Showing posts with label central asia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label central asia. 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]

Thursday, July 03, 2008

More on Mongolia


Feeling uncertain how to interpret events in Mongolia, I asked a friend with more experience there what he thought of suggestions from some Russian media that the post-election unrest is yet another "colored revolution" fomented by Western forces. Here's the response:
Nah. Of course it's the Russians calling it that; they want chaos so they can pounce. Note that the West isn't happy, but they were all about the revos in Kyrgyzstan/ Georgia. But in the end, it's nothing to Kyrgyz or Georgia. It's not a revolution. Because most people want the MPRP, who won. And they don't like the violence.

My prediction is that it'll pass, and the DPM (other party) will get a few carrots for not "indirectly" pushing for protests, which puts MPRP in position to use violence and makes them look bad. The last time there was an election, in 2004, there was nearly a 50/50 split, which created deadlock between the two parties, and then some compromise was struck. The next four years was a tussle between the two parties, with each trying to gain an upper hand but with the MPRP getting it. Mongolia suffers from corruption, so it wasn't principles that were being traded.

2008 was looked forward to as a time to "finally" give one of the parties a clear advantage to get things done, because the problem was: The political situation demanded the MPRP go populist to gain and maintain the upper hand (in other words, don't seem so elitist, support people against the mining companies); now, with the MPRP winning the majority, they can do what they need to do, and this can either be good or bad - good if they do good work, bad if their position in power only corrupts them further, as there are some bad apples in there.

Something that one of the articles about this said was true: that Ulaanbaatar (UB) is a place w/a lot of unemployed young adults in a difficult situation. It's ripe for violence. But it's not ideological, and nothing from the ground-up.

Watch - I'll be totally wrong. But this is what I got from being there [in the past].
It looks like at least one RIA Novosti commentator generally agrees: "The current unrest is unlikely to spark a revolution in Mongolia, which has merely stumbled on its way to democracy." If you're interested in how Russian media are covering the story, here is RIA Novosti's thematic page and here is Regnum's. Al-Jazeera's report follows the money, and AFP has what seems to be a decent roundup with some good photos as well as this fact-box (on the other hand, given AFP's reputation among international journalists for inaccuracy in breaking-story situations, perhaps I should be posting it with a disclaimer):

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

The "Yurt Revolution"?

Mongolians set it off

There is post-election unrest in Mongolia (see here and here, via GVO). Regnum has decided that this is a "colored" revolution and has dubbed it the "yurt revolution"; a commenter at dirty.ru picks up on this idea and points to an article last week in the WSJ Asia (and the SPB Times, but not the WSJ proper as claimed by Regnum, unless you count the online edition) by an AEI expert expressing concern about Russia's influence in Mongolia, titled "Genghis Putin" (and with a title like that, naturally it was picked up by InoPressa).

RBC also uses the "yurt revolution" moniker and turns one WSJ Asia article into alleged concerns by "the American media" at large about the elections in Mongolia, citing unnamed "experts" in also concluding that the events are "reminiscent of the 'colored revolution' scenarios in Ukraine and Georgia."

Don't these people understand that when "the West" sides with a colored revolution, even one that fizzles, they at least have a name and fashion accessories all picked out beforehand? Anyone remember the "Denim Revolution"? The only English-language mentions on Google News of a "yurt revolution" are in reference to the events of 2005 in Kyrgyzstan (more commonly known as the "Tulip Revolution").

The apparent lack of a pre-planned press kit and branding strategy for the Mongolian rioters defenders of democracy is not, of course, conclusive evidence of a lack of Western involvement, but still... before drawing any conclusions, I'd prefer to wait for further developments, and for the guys at Registan to weigh in on this - after all, it's more their bailiwick than mine. But for now they're silent on the story - perhaps because half of their formidable brain trust is still recovering after Budapest.

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Monday, September 17, 2007

Rumsfeld in retirement - looking out for Central Asia

WaPo's interview with the departed SecDef leads with his comments about the tempest in a teapot surrounding MoveOn's Petraeus ad (don't our leaders and newspapers have more important things to be discussing?). What I found more interesting was Rummy's apparent commitment to microfinance and to bolstering Central Asia's image and perhaps its lobbying clout in the US.

Rumsfeld Foundation to Encourage Public Service
Fellowships Planned; Group Also Aims to Support Micro-Enterprise, Central Asia
By Bradley Graham
Monday, September 17, 2007; Page A06

[...]Now that he is out of office, he has devised a foundation with this concern in mind. The foundation's general goal, he said, is to "encourage reasoned and civil debate" about a range of global challenges. A major feature will be student fellowships to promote study after college in fields related to public policy, with the hope of encouraging young people to go into government.

Word that Rumsfeld is developing a fellowship programsurfaced in news reports several months ago. But in the interview -- his first detailed discussion of the foundation -- Rumsfeld described a broader mission, saying the foundation will also help finance loans to "micro-enterprises" in developing countries and try to generate support for Central Asian republics. Additionally, it will fund lectures on various topics. [...]

Rumsfeld became wealthy during a 24-year business career between stints in government. A family foundation, set up in 1985 by him and his wife, Joyce, is now valued at about $20 million and makes charitable contributions to dozens of groups a year. [...]

Details about the number and size of the Rumsfeld fellowships have yet to be worked out. But they will not be attached to a particular school, going instead to individuals for study in foreign and national security affairs, economics, and other public policy fields. [...]

Rumsfeld has long spoken of the need to encourage government service. The other main aims of his foundation -- loans to micro-enterprises and help for Central Asian republics -- reflect more recent interests.

Micro-enterprise is a burgeoning global phenomenon in which people who lack access to normal credit receive financing to operate small businesses. It has proved to be an economic boon to some poor regions. Rumsfeld noted that the repayment rates have been high, and he said such loans have the advantage of bypassing sometimes corrupt governments and landing directly in the hands of beneficiaries.

His focus on Central Asian republics such as Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan stems from a concern that they lack the U.S.-based support groups that benefited the Eastern European states in their transition from communist rule. "We don't have, in Chicago or Detroit or Pittsburgh, Uzbeks or Tajiks or Kazakhs," Rumsfeld said. "I think that we need to have people who understand what's going on in Central Asia . . . and the difficulty of that transition."

This is intriguing on a couple of levels. Rumsfeld likes microfinance because it bypasses corrupt governments, but he seems to want to support image-buffing and profile-raising efforts for a region that has a reputation for some of the most corrupt governments in the post-Soviet space.

Furthermore, while it's true that Central Asian countries have lacked the strong US lobbies enjoyed by countries like Poland, the Baltics, Armenia and Ukraine, they certainly haven't been without their voices of support in Washington - who needs a diaspora when you have professional lobbyists and James Giffen? And does the comparison to East European ethnic lobbies mean that Rumsfeld's goal for the Central Asian countries would be the same as what seemed to be the number-one US-related goal for the Poles and the Balts - NATO membership? Actually, I doubt it. But if anyone in the conspiracy-osphere notices this, expect comments about how Rummy's support is gravitating towards where the hydrocarbons are.

More seriously, since it's impossible to create a committed and cohesive ethnic diaspora from scratch (and since many of the immigrants to the US from Central Asia are not representatives of indigenous ethnic groups - for example, the infamous Alexey Vayner), it will be interesting to see what Rummy's foundation's approach will be to creating US-based "support groups" for the Central Asian countries. Actually, it will be interesting to see whether anything comes of this at all.