POLITICAL TRANSFORMATIONS IN KYRGYZSTAN (1991-2006)
Abstract
Since the early 1970s, those studying the transformation processes in totalitarian and authoritarian regimes have been busy identifying the features found in all transition models and the fac-tors determining the trends and rates of democratic changes. Western political scientists (D. Ros-tow, F. Schmitter, O’Donnell, S. Huntington, and others) who have been working on the theory of democratic transition regarded the political process as common to all societies and insisted that all transition states would go through the same stages: preparatory (liberalization), decision-making (democratization), and acceptance (socialization).1
At the preparatory stage, political forces clash: the new elite mobilizes all the social strata dis-satisfied with the old regime to carry out concerted actions that lead to a protracted and bitter political struggle. Political forces rally around two opposing banners.2 Instability is an inevitable result, and economic and social crises follow suit. There are no attempts to set up a democratic regime at the first stage; it produces a technically democratic order (a so-called paternalist democracy). In the absence of a strong opposition, an authoritarian regime may survive for a long time. At the second stage, the main political forces achieve a compromise, which makes it possible to destroy the authoritarian order and set up democratic institutions in its stead. As members of the new parliamentary institutions, the opposition has the opportunity to join in the decision-making. At the third stage, the compromise is sealed and the democratic forces become consolidated. The pace of change out-lined above and the choice of roads leading to democracy depend on the alignment of the key political forces.
An analysis of the transition models reveals that the democratization experience in the states, which, according to Samuel Huntington, will hardly become democratic (Central Asian countries are among them),3 should be summarized.
We shall use the political process in independent Kyrgyzstan to identify the specific features and stages of its political transformation.
Downloads
References
See, for example: D.A. Rostow, “Perekhody k demokratii: popytka dinamicheskoy modeli,” Polis, No. 5, 1996,pp. 8-11; F. Schmitter, “Protsess demokraticheskogo tranzita i konsolidatsia demokratii,” Polis, No. 3, 1999.
See: D.A. Rostow, op. cit., p. 5.
See: S. Huntington, “Budushchee demokraticheskogo protsessa: ot emansipatsii k konsolidatsii,” MeiMO, No. 10,1995.
For more detail, see: A. Elebaeva, M. Pukhova, “Political Transformation in Kyrgyzstan: Specific Features,” Cen-tral Asia and the Caucasus, No. 4 (10), 2001.
See: Komsomol’skaia pravda: Kyrgyzstan, 2 November, 2001.
There is a common agreement in the West that a genuine revolution brings new people to power rather than restores those who already had the chance of ruling the country.
See: S. Luzianin, “Color Revolutions in the Central Asian Context: Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan-Kazakhstan,” Central Asia and the Caucasus, No. 5 (35), 2005.
See: AiF Kyrgyzstan, No. 14, 2006, p. 4.
See: Vecherniy Bishkek, 2 November, 2005.
See: MSN, 10 February, 2006, p. 2.
Since 5 May, 1993, when the Constitution was adopted, the amendments and addenda have been introduced to it four times to strengthen the president’s power.
See: Slovo Kyrgyzstana, 7 October, 2005, p. 3.
See: Slovo Kyrgyzstana, 26 September, 2006, p. 2.
The Constitutional Conference was enlarged, in addition to prominent politicians, with educators, doctors, heads of farming households, etc.
See: Delo No, 10 October, 2005, p. 3.
See: Slovo Kyrgyzstana, 26 September, 2006.
See: Ibid., 29 September, 2006, pp. 2-4.
See: Slovo Kyrgyzstana, 3 November, 2006, p. 2.
Ibidem.
See: Ibidem.
See: Ibid., p. 5.
See: Ibid., p. 2.
Under the current Constitution of 2003, the legislators’ right is limited to introducing amendments and addenda to the country’s Fundamental Law.
See: Slovo Kyrgyzstana, 10 November, 2006.
See: Ibid., p. 3.
Life has shown that political regimes that permit off-term elections are less stable.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2007 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
