A couple days ago, Ferghana.ru speculated that the European Union, balancing its interests in diversifying energy sources against its anger against Uzbekistan over last year’s violence in Andijon, would bury the hatchet with Uzbekistan and seek friendly relations. Talib Yakubov, now living in France, warns the EU against such a move and commented on some of the disagreements within the Union over renewed ties to Karimov’s government.
“Germany has been lobbying interests of Uzbekistan in the hope to have all sanctions lifted. France in its turn makes an emphasis on the human rights and democracy as a counterweight to Germany’s oil and gas angle. As I see it, France will suggest that the sanctions be retained. As for the stiffening of the sanctions, I’d say it’s a sheer impossibility because Germany insists on cooperation with Uzbekistan too strongly…”
Yakubov believes that the EU may back Germany because of the importance of oil and gas to its society.
He goes on to say that “gullible Europeans” do not understand Uzbekistan and foolishly think that dialogue will encourage reforms.
Both Yakubov and the author of the article make the point, which I agree with, that Karimov is not a reliable partner, and that any deal for gas with Uzbekistan cannot be depended on to supply Europe for too long. But it appears as if they will try, and with Germany leading the charge, one can reasonably expect to see Uzbekistan on the EU agenda not just when the vote on renewing sanctions comes up, but also during the coming German presidency of the EU, which, we have already been told, will include attempts at creating a Central Asia strategy for the EU.
Ferghana.ru’s speculation, looks even more likely today as the EU parliament voted against the extension of some sanctions, according to RFE/RL. The original version of the resolution, found here, explicitly called for the extension of the visa ban and expanding it to include other officials and freezing the assets of those on the list as well as the extension of the arms sales embargo. The final version, found here, inserts a bit of gray into the parliament’s position.
Welcomes and supports the decision taken at the General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting on 3 October 2005 to impose an embargo on the export to Uzbekistan of arms and military equipment and other equipment that might be used for internal repression, to introduce restrictions on the admission to the EU of Uzbek nationals directly responsible for the Andijan repression and to suspend sine die all scheduled technical meetings under the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, as well as the Commission’s reorientation and reduction of its TACIS programme in order to support an increased focus on the needs of the population, democracy and human rights as well as fostering links with Uzbek civil society;
I suppose that this is their way of having their cake and eating it too. The one clear difference between the two versions is that the final one clearly does not call for an expansion of the visa ban. But does it call for or reject the extension of sanctions? That is, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder. (The original sanctions can be found here — PDF.)
Talks between the two sides will continue. As parliamentarians were told before their vote, a cooperation council will take place next month between Uzbek and EU officials. This follows the recently concluded visit of the EU special representative for Central Asia, Pierre Morel, to Tashkent. One hopes though that as they go forward, EU officials pay keen attention to the difficulties that some consumers of Uzbek energy face lest they get too eager.
UPDATE: It seems quite relevant to note that Germany’s economy minister spoke out against dependence on Russian energy yesterday. Ferghana.ru has a new article that makes it seem as if Germany’s government will take the moral high road in relations with Uzbekistan, but there is undeniably enormous tension between its interests in promoting human rights and its interests in securing stable energy supplies.
UPDATE II: As Odil points out below, I failed to note the date of what I had called the “final” version of the resolution. I cannot find the version passed by the parliament.
{ 7 comments }
Europeans don’t strike me as too naive, though in general it is true that they are more prone to support dialogue whereas the U.S. supports coercion — for all you poli sci students this makes sense given the relative power of the two (though the EU, if it had a more coordinated foreign policy, might get a lot more coercive).
I think instead the main reason is gas. Last winter was a wake-up call. If friendly relations with Uzbekistan saves Europeans a decent percent on their gas bill, who are they to meddle in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation?
I think there is a mistake. The final version of the resolution to which the link is given here is dated October 27, 2005, not 2006.
Odil, thanks for catching that.
However, Nathan, the euro deputies voted separately against the paragraph 2 of the resolution calling for more sanctions which means it may have been taken out of the text, but I haven’t found the final version of the text yet. One MEP tells me that the provisional one is the last one, but another one tells me there was a separate vote on dropping Para 2. Still trying to find out the truth:)
CIS media is speculating that CIA is behind deaths of Uzbek refugees. Classical “They knew too much.”
http://enews.ferghana.ru/article.php?id=1619
Two refugees from Andijan died mysterious deaths in the United States
06.10.2006 15:23 msk
Uznews.net
Olimjon Sabirov and Zahidjon Mahmedov, refugees from the Uzbek Andijan who found shelter in Idaho (US), died in sleep.
Sabirov, 25, died in early September. Bahodyr Faiz who resides in the United States told Uznews.net that his body had already been returned to his native Andijan. Mahmedov, 30, died three weeks later, also in sleep. The Americans intend to carry out the postmortem.
Faiz calls the deaths “definitely odd” because the late refugees never complained of health problems. There is a hypotheses that both died of cardiac arrest.
Four FBI agents came to Idaho following Mahmedov’s death to interrogate other refugees. Some of the latter suspect that Sabirov and Mahmedov were murdered by Uzbek secret services because they had been persuading other refugees not to go back to Uzbekistan. Mahmedov was a particularly active agitator.
In the meantime, another group of 65 refugees is making preparations to return to Andijan from Idaho. They include Jadgoroi Yudasheva, the wife of Akrom Yuldashev known as the leader of the so called Akromijans.
Faiz suspect that the second wave of refugees’ return (from the United States this time) may continue even after that. There is another group (24 or 25 people) who would like to return to Uzbekistan from Kansas. Fifty-three refugees are already back from the United States (12 from Arizona and 41 from Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Maryland).
Sources in Andijan (the city most refugees returned to) say in the meantime that reality is not up to the former refugees’ expectations. First, they are required to report to the local police station every day. Second, they are not permitted to use telephones or Internet to call anyone. Third, the local authorities do not let them alone. The authorities constantly organize all sorts of conferences with “representatives of general public” where the former refugees are supposed to speak of how they were tricked into leaving Uzbekistan and to listen to diatribes on how they let down their Motherland and all but betrayed it out of their own stupidity.
“I think instead the main reason is gas.”
Of course it is.
“Europeans don’t strike me as too naive, though in general it is true that they are more prone to support dialogue”
Well, they *are* naïve in the sense that, even after so many misadventures in e.g. Zaïre and Côte d’Ivoire to name but two, they don’t seem to grasp that ‘realpolitik’, ‘pragmatism’ and ‘dialogue’ with maverick rogue regimes unavoidbaly backlashes sooner or later.
The same will happen with the karimovites (I mean, just look at what has become of the US’ policy of ‘constructive engagement’… ). In a number of years, European companies and economic interests will be end up in the same mess as US ones now.
The EU wants ‘dialogue’ for gas? Fine. That’s the way things go. But then, the EU must also be ready to send paratroopers to evacuate EU expats and diplomats in order to save them from angry mobs and being hanged from lampposts in the streets of Tashkent the day the karimovites are overthrown.
Ataman Rakin: No wonder that EU has to kiss Central Asians’ butts for oil and gas supplies. The only alternative for them is Russian bear, which is quickly recovering under Putin’s wise governance, and will one day cut Jurop’s throat.
Germany is going to relax visa regulations for Kazakhstan. Iraqi oil is now controlled by US. Arabs will sell their oil in exchange for printed US paper dollars which returns to US bank accounts. They aren’t going to sell their oil for printed Euro to Jurop anytime soon, except Iran.
Nuclear energy is not any safer since Chernobyl. China’s energy consumption is growing. They are even going as far as to Venesuela to get oil.
Thus, our beauty has to come up with appeasing Stans.
Oh pain, pain, have to use petrol from undemocratic states.
Comments on this entry are closed.