are forbidden to congregate in groups of any significant size.
Salikh was not permitted to speak in parliament, and security police placed him under house arrest to prevent him from appearing at an international human rights conference. In January, thugs in a screeching car without license plates tried to run him down on the street.
A haggard Salikh said in a recent interview: "After an active start, the democracy movement was stopped. Now it is a question of its life or death. Our aim is just to survive."
...Salikh attributes the intimidation to Erk's complaint that Karimov's government is profiteering through payoffs for business licenses and blocking economic recovery. "Ministries are getting rich on bribes, and the people are getting poorer," he said.
Birlik chairman Abdul Rakhman Pulatov and colleague Miralim Adylov were severely beaten by men with iron pipes outside the Interior Ministry on June 29. Pulatov is now living in Moscow.

THE BALTIMORE SUN

28.02.1993
Will ENGLUND, a Moscow cor. for The Baltimore Sun

Tashkent, Uzbekistan. -- The mindless pop music thumps away at the "Istanbul" cellar restaurant here; the prostitutes conscientiously ply their trade at the hard-currency hotel; the markets groan with melons, carrots, spices and pistachios - all in all, it doesn't really look like a police state. But the government is cracking down on its scattered opposition here with a vengeance.
Jailings, beatings and rigged trials are giving Uzbekistan - the largest and most important of the new countries of Central Asia - the worst human rights record of any former Soviet republic not now engulfed in a shooting war.
Uzbekistan's internal crackdown has sharply intensified this month, driving even the moderate opposition nearly to desperation.
"We are pressed to the wall. And we have only one way to carry on," Mukhammad Salikh, leader of the only legal opposition party, said in a recent interview. "Now is the time of confrontation. The time of dialogue is over. We kept silent for a year and a half because we feared bloodshed. But now, even if our blood is spilled, we will go the streets. It's our only course. We have no weapons, we have no regiments, no squadrons, but we will come out with our bare hands."
The day after making that declaration in his office, Mr. Salikh was hauled in for a series of police interrogations, during which, he later said, he was told he would be beaten or killed if he didn't keep quiet.
Since then he has gone into hiding. Uzbekistan's government casts itself as a bulwark against religious extremism, prepared to use whatever means are necessary to preserve a secular state. Incessantly, it uses the example of war-torn Tajikistan as a hammer with which to pound its opponents.
Leaders of the opposition - most of whom are now in jail or on the run - say they want a democratic state, not a religious one. They portray the struggle in Uzbekistan as one that pits a repressive, holdover regime against the inexorable rise of democracy and freedom that is sweeping across the world.
The government dismisses that argument out of hand.
This month, the government shut down the only remaining independent newspaper. It drove the leadership of the democratically oriented Erk ("Will") Party - the only legal opposition party - underground. A member of parliament was expelled from the legislature and put on trial on charges of "hooliganism" and resisting arrest. Another, also expelled from parliament, was beaten and forcibly evicted from his apartment, along with his wife and three children, even though they own it.
...In fact, though, opposition leaders are floored by the crackdown. Theirs has never been a strong movement. They are, for the most part, intellectuals - many of whom studied in Russia. They concede that among ordinary Uzbeks the government remains relatively popular.
Why, they ask, are they being hounded so relentlessly?
A foreign ministry official, Akhmadzhan Lukmanov, said that the government was forced to take strict measures against its opponents because their "uncivilized" protests and "lust for power."
And, inevitably, he raised the specter of Tajikistan. Uzbekistan, he said, must not allow itself to slide into civil war. Only a strong hand can prevent it.
Mr. Salikh has promised that the battered Erk Party would not give up. Despite its reputation for cautious moderation, he said, it would be taking to the streets with protests in the next several weeks.
...These past few weeks, though, the government's main focus has been on its scattered domestic opponents.
And it has been resolutely unapologetic about its human rights record.Central Asia's Political Crisis.IN: RUSSIA'S MUSLIM FRONTIERS

Martha Brill OLCOTT
Edited by Dale F.Eicelman
Indiana Univ. Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, 93, p. 57

"The weakening of the communist Party sparked the development of several opposition groups.The first, ERK (Independence), is largely a legislative caucus.Its head, well-known poet and former USSR Supreme Soviet Deputy Muhammed Salikh, ran against Uzbekistan's president, Islam Karimov, in the December 1991 election. Birllik is viewed as a more serious threat, and until October 1991 it was barred from the republic.At that time it was registered as a "movement," not a political party, and its cochair, Abdurahim Pulatov, was unable to get on the presidential ballot." (p.57)


New Nations Rising

Nadia DIUK & Adrian KARATNYCKY
John Wiley & Sons, INC. New York, 1993, pp. 185-187

... Mukhammad Salikh, formerly a secretary of the Uzbek Writers Union and now president of the Democratic Party "Erk", has long been a leading spokesman for the Uzbek people. He is concerned about Uzbekistan's economic problems, and has spoken out on the subject on many occasions, despite the Uzbek authorities' disapproval. He is forthright in his assessment: "There is a direct link between the deterriorating ecological situation in Uzbekistan and the cotton monoculture", he told us.
...By February of 1990, Salikh had become one of the founding members of the Erk Party, whose objectives were to work toward political objectives as far as possible within the legal framework of the state. Meeting up with these authors again in September 1991, Salikh demonstrated how his thinking had evolved: "Without independence [for Uzbekistan] there can be no other kind of independence, not economic, cultural, or any other".
Erk's objective, he explained, was to pursue this goal as a parliamentary political party, while spreading its views to the broad masses of the population through the party newspaper and television" (p.185-186).
...By the summer of 1992, the situation in independent Uzbekistan looked little different from circumstances of three years earlier. The defeated Muhammad Salikh, previously in favor of working with the existing regime, turned resolutely against such a path. After brutal beatings and the arrest of members of the Birlik opposition movement, he announced at a press conference that the Erk party would be joining Birlik in the underground to oppose the rejime of Islam Karimov" (p.187)


Tashkent takes the no-change
route to reform


10.01.1993, The Sunday Telegraph London
Ian MacWilliam in Tashkent

...While most of these multi-ethnic republics have a more liberal air than in Soviet days, in Uzbekistan, most populous of the five Central Asian republics, the government of President Islam Karimov is busily building a strongly centralised state with all the necessary powers to squash any criticism. Uzbekistan introduced a constitution last month that promised freedom of thought and multi-party democracy in the best 20th-century fashion. This gesture was followed almost immediately by a vote in parliament to investigate the Birlik (Unity) opposition movement for alleged anti-government activities.
Birlik has never been allowed to register as a parliamentary party. The only significant parliamentary opposition is the more moderate Erk (Freedom) democratic party. Even Erk is concerned for its future now. Muhammad Salikh, its chairman, was sitting glumly in his office last week. Telephones had been cut repeatedly for three weeks and he has been told that Erk will have to leave its premises. The KGB, renamed the SNB in Uzbekistan, needs to prove its continued usefulness by watching such people as opposition leaders. "There are no secrets here," Mr Salikh remarked, indicating the telephone and the walls, which he assumes are bugged. For critics of the government, even the old option of escape to Moscow is becoming more awkward. A new law forbids Uzbeks from leaving the republic without permission.
With a new government of former communists installed in Tajikistan last month, Uzbekistan may begin to relax about the threat of instability spreading. So far, however, the indications are that this republic has no intention of allowing the new world order to disturb unduly its former communist calm.



Political Development in Uzbekistan: Democratization?

William Fierman
IN: Conflict, Cleavage and Change in Central Asia
and the Caucasus.
Ed. by Karen Dawisha, Bruce Parrott. Cambridge
University Press, 1997; pp.: 360-408

The Emergence of Informal Organizations

... Some of the writers who contributed to the re-evaluation of Uzbek history, culture, and Moscow's policies in the conditions of glasnost became the initial core leadership of Uzbekistan's first important informal group, "Birlik" ("Unity").1 Birlik was established at the meeting of an initiative group on November 11, 1988.2 In addition to the writers and other members of th creative intelligentsia, the new organization's leadership also included such scientists as Abdurahim Polatov and Shuhrat Ismatullaev.
One of Birlik's central goals was to improve the position of the Uzbek language, in part by granting it the status of state language; Birlik's program also called for an end to the "unjustified denigration" of great Central Asian historical figures. Much of Birlik's program concerned social, economic, ecological, and health issues. Many of these related to reducing Uzbekistan's role as a producer of raw materials, especially cotton. In addition, Birlik's agenda also had human rights and other more immediately political dimensions. It called for Uzbekistan to become an independent republic of the USSR determining its fate "on the basis of a leninist nationality policy;" it also proposed inviolability of private communications, individual rights to see and dispute materials in dossiers collected by any organization, and legal protection from slander. The Birlik program supported the CPSU's efforts to "reform the USSR's political system," and noted that petitions, demonstrations, and rallies were appropriate forms of participation.
From its very inception, Birlik had an especially close bond with the Uzbekistan Writers Union. Muhammad Salih, besides being one of Birlik's founders, was also a popular poet. A number of his colleagues in the leadership, some of whom did not join until 1989, were also writers and literary critics; they included Ahmad A"zam, Usman Azim, Zahir A'lam, and Dilaram Ishaqova. Birlik members and sympathizers were active in organizing demonstrations in Tashkent at the end of 1988 and in 1989. Some of these demonstrations took place without official permission from the authorities. The first one, in Tashkent's university district on December 3, 1988, was in support of the Uzbek language. Although the organization Birlik formally did not organize the December demonstration, it did seek permission for a rally to be held in early 1989. When over the course of at least two months the authorities refused to grant permission for this gathering, Birlik leaders proceeded without authorization; they called a meeting in support of the Uzbek language which was held March 19 on Tashkent's Lenin Square. At this meeting (which according to one source attracted 12,000 participants), writers and other Birlik leaders were permitted to address a large crowd. Probably recognizing that they could not prevent gatherings, authorities granted Birlik permission to hold another meeting, on April 9, 1989. This one, however, was not held on a central Tashkent square, but in relatively remote Chuqursay raion. Along with changing directives from Moscow, these demonstrations were likely a factor encouraging the CPUz leadership to make modest concessions on language and other issues on the Birlik agenda in the first half of 1989. While signalling attention to the problems raised by Birlik, authorities continued to condemn the informal organization's techniques, the character of its leadership, and the chaos it was allegedly creating. For example, a report of a Tashkent city party conference referred to "cliques and an unhealthy moral-psychological climate" and efforts by "self-proclaimed leaders" to create extremist formations and the informal association "Birlik" and "Free Union of Uzbekistan Youth."6 At about the same time the republic press carried an especially venomous attack on Muhammad Salih, comparing him to Goebbels.
At the very end of the Nishanov era in the spring of 1989 the CPUz began to show flexibility in admitting that informal organizations could play a positive role in addressing social and political problems. However, it is clear that the party did not consider Birlik a worthy partner for cooperation. Thus, the report of an April 1989 CPUz buro meeting specifically mentioned a high level of harmful activity by "some organizers of the unregistered informal association calling itself 'Birlik'... "
Moreover, it called upon party committees to assure "high political vigilance" and to "assess in a principled fashion facts of complacency, connivance, and unscrupulousness in relation to extremist actions...

Karimov-Era Uzbekistan Prior to Independence

... The CPUz's policy toward the informal opposition forces in Uzbekistan changed when Islam Karimov replaced Rafiq Nishanov as republic party first secretary.
... With Karimov's ascension, the anti-corruption campaign of the Usmankhojaev and Nishanov eras began to be publicly portrayed in Uzbekistan as an action led by central party figures who unfairly singled out Uzbekistan for punishment, Thus, Karimov's ascension also marked the end of an assault on much of the old political guard.
However, like Karimov and former first secretary Sharaf Rashidov many of the political forces whom the new first secretary rehabilitated were members of the Samarkand-Jizzakh political grouping. Karimov's appointment also marked a new policy concerning "participation." Karimov opened up new opportunities for informal groups to operate and began to distinguish between those individuals (and wings of organizations) which sought to bring the masses into the streets and those who were satisfied to press for reform through more easily controlled activities. Beginning in the fall of 1989, the regime granted the "law abiding" leaders positive recognition and permitted them greater freedom to promote their ideas. In fact, the direction of change in policy toward the opposition was becoming evident even before Nishanov was formally removed. In early June, as riots were rocking the Fergana Valley, Nishanov was formally elected chairman of the USSR Supreme Soviet Council of Nationalities. (Thus, it was already clear that a new CPUz first secretary would soon be elected.) At this point-already in Moscow-Nishanov dispatched Abdurahim Polatov, Muhammad Salih, and Mufti Muhammad Sadiq Muhammad Yusuf (head of the Spiritual Directorate of the Muslims of Central Asia and Kazakstan) to the Fergana Valley in order to attempt to quell the violence. The disturbances in the republic at this time may help explain why Karimov, once elected, was willing to try a new tack.
...As will be discussed in more detail below, the Birlik organization was eventually to split. Although the Birlik leadership was fairly united on eventual goals, they did not agree on questions of strategy. Some leaders, such as M. Salih, apparently believed that positive change could be stimulated without mass public meetings. Others, perhaps inspired by the course of events in the Baltic republics, were less inclined to eschew public demonstrations as an instrument of pressure on the Communist Party.
...As of late 1989, none of the informal organizations besides Birlik was very large or powerful. Nevertheless, as in other republics, in Uzbekistan, too, a group named Intersoiuz arose to protect the interests of the non-indigenous nationalities, especially the Slavs. Uzbekistan's Intersoiuz was created at an "initiative group" meeting in August 1989.9 Some Birlik leaders asserted that Intersoiuz was itself an invention of the KGB.
... Given the CPUz's persecution of the "bad" groups and the genuine philosophical disagreement about utility of confrontational tactics, it is not surprising that Salih's wing of Birlik decided to distance itself from those led by Aburahim Polatov. Consequently, on February 20, 1990, Salih became head of a new smaller "Erk Public Organization." ("Erk" translates into English as "Freedom" or "Will.")
A separate and smaller organization had the advantage of permitting better control over membership. According to some sources in Tashkent, the authorities had been infiltrating Birlik with provocateur "extremists" in order to discredit it. In establishing this separate organization, Salih criticized Birlik for having become carried away with public demonstrations.
...Given the very poor personal relations between Abdurahim Polatov and Muhammad Salih, it was very difficult for Birlik and Erk to cooperate in Tashkent.

The Post-Coup "Thaw"

...The limits to Karimov's willingness to democratize were evident in the election rules and the deadlines for registration. Although the election was scheduled for 29 December 1991, the rules governing its conduct were not published until 23 November; even worse, the rules for collecting signatures--which non-party organizations had to submit to the Central Election Commission by 3 December- was not promulgated until 26 November. Due to weekends (i.e., non-working days) and the three days required to call a nomination meeting, groups other than registered parties were in effect given only one day to gather the necessary signatures! Because registered political parties were not subject to these regulations, differential treatment of Birlik and Erk registration in the fall of 1991 was of critical importance. The political party Erk received registration on September 4, 1991.
This was the very day of its application and less than a week after Uzbekistan's declaration of independence.18 Birlik did not have such good fortune. Over a year earlier it had created the "Uzbekistan Democratic Party;" in October 1991, Birlik called another meeting at which it replaced or renamed its older party with one called "Birlik." At about the same time, the Birlik Popular Movement applied to the Ministry of Justice for registration. This was granted on 12 November 1991...
Birlik Party's failure to achieve registration meant that it could not nominate a presidential candidate without gathering signatures. Birlik Popular Movement did attempt to do the impossible, to gather the required 60,000 of signatures in the course of one day. Indeed, it claims to have gathered more than the minimum, 63,000. However, because 25,000 of these were rejected by the authorities, the movement was not permitted to register Abdurahim Polatov, its chosen representative, as a candidate for president. Erk's candidate, Muhammad Salih, was not required to gather signatures because he was nominated by a registered party. Nevertheless, the presidential race was hardly played on a level field. One of the greatest advantages was that Karimov as president could directly or indirectly mobilize resources--among them the press, transportation, meeting space, and supplies--in his support. These advantages frequently manifested themselves in subtle ways. For example, the pictures which accompanied the notices of registration of the two candidates for president were of very uneven quality: In contrast to Karimov's, which was quite crisp, Salih's was somewhat blurred. Moreover, Karimov was the candidate of a large political organization, the People's Democratic Party (PDP). This party had emerged when in September a CPUz extraordinary congress adopted a declaration calling for the PDP's creation.25 Not all CPUz members joined its successor, but as of December 1, 1991, the PDP had 351,000 members.26 In contrast, Erk had 3,000 members, while Birlik claimed 500,000 supporters.
In accordance with the election law, all campaign financing for both Salih and Karimov was paid by the government. Given that Karimov was much better known than Salih, this naturally worked to the president's advantage. Likewise, the election rules specified that candidates should have equal access to the mass media. This was clearly violated, as the press devoted much more attention to the incumbent. Karimov's speeches were regularly broadcast on television. Salih was granted only fifteen minutes of air time, and this only after Birlik and Erk supporters demonstrated with demands that this time be provided; in the end, however, two minutes of Salih's speech were cut by censors. Erk alleged that there were numerous violations of the election law, including the failure to include its representatives in electoral commissions at all levels. Erk also charged that the official republic media refused to print any information about the election law or criticism of the government, that extra ballots were delivered to polling stations, and that artificial obstacles were created to hinder Erk's election observers.
...Before closing this section, a few words should be said about the respective platforms of Muhammad Salih and Islam Karimov in the presidential elections. Karimov's official campaign appeal was vague, referring to such general themes as the importance of Uzbekistan's independence, the spiritual rebirth of society, principles of relations with foreign countries, and the destruction of Uzbekistan's economy under Soviet power. He also spoke in very general terms about economic reform, such as extending privileges and greater freedom to peasants, and the need for a social safety net. Karimov's platform did not contain any specifics about political reform or guarantees of political rights. In contrast to Karimov, Salih's appeal stressed more economic change than stability. He also emphasized changes in political structures, such as the separation of legislative,executive, and judicial branches of power, and guarantees of such freedoms as speech, press, and assembly. Salih also placed an "absolute priority" on the protection of personal freedoms, including the privacy of communication. In the economic sphere, Salih expressed strong support for the introduction of a market economy and privatization "on a priority basis" of the service and household sectors, as well as the trade system, housing, and unprofitable and low-profit enterprises and farms.
Official election results purported to show that 94 percent of eligible voters took part in the election. In these same tallies, 86 percent of the votes cast for president went to Karimov, and 12 percent to Salih. Reassertion of Authoritarian Control The Crackdown of January-July 1992 It is impossible to determine with any certainty what factors encouraged Karimov to allow a "thaw" at the end of 1991. In any case, the early months of 1992 marked its end; indeed, the next three and a half years would bring no significant relaxation of Uzbekistan's authoritarian system. By July 1992, Karimov's regime had suppressed even Erk to such an extent that M. Salih would withdraw from the official political process and soon flee the country.
...As the regime was severely limiting the possibilities for dissident voices to organize within the legislative and executive branches, it also took measures to limit opportunities for foes to find support in other quarters. On April 3, the Supreme Soviet presidium adopted a resolution "On Measures to Prevent the Illegal Financing of Public Associations of the Uzbekistan Republic." This measure prohibited political parties and mass movements that pursued political goals from financing their publications with funds from religious organizations, or from foreign states, organizations or citizens. It also entrusted the Ministry of Finance to review declarations on sources of funding for all associations seeking registration in the republic, and to "strictly adhere" to the relevant regulations in the February 15, 1991 Law on Public Associations...
The growing repression convinced a wide range of the opposition-including Muhammad Salih-that a change in the dynamics of republic politics would come only with the election of a new Supreme Soviet. Consequently, as the preparations were made for the early July convening of the Supreme Soviet, leaders of Birlik and Erk held an unprecedented joint news conference where they announced plans for a demonstration on Tashkent's Independence (formerly Lenin) Square and in other cities to demand dissolution of the Supreme Soviet and new parliamentary elections.
...The Karimov regime's increasingly crude tactics made Muhammad Salih lose any hope that change could be achieved from within the system. In a journal article that went to press in May 1992 he is quoted as saying that Erk favored "cooperation with the official powers on the basis of mutual respect,pluralism of opinions, and political freedom; in July, however, he walked out of the Supreme Soviet session that his party claimed was illegal, and he resigned from his seat. Karimov, for his part, justified the continuing crackdown. In his speech on the day that Salih left the Supreme Soviet the president stated, "It is necessary to straighten out the brains of one hundred people in order to preserve the lives of thousands."

Consolidating and "Legalizing" the Crackdown

...Although beginning with the July 1992 session of the Supreme Soviet both Erk and Birlik were marginalized, they would remain legal forces into 1993. In the meantime, the Karimov regime intensified repression against both organizations and created a new "opposition."
...In late July, just weeks after Salih's departure from the Supreme Soviet, a new law took effect which provided a basis for that now even more compliant body to remove independent members. According to this law, in "exceptional cases" the parliament could "curtail the powers of deputies prior to the expiration of their terms of office." Among the conduct which qualified for such treatment was anything that "besmirch[ed] or discredit[ed] the high calling of people's deputy" or "unconstitutional acts directed... at destabilizing the sociopolitical situation, or calling for such acts..." Against this background, in August, another major figure opposition figure with a parliamentary seat, former Vice President Mirsaidov, also resigned in protest. The regime had been tightening censorship and other control of information ever since early 1992. This process intensified in the summer of that year. Erk newspaper editors found it increasingly difficult to publish materials critical of the regime and to distribute their publication. Paper, largely under government control, was in critically short supply. This forced Erk to cut its print run, which meant that it was no longer available through kiosks, only through subscription. By January 1993, the paper was shut down entirely.
Abbreviations of Parties Used in Text
CPUz: Communist Party of Uzbekistan (Russian: Kommunisticheskaia partiia Uzbekistana).
IRP: Islamic Renaissance Party (Russian: Islamskaia partiia vozrozhdeniia)
DMU: Democratic Movement of Uzbekistan (Russian: Demokraticheskoe dvizhenie Uzbekistan)
PDP: People's Democratic Party


AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE

TASHKENT, Nov 18, 2000 - Leaders of a banned lslamic extremist movement in Uzbekistan, Takhir Yuldash and the notorious Djuma Namangani, were sentenced to death Friday by Tashkent's Supreme Court.
Ten other members of the banned Islamic fundamentalist group were sentenced from 12 to 20 years in prison in a trial that has been criticized by Human Rights Watch representatives in Uzbekistan. Only three of the 12 defendants were present in court. The rest were tried in absentia. Erk opposition party leader Mukhammad Salikh, who stood against President Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan's 1991 presidential elections, was given a 15 year and six month prison sentence for organizing criminal acts.
Observers fear that opposition leader Salikh has been tried as a member of the IMU so that the Uzbek authorities could ask for his extradition from Norway where he has received political asylum. Salikh's daughter,Nigor, who was not allowed in court to hear the sentence, said., "We don't believe he has participated in these crimes." She said she fears that Norway will now be compelled to hand over Salikh to the Uzbek authorities.

UZBEK OPPOSITION BOSS SAYS AFGHANS NEED
BROAD-BASED GOVERNMENT

BBC Monitoring Central Asia Unit, Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring July 29, 1999
Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mashhad, in Uzbek 1530 gmt 26 Jul, 1999

Text of report by Iranian radio from Mashhad on 26th July The chairman of the Uzbek opposition Erk Democratic Party, Mohammad Solih, has told Iranian radio from Mashhad that the six-plus-two forum on Afghanistan which was held in Tashkent on 19th July did ''not achieve any success". He said such a forum should have been held five to six years ago. Solih added that peace could only be established in Afghanistan with the setting up of a government of ''national unity". The following is the Now comments about an issue important for all the Central Asian region -on a measure taken to settle the Afghan crisis -the six-plus-two meeting in Tashkent. According to some political observers, the holding of the six-plus-two meeting in Tashkent was a convenient time for Uzbek foreign policy to pay serious attention to regional issues and to show its diplomacy. After realizing this, Uzbekistan carried out some work in that direction and in this respect we can take, as an example, Uzbek Foreign Minister Abdulaziz Komilov's visits to Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. But according to the same political observers the Uzbek side's attention to the head of the Taleban delegation, Mowlawi Amir Khan Motaqi –acting minister of culture and information and head of Taleban delegation at six-plus-two talks on the Iocation of Islamic groups opposed to the Uzbek gevernment in those areas under Taleban control and a proposal on changing this situation placed diplomatic efforts in second place. It Iooked as if the Uzbek government was trying to use this meeting against its own opposition. In other words, Uzbekistan tried to use this meeting in its own interests.
The Iranian radio's Uzbek service correspondent questioned the Ieader of Uzbekistan's Erk Democratic Party , Mohammad Solih, on the six-plus-two meeting in Tashkent and its results. Let us Iisten to his answer together.
Mohammad Solih's voice The six-plus-two forum, of course, was the most important event in Uzbekistan Iast week 19th July .This forum was of great importance. But the results of this forum and its public meaning showed that it did not achieve any success. Nevertheless, such a forum has been carried out very Iate. Such a forum should have been carried out five to six years ago and this is not only the affair of the Central Asian or neighbouring countries to bring peace to Afghanistan but peace in Afghanistan is also an issue of great importance for Eurasia. Uzbekistan was the initiator of this forum and it was a good factor. But it seems to me that all the participants of the meeting did not have a single agenda and proposal. They all had their own aims and they went there with those aims. It is a pity to say that the issue of peace in Afghanistan was not seen as the most important issue for the neighbours of Afghanistan. It is my personal view. If the neighbouring countries had come with such a proposal and said: God willing, we want peace in Afghanistan and we will try to do our best for this. Then this forum would have achieved something. But every delegate had its own words indistinct peace in Afghanistan words indistinct .There is a kind of geopolitical situation in Afghanistan. I think that the delegates started to think over one issue: Who will overcome this situation and on the contrary , who will fail in this situation? In my view they thought about it and, therefore, the forum did not reach any agreement.
Of course, it is a good step. I want to state that if those neighbouring states gather once again and really demonstrate political courage to bring peace to Afghanistan, then they will probably achieve some results. Meanwhile, however, I think they are mistaken. The fault of the forum was that if they wanted to evaluate Afghanistan, and wanted changes for Afghanistan changes tack. Those neighbouring states, however, assessed the situation in Afghanistan proceeding from the present day situation there and tried to bring changes there. But there is only one way to bring changes there. And only in this way a govemment word indistinct can be formed with the participation of all ethnic groups in Afghanistan and it would have brought peace to Afghanistan. It was the main issue and this important issue was not raised there. There is no other way for Afghanistan to achieve peace. Afghanistan has approximately 250 years history. All this time only one ethnic group ruled there for those 250 years and other ethnic groups were oppressed. Therefore, when Russians left the country the situation changed there and other ethnic groups also wanted equality , real friendship and real fraternity and began demanding the truth. 1 think that probably they are right in their demands.
The only way to establish peace in Afghanistan, therefore, and probably the only way is to form a government of word indistinct national unity and there is no other way. And that government has to word indistinct all the existing ethnic groups there. Only in this way will it be possible to establish peace there. This issue should have been raised as an important matter in Tashkent but it is a pity to say that it did not happen.
Presenter Mr. Mohammad Solih,
Chairman of the Uzbekistan's Erk Democratic Party

ERK SAYS UZBEK PRESIDENT BENEFITED
FROM BOMBINGS

02.08.1999, RFE\RL
Clark Troy (CTroy@sorosny.org)

An article in the newspaper of the Erk Democratic Party , which has been banned in Uzbekistan, says that Presdent Islam Karimov ''hit the jackpot'' as a result of the 16 Febnary bombings, Iran's Mashhad radio in Uzbek reported on 28 July. That is because the bombings gave him the chance to introduce a ''terror movement'' of "unprecedented oppresson, Erk said that "if it was not Karimov himself who organized these bombings, then most Iikely he is currently handing out rewards to those who did. PG

UZBEKISTAN: OPPOSITION SAYS UN WILL TAKE UP TORTURE CASE

08.08.1999, RFE/RL
by Beatrice HOGAN

The leader of Uzbekistan's banned opposition party Erk met Sept. 6 in Geneva with Mary Robinson - the UN's high commissioner for human rights - to discuss the human rights situation in the Central Asian nation. Our correspondent Beatrice Hogan looks at the role the UN office plays in evaluating allegations of human rights abuses and in making governments accountable for their actions.
Mohammed Solih, the leader of Uzbekistan's banned opposition party Erk, said he presented Mary Robinson with documentation - including letters from prisoners - to support allegations of torture in Uzbek prisons.
International human rights organizations - including the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch - also accuse Uzbekistan of violating the UN's international Convention Against Torture, to which it is a signatory.
A spokesman for Robinson, Jose Diaz, confirmed that the Geneva meeting took place on Sept. 6, but said UN policy is not to comment on what is discussed at such meetings. Solih said the state of human rights in his country has declined dramatically since the February 16 bombings in Tashkent, which killed 16 and wounded more than 100. In his letter to RFE/RL, Solih said the current situation in Uzbekistan has devolved from a police state into a medieval inquisition. Solih alleges that thousands of innocent citizens have been arbitrarily arrested and tortured for their suspected role in the bombings.
Solih - who is now in exile - has been named by the Uzbek government as one of the masterminds of the bombing, which is widely believed to havebeen an assassination attempt against President Islam Karimov. Two of Solih's relatives were sentenced last month in connection with the incident.
Some Central Asian analysts suggest that Karimov may have used the bombings, however, as a pretext to crack down on political opposition in his country.
Diaz said Robinson regularly meets with a wide array of civil society groups, human rights non-governmental organizations and government representatives. He said that only if the evidence of human rights violations is compelling and reliable enough will the High Commission for Human Rights conduct an official investigation.
Diaz explained the type of evidence that would be required in such a case: "That kind of evidence is what they call evidence of systematic or gross violations of human rights - reliable information. The commission considers this information in private session and then decides whether the situation is grave enough to start considering it publicly."
The UNHCHR cannot force governments to follow its recommendations. Rather, Diaz says his organization relies on moral force and on international public opinion to convince countries to abide by their treaty obligations and to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
But, despite its lack of enforcement mechanisms, Diaz explains why countries take his organization's work seriously: "What it [UNHCHR] can do, more concretely, is to name investigators and working groups to look into particular situations. And countries do not want to be singled out in this manner by having a UN investigator named for them. So there is a certain amount of cooperation to try to avoid this kind of scrutiny."
In his letter to RFE/RL, Solih said Robinson assured him that Uzbekistan's case will be taken up in November by the UN High Commission on Human Rights' Committee Against Torture. Diaz, however, did not confirm what additional steps the UN might take.

OPPOSITION IEADER: "UZBEK ELECTIONS
WILL BE 99 PERCENT FALSITIED... ''

Excerpts from report by Iranian radio from
Mashhad on 25th August, 1999

[Announcer) Mr. Mohammad Solih, the announcement of the date of elections by the president [of the Republic) of Uzbekistan [Islam Karimov) at Iast session of the Supreme Assembly [parliament) of Uzbekistan was to some extent unexpected. What is your and the opposition Erk Party's view on this?
Solih: I do not particularly Iike making predictions, nor do I like people who do so, however it is possible to predict beforehand how some famous people, groups and even states may act in certain conditions. [passage omitted] in 1990 the opposition predicted that Uzbekistan's government would quickly switch from the communist platform; the opposition also correctly predicted that the 1991 presidential elections would be falsified, that the opposition would be prevented from running in the parliamentary elections in 1994, and that a referendum would be held to extend the president's term in office; society should know that the 16th February bombings were the start of Karimov's election campaign; the verdict issued by the Regional court in Yangiyol on 18th August on six members of the opposition was the first stage of the campaign; the best people of the Uzbek nation were imprisoned during the 16th February-18th August stage; if the elections were held today the people would not cast their votes in favour of Karimov and his parliament.
[Announcer) Mr Mohammad Solih, you have said that if the elections were held today the people and even those in the government would not vote [for Karimov). A natural question arises: will the government step down power if votes are not cast in their favour?
[Solih) Of course this regime will not abandon power even if the people do not vote in its favour. President Karimov knows better than we do that the people will not vote for him and he has made his preparations in advance. There is no doubt that any elections held today will result in a 99 per cent victory for the regime. Because there is no doubt that the elections will be 99 per cent falsified. However there are no elections today. One election is scheduled for December [5th December 1999) and another for January next year [9th January 2000). if God grants us and President Karimov Iife and if a silence Iike the silence that reigns today continues in the country , in all probability the aforementioned picture of the elections will be precisely repeated.
However, only God can predict what will happen between now and December [this year) and January next year. One thing is certain: as Iong as today's regime keeps ruling in such a way that the people's will is always rejected, the free elections the people wish will remain just a dream. Our duty , the duty of the opposition, is to tum the people's dream into reality. [passage to end omitted]... Everone should know that today Uzbekistan's opposition is at the centre of the politics. Uzbek elections will be 99 per cent falsitied.

THE CREATION OF NATIONS

Oliver ROY
THE NEW CENTRAL ASIA, New York University Press Washington Square,
New York, 2000. pp 131,132, 133

...The Erk Party of Uzbekistan (Mohamed Saleh) and Popular Front of Azerbaijan (Abulfaz Elchibey), on the other hand, were rather secular and Pan-Turkist. Erk and the Azeri Popular Front called for closer realtions with Turkey...
Karimov was elected president of the republic in December 1991 wiht 86 percent of the vote, against an opposition that was active but limited to the intelligentsia: Mohamed Saleh, leader of the "Turkist" and secular Erk party, took more than 12 percent of the vote. "The democratic opposition was whipped into line from mid-1992 onwards.The opposition members of the parliament were either forced from office or forced to toe the line. The Erk Party was banned in the late 1993 and Saleh took refuge in Turkey, which produced a chill in relations between the two countries. (pp 131,132,133)
"WE ARE READY TO SERVE OUR PEOPLE"

BBC, Uzbek opposition leader Salih: "We are ready to serve our people" / Opposition Leader Gives Interv. 04.02.2000

In an interview on Iranian radio the Uzbek opposition leader, Mohammad Solih, said that the opposition were willing to respond to the call of Uzbek President Islam Karimov to return to Uzbekistan in order "to serve our people in the country". He said, however, that they did not intend to throw themselves into the arms of the regime, they merely wanted to get their rights back. The following are excerpts from the interview broadcast by Iranian radio in Uzbek on 31st January 00.
[Presenter] We have asked the chairman of the [banned] Erk Democratic Party of Uzbekistan, Mr. Mohammad Solih, if the political oppposition is ready to return to Uzbekistan, taking into consideration the Uzbek government's call the opposition to talks, on the one hand, and its strict policy against the religious opposition, on the other hand. Please, listen to Mr. Mohammad Solih's opinion on this.
[Mohammad Solih] The Uzbek leader, [Islam] Karimov, speaking at the Oliy Majlis [parliament] announced some kind of softening of the policy towards the opposition. We started hoping that this softening of policy applies not only towards the political opposition, but towards the religious opposition as well. It is a pity but it shows that we had misunderstood this. May be I do not know the real situation there [in Uzbekistan]. If that domestic terror, that action against the people has started again there, then I think that holding negotiations on the opposition's return will not be the right thing now. As you know, we spoke about the opposition's return on Radio Liberty yesterday [30th January].
[passage omitted: speaks about people's mentality]
In this respect, we replied sincerely to Uzbek President Karimov's calling upon the opposition. But it does not mean that we fully believe in Karimov's call. We do not know if this call is to be believed. Therefore, at the first stage we have put forward small and easy conditions. The implementation of those conditions will show that Karimov's intention to recall us to the country is a true one. Otherwise, we have to regard this as the Uzbek leader's next manoeuvre, because, knowing that a group of young people were taken to a mosque [by the Uzbek police] and forced to take an oath not to join the opposition, that part of the opposition are being kept in prison or threatened, but at the sametime, recalling the other part [of the opposition] to the country, this would undoubtly be hypocrisy. And, after all this, we are not intending to return to the arms of the regime. We are forcing ourselves merely to respond to this call. We say that the conditions and situation in the country [in Uzbekistan] are difficult. With the aim of serving the country, we are ready to forget the harm done, having come to a compromise, and even we are ready to forget the merciless brutality used against us by the [Uzbek] government. We have announced our readinesss to negotiate with them [Uzbek gevernment] now, only proceeding from the point of view that all this will help our people and the nation. But it is not possible just to return to the country, having seen all this. Such an action [returning] would not suit us. If we return to the country, then it will be a betrayal of the goals on our part, for which we had to leave the country before. This would be a betrayal of our people. And it would be like a reconcliation with the regime, which pardons one part of the people and puts the other part in prison. Believe us, we will never do things that way.
[passage omitted: the opposition responses to the call to return to the country]
If we do not respond, then Karimov will announce all over the world: I have recalled the opposition to the country, But they did not respond, did not believe me and they considered my call to be a trick. They are to blame for this.
We are responding seriously to Karimov's call so that he does not have the chance to say that. Some of our friends refer to the Tajik government, saying that the government and the opposition had come to an agreement, though there were clashes, there were many victims there, but in spite of all that they had become reconciled and had started a new life.
[passage omitted: repeated criticism of Karimov's policy]
I want to say this on behalf of the opposition: We did not leave for the West because of the good life there. We had to leave the country [Uzbekistan] only with the aim of protecting ourselves and our families from the terror and mortal danger threatened by the regime. We are responding to the Uzbek leader's suggestion to return the opposition not because we like this regime, but we are responding to this only to get our rights back. If we get our rights back, then we will serve our people in the country. We have no other claims.
[passage omitted: repeated criticism of Karimov's policy]
But we hope for the better and demand that the repressions be stopped there. If the repressions do not stop, comrade Karimov should not suggest that we return to our country.
[Presenter] You have listened to the chairman of the [banned] Uzbek Democratic Party, Mr Mohammad Solih.
Source: Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mashhad, in Uzbek 1500 gmt 3 Jan.00
BBC Mon CAU 030200/** GAR/JF/AA

FIVE PARTIES TO CONTEST UZBEK
PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS

15.09.1999, RFE\RL NEWSLINE

A spokesman for Uzbekistan's Central Electoral Commission told journalists in Tashkent on 14 September that five political parties have received permission to contend the 5 December parliamentary elections, Reuters reported (see "RFE/RL, Newsline," 23 August 1999). They are the People's Democratic Party (the former Communist Party of Uzbekistan), the Adolat (Justice) party, the National Revival Party, For the Progress of the Motherland Party, and the Fidorkorlar (Selfless Ones). LF

COMMENT FROM MUHAMMED SALIH: PUPPET THEATER OF THE UZBEK GOVERNMENT MUHAMMAD SALIH CHAIRMAN ERK PARTY OF UZBEKISTAN Government of Uzbekistan intends to install a political show at the end of this year. The juncture is called "elections to Supreme Medzhlis", compiled by the President of Uzbekistan it's producer, represents the roles to execute five puppet parties. Therefore, in this vein it is possible to entitle it a "puppet-show theater." "Theater" wants to introduce to the world, by intending to invite the guests from different countries, and in commonwealth opinion, these visitors can be present as observers. "The Government of Uzbekistan is not afraid to have observers. Choices will be democratic. Let observers see as much as they want." When asked the reason for such boldness of the Uzbek government, the answer is that all five parties belong to Karimov. Moreover, what about Uzbek people, "whose sweat drops from their arms, into their boot-tops". Is there any alternative to President Karimov? And who will lose? The Uzbek people will lose. They are already used to losing, only what will be the world's reaction by the observers on this juncture? In opinion of Uzbekistan government, Uzbekistan as an independent state will conduct elections as it needs, irrespective of reacting anyone's observations, even globally. That is to say, Uzbek government, as always, is hiding the democrats for independence. Trampling rights of the person, terror against a political opposition and devotees, persecution on dissidents, and other savageries were always done in this country behind a screen by this demagogy. Everyone, who from the side tried to prevent torture to the people, Uzbek authority here accused them of interference in private business of sovereign state. Therefore, in such situation democratic countries can send the observers on this farce of Uzbek elections. One representative of the OBSE in region answered this question shortly, but it is very clear., "If the opposition will not participate in options, there is no also sense to observe these elections". Everyone knows, that political opposition is present in Uzbekistan, two entities: the party of ERK and the Birlik party. On whole, they will not be represented on these elections. There wlll begin a new stage in the sovereign reign of the tyrants.

UZBEK OPPOSITION LEADER MUHAMMED SALIH
SAYS VERDICT ILLEGAL

BBC Monitoring
Text of report by Iranian radio from Mashhad, 20.11.2000

On the day when the [Uzbek] Supreme Court announced its verdict [in opposition leaders' trial,17th November], we spoke by telephone with the chairman of the Erk Democratic Party, Muhammad Solih, for whom the prosecutor had asked the death penalty, but the court sentenced him for 15 and half years in prison - most observers assessed this as a surprise. Here is his opinion:
[Muhammad Solih] I expressed my opinion before the beginning of the trial. But I kept silent during the trial because I was one of those groundlessly accused. The verdict was announced today and I can express some views. First, the prosecutor asked for the death penalty for me as well as for Tohir Yoldosh and Juma Namangoniy [leaders of the banned Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan] and others. According to the sentence passed today, for some reasons that punishment was not given to me, the sentence envisages 15 or 15 and half years in a strict regime prison. This, first of all, somewhat surprised me, of course, because 15 years, given the present circumstances in Uzbekistan, for a person like me, is really very little, because this regime, the totalitarian regime in Uzbekistan considers me a major enemy.
Fifteen years are given to ordinary people, for example, to my brother, he did nothing, he is innocent. Not only one, but all the three my brothers were given 10-15 years, they have nothing to do with politics. And Mamadali Mahmud, only because he is my friend and because he went to Ukraine to see me, was sentenced to about 15 years. This reminds me an anecdote from Stalin's period. This anecdote is not a joke, because a joke is about some funny things, whereas an anecdote is something containing the whole tragedy and drama of an event. To be short, two prisoners in jail are talking. How many years are you sentenced to, asks one. Twenty years, was the answer. What for? For nothing, I have no guilt, answers the second. This is impossible. Those not guilty are given here 15 years, so you must be guilty of something, once you've got 20 years.
Similarly, I also have no guilt, and I have got 15 years. And this is probably the logic and justice of a totalitarian state.
However, to comment on this without any anecdotes, I think, they were preparing to give me the death penalty, but having thought they decided that the death penalty was not convincing. First of all, it is an exaggeration, second, they probably feared that the death penalty would further increase the prestige of Muhammad Solih, third, this would have made more difficult for Uzbekistan to demand Muhammad Solih's extradition. They limited themselves to giving me 15 years in prison proceeding from these three factors. In fact, a punishment I would have accepted from such a totalitarian regime should have been tougher.
Today I am being asked by radio stations whether I am going to appeal against the court ruling and I tell them that I will not. Because I do not recognize the existence of either the court or justice in that state, or any structures of that state. If I did recognize it I could have appealed or hired a defence lawyer. Unfortunately, the ruling government in Uzbekistan today is doing every injustice to our people.
My tragedy, the tragedy of my family and my brothers is only one episode of that great tragedy. We do not expect any justice from this government, we do not recognize its court and if we appealed to it to reconsider [the case] or against any other procedure it would mean our recognition of its legality. We consider that government and its courtan illegal state and an illegal court.
Source: Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mashhad, in Uzbek 1500 gmt 20 Nov, 2000.