Central Asia: Part Of NATO’s Global Chain To Ring In Russia And China

24.kg
May 14, 2011

Kyrgyzstan. Are you tired of NATO?
By Daniyar Karimov
[Edited by RR]

*****

Not long ago, various experts asserted that NATO’s life was short. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Alliance seemed to lose its enemy and original basis of unity. However, it turned out that it was too early to bury NATO. The military bloc has rapidly increased the number of its members with the incorporation of the countries of the former socialist bloc and eventually began to claim the status of a global gendarmerie. At first, Yugoslavia, and then Iraq and Afghanistan tested it. Today, Libya is conducting a firmness test….

*****

The Tien Shan [mountain range] seems, slowly but surely, to be becoming a part of the global chain which NATO uses to gradually ring in its main potential opponents – Russia and China.

Alliance, do not hurry to “go away”

The demonstration killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan has made many experts believe in the theories of the close completion of the antiterrorist campaign in Afghanistan. In the next three years, NATO plans to curtail military operations in the country and pass the initiative to the local military services. The North Atlantic Alliance is withdrawing its troops, leaving increased drug trafficking and strong transnational groups in Afghanistan, which feel comfortable at the “great heroin road”.

However, despite its antagonists’ expectations, the Alliance is not going to leave Central Asia. The NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia Mr. James Appathurai openly spoke about it during his visits to southern post-Soviet republics. “We intend to end the military operation in Afghanistan in 2014, but it doesn’t mean that there will be not a single NATO solder in Central Asia on January 1, 2015,” Mr. Appathurai said during a recent visit to Bishkek. “We have long-term obligations to Afghanistan and we do not intend to leave a security vacuum after withdrawal of troops.”

NATO intends to consolidate in Central Asia just not to leave the “hallowed place” empty. But it’s going to present itself not in the role of an invader but in another, but very close, one. The Alliance, as Brussels’ high-ranking emissary said, was planned to have in the country both military forces or instructors and their representative offices, which would help to improve ties and bring Central Asia and the Atlantic military bloc together.

In Kyrgyzstan, NATO interests are associated with a representative office of the alliance, which is to be opened here, and with another three lines of “cooperation”. All these facts, alas, create another reason for Kyrgyzstan’s partners in CSTO and SCO to doubt the sincerity of official Bishkek.

The main issue for NATO is the military base in the Manas airport. It’s being considered as an American one for a long time, as there are mainly Pentagon representatives there. But according to some experts, this base deals not only with military operations but also with intelligence support. American diplomats tried to attribute such theories to banal rumors. However, an unforgettable incident, when an Iranian terrorist was removed from a plane of the Kyrgyz airlines in the spring of 2010, brought all their attempts to naught. Recall, he admitted that he was going to meet with CIA agents at the Manas Transit Center.

As early as during Kurmanbek Bakiyev’s presidency, Washington managed to make an agreement with Bishkek on the use of the Manas air base till 2014. However, the White House could not secure itself against Kyrgyz instability. The fate of the so-called Transit Center was uncertain after the “April revolution”. A lobby of pro-American groups in the team of interim president Roza Otunbayeva helped the U.S. to keep its positions in Kyrgyzstan. She also does not hide her sympathy to the West.

High-ranking foreign officials became frequent guests in Bishkek, due to favour of the head of the interim government of the KR [Kyrgyz Republic]. Tien Shan has never before seen such a great number of VIP persons. The plan worked out: Bishkek, vainly overestimating its geopolitical importance, graciously allowed the Americans to stay. However, it is clear that the decision on the TC [Transit Center] was temporary and Kyrgyz authorities will over and over discuss the Pentagon’s presence in the KR.

According to some reports, U.S. and NATO representatives discussed the base issue at multiple meetings with Kyrgyz politicians. Roza Otunbayeva is not an exception: being the president of the country, she allows the western guests to expect temporary but more or less close cooperation. And, apparently, official Bishkek successfully plays this card.

According to sources close to the president for the transition period, James Appathurai paid not just a courtesy visit to Kyrgyzstan but also discussed the future of the Manas military base with Roza Otunbayeva at a behind closed doors meeting. However, she is not the only one with whom the West is trying to negotiate to keep the outpost on the outskirts of the Kyrgyz capital. NATO is obviously trying to find points of cooperation with a favorite in the upcoming presidential race – Prime Minister Almazbek Atambayev.

Even if the Pentagon officially agrees to withdraw its military troops from Kyrgyzstan, which seems to be doubtful now, NATO will not abandon the Manas outpost. The United States will be replaced by another member of the alliance – Turkey. Recall, Kyrgyzstan and Turkey discussed the possibility of establishing a public Transit Center at the place of the so-called Transit Center. Will the new-old center serve only commercial goals?

“Blue” integration

“Our bilateral relations with Kyrgyzstan depend not only on Afghanistan,” said James Appathurai during this visit to Bishkek. “The country is very important for us. It is on the road of democratic reforms and we want to support it.”

Kyrgyzstan’s efforts in the sphere of democratic reforms, coordinated with NATO, lead to a question on the development of the defense potential of the country. Kyrgyz military forces willingly cooperate with Turkey; Roza Otunbayeva asks the North Atlantic Alliance to assist in improving the country’s southern borders and border troops. By the way, at first she discussed it with NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen during her visit to Brussels two months ago. A few days ago she discussed it with James Appathurai. However, the alliance, according to official sources, expressed its readiness to assist in capital repairs of the missile and artillery equipment warehouses of the Defence Ministry of the Kyrgyz Republic, “paying main attention to the southern region of the country.” Apparently, NATO is unwilling to openly conquer the Fergana, not to irritate Kyrgyzstan’s neighbors.

At the same time, James Appathurai did not exclude Kyrgyzstan’s participation in the NATO program Process of Analysis and Military Planning. “The program includes military reforms that would bring armed forces of the republic in line with the Alliance.” This, by the way, will prepare the army to participate in peacekeeping operations of the Atlantic bloc. The NATO Special Representative stressed the need “to achieve compatibility” of Kyrgyzstan and NATO in this field, the same as observed in co-operation on the Afghanistan issue.

However, as usual, neither society nor the ruling circles have a single position on the issue of NATO’s approach to Kyrgyzstan. There is a fanatic “for” and an equal radical “against.” Deputy Director of the Diplomatic Academy under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the KR Nur Omarov expressed a more conservative opinion. “We ought to avoid unfriendliness, which some members of the alliance feel in relation to Central Asian partners and the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization],” he stressed. “The establishment of a NATO Special Representative Office in Bishkek will contribute to strengthening the alliance’s cooperation with the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization] and the CSTO. NATO shall focus all its efforts in Central Asia on the reduction of potential conflicts.”

While there is no consent among the parties, the Kyrgyz elite continues its geopolitical games. In Kyrgyzstan, it is called multi-directionality. “We’ll continue cooperation with NATO,” said Roza Otunbayeva after her meeting with the NATO Secretary General. “We have a right to improve the potential of the republic and we’ll continue to do it, using all available methods.”

Atlantic weeble wobble

To justify military multi-directionality, official Bishkek is trying to play the role of global peacekeeper. “The countries of Central Asia may become a bridge for the development of NATO’s cooperation with the SCO and the CSTO,” said the Director of the Diplomatic Academy under the Kyrgyz Foreign Ministry, Zhumagul Saadanbekov.

But now, there is no opportunity to bring NATO and the CSTO together, even within the OSCE [Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe]. Perhaps it is because the main participants of these military-political blocs did not come to an agreement on the most topical issues of global security – missile defense. The U.S. suspended missile deployments in Poland and the Czech Republic but found a new place for the missile defense deployment – Romania.

Not long ago, various experts asserted that NATO’s life was short. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Alliance seemed to lose its enemy and original basis of unity. However, it turned out that it was too early to bury NATO. The military bloc has rapidly increased the number of its members with the incorporation of the countries of the former socialist bloc and eventually began to claim the status of a global gendarmerie. At first, Yugoslavia, and then Iraq and Afghanistan tested it. Today, Libya is conducting a firmness test, giving analysts a new reason to speculate about the imminent end of the alliance. It is well known that some members of the alliance do not participate in the operation against the Gaddafi regime.

A report of the International Independent Investigation Commission of Kimmo Kiljunen, which found crimes against humanity in the Osh events, forced the local elite to think whether it would face the fate of Arab leaders against whom Europe is trying to initiate hearings in the International Court of Justice. However, Kyrgyzstan, of course, is not a key country in NATO’s plans. The bloc sets bag for the whole Central Asia and Caucasus.

Probably, Brussels and the capitals of NATO’s main members can identify its real goals in Central Asia. By the way, five of the bloc’s members are in the top ten of countries with the largest military budgets (the U.S., UK, France, Germany, Italy), another two members in that category are alliance-friendly countries Japan and Saudi Arabia.

The countries which won’t become members of the alliance have only three places in the “military ten”. They are China, which took second place in world military spending, Russia (7th place), and India (10th place). In games of the members of the “military ten”, Kyrgyzstan can obtain only [a badminton] birdie role. Who is the next to play?