I think Nathan is more right. He says Uzbekistan boils down to a tough case. If a tough case allows us in–and they rarely do–I do think we absolutely should take advantage of the situation knowing that our successes are going to be few and far-between and that change will be a very long time coming. However, if Uzbekistan wants to dump us, we have little choice but to let them.

My longer (too long! as usual...) response is in yesterday's comments.

Nathan makes the point that the US required reform right from the start. Which hasn't happened. The only way to "force" it is regime change; though words of condemnation can help (and hurt).

Nathan quotes an Uzbek woman:
To be honest, no one actually cares about Americans at this point. People care about how THEY are treated by the government.

Nathan continues:Like me, she wants action. What can we do to make her life better? Sadly, the answer is increasingly looking like nothing. So, what do we do? Personally, I think that if we leave, we should do it kicking and screaming...

Like I mentioned -- finance private house construction.

Posted by: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad at June 10, 2005 03:44 AM

I find myself tending towards Nathan's side on this. Our foothold in Central Asia is quite tenuous, we share no borders with any state in the region, nor is there any coastal state that offers access to the Navy. This is why Pakistan was so important to the operation in Afghanistan: we needed to fly over Pakistan to even get to Afghanistan. I suppose it is this inaccessability that makes the airbase in Uzbekistan important. Iran may be the true key to the region.

As to how to bring about change in Uzbekistan, I think Nathan's comments about Karimov being relected and what he does for the country are worth keeping in mind. I have heard similar sentiments expressed by Kazakhs. We should remember that the true powers in the region are likely to be Russia, Iran, Pakistan, and possibly India and China. So we should consider carefully just how entangled we wish to become in that rat's nest.

So what to do? Long term, probably just keep some pressure on, and press forward with development in the whole region. I am sure some strategic thought has been given to the whole of Central Asia, I would just like to know more about what the ideas are.

Posted by: chuck at June 10, 2005 06:54 AM

Another VERY annoying thing is how Leftists are so fast to DEMAND that the US dump dictator-allies, over whom the US has some little or very small influence, yet are quite willing to ask for ever more aid for dictators and neo-dictators (Chavez) who are neutral or in opposition to us.

Posted by: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad at June 10, 2005 07:12 AM

Tom,

forget Chavez, these anti-dictator Leftist types have been whining for us to lift sanctions on Castro for decades.

You can boil it down to this, the Left likes commie dictators because that variety of strongman is anti-American, and the Right likes rightwing tinpot dictators because those are pro-American.

And I'll boil it down even further. The Left is anti-American, and the Right is pro-American. This is the very essence and core of all politics.

Flame away you Lefties

Posted by: spaniard at June 10, 2005 07:24 AM

Realizing how vile our own ally is, and how much we need him, and how vile his opponents are...seem to be necessary reality check to neocon idealism run amok. Guess what -- we are not the masters of the universe.

Another reality check is this article in today's Post, the most depressing one I've ever read on our efforts to train the spanking new Iraqi army. Pennsylvanian Christians vainly yelling in incomprehensible English for Muslim Iraqis to search a mosque for other Muslims who had attacked the Americans. Pathetic. (Go ahead, read it and blame the "MSM" for telling "lies", based on their actual first hand observations)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/09/AR2005060902245.html?nav=rss_email/components

spaniard,

regarding Castro, it's not the leftists, but the moderates and the realists, some of whom are even Republicans, who realize that the sanctions are the best thing that have ever happened to Fidel Castro. They are his main weapon in retaining power.

The rest of your comments will get no response from me, nor hopefully from anyone else.

Posted by: markus rose at June 10, 2005 07:53 AM

Another thing worth pondering: what is in it for Karimov? I think his original motivation for letting us in was to counter the Pakistani power being projected through the region by the Taliban. OK, that is more or less under control. What remains? What's in it for him now? My guess is we balance Iran and Russia and also bring in some money. How important is that to him? Beats me, I am just raising the question.

Posted by: chuck at June 10, 2005 07:58 AM

...sanctions are the best thing that have ever happened to Fidel Castro. They are his main weapon in retaining power.

It is pretty obvious that the main things maintaining Castro's power are guns and the police force. Cuba has always been free to trade with Europe and most of the Hemisphere. Talk about a reality check.

Posted by: chuck at June 10, 2005 08:05 AM

Chuck, I think that what was in it for him originally was prestige and money. When I was around, the government seemed to derive a lot of pride out of organizations, governments, and companies paying attention to it.

As an added bonus, it was a thumb in the eye of the Russians (even though Russia helped us transport stuff to set up our operations). I think it continues to be a way for the Uzbek government to keep Russia and China from getting too close or assertive. Pakistan's not a place that the Uzbek government worries too terribly much about despite its support of the Taliban.

Posted by: Nathan at June 10, 2005 08:09 AM

regarding Castro, it's not the leftists, but the moderates and the realists, some of whom are even Republicans, who realize that the sanctions are the best thing that have ever happened to Fidel Castro.

Markus,

so now I'm supposed to be believe the Left wants sanctions lifted because they're anti-Castro? Good one. Who do you think you're kidding.

The Left supports Castro-- I've heard if from their very mouths-- but they despised Pinochet, et al., and now Karimov. I can only assume it's because they are anti-American. I don't pretend this to be a subtle point, just a right on target one.

Posted by: spaniard at June 10, 2005 08:22 AM

Interesting. However I raised my eyebrows at this statement: "But I think it boils down to a tough case." One shouldn't use the word 'boil' when referring to Islam Karimov.

Posted by: at June 10, 2005 08:22 AM

chuck -- castro blames the sanctions for everything that goes wrong in Cuba, and this has worked for years. No sanctions, no scapegoat.

spaniard -- did you say something?

Posted by: markus rose at June 10, 2005 08:29 AM

Actually, he who hasn't left a name, it's interesting you bring that up. It kind of highlights how skewed the perceptions of Uzbekistan are. Anytime someone comes out blasting with the "Karimov boils dissidents" argument, I find it a good indicator that they don't actually know all that much about human rights in Uzbekistan beyond a few generalities that filtered into the media's Uzbekistan story templates.

Posted by: Nathan at June 10, 2005 08:52 AM

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/foleyx-browse?id=Alliances

Posted by: Jefferson's friend at June 10, 2005 09:10 AM

I disagreed with abandoning Karimov at the time. I no longer do. Uzbekistan is just not that important an ally, and Karimov is never going to be a liberal autocrat.

I don't know why we bother with sanctions. They didn't work in Cuba even after 50 years, didns't work in Iraq after 12 years, didn't work to replace tyranny with democracy anywhere I can think of.

We should lift the sanctions and export 20,000 Marines to Havana.

Posted by: TallDave at June 10, 2005 09:27 AM

You have a point about sanctions TallDave. With Uzbekistan though, I think we might be able to nail them through cotton should it come to that. In fact, I remember in early 2001 the US banned the purchase of Uzbek cotton. They rely on it so much for state revenues and the economy is getting so screwy that farmers are starting to get a little frisky and activist over not receiving payments for the cotton that they are required to sell to the state (grown on land that they are not allowed to own and harvested by children who should be in school).

Posted by: Nathan at June 10, 2005 09:43 AM

Islands of Freedom have a long history of being subjected to turmoil and the need for oversized Armies. Ask the Israelis and South Koreans or the Iraqis.

The reverse is true as well. Most people(at least that I am aware of) believe Belarus and Zimbabwe are in the final throws of tyranny.

Uzbekistan(rated 6.5 on freedomhouse scale) is sandwiched between Kazakstan(5.5 on FH scale) and Turkmenistan(7 on FH scale).

What happens in Kazakstan and Turkmenistan has just as much to do with what happens in Uzbekistan as any US influence, unless we are prepared to send in 150,000 US troops.

The US can shut down its airbase in Uzbekistan and lose what little influence it has, or the US can stay and continue to apply pressure.

Posted by: Solder's Dad at June 10, 2005 09:55 AM

Nathan,

How does Uzbek cotton get to the US? And does it matter? I thought textile production had moved to China and India, although I am pretty vague about this.

Posted by: chuck at June 10, 2005 09:57 AM

Chuck,
When Castro had all the aid coming from the SOviets, the sanctions were appropriate. At this point, the quickest way to get rid of him would be to open up everything with Cuba. Unfortunately, neither party wants to risk offending the Cuban-AMerican vote.

Posted by: exhelodrvr at June 10, 2005 10:58 AM

exhelodrvr,

At this point, the quickest way to get rid of him would be to open up everything with Cuba.

Well, I am certainly not arguing for the effectiveness of sanctions, just that sanctions are not what keeps Castro in power. I suppose that if sanctions were lifted we might have more influence in post-Castro Cuba. Whether or not the Cubans would benefit would depend more on what the government did with whatever money it made on the deal. I can't see Cuba letting folks buy whatever they want on the open market. As an alternative to lifting sanctions, may I propose encouraging smuggling? If we called off the US Coast Guard, goods could enter the black market where ordinary Cubans could buy them. Some links: Implications of Lifting the U.S. Embargo and Travel Ban,Foreign Investment in Cuba.

Posted by: chuck at June 10, 2005 11:38 AM

The squalor of Cuba is lesson enough for most of Latin America. That many in Latin America are slow learners is good enough reason to keep Castro in place.

Posted by: mika. at June 10, 2005 11:46 AM

"You have a point about sanctions TallDave. With Uzbekistan though, I think we might be able to nail them through cotton should it come to that."

They'll just start growing poppies.

Posted by: mika. at June 10, 2005 11:48 AM

I agree sanction and/or the threat of sanctions can help move nominally regimes toward democratic reform; there's lots of precedent for that. Regimes like Cuba, Iran, Iraq, etc, that are actively hostile, aren't going to be budged by them.

Posted by: TallDave at June 10, 2005 11:54 AM

That said, I don't think opening up trade with Cuba would necessarily help things either, unless we ship them some Marines. Otherwise I think we'd just trade a wretchedly poor dictatorship for a less poor one.

Posted by: TallDave at June 10, 2005 11:56 AM

Chuck, probably doesn't matter much. Our objections before had to do with their practice of using children to harvest the cotton.

They are usually the 2nd or 3rd largest exporter in the world. I'm far from knowledgeable about the international cotton market, but I've read that Uzbek cotton is fairly high-quality and very desirable to countries like China. So, any kind of sanctions would likely need to involve quite a few countries to have a huge impact.

Posted by: Nathan at June 10, 2005 11:59 AM

Reality check for Spaniard, et al. Karimov IS a Commie Dictator! He was there before the USSR fell apart and he didn't move. He was a happy Communist Party apparatchik all his life until by luck Yeltsin and gang broke up the Soviet Union on his watch and Karimov grabbed his share. Karimov is not a Franco or a Pinochet who at least we're plausibly motivated by national pride and Western/Catholic values at some level. Karimov has no love for the US at all, he's just using us as leverage against Russia and China. (And he's quite willing to use Russian and China as leverage against us). Karimov has never shown any great willingness to support real market reforms or any understanding of what a market economy is. In his mind the Uzbek state exists to provide wealth to him and his clan.

Posted by: Vanya at June 10, 2005 12:04 PM

Vanya,

Thanks for the reality check, I didn't know that. Though it doesn't address my point, which was about being pro vs anti-American, not commie vs capitalist.

Posted by: spaniard at June 10, 2005 01:34 PM

Gah! Should read "help move nominally friendly regimes toward democratic reform".

Pimf.

Posted by: TallDave at June 10, 2005 04:00 PM

Gross import/export sanctions hurt more the poor people (of both countries); both in Cuba and Uzbekistan. The Uzbek cotton will go to China and/or India (and Russia?), so sanctions without those countries are worse than useless -- like Castro using US sanctions to demonize America AND justify all bad policies and bad policy outcomes.

The fact that pro-Castro folk (say they) want the sanctions lifted is the only reason I'm not more anti-sanctions.

Yet sanctions on top leaders is different -- let the leaders, their top people, and most of the rich of that country know they are not welcome. Not give them visas to visit. That's a small, but real, insult that hurts only the top. Get rid of gross sanctions as a tool.

Karimov is likely a "commie entreprenuer" of the type that will do whatever it takes to maintain power.

Again, offer him "money" in the form of mortgage loans for house building. More when doing good, less when not.

Posted by: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad at June 12, 2005 06:16 AM

With Uzbekistan's cotton, I'm not sure that anyone gets much benefit but the government anyway. Farmers aren't paid even the way below-market prices that the government seizes it from them for. The kids who harvest it tend to end up owing money for transportation and food while they're in the fields.

Still though, we would need China and India on board, and there's too much in it for them to keep buying.

Posted by: Nathan at June 12, 2005 10:43 AM

I posted a little while back on why I think that, perhaps, maybe, Bush co. will increasingly disengage with Uzbekistan - engagement is no longer strategically important and that appears to be the guiding test of whether or not the "Bush doctrine" of promoting democracy applies.

Posted by: at June 13, 2005 05:01 PM

: Dish Network. : I use Dish Network.com.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.

Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.

Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should get Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network Offer.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Dishnetwork.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dish Network.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Direct TV.
Youll should use Dishnetwork.
I use Dental Insurance. Posted by: David Niven at June 23, 2005 11:40 AM