Kyrgyz Crossword

A Country of Paradoxes

Kyrgyzstan is an intriguing country in post-Soviet Central Asia. The historical drama of the country is full of conflicts and crucial plots, mysteries and myths; it has more questions than answers.

It is the most open country in the region, with strong civil society and freedom of speech. At the same time, it is the most disorganized country, with weak government institutions and an inefficient bureaucratic system.

According to many experts, the country essentially did not realize itself as a state during fifteen years of independence. It still has not clearly found its position concerning main internal and external vectors of development.

Among the former Soviet states of Central Asia, Kyrgyzstan was the first to introduce a national currency, entere the WTO, and started land privatization. However, the advantages of some of these steps are not obvious. The economy is weak and vulnerable to serious external factors, and is damaged by corruption in addition. The government indeed cannot manage its huge external dept, which is why it fully depends on donor countries and international financial institutions.

Smart and dynamic Kyrgyz businessmen currently occupy medium and small businesses niches in Kazakhstan and Russia, leaving far behind the active part of the population in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in understanding the mechanisms of the market economy. Most working age citizens are massively leaving the country in search of a better life. Thanks to their remittances, which annually amount to more than $500 million, economic and social projects in the country continue to exist, and are even developing in some cases.

The population is strongly politicized; the most active part of it constantly participates in mass political events and does not allow the establishment of an authoritarian regime. In 2005, it became the only country in Central Asia to replace the system of rule by forceful pressure; it oddly presents elements of revolution and counterrevolution, coupe d’etat and constitutional transfer of authority.

The nation is divided into two regions in political terms, but is united in the strive for better changes. The economically active population feeds the authority, and has lost all hopes of getting help from them in return. The authority steadily increases its level of life at the expense of the population, not understanding how to help people substantially. Kyrgyzstan is a country of paradoxes in which many unexpected things could happen.

The Lessons of the Last Fifteen Years and of 2005

During the first years of independence, it was generally believed that the country took a route for welfare, and expectations were high. The participation of people in political and economic life became more and more active, resulting in the emergence of opposition and establishment of a private sector.

However, there was an attempt to establish clan-based rule of one family at the top instead of promoting systematic and consistent transformation of the political system with an objective to increase the efficiency of governance as a whole. Naturally, this occurrence prompted the appearance of three threatening trends: 1) the growth of corruption in the governmental system and system of public affairs management, 2) the intensification of crisis between the executive branch of authority and the parliament, 3) the moral and professional degradation of the prestige of the judicial branch of authority.

The shadow economy became almost equal to the official one. The arrogant and empty way of life of corrupt officials and new bourgeoisie promoted the quick deflation of the moral values of the society, resulting in the moral degradation of the population’s majority, who began to live according to the principle that ‘everything can be bought and sold.’ The psychology of thieves, crooks and nepotistic leaders became prevalent in the society. Elections at all levels turned into shameless exchanges, opening a way to politicians without morality or principles.

By 2005, the country had a permanent president and had gone through many prime ministers, speakers, and oppositional politicians, but had never seen a true leader of the nation.

It is necessary to stress that the factor of leadership plays a decisive role in the destiny of any country. The history of both successful and failed countries proves this point, which can especially be seen in the history of post communist countries.

After the collapse of the USSR, the soviet party nomenclatura was the only source from which to form a ruling circle. A split in the Kyrgyz Communist Party in 1991 demonstrated that there was no strong leader, and regionalist politics openly emerged in the arena. It is for this reason that a member of the mid-level nomenclatura occupied the position of the presidency, someone who was able to mislead the public from the start by positioning himself as democrat and a progressive leader.

On the sly of anticommunist rhetoric, the top of the nomenclatura was eliminated from political life and replaced by a rattling mix of blood relatives and representatives of the academic nomenclatura intelligentsia.

At the same time, the one and only criterion to get access to authority was full obedience and personal devotion to the president and his family. It is not surprising that this criterion became both a basis to reinforce family rule and a trend towards the degradation of the ruling circle. Most people did not notice that the country fell deep in dept under the thick screen of loud promises and endless plans.

The unique natural resources of Kyrgyzstan turned into objects of shameless exploitation, robbery, and means of trade for the ruling circle and its associates. The Kyrgyz opposition was formed under conditions of growing discontent among the people with the method of rule and personal qualities of the president and his close associates.

The first group of opposition consisted of representatives of the intelligentsia, who began political activity during perestroika. The number of opposition later increased with the addition of representatives of marginal groups in the society. It seems that the social origin and level of political culture of the political elite gave birth to two types of opposition: ideological and pseudo opposition.

Pseudo oppositionists grew only on the basis of bare protest against the owner of the White House and his policies. They were always driven by only bare interests – to get into authority themselves by any means. Their number continues to increase from time to time with the addition of those people who have been stripped of opportunities to get rich at the expense of other people, and have thus become exploited themselves. Moreover, these people did not pay special attention to the doubtful origins of politicians’ money. Such politicians never possessed idealism.

For this reason, it is no coincidence that some of them who have gained government power currently cannot change the essence of authority for the better; they are mirror reflections of their rivals of yesterday. It is logical that the property of losers passed into the hands of winners.

It is utopia to expect constructive politics in the form of alternative projects for the country’s development and positive ideology from pseudo oppositionists.

In contrast, politicians who had certain a political philosophy and democratic commitments were not able to connect their political goals with the hopes of simple people. Now they are desperately searching for a cure against regionalism in order to find a way to reach the wider public. They have not succeeded in turning their ideology into a philosophy of the masses.

Thus, Kyrgyz oppositionists, not having a clear political plan, unity, or solidarity on the basis of principles, and also lacking a leader with firm democratic commitments, could not play a large historical role. When protesters brought them to the top of the political pyramid in March 2005, giving them a rare chance to become authors of a better history for people, they did not use it. After 24 March, 2005 the power of protesting people was not directed towards progress. Great efforts yielded little result…

Look back at the past. The Kyrgyz nation appeared in history as a union of tribes with an elected khan, the authority of whom was not hereditary. Tribalism in the political life of the Kyrgyz people played a large role over a long period of time, and did not allow the creation of a centralized state. Ethnic unity and regionalism gained important meaning during a period in which the political struggles of the Kyrgyz entering into the sphere of influence of (and a system of relationships with) despotic oriental states. Russia used intertribal and regional contradictions as an instrument of influence and colonial management. Soviet authority attempted to replace tribalism and regionalism with class struggle and to introduce an ideology of modernism into Kyrgyz society. However, it was not able to fully destroy remnants of the past. Tribalism has been reanimated in the years of independence, and manipulation by a regional factor has taken place for the sake of reinforcing personal power, instead of substantial attempts to unify the nation and search for nationwide ideology. Return to the spiritual ancestry and the roots of Kyrgyz statehood has remained in the shadow of greedy self-interests. In ideological terms, there is always a contest between truth-seekers like Toktogul and the high and mighty among the Kyrgyz people.

In 2005, political life did not flow in a new direction of transfer from regionalism to ideological contest in politics. Conservative thinking, involving retrograded populism and world outlooks, and the political immaturity of political elite hindered the country from progressive development.

In many countries, progressive politicians, especially some outstanding leaders who had historically short terms, performed revolutions in the minds of their people and build a new beautiful world for all on that basis. Kyrgyzstan also has a chance, but the country is allowing it to pass. The system of governance remains weak. The political system is in crisis. Confrontation between the executive branch of authority and the parliament have attained a permanent, dead-end character. The condition of the parliament discredits the model of a multiparty system and parliamentary form of ruling in the eyes of the population. Corruption and inefficient management of public affairs has destroyed the remaining hopes of the population after the change of authority. Neither the authority nor the opposition have a competent, consolidated position on any of the principal issue of national or foreign policy. The HIPC program demonstrates this state of affairs best.

People do not have a leader; they have a tandem. There is combative opposition, many-headed and many-voiced, which still does not know what kind of society to build. In short, the historical ancestry and future of the country, the hopes and expectations of people are in the hands of an immature political elite.

What we can expect in the nearest future?

The situation in the country and the condition of its citizens will depend on the policy of the White House and opposition, as well as on the level of participation in politics of the active part of society. Let us take a positive, desired scenario as an example – one which could be called the spurt forward-overcome model. The new Constitution has been adopted, and both sides agreed in general that this is a step forward.

The executive branch of authority and the parliament will seriously start to reinforce the political system and the basis of governmental authority according to the new Constitution, smoothing the contradictions and optimizing mutual relations.

At last, both sides will reach consensus in understanding the main directions in the development of the country. All politicians will become united and patriotic in lobbying the interests of nation, and will also clearly define their roles in the process and assume mutual obligations to observe the clear rules of the game of politics.

The opposition will acquire official political status and rights which are protected by laws, and will finally become a significant force in society. The body that will preside over reforms will consist of highly educated youth, honest professionals, and politicians. A real fight against corruption will begin, and stolen money will be returned to the treasury of government.

Economic freedom and efficiency will increase as the government promotes the growth of production, the expansion of exports, and the increase of goods turnover in the country. The government will set up a professional, non-confrontational foreign policy, achieve the understanding of donors, and take a favorable position on credit return.

The advantages of this model are that it highlights a way to achieve systematic change and demolition of the conditions which give birth to self-interest and corruption. In addition, there are opportunities within the model for intellectual and ideological competition, which will result in forwarding the opportunities of the best minds and characters in the system of governance and economics, while limiting those of untalented grey impostors and robbers. However, transition to and realization of this model require historical thinking, great political will and a strive to serve to one’s nation truly.

The other model is negative, and more likely. Let us call it the full backtrack model. If we proceed from reasons, background and dynamics of May-November events of 2006, and analyze behavior of three main political forces in the country (executive branch and its parliament satellites, opposition and politically active population), then grounds for the model’s realization are more than enough. Main characteristics of the model are: a) full distrust between political opponents and scorn against each other; b) efforts to undermine resources of opponents by any means using governmental power mechanism; c) escalation of interregional tension by intentional use population’s prejudices, exploitation of term of historical fairness and also parity of presence in government; d) formation of supporters’ group on the grounds of regionalism. If the present parliament stops its work then the government will be in even more vulnerable position, the whole state authority will weaken, protest in politics will intensify manifold and all these may finally throw the country into chaos. Implementation of such kind policy will promote corruption in the economy, bandit redistribution of property and gradual decay of financial and investment system. A war of all against all in politics and economics will completely bring the country under the control of donors, creditors, rich neighbors, and the current disputes about the HIPC will appear as a very minor issue. The continuing foreign policy based on preferences the country will be isolated from main international relations actors and political leadership of the country will lose credibility on the international arena. Intentional incitement of regional confrontation, full fallback from sound compromise will results in forceful confrontation and separatism. The state authority will collapse, the society will completely come apart and there will be a search for a new state composition, with active participation of other countries.

Intermediate Way to Nowhere model is also possible. There are also conditions for its realization. Mechanically, the country moves in neither a good nor a bad direction, but somewhere in an unknown direction. Meanwhile, there is a lot of noise about imaginary success. The authority imitates reforms and continues to bargain with donors, not having a clear perspective or fully understanding the consequences of the decisions that they take. They cannot pay the national dept, but at the same time, they are afraid of the HIPC Initiative. They keep the population ignorant about where and how credits disappear, and do not take real measures in the fight against corruption. The notion that ‘in Kyrgyzstan, only fools and lazy people do not steal’ will be even more topical. The moral degradation of the society will reinforce tensions and weaken government institutions further. In foreign policy, tactics of preferences, sharahanie, and nonobservance of obligations will only intensify the neurosis and irritation of important partners, and thus a serious problem will emerge with a trust deficit. There will be a strange parity in politics: the authority will have a desire to overcome the opposition, but in the end no power to do so, and the opposition will not have a clear understanding of what to do with this authority despite its criticism of the authority. The parliament, more dead than alive, will try to drag itself through until the end of the term. New youth leaders and lesser-known politicians will try to create an alternative to the authority and opposition, hoping that existing elites will discredit themselves totally in the eyes of public by the next elections. Thus, we can arrive at the same point in 2009 as we reached in 2005 – running without moving.

We choose, or we are chosen.

"Authorities-Opposition" Tandem in 2007

In 2006 Kyrgyzstan failed to find way out of stagnation and develop a consolidated development strategy, which would satisfy all active parts of society: the authorities and opposition, political parties and civil society.

Instead of a loudly announced 8% economic growth, a 2.7% growth was barely achieved, and the GDP is continuing to decrease. Despite the fact that the new authorities position themselves as "industrialists", the economic situation is developing in the opposite direction: there is a considerable reduction of the volume of output in industry, the price index of producers of industrial output increased by more than 15%, the deficit of trade balance increased by 2.2 times, the growth of medium and big enterprises almost stopped, whereas the growth of small enterprises and individual entrepreneurs is insignificant.

The growth of consumer prices, preservation of general wages arrears, and the grave crime rate disturbs the population. Emigration keeps growing: 25,000 Kyrgyzstanis left the country in 2005 and 26,500 in 2006. The number of HIV-infected is growing at a catastrophic pace - compared to 2005, in 2006 it increased almost by 50%. Over 60% of all crimes are serious crimes and felonies, whereas robberies, economic crimes and drug trafficking are on the rise.

It should be acknowledged that such a situation has been developing for years and the main reason for this is the vicious system of a corrupt government, which has turned into an instrument for plundering the country's wealth. Not only has the state, an excessive bureaucratic machine, become an insatiable monster, devouring the country - but it has also turned into an obstacle to development.

The share of state expenses in the country's GDP remains high at the level of 27-28%. In 2006 34.3% of the national budget was allocated for maintenance of the state machine. Thus, the Kyrgyz bureaucracy is not only a heavy burden on the national budget but also the main drain on the people's wealth and their incomes.

Influential bureaucrats who control the main financial expenditures of the country, not the commercial and financial bourgeoisie, are referred to as "the new Kyrgyz." The underlying problem is in the absence of a separation between business and power. Business has administrative resources, whereas power is money motivated. Thus, the nomenclature devours Kyrgyzstan.

The rule of law is non-existent in the country, inviolability of private property is virtually absent, and many sectors still receive support from the state.

With such conditions the people naturally expected the new administration to eliminate the vicious system and begin the policy of creating a system of government open to the public, free from corruption, effective, and generating the growth of the population's incomes. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of the population sincerely believed the promises of the leaders of the new administration and at the beginning provided them with strong support. However, the final events of 2006, as verified by sociological surveys, did not justify the expectations of most of those people. The administration and opposition failed to find ways for constructive cooperation and confrontation defined their relations. In response to the demands of the people for changing the system of government, the political leadership responded with a miserable farce of power redistribution by adopting two constitutions in two months.

Negative tendencies in the political system continued in 2007. The parliament helped ruin the tandem, and Kulov founded and headed United Front "For Decent Future of Kyrgyzstan", a new social and political movement, which openly stated the need for early presidential elections. Thus, for the first time after July 10, 2005 presidential elections, Bakiev's legitimacy as President is being openly questioned. Moreover, it is being questioned by one of the main participants of the presidential campaign. To this very day Bakiev's strength was that he was popularly elected, and Kulov's attempt to indirectly recall his share of votes makes Bakiev's authority unsustainable, creating a new political situation.

The start of a sharp polarization of political interests and a deepening feud within political powers are the defining features of the new political situation. De jure Bakiev is a popularly elected president, and even his principled opponents to this very day acknowledge his right for a constitutional term of office. Beknazarov and Co. questioned the President's ability to meet the best expectations of the people, but even they have never openly crossed the line.

After the statement of the United Front, de facto supporters of Kulov and part of the opposition do not recognize Bakiev's authority. Some political forces are already calling for a referendum to confirm the President's legitimacy. Structurally a similar situation emerged after the infamous Aksy events when de jure Aksy was subject to Akaev's authority, but his authority right up to the events of March 2005 was not recognized by residents of Aksy. Later non-recognition of the central authority spread to a number of regions. At present this process of division of the country along political estates may follow a dangerous new course. The administration itself created such force, and in order to tame or pacify it, authorities will have to resort to significant forces and resources.

At the beginning of 2007 a new Cabinet emerged from the ruins of the tandem. However, the people are not in a hurry to call it reformist or innovative. The Cabinet, toeing absolutely the President's line, has made two notable steps - they turned down the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative and moved to a two-level budget. Both steps depending on the quality of policy may either strengthen the administration or create new unsolvable problems for it.

Thus, 2007 promises to be a landmark year. There are so many problems and contradictions and not enough ways to solve them properly. There are so many processes and tendencies that have been unfolding for years and so little preparation to transform them into positive channels. It should be acknowledged that the mass of political creative work done by the people, having gone through the process of the 2005 revolution, did not continue.

The victorious part of the political elite divided up the power, stopped the revolution but so far has been unable to direct the unrealized energy of the people into the proper course. The tragedy of this part of elite is that it does not understand the similarity of the notion of "revolution" to the notion of "justice."

The defeated politicians, speaking of fundamental transformation of the political situation, does not rule out the possibility of taking advantage of the discontent of a significant part of the population and seizing power. The tension that emerged between power groups should be reduced, but the question is how. How can the increasing inter-regional antagonism be overcome?

In the future events will undoubtedly unfold along the course of objective historical and political processes, taking into account the realities. Two dangerous precedents were set in 2005: seizure of power by using force and official legalization of the dangerous "north-south" division through the creation of the tandem. Interference of criminals, irresponsibility and corruptibility of the top leadership brought about the situation of March 2005 when power was seized through violence.

The events of November 2006 demonstrated that the line between political pressure on the authorities and the temptation to seize it by using force is very thin. Given mass protests it was very difficult to withstand such a temptation. Moreover, the politically active part of the population of Kyrgyzstan saw first hand that the successful are never blamed.

In the struggle for power the Kyrgyz Communist language during Soviet times artificially strengthened regional division and local interests. A total domination of the Communist bureaucracy concealed its ideology about local interests and deeply penetrated social relations.

During independence the Kyrgyz government started to rely mainly on clan relations and that way it only strengthened inter-regional antagonisms. Such new factors as competition for scarce jobs, material resources, spare land in the north of the country and position in the state hierarchy also contributed to the growth of inter-regional tension.

Corrupt government and a poor economy aggravated the negative factor of "us vs. them". A forced union - a tandem, bound by a secret division of all important government positions, from the very beginning, contained in itself more destructive potential than constructive potential. Therefore the tandem could have played a positive role only if it existed in a constructive form till the next elections and in a worthy manner gave way to a new generation of the country's leaders.

The main mission of the tandem was overcoming the dangerous tendency of regional divisions and paving the way for balanced development of Kyrgyz politics for the following period. However, the mission turned out to be unrealizable.

What should be expected in the forthcoming months? To begin with careful attention should be paid to the essence of the authorities and the opposition - the main players on the political scene.

For the authorities the clock is ticking, whereas the number of problems is drastically increasing. The politically active population is not going to be patient. The President recently made the second attempt after 2005 to increase the number of loyal supporters in power. According to experts, in the central government there are more people who imitate loyalty and have a wait-and-see attitude than are really faithful. Even so they are trying to expand and strengthen the social basis for Bakiev's administration as well as make positive growth in the economy tangible for the population.

So far the authorities are relying on the staunch southern electorate and those who have certain benefits from cooperation with the authorities. The administration could also receive the support of those strata of the population that are afraid of the radical actions of the opposition and think that a lean compromise is better than a fat suit.

The pressure on the part of the mass media on people's opinions, especially among rural populations, is continuing with the goal of expanding the support base. The positions of the authorities are very weak in the ideological sphere. Following the example of his predecessor, the President is limiting himself to usual protocol, not paying enough attention to the expectations of the population, and primarily to the expectations of an ideological leadership. More and more important questions are accumulating within the society regarding the fate of the country, the preservation and development of the Kyrgyz nation, its place and role in contemporary human civilization. Given the lack of proper reflection on the part of the population over these problems, there is an increasing suspicion about the unhealthy interests of the administration and doubts about its moral right to rule the country.

The main issue is about the willingness and ability of the President to break the existing corrupt system and become a real leader of progressive transformations. If there are not to be tangible results from the fight against corruption then even the settled opinions of part of the southern electorate could change sharply. Such changes have already occurred in many people's opinion in the South. It is impossible to continue the course of a socially oriented state not increasing the incomes of the population while being at the center of a corrupt system.

On the other hand, democracy is the main resource of Kyrgyzstan in the foreign policy sphere. Whatever our neighbors say about us, Kyrgyzstan is the most free and democratic society in Central Asia with the strongest and most stable civil society. Kyrgyzstan is strongly tied to international and regional economic relations, and greatly dependent on foreign aid. Assistance to Kyrgyzstan in making transformations is of great importance to donor-states and international financial institutions, and two ideas are of critical importance in this regard - fighting corruption, and development of democracy.

The opposition in its present state could be divided nominally into three camps.

1. Radical opposition. It includes the United Front and radical part of the Movement "For Reforms!" They concluded that "the acting head of the state is unable to act as a guarantor of the constitutional reform, has discredited himself by the previous actions on disruption of the constitutional reform as well as practically lost his legitimacy as a result of repudiation of commitments signed by him, including commitments within the framework of the tandem," and raised the issue of early presidential elections. The radical opposition has one ideology - finish with family rule in the country. Many people are ready to support the essence of the political claims of the United Front towards the authorities, but the proposed solution of crisis puts them on their guard. The disenchanted part of the electorate will undoubtedly support the actions of the United Front and everything will depend on the tactics of political struggle. If the leaders of the opposition manage to attract the main body of civil society, make persuasive steps regarding the southern electorate and, foremost, offer a clear and attractive program for the country for the coming years, then they may become a dominant force in Kyrgyzstan within a short time.

Kulov plays an important role in this. People keep accusing him of inconsistency and indecision, and even in betraying his genuine supporters when he was Prime Minister. The issue is about whether he will position himself as an ambitious Kyrgyz ‘Napoleon' or a political ‘system designer' who will fight corruption and clear the way for the new generation.

The second obstacle in the way of the United Front is regionalism. No matter how aggravated regional sentiments, no matter how objective are arguments for justification of division, still the majority of the Kyrgyz people support national unity. Therefore any attempts to play on regionalism will in the end discredit any politician. Based on a unique political experience accumulated for the past 16 years, the capacious Kyrgyz society is able to separate the husk of words from the kernel of truth. Significantly powerful politicians who profess ideologies of regionalism and local interests could be found on the extreme right of the authorities and opposition. It is they who played on regional passions of the conservative part of the electorate during the events of November-December in 2006. Therefore collision of these forces is inevitable. Dissemination of their ideology of regionalism and revanchism among the masses is dangerous.

2. Moderate opposition. These include the socialists, nationalists, liberals, and even communists. That is, those who add stability of the political system and do not allow breaking down the foundations of the state. Except communists who wish return to the Soviet order, others failed to clearly propose their models for the development of Kyrgyzstan. But socialists keep maintaining their principles and calling for a socially oriented economy, nationalists for a distinct development plan, and liberals for more freedom and limitation of state interference into public affairs. A large number of non-governmental organizations are also part of this circle. Notwithstanding their differences, they are united by their aspiration for positive changes, since according to them, the new administration failed to become a force for progress and hinders the country's development. However, the moderate opposition wants changes through constitutional democratic means - on the basis of elections. The radical part of the opposition does not appeal to them by its excessive ambitiousness, inconsistency, and lack of a clear program of action. The moderate opposition may turn into a powerful political force if they manage to create a solid coalition aimed at a concentrated informing of the electorate, and by putting pressure on the authorities to make reforms.

If the authorities fail to appreciate their role in society, and establish constructive relations with it, then many moderate opposition figures will go for a favorable alliance with the radical opposition and question the need for such executive power. As demonstrated by history, one must deal with such things skillfully and not harbor grudges.

3. Favorites-situationists. This is a very common phenomenon in post-Soviet states where positions of the opposition are not regulated legally, politically, nor with relation to political culture. Given the hostile attitude towards dissidence, many cannot openly state their views and have to take such a position. Being in power they undermine it from within.

The people of Kyrgyzstan witnessed how officials and politicians discussed the HIPC Initiative and what their choice was. This is a particular case since it was about a principled and important issue therefore a personal choice has to be principled as well. As was expected the overwhelming majority of officials waited till the master of the "White House" made his choice. The country was again persuaded that the Kyrgyz bureaucratic elite continues to serve individuals and their own selfish ends rather than the people. There were noteworthy exceptions and this gives hope that the authorities may have the people's interests at heart. The whips within the government agencies depend on the position these opposition figures take.

Новое дыхание кочевого мира

Вся история человека – это история его кочевания во времени и пространстве в поисках самого себя. Посмотрите на современный мир – разве он не напоминает вам караваны кочевников, путешествующих во вселенной? Единый в порыве, обуреваемый страстями и любопытством, многоголосый караван движется в неизвестность. В этой самой неизвестности и есть главный смысл движения. Мир перестаёт быть интересным, а жизнь не имеет смысла, если мы заранее знаем что впереди. Поэтому не прекращаются споры о правильности выбранного пути и нет согласия между путниками. И, слава Богу!

Начало ХХI века: мир Интернета, цифровых технологий, консьюмеризма и тревожное ожидание Апокалипсиса. Империи прибыли и развлечений США, Япония, Европейский Союз ускоряют шаг, с опасением оглядываясь на новых искателей успеха – Китай, Индию и Бразилию. Мир в век глобализации стирает стереотипы, ломает традиции, ищет новые образы, жаждет неизведанного. Ему нужны новые герои, новые товары, новые страсти и новые загадки. Главное в мире консьюмеризма это не обладание, а интерес, это извечное любопытство человека познать доселе неизвестное, быть первым или, по крайней мере среди первых. Современному человеку – консьюмеристу - хочется больше интеллектуального и духовного адреналина. В ожидании заката своей судьбы, он хочет быть сверхчеловеком Ницше, и отчаянно ищет новый смысл своему существованию. Апокалипсис это его боязнь лишиться великого интереса и шанса заглянуть за видимый горизонт.

Мы, потомки легендарных кочевников оказались у ворот нового мира. Жители этого мира стремительно разрушают стены своих крепостей и уже их ворота символически стоят одиноко без стен, приглашая всех путников. Мы привыкли, что они веками отгораживались от нас китайскими стенами, адриановыми валами и римскими крепостями и оказались не готовыми к их открытости. Заново разворачивается великая драма кочевника, тысячелетиями крушившего непробиваемые стены, великолепно укрощавшего агрессивный пыл оседлых народов и теперь растерянно раздумывающего о своём пути на пороге мира «макдональдсов» и «мейсисов».

За сюрреалистическими воротами, красивым с виду миром, управляют те, кто смог создать национально-глобальные образы и убедил весь мир в их необходимости. Национальные образы по всему миру стали красивой привлекательной обёрточной бумагой господствующих брэндов. «Шератоны» и «Хилтоны», «Сони» и «Вольво», «Дэлл» и «Нокиа» изменили нашу среду и раздвигают границы нашего понимания. Они вошли в нашу жизнь, а многие комфортно расположились в наших домах. Концепция SISOMO – среда, звуки и движение управляющего Саатчи/Саатчи стала важной характеристикой человека ХХI века. Мы стоим в растерянности и не знаем, что предложить алчному миру. Мы не можем быть просто потребителями и статистами. В этом театре страстей, вещей и тщеславия мы хотим добиться признания, стать узнаваемыми. В который раз мы пытаемся преодолеть непонятные засады и найти своё место в образах нового мира.

От классического кочевого мира Евразии ныне остались три больших анклава: Казахстан, Монголия и Кыргызстан да островки по краям некогда Великой Степи. Сегодня, проезжая через растущие нефтегорода в казахской степи, пересекая бурные реки горной страны кыргызов, путешествуя по лесистым холмам Монголии, мы можем увидеть, как мировые брэнды по хозяйски устроились в Великой Степи. Не успели мы подумать о приветствии, с которым выйдем в новый мир, как он уже в нас самих. Мы уже начали вкушать их блага и привыкать к их образам. Западный мир привык штамповать свои копии среди просыпающихся народов. Но не это нам нужно. У этого мира помимо аппетита к универсальному, есть жадный интерес к новому. Согласитесь, когда он пристально смотрит на нас, нам кажется, что он задаёт трудный для нас вопрос: кто вы и с чем пришли?

И действительно, кто мы и с чем мы здесь?

На одном из знаменитых полотен Урала Тансыкбаева казах на коне в малахае смотрит на ковыльную степь, которую распахивает трактор. Щемящая тоска по исчезающему миру предков охватывает сердце степняка, и непонятная тревога за будущее бередит его душу.

Мы ещё слышим грохот развала великой империи Советов, на нас ещё пыль этой катастрофы. Евразия надломилась, но не пропала. Она даст новые всходы, и появятся надежды. Это уже было много раз в нашей долгой и запутанной истории. В противоборстве с Китаем разорвалась когда-то на куски великая империя хуннов на далёком Востоке и в могучем порыве её наследники - неукротимые гунны через несколько веков, превратили Европу в огромный котёл народов и поставили последнюю точку в затянувшейся агонии Римской империи. Ушли в небытие небесные тюрки, оставив на огромных просторах Азии, Европы и Африки тюркские гены и память о легендарной отваге приверженцев Тенгри. Монголы и тюрки, стремя к стремени, за 25 лет покорили территорию, на равную которой древние римляне затратили 400 лет и создали самую могучую и обширную империю в мире, дыхание которой ощущается и поныне.

Гунны Атиллы дали толчок новой Европе, в противоборстве и смешении с бесчисленными поколениями кочевников, начиная от хуннов и заканчивая маньчжурами, выстояла и окрепла китайская цивилизация. Чингисхан и его потомки создали мир Евразии, подобно тому, как Александр Македонский - эллинистический мир. Из гигантских разломов великой орды кочевников выросла Российская империя, появилась империя османов, образовалась современная Индия, и множество других государств. СССР был последней гигантской империей, созданной на властных традициях кочевого мира.

Тысячелетиями кочевники Евразии господствовали в мире, стремительно покоряя огромные пространства, сдвигая народы к великому переселению, смешивая расы и народы, культуры и традиции. Они преодолели изоляцию между родами и народами, проложили путь от разобщенности к единству. Для чего мы в который раз вспоминаем об этом? Нет, не для того, чтобы сегодняшнее своё бессилие перед суровыми вызовами прикрыть величественными одеждами предков. А чтобы иначе посмотреть на наш караван во времени и пространстве.

Пора. Мы так долго смотрели на мир и самих себя чужими недобрыми глазами. Нам следует быть активными игроками этого мира, но при этом оставаться самими собой.

Мы потомки глобальных игроков, которые были дрожжами нового мира, творцами крепких фундаментов великолепных зданий современности. Именно поэтому мы не можем быть блеклыми копиями торгово-финансового мира, мы не имеем права принести в жертву свою неповторимость и стать современными манкуртами. Мы не отстали, и положение наше как никогда блестящее, ибо мир глобальных отношений открывает нам невиданные возможности. Границы и линии интересов, бетонные стены и железные занавеси долго держали нас, потомков покорителей пространств и страстных любителей новых ощущений, в гнетущей изоляции. Мы же были поклонниками Мирового замаха, вселенского величия. Это о нас Лев Толстой сказал: все во мне и я во всем. Настал и наш час встать во весь рост.

Обратите внимание, как многие народы презентуют себя миру и как человечество реагирует на национальные образы. Японцы – удивительная нация, которая свои старые традиции сделала неотъемлемой и необходимой частью своей современной жизни. Образы сакуры, хризантемы и дух самурая подчёркивают тонкость вкуса, изощренность мысли и непоколебимость в характере нации. Японцы продолжают строго следовать старым правилам жизни, установленным их предками, их привычки и отношения в обществе разительно отличают их от других народов, но в то же время это суперсовременная изобретательная нация, пользующаяся всеми благами цивилизации. Они стали глобальными игроками несколько веков назад и прочно удерживают свои лидирующие позиции.

Китайцы - великие труженики в мире, строгие традиционалисты, стремительно осваивающие и копирующие все, что интересует мир консьюмеризма. Они не теряются перед новым, а говорят, что это уже было в их бесконечной истории. Тем не менее, сбивая всех с толку, продолжают удивлять мир всё новыми и новыми чудесами. Поэтому мир восхищается ими, но и очень опасается их. И главное считается с ними.

Русские - это холодная зима, беспокойный медведь и изящный русский балет. Суровость и загадочность русских настораживает, но высокое искусство и проникнутая глубоким состраданием к человеку литература ХIХ века вызывают чувство истинного уважения к русскому человеку. Слава русских не в их армии и танках, ракетах и диктаторах, а в их мыслителях, писателях, артистах и живописцах, которые создали великую культуру гуманизма.

Казахи сейчас тратят огромные финансовые средства на размещение в ведущих западных газетах обширных материалов о своей нефти, цветных металлах. Это интересно инвесторам и мировым нефтебаронам… А как насчёт остального человечества? Что могут казахи предложить жаждущему консьюмеристу? А чем может быть интересен кыргыз пресыщенному миру? А монгол? Вот настоящие вызов и трагедия – когда интересуются не тобой, а тем, что лежит в земле у тебя под ногами. Это страшно, когда страна известна не людьми и их культурой, а полезными ископаемыми.

Торговля и туризм, Интернет и глобальное телевидение раскрывают нам глаза на все и превращают нас в глобальных людей. Новый Свет, ведомый американцами, уже ищет в образах Старого Света новые возможности. «Король Артур» и «Код да Винчи» как раз об этом. Стареющая Европа всё еще находит смысл бытия и удовольствие в классической культуре и пытается делать короткие забеги в историю и культуру древних народов. Недавно появился и стал устойчивым интерес к новым, растущим странам. Малайзия преподносит себя как настоящую Азию, Япония и Южная Корея пытаются стать футбольными державами и площадкой современного искусства. Индия – колыбель древней культуры - постепенно завоевывает мирового потребителя при помощи современных информационных технологий, быстро растущей киноиндустрии и индустрии моды. Австралию, которую знают как родину культовых артистов Николь Кидман и Рассела Кроу, полюбили после Олимпийских игр. Новая Зеландия, где проходили натурные съемки «Властелина колец», самого кассового кинофильма последнего десятилетия, глубоко запала в души всех странников мира. Вот что поразительно и восхитительно! Один фильм, один выдающийся акт высокого искусства, современная звезда могут вызвать интереса к стране и народу в миллион раз больший, чем бесчисленные мифологизированные рекламные ролики, статьи и статистические данные в журнале «Экономист». Культура и уникальные образы – вот что притягивает внимание человечества.

На планете мало мест, ни разу не попадавших в объектив вездесущей кинокамеры. Мало, но они есть. Это Великая Степь. Мы очень долго пребывали в забвении, незнакомы остальному миру и сейчас. Лев Николаевич Гумилёв подробно разъяснил причины этого в своей книге «Чёрная легенда». К тому же нынешние потомки великих номадов ведут бессмысленный спор о наследии Чингисхана. Обмельчали потомки. Что важнее: красочно и привлекательно для современного мира раскрыть и преподнести самобытную культуру легендарных людей Великой Степи или продолжать спорить об их национальной принадлежности? Все они были сыновьями и дочерьми Великой Степи – родины наших предков. Мало нам ограниченных патриотов, к ним в подмогу спешат псевдогуманисты, и мифотворцы, пытающиеся задним числом осуждать или возвышать великих потрясателей вселенной. Ни в тех, ни в других духи наших предков не нуждаются. Они жили по законам своего времени. Несправедливо восхищаться Александром Македонским и Карлом Великим и предавать анафеме Атиллу и Чингисхана.

На Западе растёт интерес к империи и личности Чингисхана: выходят книги, снимаются фильмы, выдвигаются гипотезы. Образ Атиллы продолжает занимать и восхищать многих европейских и американских писателей. Их интересует, как кочевники смогли создать обширнейшие империи со строго централизованным управлением, кто они были, во что верили, кого любили и как умирали. Посмотрите, какие возможности раскрываются перед нами! Мы обязаны использовать эту волну интереса. Когда-то мы уже совершили непростительную ошибку, не поддержав словом и делом Л.Н.Гумилёва, защищавшего наших предков от клеветы, и сохранившего бесценные сведения о нашей великой истории. Тысячелетняя драма кочевников ждёт своего Шекспира и Льва Толстого, Стивена Спилберга и Мэла Гибсона. Богатый на драматические образы, трагедии и баллады мир кочевников ждёт своего часа и он непременно наступит! Поэтому надо красиво и умно раскручивать образ глобальных игроков – великих кочевников и их культуры.

Какой уникальный литературный и кинематографический материал кроется в образах Тимура и Тохтамыша, Шакарима и Токтогула, а сокровенная история монголов - это готовый эпический сценарий кассового триллера. Но мы продолжаем держать свою историю и культуру в гетто – ограничив, запутав и оболгав. Комфортный туризм по Великой Степи быстро выдохнется и не вызовет глобального интереса без солидного культурно-исторического компонента.

Ныне Чингисхан и его империя это историко-культурный бренд в мире. Посмотрите, сколько информации об этом. Казахстан, Кыргызстан и Монголия могли бы позиционировать себя как последние остатки великих кочевых империй. Культурный покров этого проекта должен быть оригинальным и неповторимым: удивительно выразительный и динамичный звериный стиль, орнаменталистика, искусство акынов и жырау, мудрые традиции и обычаи. Культура наша имеет смысл как неразрывное сплетение традиций и модернизма - только в этом сочетании она будет интересна остальному миру. А традиционная одежда кочевников, преображенная искусными кутюрье, может вызвать фурор в мире современной моды.

Главный кыргызский проект, на мой взгляд, должен состоять в раскручивании образа свободной страны горцев Ала-Тоо с уникальной культурой, древней историей и чудесной природой. Современные кыргызы - потомки великих хуннов, величественных тюрков и свободолюбивых евроазийских кыргызов – то есть глобальных игроков прошлого тысячелетия. Большая часть Великой Степи до ХIХ века называлась кыргызской степью. Мы должны научиться ценить свои богатства, рассматривать их как источник нашего благополучия. Надо помогать режиссерам, художникам, артистам раскрывать эти историко-культурные образы.

На основе таких историко-культурных проектов можно создавать эффективные социально-политические и футурологические модели. Например, Казахстан – современная степная империя благополучия в Евразии! Почему бы и нет? Кыргызстан – союз свободных горцев. Не копируя полностью чужой опыт, на основе своих традиций власти и управления кыргызы могут построить открытое, эффективно управляемое государство. Монголия может преподнести миру степной вариант парламентаризма.

Раскрытие и возвеличивание культуры имеет и глубокий геополитический смысл. Мы находимся между стремительно растущим Китаем, восстанавливающей свои силы Россией, многолюдным радикально настроенным и беспокойным миром ислама. Запад упорно тянет в сторону евро-атлантического выбора. Ни природные ресурсы, ни экономика, ни политические институты, а только развитие культуры может спасти нас от ассимиляции, негативного влияния глобализации. Не первый раз мы сталкиваемся с такой угрозой. Основой могущества и господства кочевников была богатая духовная культура. Они представляли себя миру как благородные и возвышенные люди. Кочевники столетиями управляли в странах Южной Азии, Ближнего Востока, Европы, Дальнего Востока. Где они сейчас? Кто их потомки? Как только они переставали обращать внимание на развитие своей культуры и подпадали под влияние чужой, так полностью растворялись в других народах. От султана Бейбарса и мамлюков в Египте остались только мечети и легенды, от Кутбедина Айбека и Великих Моголов величественные дворцы и развалины, имя Аттилы сохранили покоренные им венгры, потомки аристократов Золотой Орды и вольных батыров – казаков стали русскими дворянами и влились в русское казачье войско.

Да, они удачно приспособились к огромным пространствам с суровым климатом, но долгое господство притупило у них чувство времени и новизны. Кочевники потерялись во времени, они остались в прошлом. То что, когда-то было источником их силы, стало причиной их поражения. Они уступили тем, кто построил корабли, создал паровоз и автомобиль, придумал пулемёт «максим» и опутал мир своими дорогами. Новые кочевники оседлали технику и технологии и формируют мир на свой лад.

Ушёл ли мир кочевников навсегда в прошлое или у него есть шанс? Шанс есть. Мир кочевников в зародыше имел то, что присуще всему человечеству – стремление к неизведанному и непоколебимую веру в силу человеческого духа. Культурным и духовным сокровищем ХХI века может и должен стать новый кочевой мир.