Uzbekistan: Human rights concerns raised amid sanctions freeze

Joanna Lillis: 6/23/08

Nearly two months after the European Union ruled that sanctions against Uzbekistan would remain suspended for six months, there are signs that Western governments continue to seek rapprochement with Tashkent. The trend is happening even while human rights bodies caution that lifting sanctions altogether will leave the West with no leverage to seek improvements in the country's dismal human rights record.

On April 29, the EU decided to maintain a freeze on sanctions imposed after the 2005 Andijon crackdown, saying that it welcomed "the progress achieved in Uzbekistan in recent months in the promotion and protection of human rights and the rule of law." Among the improvements cited: the abolition of the death penalty, the introduction of habeas corpus, the ratification of an International Labor Organization child labor convention and the February release of four political prisoners.

The sanctions remain suspended even though Uzbekistan has still not met the EU's own criteria to lift them. These conditions include permitting an international Andijon inquiry, releasing imprisoned rights defenders, accrediting a Human Rights Watch (HRW) representative in Uzbekistan, cooperating with United Nations special rapporteurs and removing restrictions on non-governmental organizations.

Some observers think the decision was a victory for Uzbekistan. "I think Uzbekistan was quite bullish and ignored all the demands of the EU, and has forced it to change its policy and engage Uzbekistan in a different way, which means start dealing with it without any preconditions," Naubet Bisenov, an analyst specializing in Uzbekistan at the Institute for Economic Strategies-Central Asia in Almaty, told EurasiaNet. "My personal opinion is that Uzbekistan has done everything contrary to what the West, and the EU in particular, expected from it."

The sanctions – a partial suspension of the EU-Uzbekistan cooperation agreement, a visa ban on 12 officials and an arms embargo – have been gradually relaxed since 2005 and will automatically expire in October unless the EU unanimously decides to renew them.

HRW urged the EU to state in its April review that the sanctions will be maintained beyond October. "We chose not to call for the sanctions to be reinstated, even though we did make it clear that obviously, despite the fact that there have been positive steps in the right direction, the overall human rights situation remains atrocious and the criteria as such had not been met," Veronika Szente Goldston, advocacy director at HRW's Europe and Central Asia Division, told EurasiaNet. "What we called on the EU to do was to accompany the extension of the suspension with an extension of the sanctions regime beyond October so that this leverage… would be maintained. Unfortunately, this did not happen."

HRW rejects the argument that it was Western engagement with Uzbekistan that brought about some progress since the last sanctions review. "It wasn't the suspension per se that triggered these positive steps, but the looming threat of reinstatement of these sanctions," Szente Goldston argued.

Since the EU extended the suspension, Uzbekistan's government has done little to demonstrate good faith on human rights. It has denied HRW's representative accreditation, hosted a media conference that degenerated into bitter controversy, arrested an independent journalist and accused reporters of anti-state activities.

HRW's application to accredit its representative was rejected in May, Szente Goldston confirmed, on the grounds that he is "not familiar with the mentality of the people of the region." The argument that Uzbekistan has a particular mentality that outsiders fail to understand – a concept routinely promoted by the Uzbek administration – is rejected by critics as a pretext for flouting human rights.

This is not the first time Uzbekistan's government has refused to accredit an HRW representative, and the organization, which is asking the government to reverse the decision, is concerned with the impact on its operations. "This is the latest in a longstanding attempt on the part of the Uzbek government to create obstacles for our ability to pursue our work in Uzbekistan and this is more a sign of that – of trying to hamper our human rights work in the country," said Szente Goldston.

International media outlets also face obstacles obtaining permission to work in Uzbekistan. On June 17, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Media Freedom Representative Miklos Haraszti said that he had raised the issue with officials. Haraszti's comments came in a statement expressing concern over the arrest of independent journalist Solijon Abdurakhmanov on charges of possessing narcotics and over accusations aired on Uzbekistan's state TV that Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty journalists were engaged in anti-state activities.

"These assaults on free reporting are especially regrettable as Uzbek authorities told me during my visit last week that they were ready to start the much-needed reforms of the media governance in the country," Haraszti said.

Haraszti was in Tashkent for a government-sponsored media freedom conference, which was condemned as "a sad farce" in a joint statement by HRW, the International Crisis Group, Reporters Without Borders and the Open Society Institute after many independent voices were excluded.

[EurasiaNet operates under the auspices of the Open Society Institute's Central Eurasia Project, but maintains an independent editorial policy.]

Critics of engagement say Uzbekistan is demonstratively flouting reform pledges now that the sanctions review is behind it, and question its incentive to reform. "The EU's weakness in pushing the human rights issue, given Uzbekistan's rejection of meeting any demands, will not have any positive impact on Uzbekistan's human rights record, because Uzbekistan sees that its human rights abuses are going without punishment," analyst Bisenov said.

The recent release of two additional prisoners – human rights activist Mutabar Tajibayeva, whose sentence was suspended, and 83-year-old Ahmadjon Odilov, Uzbekistan's longest-serving political prisoner – have been held up as examples of progress, but Bisenov argues that, since the convictions have not been struck down and others remain imprisoned, the releases are "in no way an indication of an improvement in human rights." HRW is calling for the release of all political prisoners, saying at least 11 remain behind bars. Some estimates suggest Uzbekistan's prisons may house 7,000 to 10,000 detainees imprisoned for practicing religion outside state-controlled bodies.

For Western strategists, improving relations with Uzbekistan after years of frostiness since Andijon is a priority as the war in Afghanistan, on Uzbekistan's southern flank, continues unabated, and the West engages in a bitter struggle with Russia over Central Asian energy resources.

US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher made clear during an early June visit to Tashkent that he was there to rebuild relations, and said "a very practical approach" was at the heart of US policy. Human rights were "a major issue in our discussions," he added, without giving specifics.

The West's message is clear, argued the Institute for Economic Strategies-Central Asia's Bisenov: "The West wants to tell Uzbekistan that their time of bad relations is behind and they want to improve ties. They are inviting Uzbekistan for fully-fledged cooperation and back into their sphere of influence."

Editor's Note: Joanna Lillis is a freelance writer who specializes in Central Asia.

Posted June 23, 2008 © Eurasianet