Showing posts with label Kyrgyzstan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kyrgyzstan. Show all posts

Thursday, July 21, 2011

The Parable of the Isms - a guest post by Matthew Rojansky


[image source]

The Parable of the Isms, as Applied to the Former Soviet Union
Guest post by Matthew Rojansky

My colleague Karim Sadjadpour recently published a satirical analysis of Middle East politics, "The Cynical Dairy Farmer's Guide to the New Middle East," riffing on a famous Cold War joke about communism and capitalism, known as "the parable of the isms."  As Karim noted,
 No one really knows how the two-cow joke known as "Parable of the Isms" came about, but most students of Political Science 101 have likely come across some variation of the following definitions:

Socialism: You have two cows. The government takes one of them and gives it to your neighbor.

Communism: You have two cows. The government takes them both and provides you with milk.

Nazism: You have two cows. The government shoots you and takes the cows.

Capitalism: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.
Satire it may be, but the essential truth of the "cow jokes" is what makes them funny. Karim's thirteen terse metaphors for Middle Eastern regimes cut to the heart of a complex region in which increasing American interest has followed increasing investments of blood and treasure, with very little added understanding of what's really going on.

The Soviet Union suffered no dearth of American attention over nearly half a century after World War II. Yet even the keenest observers, like Kennan and Kissinger, were focused almost entirely on Moscow, and within it mostly on the Kremlin. During the Cold War, that made good sense - after all, no one in Kiev or Almaty, let alone in Chisinau or Ashgabat, was making particularly important decisions for US foreign policy and global security.

But twenty years after the collapse of Communism and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, things work a bit differently in Eurasia. To understand why drugs flow so readily from Afghanistan through Central Asia and into Russia and Western Europe requires some sense of what's going on - and what's not - in places like Dushanbe and Astana. To see why a NATO-Russia impasse over missile defense is so serious requires an understanding of how the people, and the governments, in Kyiv and Tbilisi relate to their massive neighbor.

The former Soviet republics are no longer defined so much by being formerly Soviet, as by what they have become after twenty years of independence. Yet the old categories - socialist, communist, capitalist, fascist - don't easily work to describe a region where political cultures draw on everything from Rome and Byzantium to Baghdad and Beijing. Let's see how the "parable of the isms" might offer a convenient shorthand guide to the fifteen states that once made up the USSR.

Russia
You have six cows and four bulls. Two of the bulls die from alcoholism, and the remaining two form a "tandem" to take the cows' milk and sell it to Germany and China.

Ukraine
You have four of the most productive cows on the farm, two of which allow themselves to be milked by Russia, which upsets the other two so much their milk goes sour.

Georgia
You have two cows and one prize-winning bull. The bull is so distracted winning prizes that Russia runs away with both cows.

Belarus
You have one cow which you savagely beat until it produces milk. The milk dries up after your last savage beating, so now you must sell the cow to Russia.

Moldova
You have two cows and a calf, but the cows live in Italy and Russia and send milk home by Western Union. You ferment the milk into wine, and launch a frenzied campaign to join the EU. Meanwhile, the calf is stolen and sold by rustlers.

Armenia
You have four cows, but three of them live in Los Angeles and think they are horses. They send money for you to build stables.

Azerbaijan
You have one cow that produces lots of excellent milk. You sell the milk to Farmer Browne and buy cattle prods from Israel and Turkey.

Turkmenistan
You had one cow but you sold it to buy a golden statue of a cow that rotates with the sun.

Kazakhstan
You have two cows that produce vast quantities of milk. You sell the milk, buy each cow a gold-plated cow bell, and declare yourself bull for life.

Kyrgyzstan
You have two cows: one Kyrgyz and one Uzbek; they hate each other and refuse to be milked. Instead of hay, feed them tulips. Then sell one each to Russia and the United States. After six months sell them again.

Tajikistan
You have three cows: one Tajik, one Uzbek, and one Russian. You beat the Russian cow until it runs away, and use your misfortune to plead for international aid. Meanwhile Iran milks your remaining cows.

Uzbekistan
You have four cows. You let them drink all the water in the neighborhood swimming pool. Now no one can go swimming. You blame this on "corrupt and lawless elements," and volunteer to remain in power until the problem is solved.

The Baltic States
You have lost half your cows, for which you blame Russia and demand an apology. As consolation, the EU gives you a sleek Scandinavian-designed barn and NATO farmers teach you advanced milking techniques.

[image source]

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Post-colonial healthcare worker migration patterns

IWPR has a piece on the impact of labor migration on the healthcare system in Kyrgyzstan. Reading it, I couldn't help but think of the controversy caused by healthcare workers emigrating en masse from Africa to the UK. This was a much-discussed topic in a very interesting course I took last fall on "international migration and development." The reasons for migration from rural regions of Central Asia to urban areas of Kazakhstan and Russia are similar to the reasons for migration from Africa to the UK - money is the main reason, of course, and a common language smooths the path of migration, although there are some interesting wrinkles along the way. For example, according to this article on "Doctors and Soccer Players - African Professionals on the Move," in Ghana, the dearth of native professionals is made up in part by reinforcements from Cuba.

One of the things mentioned in the IWPR story is that Russians are coming down to Kyrgyzstan to recruit healthcare workers. The UK and South Africa apparently reached an agreement to reduce such "poaching" several years ago, but I doubt such agreements will be in the offing between former Soviet republics in the near future. Russia needs the professionals and can pay them, and given relatively low barriers to migration labor will flow to where it gets paid most.

Friday, August 05, 2005

Scare tactics...

Earlier in the week, I photographed this public health warning at the local clinic in my wife's hometown of Floresti, Moldova:



The center panel traces the steps "from alcoholism to AIDS; it's just one step."


This poster is unsigned, but I like to imagine some artist who cut his/her teeth depicting the evils of fatcat capitalists or corrupt kolkhoz chiefs for the Soviet propaganda machine, but in the post-Soviet environment is able to produce posters that will hopefully save lives.

Related links:
AIDS.md
World Bank anti-AIDS program in Moldova
a synopsis of the dire situation from the UNESCO website
UNAIDS country page - Moldova

Friday, March 25, 2005

Elsewhere in the CIS

Kyrgyzstan is not the only place where things are happening today. Veronica of Neeka's Backlog mentions some unrest in Minsk today; and Andy at Siberian Light has a truly excellent post which might well be titled "Whither Moldova?" A topic near and dear to my heart.

"Avoiding a Russia-vs-West Rift on Kyrgyzstan"

RIA Novosti also has a column in English by Angela Charlton, titled "Avoiding a Russia-vs-West Rift on Kyrgyzstan." Here's the full text (I haven't yet mastered the art of editing these down to one or two key paragraphs):

2005-03-24 17:27
AVOIDING A RUSSIA-VS-WEST RIFT OVER KYRGYZSTAN
PARIS (by columnist Angela Charlton for RIA Novosti) - Is Kyrgyzstan following the footsteps of Ukraine and Georgia, as yet another opposition movement takes to the streets to threaten the status quo?

All three ex-Soviet republics held questionable elections that sparked protests. But dig beneath the surface and the similarities disintegrate. Unlike in Ukraine and Georgia, Kyrgyzstan's demonstrations have already turned violent, scaring away for support for both sides; the opposition lacks a unifying leader; and drug barons and Islamic militants have mingled with the disgruntled activists.

With opposition groups occupying government buildings in Bishkek, international mediation may become necessary to avoid a civil war. Russia and the West don't have to be on opposing sides this time. Joint Russian-US involvement would be the wisest and safest solution for Kyrgyzstan, and for Central Asia as a whole.

Sober minds in Moscow and Washington recognize the dangers of taking sides in the Kyrgyz dispute. It remains to be seen whether they will prevail, or whether Russia and the West will plunge into another round of geopolitical wrangling that leaves beleaguered Kyrgyzstan the victim.

As soon as news of opposition protests over Kyrgyz parliamentary elections broke earlier this month, many western observers gleefully predicted the next post-Soviet revolution. Buoyed by democratic rumblings in the Middle East, American observers especially are eager to see the Ukrainian and Georgian scenarios repeated - and to see stubborn Russia embarrassed yet again in its own backyard.

Some even labeled Akayev an acolyte of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Yet Akayev had an iron grip on power well before Putin became president, and the Kremlin has been distancing itself from Akayev for years. Mikhail Margelov, chairman of the Federation Council's foreign relations' committee, called Akayev's democratic record "far from ideal" and suggested the Kyrgyz elections were less than perfect.

Unofficial reports say Akayev came to Moscow during the heat of the protests on Sunday, but was denied a meeting with Putin and sent home with a warning to avoid a crackdown. The next day, Akayev was in Kyrgyzstan toeing a softer line, promising a review of the most controversial election results and suggesting negotiations with the opposition were possible.

Moscow appears to have learned some lessons in Ukraine. Russian officials have hosted top Kyrgyz opposition figures, leaving both sides prepared in case regime change in Kyrgyzstan becomes likely. But the Kremlin is taking care not to antagonize Akayev, to avoid repeating what happened in Moldova earlier this year, when a once pro-Moscow president turned against his Russian mentors.

The West's relationship with Kyrgyzstan is more tangled than its relations with Ukraine and Georgia. Akayev was considered the most liberal of Central Asia's presidents in the 1990s, but his democratic reputation soured as he amassed more and more power for his allies. Then he was again in favor in 2001, when Washington needed his permission to install U.S. air bases in Kyrgyzstan for the war in Afghanistan.

Akayev and some Russian observers accuse western sources of funding and fomenting the unrest in Kyrgyzstan. But as the crisis has unfolded, U.S. officials have kept a low profile, unlike they did in Ukraine and Georgia. They appear more concerned with U.S. security interests - and their relationship with China, on Kyrgyzstan's eastern border - than democratic revolutions.

Russia and the United States have more in common when it comes to Kyrgyzstan than both sides seem willing to admit. Both have a military presence there, and both want stability in the region but have reservations about Akayev. Both are determined to retain influence in Central Asia: Moscow wants to keep Washington from gaining the upper hand, and Washington wants to make sure it doesn't become a Russian fiefdom. Facing off over Kyrgyzstan would put both sides' goals at risk.

This looks like a pretty pro-Russian column to me, and as the author seems to be a regular columnist for RIA Novosti that's no surprise. But as I mentioned before, I wasn't following this story until today, so I have little appreciation for the nuances. This point of view is interesting and seems to be backed up by at least a little common sense, which is sometimes in short supply in revolutionary times.