Dr. Andrea Berg, a senior researcher at the Institute of Peace Research and Security Policy, University of Hamburg was in Washington today, to talk about "The Tensions between Authoritarian Rulers and International Organizations in Central Asia" at the Woodrow Wilson Center.
Dr. Berg knows what she is talking about. Here is the conclusion from her paper on Uzbekistan's NGO problem, called "Encountering Transition in Uzbekistan":
The incentives and desired possibilities of financial aid have resulted in a growing number of NGOs and NGO activities in Uzbekistan. Due to artificial conditions, most NGOs are not grass-rooted or embedded in their environment. Instead of focusing on local support, they only intensify their relations with foreign donors. In my opinion, this is a dangerous starting point for the future when foreign assistance declines and the aid caravan moves on to the next region of interest. The situation in East Central Europe has already reached this point. McMahon observed that in Poland “in the last few years declining international support for the region has contributed to substantial problems among women’s groups.” While focusing on donor priorities, NGOs in Uzbekistan run the risk of losing the chance to develop ideas based on their own experience and background.From http://dbs.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/iee/download/working_papers_171.pdf.
Although some NGO representatives criticize donor activities, they are dependent on grants and assistance. Few of them consider their target group’s needs and desires. Donor agencies stimulate this tendency. For now, they lack diligence, because, to a great extent, they work with the most visible and well-known NGOs. On the one hand, the “success” of these NGOs results from good networking and is connected with the assumption that “development” or “civil society” is somehow countable. Representatives of those NGOs reinforce the importance of quantity by proudly talking about the number of training seminars they conducted or the number of people who took part in them or who called their hotline. On the other hand, donor agencies prefer to trust those they consider to be “leaders” and “brokers”, and resources are routinely placed in a single individual’s hands.
Although non-governmental organizations are important, they are not the only actors in the fairly active Uzbekistan society. Networks of kin, neighbors, and colleagues are manifestations of shared socio-economic needs and common strategies to cope with these needs. Instead of only focusing on cooperation with non-governmental organizations, foreign agencies should include local groups, communities, and networks in their activities. While non-governmental organizations are a relatively new phenomenon in Uzbekistan and often do not reach beyond the urban context, local networks and other groups represent an indigenous kind of interest group, whether economic, social, or religious. Only if foreign organizations as well as NGOs learn to rely on already existing local ideas and strategies will aid become rooted and productive. By cooperating with all actors and combining their potential, foreign aid could do a great deal to gain and establish vital projects tailored for the respective local context.
In her Wilson Center talk today, Dr. Berg gave a thorough rundown of problems between NGOs and governments in the aftermath of the Rose and Orange revolutions. She had some interesting perspectives:
* KRYGYSTAN: The so-called "Tulip Revolution" was not a regime change, but a power change. It did not fundamentally alter the patrimonial networks in Kyrgyzstan, but did destabilize the central authority's ability to allocate resources. Result: destabilization. The country may be worse off than it was before--and no more democratic. There is now, according to Berg "a fragile security situation" due to the erosion of the national state. Any future problems for Uzbekistan in the Ferghana Valley might adversely affect Kyrgyztan. "The future looks dark."
*UKRAINE: Central Eurasian Studies Society conference-goers in Boston, American scholars of Central Asia, appeared to be unaware that Viktor Yushchenko's wife was an American citizen (now she is a Ukrainian citizen) who was a former US State Department employee--a fact widely reported in Germany, that affected CIS perceptions of the event.
*KAZAKHSTAN: The lower house of parliament has passed the draft of two new laws limiting the activities of NGOs, including re-registation and government approval requirements. President Nazarbayev submitted both laws for review to Kazakhstan's constitutional council on 13 July 2005.
*UZBEKISTAN: While she did not speak about the Andijan events, Berg did note that it has become increasingly difficult for Western NGOs to operate in Uzbekistan. She said that although the restrictions are widespread, analysts argue they were aimed at the Open Society Institute, the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute, and Freedom House. All money must go through two banks, either the National Bank of Uzbekistan or Asaka Bank, so it may be traced. She quoted a headline from a newspaper article symptomatic of the whole discussion, that the "Georgia revolt carried the mark of Soros."
*RUSSIA: Preparing laws similar to those of Central Asian to restrict NGO activity.
*TURKMENISTAN: One additional problem is a change in the education law that now ends schooling after the 9th grade, which hurts efforts by the Aga Khan University, American University of Central Asia, and so on, to recruit Turkmen students.
*TAJIKISTAN: Here it is quiet as far as NGO legislation is concerned. However, there are big problems and politically it is anything but quiet, Berg said.
*OSCE: Nine former Soviet republics signed a declaration on July 3rd, 2004 complaining of OSCE double standards, violations of national sovereignty, and various objections to field centers. After a decade of cooperation, the statement marked the beginning of a period of confrontation.
*EU: Berg felt the EU decision to impose an arms embargo on Uzbekistan and put visa restrictions on government officials may further intensify problems in relations with Western NGOs.
Berg made a very good impression, quoting an anonymous Kyrgyz about nostalgia for the USSR: "In those days, we did not disturb the state, and the state did not disturb us." Berg said that as a former citized of the German Democratic Republic, she understood the sentiment.
If only other representatives of NGOs had Berg's understanding, I'd feel a little better about the future of Western relations with Central Asia.
She is also responsive to questions, unlike the International Crisis Group, which has never answered my inquiries.
For example: When I asked Berg whether any Americans had in fact been involved in the Andijan uprising, as the Uzbek government charges, or if the Uzbek government is making it up, she said she did not know but would check it out and get back to me. She told me that Human Rights Watch currently has an observer at the trial in Tashkent, and that she will ask her what the story is.
So, stay tuned...
