Uzbekistan: 75,000 Uzbeks flee riots in Kyrgyzstan

[G_j]

Source: AP

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan – Kyrgyz mobs burned Uzbek villages, slaughtered their residents and looted police stations Sunday in the worst ethnic rioting this Central Asian nation has seen in 20 years, sending more than 75,000 Uzbek refugees fleeing across the border into Uzbekistan.
Most of the Uzbek refugees were elderly people, women and children, and many had gunshot wounds, the Uzbek Emergencies Ministry said in a statement carried by Russia's RIA Novosti news agency. It said refugee camps were being set up for them in several areas of Uzbekistan.

Fires set by rioters have destroyed most of Osh, the country's second-largest city, and food was scarce after widespread looting. Triumphant crowds of Kyrgyz men took control of most of Osh on Sunday as the few Uzbeks still left in the city of 250,000 barricaded themselves in their neighborhoods.
The rioting has significant political overtones. Former President Kurmanbek Bakiyev was ousted in a bloody uprising in April and fled the country. Uzbeks have backed Kyrgyzstan's interim government, while many Kyrgyz in the south support the toppled president.

Interim President Roza Otunbayeva blamed Bakiyev's family for instigating the unrest, saying it was aimed at derailing a June 27 constitutional referendum and new elections scheduled for October. A local official said Bakiyev supporters had attacked both Kyrgyz and Uzbeks to ignite the rioting.
From his self-imposed exile in Belarus, Bakiyev issued a statement denying any role in the violence and blaming interim authorities for failing to protect the people.

The interim government has ordered troops to shoot rioters dead but even that has failed to stop the spiraling violence that has left more than 100 people dead and about 1,250 wounded since Thursday night. Doctors say even that toll is far too low because wounded minority Uzbeks are too afraid of being attacked again to go to hospitals.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100613/ap_on_re_as/as_kyrgyzstan_unrest

[aquart]

1. Are we going to have an Uzbek/Kyrgyz forum?

[Ian David]

2. No, because it's not as fashionable to hate Uzbeks or Kyrgyks as it is to hate Jews. n/t

[ChiTownChavista]

3. Neither the Uzbeks or Kyrgyks

are occupying powers.

Your weak analogy fails.

[Ian David]

4. Depends who you ask. n/t

[DRex]

5. Edit: on second thought, I'm withholding comment...

wrong forum. Not worth it.

[Posteritatis]

16. Pretty sure Judaism isn't one either. (nt)

[Robbien]

6. Violence instigated by third party?

Al Jazeera's Robin Forestier-Walker, reporting from the border, said there was a steady stream of ethnic Uzbeks trying to cross and that violence in Osh was ongoing on Sunday.

"We set out into the city earlier today but had to turn back because it was simply too dangerous.

Our correspondent quoted witnesses as saying that three Uzbek neighbourhoods were under attack, but stressed that he had only been able to hear the Uzbek side.

Many of the fleeing ethnic Uzbeks accused Kyrgyz law enforcement officials of abetting gangs of ethnic Kyrgyz.

There has also been claims that Kurmanbek Bakiyev, the former president who was ousted in April, have been orchestrating a campaign of ethnic conflict along with his supporters.

Michael Andersen, a Danish film maker who has been living in Osh, said "it's very likely that Bakiyev and his cronies are behind this."

"I lived in Osh for several years and when you live there, you don't feel any everyday tension between Uzbeks and the Kyrgyz," he told Al Jazeera.

"This is clearly something that is constructed and provoked by some third party."

Bakiyev, who lives in exile in Belarus, has denied any involvement in the violence.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/06/201061318596598750.html


Something is going on here other than the usual bogeyman "ethnic clan clashes".

Both the US and Russia are refusing the interim government's pleas for help.

[Go2Peace]

14. Uzbek fundamentalists have been moving in and trying to take southern Kyrgyzstan

This is a (violent) reaction to push them back out. Russia and the US may not be eager to help because essentially what is causing this is expansion of radical fundamentalist control.

[Xithras]

21. Yeah, his name was Joseph Stalin

Seriously, look up that valley on Google Maps, and then look up its history. Before the Russian tsars took it over, the region was tribal. After they took it over, the tsars ran it as a single area. When Stalin stepped in, the valley was partitioned into three different SSR's with borders that look like they were scribbled on a map by a three year old. Stalin personally had a hand in the borders, and the creation of one of the SSR's to handle an internal conflict at the time. This wasn't a huge problem when the three SSR's were all Soviet states and the borders were just internal administrative boundaries, but became a major problem 20 years ago when the Soviet Union disintegrated and those confusing "administrative lines" became actual national borders.

You have one nation controlling most of the farmland, water, and agricultural wealth, a second nation controlling the foothills surrounding the valley on 3 sides, and a third nation controlling the access to both regions, which likes to periodically close its borders and cut them off from the rest of the world.

It's a nasty situation, and this isn't the first time they've fought over it. The recent introduction of religious radicals to the equation has just inflamed an already tense situation.

[Go2Peace]

7. This is an eruption of Tribal Islamic groups

As are many of these issues in the region. It is always interesting how the media likes to avoid the fact that religion is a primary component of these slaughters.

It's not "ethnic", it's a religion\sect related conflict.

[DRex]

8. True, just like Bosnia. nt

[MellowDem]

9. It is ethnic....

sometimes religion is considered to be part of that ethnicity, like the Jews. But the Uzbeks are a different "tribe" as it were. Throughout history, most wars and battles have been all about very secular things. Even supposedly "religious" wars. Just google a list of all the wars of history, scan down that list, and pick out how many were mainly because of religion. It's not many.

[Go2Peace]

11. No, it is a known radical Islamic sect that started this

Kyrgyzstan has been under attack by the "Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (UMI)". This is not the first time. And Uzbek Islamic members have been moving into southern Kyrgyzstan and are attempting to take control of the governments there and introduce fundamentalist law.

I am not saying it is right, but this is a response in fear. Imagine if radical fundamentalists tried to impose sharia law in your county and stack the population by moving in enmass. I am not sure that the same might not happen here.

http://www.eurasianet.org/node/61262

I don't really want to argue what you wrote above. But if you don't think that fundamentalism is heavily involved in many of the conflicts on the other side of the globe you need to read more foreign press where they are less afraid of being called politically incorrect.

And I have no problem with Religion being a Christian myself, fundamentalism however, of most persuasions, including Christian, is almost always irrational and can often become violent.

[MellowDem]

13. Not from the OP's story...

Looks like a very complicated situation. Though they did mention how in the 90s there were land disputes between the two, which just goes to show what most of these conflicts are really about.

[Go2Peace]

15. I have relatives in another part of the former USSR and am very aware of what is going on

Fundamentalist Islam believes they own all the land throughout Asia, they have an active program of "Evangelism" through emmigration. They and their churches are supporting mass movements of people out of other Islamic countries who then "squat" and build mass. Most of the former countries of the USSR are dealing with this, but they are afraid or cannot effectively deal with the problem. Eventually, when enough immigrants have moved in they attempt to change the government, which is a religious response, as they believe that non Islamic governments are against God.
They usually try to take the government through peacefull means, but as you can imagine, considering what they want to replace it with (primitive sharia law) there tends to be a struggle. Almost inevitably, it eventually ends in violence, as fundamentalists will not rest until they have control.

I know it isn't "politically correct" to discuss this. But that is a component of what is happening, for good or ill.

This action looks to be a counter from people who are in fear, brought on by a third party interested in igniting the tensions. They have already had bombings and attempts to take over the southern countryside by fundamentalists.

Islamic Fundamentalism is a core component that is igniting the region, regardless of how it is playing out.

[harry_pothead]

22. Europe should take note of this fact.

[Posteritatis]

17. I love how we're "ethnic" and everyone else is "tribal." (nt)

[Go2Peace]

18. I used the term that was used in the article, that is apparently part of the terminology.

I think there is a history behind it and it comes from the religion's own terms. You know, like the 12 tribes of Abraham? Differerent Islamic groups are often referred to as tribes.

The term does not mean "primitive", it means different groups fighting each other. If you read modern Islamic history you will learn that fundamentalist Islamic sects are quite violent against each other. Much more so than against Christians, as we might think.

And when I talk about it I am talking soley about Fundamentalist groups. Non-fundamentalists Muslims are generally peaceful. Fundamentalism is the problem, not the religion per se. At least in my opinion.

[Kringle]

10. let's hope for a good outcome ...

let's hope for a good outcome ...

US non-involvement

[rug]

12. Headlines like this make me think it's the 13th century.

Not to mention the Flemish and the Walloons.

[Stuart G]

19. Does the hate ever stop????????nt

[jazzelle]

20. Thats terrible.

.