< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://davejustus.com/" >

Monday, May 16, 2005

Uzbek massacre

Telegraph :

Residents of Uzbekistan's eastern city of Andizhan searched desperately for missing relatives and friends yesterday after the massacre of hundreds of civilians by government troops sent in to crush an armed uprising. As calm returned to the city of 300,000 people and the first burials took place, it became apparent that the assault, ostensibly aimed at armed insurgents, swept away many innocent lives. As many as 500 bodies were retrieved after the violence. Uzbek soldiers reportedly fired into a crowd of thousands protesting over hardships in the former Soviet republic as police officers begged them not to shoot. 'They shot at us like rabbits,' one youth said. Troops later moved in among the bodies, finishing off some of the wounded with a single bullet, according to another witness. Panic broke out as security forces fired on the crowd from roof tops and pursued fleeing demonstrators down narrow alleyways.
Unfortunately, it seems that many nations are buying the 'Islamist Terrorist's are behind all of this. I have my doubts about this, although by all accounts this was not exactly a peaceful demonstration. Regardless of any guilt by revolutionaries or Islamist terrorists, it seems extremely clear that the government troops had a single purpose, putting enough fear in the populace to prevent any sort of anti-government protest. I am sure right now, many in Uzbekistan (and other places) are looking to the West to see if the rhetoric of promoting democracy (and perhaps stopping the odd civilian massacre or two) means anything when things get serious or if President Karimov has bought off the Western powers by his anti-terrorism stance. Sadly it appears that those who are looking for support from our nation may be looking in vain. This article gives a round-up of world opinion:
Meanwhile, Western reaction to the crisis has been somewhat muted. "The Wall Street Journal" today quoted White House spokesman Scott McClellan as saying the United States is "concerned about the outbreak of violence, particularly by some members of a terrorist organization that were freed from prison." The U.S. State Department has expressed its concern that members of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, designated a terrorist group by the U.S. government, may have been freed during the 13 May unrest.
Hardly stirring support for democracy or reform of any kind in Uzbekistan, and a pretty clear message that if you fight terrorists, it is ok to terrorize your people. I am extremely disappointed, both in our Governments morality and it's far sightedness. Our failure to condemn these events in Uzbekistan will have major global repercussions. It has the potential to both derail pro-democracy movements in a variety of countries as well as build support for terrorist aims. Hopefully our Government will correct this and reverse it's position.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Polictics make strange bedfellows, or some such crap as that. Looks like the old "your enemy is my enemy and we'll fight when the enemy is whipped." The USA as well as other governments have often allied with or else supported governments that were nothing less than tyants. The alliance with the USSR to fight Hitler is an example. Morally right? Hell, I don't know. Could the allies won without the USSR? Is the fight against Islamic terrorists justification to support a tyrant? Again, I don't know.

5/16/2005 03:40:00 PM  
Blogger Dave Justus said...

Those conflicts were slightly different. They were for the most part conventional power vs. conventional power. Germany presented a clear, and immediate military danger and we took what allies we could. One could second guess various what-ifs but a win is a win.

While there was a strong ideological componant in the cold war, it was fairly clear dividing lines and actual direct military strenth (often through proxies) played a decisisive role. I am not entirely happy about some of the allies we chose during that period, and the compromises of our principles, but once again, we did win and it is hard to second guess that.

The War on Terror is a different beast. If you believe, as I do, that the primary cause of terrorism is a lack of freedom and democracy, then siding with a totalitarian regime against terrorists is a self defeating effort.

I am willing to concede to making deals to facilitate certain campaigns (Uzbekistan during the Afghan invasion), and even the occassion deal of supporting a 'moderate strongman' where the risks of chaos are extremely high (Pakistan) but supporting a totalitarian regime against their own people and letting them use terrorism as a pretext is a recipe for disaster.

5/17/2005 08:26:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home