Kyrgyzstan?

[stoutfellow]

Apparently some wild things are going on in Kyrgyzstan; Askar Akayev has reportedly fled the country in the face of massive demonstrations, and the opposition has taken power.

I'm not sure what to make of this. In the first few years after the USSR broke up, as I recall, Akayev was pointed to as something of a democrat, but in the last few years he seemed to be working on presidency-for-life or, failing that, establishing a dynasty. On that basis, it's probably good to see the back of him. But from what I'm hearing the opposition isn't unified and may quickly turn to squabbling. There's been some good discussion at Obsidian Wings (which has become my favorite political blog - a good mix of left and right, with, in most cases, civil discourse, even in the comments).

I don't know, either, whether Kyrgyzstan has the kind of social institutions that can support a democracy. They can be built, if they're not there, but for the first while they can be awfully fragile. A lot can turn on the quality of the leaders who emerge - Robespierre or Washington, Mugabe or Mandela - and I don't know anything about the Kyrgyz opposition figures. We shall see.

Comments

Squabbling is good.

[p-o-u-n-c-e-r.livejournal.com]

Heck, squabbling is GREAT. Shouting matches, pushing, shoving on the floor of the Senate ...

Wait, that was the U.S. in the 1860's. Or maybe I mean the 1960's...

It's raids on the armories and untrained mobs arming themselves to march against the authorities and lynch whoever they dislike that's not so great. Or not so good. Or not good at all, actually. Uhm. Bad, even. Like the US in the 1770's, actually. Or the 1850's.

Agreed that much depends on the quality of the revolutionary leadership. Vlacav Havels and George Washingtons, even Nelson Mandelas, seem to be in short supply. On the other hand, the list of good examples gets longer every decade.

Re: Squabbling is good.

[stoutfellow.livejournal.com]

I don't really mind squabbling, at some level. The problem here is that it would not be good to open the door either to the kleptocrats of the old guard or to violent Islamists (who have tried to gain power in Kyrgyzstan at least once before). Remember, the initial appeal of the Taliban was that they put paid to the warlords.

[pompe.livejournal.com]

And yet, wouldn't it be both ironic and hopeful if a popular revolt would install democracy in a to the world mostly forgotten Muslim ex-Soviet nation, far cheaper, more peaceful and quicker than the otherwise popular procedure these days: divisions of Western invasion forces...

I doubt the Soviet experience has been entirely bad, structural-wise. There may be less institution-building necessary than we think.

[stoutfellow.livejournal.com]

I would love to see that happen. I'm just not sure (and I mean precisely that: I am professing ignorance, not coyly making a negative assertion) how likely it is.