ForumGarden

posted by scrat

I think this means a lot more power for Islamic extremists though in a worldly sense. When the Russians go home somebody fills the viod and it is not Americans.

My better half thinks this is yet another stupid move by Russia and the west, she makes a living off of the study of things like this so I tend to believe her word on it.

Russia just wants to sit and be happy behind her borders, America/Europe is overly ambitious and not capable of filling in the void that Russia is leaving behind.

What do you think?


I think you need to let them sort it out for themselves and let things run their course. You can't call for freedom in countries like uzbekistan and then turn round and complain because it is the wrong kind of freedom. Nor can you give tacit support to oppressive regimes and help them suppress popular political movements because it suits your interests without that movement becoming more extreme and hostile to the west and Russia for interfering. Definitely the EEC and US should keep out of it. Opposing it just gives more credence to islamic extremists by making them heroes in a freedom struggle.

Popular rising in Ukraine good, popular rising in Uzbekistan bad. Ever so slightly hypocritical don't you think? The causes are the same.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4545707.stm

Although initially touted as the latest pro-democracy "coloured revolution" to hit the former Soviet Union, the uprising in Kyrgyzstan has done little to improve living conditions or the sense of hopelessness that pervades the region.

Torture 'systematic'

Uzbekistan remains a close ally of the US, with its airspace and military facilities made available for the ongoing operation in Afghanistan.

The US military presence may well have acquired a permanent character. President Bush has never publicly criticised Uzbekistan's denial of freedom to its citizens.




Meanwhile, the US State Department's website carries reports on the "systematic" use of torture by the Uzbek government, but also, somehow, also manages to call it "a stable and moderate force".

Russia's approach is not terribly different. Moscow has had a mixed relationship with Tashkent, but the line from Russian diplomats appears to be that secular rule at any cost is better than the threat from Islamists.


I can't think of anything better guaranteed to end up with a fundamentalist state than using force to suppress political protest.

If the extreemist would just take to drinking beer the world would be a better place:)

Part of the problem - although one that it`s not "PC" to discuss - seems to be that whilst the developed countries are having a smaller birth-rate (even a negative one in , I think, Japan), those from the `developing` countries have more and more babies - ie, there are more and more of them and less and less of us. I generally agree with the 2 previous comments, though.