Questions remain as to who was behind deadly protests in Uzbekistan’s Karakalpakstan region

Two weeks after violent protests rocked Uzbekistan’s Karakalpakstan region, speculation continues about who was behind the turmoil that appeared to take officials in the capital, Tashkent, completely by surprise. This despite the fact that the reasons that triggered the unrest appear to be clear, namely proposed constitutional changes that promised to weaken the autonomy of the region, which occupies a territory, of 166,590 sq kms, and has a population of 1.9 million.

Official reports say that 18 civilians were killed during the protests, 94 hospitalised, and hundreds more injured.

The Uzbek Government has blamed unspecified foreign forces for being behind the unrest. Uzbekistan is a tightly managed country, where such unrest is by and large unheard of, and where the only country that has the potential to provoke such wide-spread disturbances is Russia, given its longstanding and deep rooted influence in Central Asia. Some Uzbek diplomats in Europe have been briefing that the disturbances were part of a planned “colour revolution”, although they did not quite explain what they meant by that. Uzbekistan is known to have been under considerable pressure from  Moscow in recent years to join Russia-led regional structures, such as the Eurasian Economic Union and the CSTO military alliance, but president Shavkat Mirziyoyev has so far resisted the pressure. Across the Central Asian region local governments have recently shown they were concerned by the overdependence of their countries on Russia, and have been seeking closer co-operation with China, the Gulf States, the US and the EU among others. 

Propping up separatist movements is a tactic that Moscow has used shamelessly and successfully since the collapse of the Soviet Union in the former Soviet republics in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, as a way of exerting pressure and keeping their western oriented governments in check. Some observers feel that the same playbook is now being used in Central Asia.

On the other hand the discontent with the proposed constitutional changes appears to have been widespread and most protestors were intent on a peaceful protest. Economic grievances could also have added to the appearance of large numbers at the protests. But it could also be that what started as  a peaceful protest could have also been hijacked by others with a more sinister agenda, which may explain some of the looting and violence that ensued. 

Speaking to the country’s parliament last week, Uzbek President Mirziyoyev said that the constitutional amendments were proposals that had been submitted for public discussion and would in any case have to be adopted in a referendum. But he made it clear that the changes as far as Karakalpakstan were concerned were now being withdrawn. “I believe in the wisdom of the people of Karakalpakstan, hardened in the trials of life. I urge them to show prudence, not to yield to provocations, including those of external hostile forces and movements, and not to become their victims”, he said.

Uzbekistan’s Ambassador to Kazakhstan Saidikram Niyazhojayev briefed journalists on July 8 on the disturbances. Niyazhojayev said it was an “attempt to undermine constitutional order, territorial integrity and unity of the Republic of Uzbekistan.” “The riots were organized with the assistance of external forces. The events were not accidental and had been prepared in advance. These unlawful actions had obvious signs of pre-planned sabotage aimed at fomenting separatism, destabilizing and splitting the peaceful united democratic country,” said Niyazhojayev.

Uzbek diplomats in Europe have also been briefing that the disturbances were part of a planned “colour revolution”, although they did not quite explain what they meant by that.

Background

Under the Soviet system many of the 15 Union Republics of the USSR, of which Uzbekistan was one, also incorporated within them a number of autonomous republics, regions or districts. Karakalpakstan, located in northwestern Uzbekistan was in 1936  incorporated into the Uzbek SSR as an autonomous republic. Today, it is the largest region of Uzbekistan and retains its own state symbols, constitution, government and parliament.

Under the current provisions of the Uzbek constitution, Karakalpakstan is an autonomous republic with veto power concerning any decisions that would affect its status. But more significantly it has a legal right to hold a referendum on secession from Uzbekistan.  Under the provisions of the new constitution currently under discussion in Uzbekistan Karakalpakstan’s  autonomy was to be increasingly weakened, and the right of secession cancelled.   

The news was poorly received in Karakalpakstan and led to widespread protests. In Nukus, the capital of the region, thousands gathered outside the farmer’s bazaar. The protestors then moved towards the legislative council where they were met with force. While there is little knowledge surrounding what caused the clashes, video footage showed authorities using water cannons, stun grenades, as well as smoke grenades.

Despite its low population density and desert terrain, Karakalpakstan has large reserves of natural resources and hosts a major gas pipeline system. The Uzbek government is very wary of secession, and is eager to eliminate its threat. Karakalpakstan, on the other hand, has called for referendums on its status before, but it remains for now largely dependent on Tashkent.

On 3 July, President Mirziyoyev made a statement to dissuade continuing protests, saying “Calls for separatism and mass riots will be firmly crushed in line with the current legislation. Those responsible for this will suffer inevitable punishment.” Moreover, a state of emergency was introduced in the republic that is set to remain in place until 2 August. According to President Mirziyoyev, this was to "ensure the security of citizens, defend their rights and freedoms and restore the rule of law and order". The Internet is also down and local news agencies have reportedly been warned not to report on the protests.

According to figures provided by authorities within Uzbekistan, 18 civilians were killed, 94 were hospitalised, 205 were injured, and 516 were detained.  

Mirziyoyev succeeded autocratic president Islam Kerimov in 2016, and has since been slowly trying to implement much needed reforms in both the political and the economic spheres. This year he won the election for a second term. The incidents in Karakalpakstan are probably the most serious challenge to his presidency so far. In a move that is seen as attempt to distance himself from the original decision to include restricting Karakalpakstan autonomy in the original package of constitutional amendments, Mirziyoyev last week fired his chief of staff. The swift decision to rescind the new constitutional changes as regards Karakalpakstan's autonomy was welcomed in the international community.

EU sees Uzbekistan as an important partner

The incidents in Karakakpakstan were closely watched by Uzbekistan’s neighbours and the wider international community. In a statement on July 4th, the European Union called “for an open and independent investigation into the violent events in Karakalpakstan following the publication of the proposed amendments to Uzbekistan’s Constitution. We deeply regret the casualties and loss of human life and continue to follow developments closely.”

The statement added, “We acknowledge the steps taken by President Mirziyoyev to respond quickly to public concerns over the proposed constitutional amendments. We call on all sides to show restraint in their actions, with a view to avoiding any escalation or further violence. The European Union urges the authorities to guarantee human rights, including the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, in line with Uzbekistan’s international commitments.

The European Union has a strong and growing partnership with Uzbekistan. We remain committed to supporting Uzbekistan’s reform efforts,  and call for it to continue this process in consultation with citizens and stakeholders, based on international norms and best practices.”

The incidents came just a few days before Uzbekistan and the EU initialled a new Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (EPCA). According to the EU, the EPCA will provide a new, modern and ambitious framework to step up the EU-Uzbekistan  partnership. The agreement includes new areas of cooperation and significantly upgrades the regulatory framework for trade and economic relations.

Sources: Commonspace.eu  
Photo: Nukus, capital of Karakalpakstan

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

srael’s parliament approved a bill on Monday that would allow the execution of Palestinians convicted on terror charges for deadly attacks, a move that has been criticized as discriminatory and immediately drew a court challenge. Sixty-two lawmakers, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, voted in favor and 48 against the bill, championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. There was one abstention and the rest of the lawmakers were not present. Ben Gvir in the run-up to the vote had worn a lapel pin in the shape of a noose, symbolising his support for the legislation. “We made history!!! We promised. We delivered,” he posted on X after the vote. The bill would make the death penalty the default punishment for Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank found guilty of intentionally carrying out deadly attacks deemed “acts of terrorism” by an Israeli military court. The bill says that the sentence may be reduced to life imprisonment under “special circumstances.” Palestinians in the West Bank are automatically tried in Israeli military courts. Meanwhile, under the bill, in Israeli criminal courts anyone “who intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of harming an Israeli citizen or resident out of an intention to put an end to the existence of the State of Israel shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.” Criminal courts try Israeli nationals, including Palestinian citizens and residents of east Jerusalem. The bill sets the execution method as hanging, adding that it should be carried out within 90 days of the sentencing, with a possible postponement of up to 180 days. - ‘Parallel tracks’ - The bill appears to conflict with Israel’s Basic Laws, which prohibit arbitrary discrimination, and shortly after it was passed, a leading human rights group announced that it had filed a petition with the Supreme Court demanding the legislation’s annulment. “The law creates two parallel tracks, both designed to apply to Palestinians,” the Association for Civil Rights in Israel said in a statement. “In military courts — which have jurisdiction over West Bank Palestinians — it establishes a near-mandatory death sentence,” the rights group said. In civilian courts, the law’s stipulation that defendants must have acted “with the aim of negating the existence” of Israel “structurally excludes Jewish perpetrators,” the group added. The association argued the law should be annulled on both jurisdictional and constitutional grounds. During the debate in parliament, opposition lawmaker and former deputy Mossad director, Ram Ben Barak, expressed outrage at the legislation. “Do you understand what it means that there is one law for Arabs in Judea and Samaria, and a different law for the general public for which the State of Israel is responsible?” he asked fellow parliamentarians, using the Israeli name for the West Bank. “It says that Hamas has defeated us. It has defeated us because we have lost all our values.” - ‘Discriminatory application’ - Lawmaker Limor Son Har-Melech from Ben Gvir’s party, who years ago survived an attack by Palestinian militants in which her husband was killed, urged fellow parliamentarians to approve the bill. “For years, we endured a cruel cycle of terror, imprisonment, release in reckless deals, and the return of these human monsters to murder Jews again ... And today, my friends, this cycle has come full circle.” The Palestinian Authority condemned the law’s adoption, saying that “Israel has no sovereignty over Palestinian land.” “This law once again reveals the nature of the Israeli colonial system, which seeks to legitimize extrajudicial killing under legislative cover,” it added. In February, Amnesty International had urged Israeli lawmakers to reject the legislation, citing its “discriminatory application against Palestinians.” On Sunday, Britain, France, Germany and Italy expressed “deep concern” over the bill, which they said risked “undermining Israel’s commitments with regards to democratic principles.” While the death penalty exists for a small number of crimes in Israel, it has become a de facto abolitionist country — the Nazi Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann was the last person to be executed in 1962. Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967 and violence there has soared since Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel triggered the Gaza war. (read more by clicking the image above).

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)