Kyrgyzstan: Internal and External Course of Development

After collapse of the Soviet Union Central Asia (CA) was not in the focus of academic society and big geopolitical players, Kyrgyzstannot being an exception. But today Russia is back to CA through the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and Collective Security TreatyOrganization (CSTO). Kyrgyzstan is a member of CSTO and is going to join the EEU. Therefore it is worth of broader analysis. Thisstudy tried to understand specifics of Kyrgyz internal and external course of development. It found that internal political process inKyrgyzstan used to be very problematic. The country suffered a lot from two revolutions, caused by the authoritarian “family rule”of Askar Akaev and Kurmanbek Bakiev. After that Kyrgyzstan decided to change its system of government from presidential to parliamentary(or semi-presidential) model. But this experiment did not bring peace and stability, additionally complicated by ethnictension between Kyrgyz and Uzbek citizens. Possible recipe of success – bigger socio-economic responsibility of the government,but it is still not in place. After two people revolts Kyrgyzstan was near to become a “failed state”, but orientation towards strategicpartnership with Russia and membership in the EEU can help it to survive politically and economically at the expense of Russiangeopolitical ambitions, compensate internal political turbulence by external factor of stability. Moreover, close (also institutional)cooperation with Moscow strengthens systemic power of Kyrgyzstan in its relations with the closest neighbors, such as Uzbekistan(not satisfied with the water policy of Bishkek) and Afghanistan (poses real security threat of Islamic extremism and terrorism toKyrgyzstan). To sum up, for the moment Kyrgyz internal politics is hardly predictable, also because of the parliamentary experiment,but definite external orientation towards Russia and the EEU creates some basis for stable long term development of the country.