What's new

Tajikistan poised to slide back towards war

Kambojaric

MODERATOR
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
5,480
Reaction score
16
Country
Pakistan
Location
Sweden
Hashmat Moslih , Tajikistan poised to slide back towards war - Al Jazeera English

a9b8f01d1e1d41588ab1740c1924d401_18.jpg


A nearly two-decade-old peace agreement that ended Tajikistan's civil war is quickly unravelling and threatening to plunge Central Asia's poorest country back into violence, a new report warns.

A ban by the government of hard-line President Emomali Rahmon on the opposition Renaissance Party of Tajikistan (IRPT) - widely considered moderate - has caused growing concern both within and outside the country.

"Given its problems, Tajikistan should be a conflict-prevention priority for the international community," the International Crisis Group said in its January 11 report.

Rahmon's rule has been marred by corruption, violence and economic tumult, while security in the country - which shares a 1,400km-long border with Afghanistan - is increasingly deteriorating, the report said.

Ever since a peace agreement ended a five-year civil war in 1997, Rahmon's government has cracked down on both religious and political opposition in the country.

IRPT represented the civil war's opposition forces in parliament, but the party lost all of its seats in the March 2015 election, which the report said was "riddled with irregularities".

The party was banned in August and in September it was branded a "terrorist organisation" by Rahmon.

In December, Tajik lawmakers voted to give Rahmon the title "Leader of the Nation", and granted him and his family lifelong immunity from prosecution.

But problems continue to arise in the mostly Muslim nation of 8.2 million people.

The deputy defence minister, General Abduhalim Nazarzoda - a member of IRPT -was killed in September by Tajik security forces. He had been accused of organising "terrorist" attacks by the authorities.

The Brussels-based International Crisis Group reported that the 1997 peace agreement that ended the civil war "is unravelling".

"The 1997 peace agreement masked rather than resolved tensions after a brutal civil war," the report said.

"Its core was IRPT representation of the war's opposition forces in parliament, but Rahmon deprived the party of its parliament seats."

Mahmudjon Faizrahmonov, an IRPT spokesman, told Al Jazeera that renewed unrest appears to be on the horizon.

"We expect the situation to get worse," he said. "The undemocratic policies of President Rahmon will move the country towards violence. There are extremist parties across the border in Afghanistan. Rahmon's undemocratic policies play into their hands, but we reject violence."

Religious repression is also causing security concerns. Reports indicate that hundreds of Tajiks have left and joined Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) fighters.

In a YouTube video released on May 27, General Gulmurod Khalimov - head of the Special Assignment Police Unit of Tajikistan - said he had defected to ISIL in Syria because of increasing restrictions on religious freedom in Tajikistan.

Rahmon has ruled Tajikistan since 1994 and his current presidential term is expected to end in 2020.

________________________________

A civil war in Tajikistan will almost certainly have implications on the war in Afghanistan, and therefore affect us as well. Pakistani policy-makers should follow the events in this country closely.
 
I might also add, a civil war will also have implications on India's Farkhor air force base.
 
i pray sense prevail among tajiks, powerful countries are always ready to support their favourite puppets in every country going through difficulties.

Moreover, We dont need another Afghanistan, Syria, libya in Muslim world.
 
I understand that there's also a conflict ongoing between the Turkey supported Uzbeks and Iran supported Tajiks in Tajikistan itself? There was some riots a short while ago between the two groups as the Uzbeks or the Tajiks had part of their territory handed to the other deliberately by Stalin in an attempt to create conflict between the groups.
 
Let's hope there's no civil war there. We can't afford further regional instability.

Likewise, yet Rahmon is pushing the opposition towards armed rebellion, and making even moderate Muslims oppose him increasingly. It comes as no surprise of course given the stuff he has been upto (Tajikistan: No Hajj, No Hijab, and Shave Your Beard | The Diplomat ) Yet just like in the Middle East (Syria/Libya etc), a civil war in Tajikistan will undoubtedly see ISIS entering the fray as well. The Gorno-Badakshan region has a large Shia Ismaili population, they now need to watch their own backs.
 
Last edited:
I understand that there's also a conflict ongoing between the Turkey supported Uzbeks and Iran supported Tajiks in Tajikistan itself? There was some riots a short while ago between the two groups as the Uzbeks or the Tajiks had part of their territory handed to the other deliberately by Stalin in an attempt to create conflict between the groups.

Actually, the Turkish-Uzbek relations aren't good and Tajikistan is a Sunni majority country.
 
I understand that there's also a conflict ongoing between the Turkey supported Uzbeks and Iran supported Tajiks in Tajikistan itself? There was some riots a short while ago between the two groups as the Uzbeks or the Tajiks had part of their territory handed to the other deliberately by Stalin in an attempt to create conflict between the groups.

The only major ethnic riot in C. Asia that I am aware of in recent time's is this one 2010 South Kyrgyzstan ethnic clashes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia , which had little to do with foreign interference and more to do with messed up boundry drawing by the Soviets as you said. I do know that Uzbekistan and Tajikistan have issues between them, especially over water (Rogun Dam), but dont know about any Turkey vs Iran proxy war going on in these countries.
 
Syria or Afghanistan (unfortunately) should serve as as reminder for the people of Tajikistan .. This civil war route revolution is very very destructive & bloody
 
Actually, the Turkish-Uzbek relations aren't good and Tajikistan is a Sunni majority country.

You probably know more about Turkey's relations with its fellow Turkic peoples than me. I'm assuming this dates back to the days when Turkey tried to form a pan-Turkic alliance in the region and the local Russian quislings in the region objected? and the rather mysterious death of Turgut Ozal, allegedly poisoned by the Russians?

As for Tajikistan, yes that's true but the Tajik leadership has been allied with the Ayatollahs since the days when the Iranians worked with the Russians to oppose Turkey's role in the region.

@Kambojaric it wasn't the result of 'messed up soviet drawing of the border', it was a deliberate attempt to sow conflict in the region. I'm not the first to say that. Please check the history books about the region.
 
@Kambojaric it wasn't the result of 'messed up soviet drawing of the border', it was a deliberate attempt to sow conflict in the region. I'm not the first to say that. Please check the history books about the region.[/QUOTE]

Oh yeah it was certainly intentional and thats why I said it was messed up. Stalin did this throughout the Union to divide the various ethnic groups, pushing one group against the other so that no one was strong enough to consider breaking away.
 
Can someone give more background on this? Why is there talk of civil war? Is there any conflict currently?
 
@Kambojaric

Oh yeah it was certainly intentional and thats why I said it was messed up. Stalin did this throughout the Union to divide the various ethnic groups, pushing one group against the other so that no one was strong enough to consider breaking away.

Apologies. I misunderstood you.

It's been a long time since I've looked at the way in which the Russians and then the Soviets took over the region. Essentially they replicated the divide et imperia strategy not only in Central Asia but also in the Caucasus. The current self-serving Russian complaints of a 'destabilized central asia' should be treated with caution since the Russians did their best to assist that process.
 
I might also add, a civil war will also have implications on India's Farkhor air force base.
Civil war will actually lead to greater demand for India in the region.

The previous civil war led to Tajik antipathy towards Taliban for supporting the losing side. Perhaps that is reason India is allowed to operate the base.

More interesting would be to see Russian response to crisis of a fellow CSTO member.
 
Can someone give more background on this? Why is there talk of civil war? Is there any conflict currently?

Tajikistan underwent a massive civil war in the 90s after it got independence, between the old communist elite and the islamists, and in the peace agreement signed to end that war, the rebels were given seats in parliament and allowed to form a political party. Now the government has again banned the opposition along with banning hijab, beards as well as harrasing Muslims trying to practise their religion. Basically the things that kicked off the first civil war are happening again, but the major difference is now you also have Isis and other extremists in the region, who will most certainly enter any conflict that gives them a chance to take over territory in the region.

Apologies. I misunderstood you.

It's been a long time since I've looked at the way in which the Russians and then the Soviets took over the region. Essentially they replicated the divide et imperia strategy not only in Central Asia but also in the Caucasus. The current self-serving Russian complaints of a 'destabilized central asia' should be treated with caution since the Russians did their best to assist that process.

No need, my wording could have been more clearer. As for divide and conquer, the soviets mastered that art.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom