Brussels, 20/09/2006 (Agence Europe) - For much of the 1990s, “the distant and complex region of Central Asia was not on the EU radar screens”. Anna Mateeva, a British researcher at the London School of Economics explains in Chaillot Paper No. 91 “EU Stakes in Central Asia (published by the EU Institute of Security Studies and headed by Nicole Gnesotto) that the region became more visible following the involvement of energy companies and the activities of international organisations like the UN and the OSCE. The final note in the preface explains that “most of the security challenges in the European Security Strategy are embodied, more or less violently, in the different countries of the region”: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan. Ms Gnesotto, underlines that the author is not appealing for a global strategy for these countries but for more coherency in how they are treated by the EU (particularly in respect of the designation in June 2005 of a Special Representative and the elaboration by the European Commission of a new Regional Strategy for 2007-13). It is also pointed out that none of the countries from the region are EU accession candidates. This specific situation means that the Union should develop both “a very broad level of flexibility” in defining its bilateral relations with these countries as well as an “original political reflection”.
Anna Mateeva explains that the region “has achieved some notable successes in peace and stability”. In this respect, the civil war in Tajikistan (1992-97), “the most brutal conflict to have occurred in the aftermath of the Soviet dissolution”, which ended with the signing of peace agreements that “paved the way towards security and modest prosperity”. The region has not experienced “the rise of destructive nationalism, as happened in the Balkans or the Caucasus, and minorities, although having lost some of their former standing, live peacefully alongside majority populations”. The author notes, however, the “brutal repression” in May 2005 in Uzbekistan and the “turbulence in Kyrgyzstan after the power change in March 2005”. According to Anna Mateeva “Central Asian presidents are ageing” and there is no mechanism for ensuring their succession as the region becomes “a victim of 'negative globalisation', witnessed in drug trafficking and the penetration of jihadi ideology” and the rise in the region of “Islamist ideology and terrorist attacks” (Uzbekistan in 1999 and 2004) and “organised crime with connections to Russia, Turkey and beyond, as well as state repression”. However, according to Mateeva, an opportunity exists for strengthening moderate Islamic states which are well disposed towards Europe and promoting harmony between Islam and secularism in these societies. She says that EU policies in Central Europe could also lead to an improvement in links between Russian and China, whose engagement in the region will continue to increase.
The author says that it is unlikely that the states of Central Asia will “grow together in a regional integration dynamic” and that it is “also doubtful that they will become free-market economies with strong connections to international markets”. She also asserts that the EU ought to opt for a “low key” but long-term political approach that does not necessarily push any grand initiatives. Ms Mateeva points out that the EU should focus on “the promotion of Kazakhstan as a regional leader” and warns that “the policy of rewarding the best and richest pupil is understandable given the setback in Uzbekistan. However, the EU should not fall into the trap of substituting policy towards Central Asia with policy towards just one country”. According to Ms Mateeva the Union “should not give up on 'difficult partnerships' altogether and may need to explore whether and how its relationship with Uzbekistan can be gradually mended and dialogue can be established”. The author suggests that in respect of Turkmenistan they should “follow through policies of diversification of energy supplies, if and when they arise, but keep its expectations over Turkmen modest”. (Institute Site: http://www.iss.europa.eu ).