Category: Kyrgyzstan

  • Chingiz Aitmatov’s Lifelong Journey Toward Eternity

    Chingiz Aitmatov’s Lifelong Journey Toward Eternity

    Chingiz Aitmatov

    December 12, 2008
    By Tyntchtykbek Tchoroev

     

    This week marks the culmination of a yearlong celebration in Kyrgyzstan of the writer and thinker Chingiz Aitmatov, who died on June 10, a few months short of his 80th birthday.

    Aitmatov is revered for building a bridge between the world of traditional Kyrgyz folklore and modern Eurasian literature. His writings illuminate the challenges that faced the peoples of the Soviet Union both before and after its demise, and his own life is an integral part of that broader turbulent pattern.

    He was born on December 12, 1928, and brought up in the village of Sheker in the Talas region of northern Kyrgyzstan. He studied in Jambul (in present-day Kazakhstan), Frunze (now Bishkek), and Moscow. He witnessed Josef Stalin’s purges of the 1930s firsthand: his father Torokul, a prominent political figure, was arrested in 1937 and executed the following year as an alleged enemy of the people and counterrevolutionary.

    It was only after Kyrgyzstan became independent that Torokul Aitmatov’s remains were found, together with those of other prominent intellectuals and politicians. He was given a state funeral in August 1992. Chyngyz Aitmatov named the new cemetery near Bishkek for victims of Stalinism “Ata Beyit,” or “The Graveyard Of Our Fathers.”

    Some superficial critics of Aitmatov argue that he was simply serving the communist system. They point to the numerous honors and awards — including the Order of Lenin and Hero of Socialist Labor — that he received for his work.

    But Aitmatov was equally respected outside the USSR: He received India’s Jawaharlal Nehru award, and was named a member of the World Academy of Science and Arts and the European Academy of Science, Arts, and Literature. His works were translated into more than 170 languages and sold more than 60 million copies worldwide, showing that their appeal transcends communist ideology.

    Changing From Within

    Aitmatov can be compared with Voltaire, the 18th-century French Enlightenment writer who revolted against the old system while enjoying all the benefits it had to offer. The intellectual war against authoritarianism found expression not only in the works of openly dissident writers such as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, but in a milder and more sophisticated way in Aitmatov’s novels.

    As a student in the then-Kirghiz Soviet Socialist Republic, I could not find Solzhenitsyn’s main works in public libraries. But we could and did discuss Aitmatov’s easily available works relentlessly, deciphering the hidden meanings between the lines. How can anyone argue that the writings of exiled dissidents were the only effective weapon against totalitarianism when they remained unattainable to most readers?

    The Czech writer and playwright Karel Capek coined the word “robot” to describe a machine that resembles a human being; Aitmatov resurrected the old Kyrgyz word “mankurt,” meaning a robot-like human stripped of his intellect by a process of physical brainwashing imposed by a brutal, oriental tyranny.

    Aitmatov in 1963

    Defying the ideology of mature socialism that promoted and glorified the merger of the USSR’s smaller ethnic groups with the Russian people as their only path to a “bright future,” albeit one in which their sense of national identity was lost, Aitmatov wrote a novel about a Kazakh woman, Mother Naiman, who begs her “mankurt” son to remember his father’s name, his ancestors, and his personal identity.

    Aitmatov’s famous predecessor Makhmud Kashghari, born near Lake Issyk-Kul in the 11th century, wrote a famous monograph on the Turkic languages (in Arabic), challenging the acknowledged supremacy of the Arabic language by likening Arabic and the Turkic languages to two horses galloping neck-and-neck.
    Aitmatov repeated the same challenge in the 1980s, urging the Kirghiz Soviet authorities to treat the Kyrgyz language with dignity and to elevate its official position to that of Russian, which one communist leader in Kirghizia at the time described as “the second mother tongue” of the Kyrgyz people.

    At that time, because of the emphasis placed on the “leading role” of the Russian language, there were only a few schools in Frunze with instruction in Kyrgyz. But on September 23, 1989, at the height of Communist Party General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev’s famous “perestroika,” the Kyrgyz language was declared the sole state language of the Kirghiz Soviet Socialist Republic, with Russian downgraded to the status of the lingua franca in a multiethnic society.

    Hero To Kyrgyz Nation

    Some of Aitmatov’s early works from the 1950s, written in Kyrgyz, incurred harsh condemnation from his enemies. One of his critics lambasted his early love story “Jamiyla” — which the French poet Louis Aragon described as “the world’s most beautiful love story” — arguing that it was immoral to praise the heroine, who fell in love with someone else while her husband was courageously fighting Nazi Germany during World War II.

    Aitmatov’s subsequent decision to write in Russian undoubtedly furthered his career. So too did his willingness to promote the Soviet authorities’ slant on specific developments. In 1977, two years after the signing of the Helsinki Final Act, he published an article entitled “There Is No Alternate To Helsinki,” in which he affirmed: “We are changing the world, and the world is changing us.”

    In October 1986, Aitmatov founded the famous Issyk-Kul Forum, which brought intellectuals from the Soviet bloc and the West together at a lakeside resort to discuss major global challenges face to face. He served as an adviser to Gorbachev during the perestroika years, and after Kyrgyzstan became independent as Kyrgyz ambassador to UNESCO, EU, NATO, and the Benelux countries.

    In 1989, I was part of a group of young Kyrgyz historians that organized to challenge official Soviet historiography. We appealed to Aitmatov, at that time chairman of the Union of Writers of Kirghizia, and to his deputy, the poet Asan Jakshylykov, to allow us to hold the founding conference of our Young Kyrgyz Historians Association in the conference hall of the Union of Writers. And despite increasing pressure from the central authorities, they said yes, and thereby contributed to the emergence of a new generation of Kyrgyz historians.

    Throughout his life, Aitmatov preserved his love for his fellow men, and for nature and the animal world. His last novel, titled “When The Mountains Fall Down: The Eternal Bride,” was written in 2005 as a final appeal to his people to preserve the beauty of the Celestial Mountains (Tengir-Too in Kyrgyz, Tian-Shan in Chinese), which the Kyrgyz have traditionally regarded as sacred. The two heroes of the novel, a journalist named Arsen Samanchin and an indigenous snow leopard (Jaa Bars), both become victims of international poaching in a tale of the perils of the greedy and careless exploitation of the environment.

    Tyntchtykbek Tchoroev (Chorotegin) is the director of RFE/RL’s Kyrgyz Service. The views expressed in this commentary are the author’s own, and do not necessarily reflect those of RFE/RL

  • Pre-Ottoman and Ottoman Symposium in Bishkek, Aug. 24-29, 2009

    Pre-Ottoman and Ottoman Symposium in Bishkek, Aug. 24-29, 2009

    Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University

    International Committee of Pre-Ottoman and Ottoman Studies (CIEPO)

    Interim Symposium

    On the Central Asiatic Roots of the Pre-Ottoman and Ottoman Culture
    August 24-29, 2009, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

    First Circular

    We are pleased to announce that the CIEPO Symposium on the Central
    Asiatic Roots of the pre-Ottoman and Ottoman Culture will be held at
    Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University, Bishkek, 24-29 August, 2009.

    The Organizing Committee calls for your presentation of current
    research on the Central Asiatic roots of the pre-Ottoman and Ottoman
    culture related to the themes of administrative, social, economic,
    military,  political aspects, as well as medicine, science,
    architecture, education, trade, historiography, literature and
    international relations.

    Individual papers will be organized into sections by the Organizing
    Committee.  Abstracts for individual papers should not exceed 300
    words. The desirable duration of a paper presentation is 15 minutes;
    it should not exceed 20 minutes. In case it becomes necessary to limit
    the number of papers, the selection will be made by members of the
    Organizing Committee.

    Pre-organized panels/sessions and thematic workshops should consist of
    two to three papers, plus an analysis of them by a discussant (or a
    designated chair) of ten to fifteen minutes maximum length. The papers
    should center on a single theme or question, and the panel proposal
    should include an abstract (300 words maximum) for the entire panel
    explaining its theme and rationale and how the individual papers
    contribute to that theme, in addition to an individual abstract (300
    words maximum) for each paper.  In case it becomes necessary to limit
    the number of papers, the selection will be made by members of the
    Organizing Committee.

    The participants are requested to send Registration Form by the end of
    December 2008 (request by email from organizers).  The deadline for
    the paper titles and abstracts and/or the initial proposals and
    abstracts for pre-organized sessions and workshops abstracts is by the
    end of January 2009.

    The symposium languages are English, French, German and Turkish.

    Participants are requested to finance their own travel expenses and
    accommodation. The registration fee for the symposium is 50 (USD)
    which should be paid to the accounts opened on behalf of the CIEPO (we
    expect to give the name of bank and account number in 2nd circular).
    The CIEPO membership should be paid 10 (USD) in advance as well.

    The fees are intended to cover the expenses of lunch, farewell dinner
    and excursion. The details about accommodation options (with prices)
    will be provided also in the 2nd circular).

    Sincerely yours,

    Ilhan SAHIN
    On behalf of Organizing Committee

    Please submit your registration form and proposals to:
    E-mails: ciepomanas@gmail.com
    or ilsahin40@gmail.com
    Tel.  00996 (312) 49 27 83 (internal number 12 03 and 12 06)
    Fax: 00996 (312) 49 27 82

    Presidents
    Prof. Dr. Suleyman KAYIPOV (Manas University, Rector)
    Prof. Dr. Ugur ORAL (Manas University, Deputy Rector)

    Organizing Committee
    Prof. Dr. Dilaram ALIMOVA (Uzbekstan)
    Prof. Dr. Remzi ATAOGLU (Turkey)
    Prof. Dr. Tuncer BAYKARA (Turkey)
    Prof. Dr. Victor BUTANAYEV (Russia)
    Prof. Dr. Jean-Louis BACQUÉ-GRAMMONT (France)
    Prof. Dr. Cenis CUNUSALIYEV (Kyrgyzstan)
    Prof. Dr. Rémy DORE (France)
    Prof. Dr. Hikari EGAWA (Japan)
    Prof. Dr. Feridun EMECEN (Turkey)
    Prof. Dr. Yuliy HUDYAKOV (Russia)
    Prof. Dr. Mushtaq A. KAW (India)
    Prof. Dr. Olcobay KARATEEV (Kyrgyzstan)
    Prof. Dr. Sergei KLASTORNIY (Russia)
    Prof. Dr. Dariusz KOLODZIEJCZYK (Poland)
    Prof. Dr. Hisao KOMATSU (Japan)
    Prof. Dr. Bulat KUMEKOV (Kazakhstan)
    Prof. Dr. Heat LOWRY (USA)
    Prof. Dr. Anvarbek MOKEEV (Kyrgyzstan)
    Prof. Dr. Ilber ORTAYLI (Turkey)
    Prof. Dr. Ajay PATNAIK (India)
    Prof. Dr. Tadashi SUZUKI (Japan)
    Prof. Dr. Ilhan SAHIN (Turkey), General Secretary of CIEPO
    Prof. Dr. Ahmet TASAGIL (Turkey)

    Excursion program being planned for the congress participants

    – Nevaket – archeological complex ruins of the medieval city of
       Turkic rulers of the 6th-12th century (Chuy valley)
    – Site of ancient settlement Ak-Beshim – ruins of the medieval city
       Suyab. The capital of Western Turks, Turgesh and Karluk states (VI-Xth
       century, Chuy valley)
    – Burana -archeological and architectural complex of 10th-12th
       century: The capital of Karahanid state (Chuy valley)
    – Suusamir- summer quarters of the Avrasya nomads
    – Koksay – location of Ancient Turkic runic inscriptions of the 8th
       century
    (Kochkor valley, Naryn oblast)
    – Rock painting gallery Cholpon Ata- petroglyphs of the ancient Iron
       Age and Medieval Age, Northern shore of the Issyk-Kol lake
    – Royal kurgans of Issyk Kol- funeral constructions of the ancient
       Saka society aristocracy
    – The Ferghana Valley – historically most important staging-post on
       the so-called Silk Road for goods and people travelling from China to
       the Middle East & Europe

  • TURKEY PUSHES FOR CLOSER POLITICAL TIES WITHIN THE TURKIC-SPEAKING WORLD

    TURKEY PUSHES FOR CLOSER POLITICAL TIES WITHIN THE TURKIC-SPEAKING WORLD

    TURKEY PUSHES FOR CLOSER POLITICAL TIES WITHIN THE TURKIC-SPEAKING WORLD

    By Saban Kardas

    Monday, November 24, 2008

     

    The speakers and delegates of the parliaments of the Turkish-speaking countries—Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Turkey—met in Istanbul on November 20 and 21 for a Conference of Turkic-Speaking Countries’ Parliamentary Speakers. Turkish Speaker of Parliament Koksal Toptan, Azerbaijani Speaker of Parliament Oktay Seidov, Kyrgyz Speaker of Parliament Aytibay Tagayev, and Vice-president of the Kazakh Senate Mukhammet Kopeyev signed a declaration for the establishment of a Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries (TURKPA) (Anadolu Ajansi, November 21). The body is open to admitting other countries in the future.

    Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev proposed launching the TURKPA at the summit meeting of the Turkic leaders in 2006. At the time, given Turkey’s more extensive experience in parliamentary democracy, Nazarbayev requested the Turkish Parliament to coordinate efforts toward establishing the proposed assembly. In February the parliamentary deputy speakers met in Antalya to prepare the groundwork for the assembly. A second meeting in Astana in March produced a draft declaration, which was expanded during the conference in Istanbul (www.tbmm.gov.tr, November 21).

    Turkish President Abdullah Gul and Speaker Toptan addressed the conference. Referring to the shared historical, cultural, and linguistic ties among the founding members, Toptan called the declaration a historic step toward expanding cooperation. He noted that if these countries could manage to act together in a spirit of solidarity, they could bring peace, stability, and prosperity to Eurasia (Cihan Haber Ajansi, November 21). Gul also stressed that “our brotherhood [of Turkish countries] does not target anyone. Instead, it represents a union of hearts and minds [that has been created] to promote the peace, stability, and welfare of the region” (Zaman, November 22).

    Kyrgyz Speaker Tagayev emphasized that closer cooperation among the legislative bodies of these countries could lead to the creation of necessary legal regulations and could also facilitate cooperation in financial, scientific, and cultural cooperation (Cihan Haber Ajansi, November 21). In particular, Gul emphasized that parliamentary cooperation could facilitate the realization of joint projects in economics, transportation, and communications, as well as in the fight against common security threats, such as terrorism and radical movements, drug smuggling, and illegal weapons trafficking (Ortadogu, November 21).

    The primary goal of the new assembly is to boost relations among the parliaments of the participating countries, provide a platform for exchanging views, and explore joint projects. Although details about its exact institutional structure, rules of procedure, and committees are unavailable, it was suggested that it might resemble the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (www.assembly.coe.int/; ANS Press, November 22). Gul also referred to similar initiatives in other regions as possible models to follow (www.cankaya.gov.tr, November 21). Sayyad Aran, the Azerbaijani consul general in Istanbul, told reporters that the assembly would meet annually. He also noted that the next meeting, which is scheduled to take place in Baku in 2009, would lay out the assembly’s working procedures (APA, November 22).

    Turkey’s leading role in the creation of the assembly is no surprise, given its interest in promoting cooperation with Turkic-speaking countries. Shortly after the dissolution of the East bloc, Turkey initiated several projects to deepen ties with its cousins in the ex-Soviet space. Both the state and private entrepreneurs played a major role in developing extensive relations in economics, culture, and education. Although successive Turkish governments have refrained from promoting a pan-Turkic agenda toward the region, which was advocated by nationalist circles within Turkey, the idea for closer political integration between Turkey and Turkic-speaking countries has always guided Ankara’s policies in one form or another. The Turkish state has institutionalized several mechanisms to facilitate political cooperation among these countries.

    The major such multilateral platform has been the summit of the heads of state of Turkic-Speaking Countries, bringing together Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. After the first gathering in Ankara in 1992, seven subsequent meetings have been held at irregular intervals. During the seventh meeting in Istanbul in 2001, internal friction about establishing closer ties among the Turkic states surfaced. Despite Turkey’s expectations to the contrary, the presidents of Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, the two countries that are also absent from the TURKPA conference, declined to attend the summit.

    The failure of high-level summits to institutionalize concrete projects and their ineffectiveness in resolving bilateral and regional problems were reportedly behind Turkmenistan’s decision to opt out in 2001. Publicly, Turkmenistan’s official policy of positive neutrality was given as the reason for its reluctance to maintain closer political ties with the rest of the Turkic world. The lukewarm relationship between Turkey and Uzbekistan largely explains Tashkent’s negative attitude toward the summit (www.tusam.net, December 2, 2006). It was recently reported that Baku would host the ninth summit in the first quarter of 2009 (Trend News Agency, November 11).

    The establishment of TURKPA was among the ambitious goals announced at the eighth summit and represents a successful step toward realizing common aims. President Gul, in his address to the TURKPA conference, said that the organization’s meeting after the Baku summit would be held in Bishkek. He also noted that other goals set at the eighth summit would soon be realized. By the Bishkek summit, the legal framework for setting up a Permanent Secretariat in Turkey to streamline the activities of the summits of Turkish-speaking countries would be finalized. Gul also expressed Turkey’s support for the idea of creating a committee of experts (Aksakallar Kurulu), as proposed by Kazakh President Nazarbayev (www.cankaya.gov.tr, November 21).

    It remains to be seen whether the members of TURKPA will be able to turn rhetoric into mutually beneficial cooperation and convince the two opt-outs to join their ranks by the time the leaders of the Baku summit in 2009.

  • Conference for establishing Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries signs an agreement

    Conference for establishing Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries signs an agreement

    The idea of establishing Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries was initiated by President of Kazakhstan PNursultan Nazarbayev in 1996.

     

    Agreement has been signed on establishment of Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries in the “Conference of Speakers of Parliaments of Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries”, the Chairman of Turkey- Azerbaijan parliamentary group of friendship Mustafa Kabakchi has phoned from Istanbul.

    The aim of the PACE type Assembly is creation of the mechanism of inter-parliamentary relations and strengthening of interrelations, rapprochement of political views, exchange of experience, realization of joint projects. The agreement was signed by the Speaker of Turkish Parliament Koksan Toptan, Speaker of Azerbaijani Milli Majlis (Parliament) Ogtay Asadov, Speaker of Parliament of Kyrgyzstan Aytibay Tagaev, and the Vice-president of the Senate of Kazakhstan Mohammed Kopeev.

    The members of parliamentary friendship group Turkey-Uzbekistan, Turkey-Turkmenistan as well as heads of diplomatic corpses of Turkic- speaking countries accredited in Turkey have also participated in the signing ceremony.

    “Conference of Speakers of parliaments of Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries” started its work early Friday morning. President of Turkey Abdullah Gul addressing the event said he supported establishment of Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries and underlined the significance of it. President Gul also added that creation of Council of Aksakkals (Elders) is being planned.

    Remind that, the first session at level of Vice-speakers of the Turkic-speaking countries was on February 21-22, 2008 in Antalya. The session passed a decision on creation of inter-parliamentary council of Turkic-speaking countries. Creation of the mechanism of inter-parliamentary relations and strengthening of interrelations, rapprochement of political views, an exchange of experience, and realization of joint projects was the purpose of establishment of the council to include a number of parliaments of Turkic-speaking countries.

  • Azerbaijan to join 1st Conference of Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries

    Azerbaijan to join 1st Conference of Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries

    Baku. Elnur Mammadli–APA. Delegation of Azerbaijani Parliament will leave for Turkey on Thursday to participate at the 1st Conference of the Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries. The Azerbaijani delegation will be headed by Speaker Ogtay Asadov, Spokesman for the Parliament Akif Nasirov told journalists, APA reports. The conference will take place on November 20-22. Delegations of Azerbaijani, Turkish, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan parliaments will sign agreement to found Parliamentary Assembly of the Turkic-speaking countries.

  • Headscarf Ban Remains Live Issue in Central Asia

    Headscarf Ban Remains Live Issue in Central Asia

    Linking hijab controversy to fears of Islamic extremism may be counter-productive.

    By Abdumomun Mamaraimov in Jalalabad and Saodat Asanova in Dushanbe (RCA No. 556, 14-Nov-08)

    “We face a difficult choice – take the headscarf off or give up on school,” said Sahiba Yusupova, whose daughters are under increasing pressure from their school in southern Kyrgyzstan to remove headscarves on the grounds that they are too public a display of Muslim faith.

     

    Yusupova has already had to take her elder daughter out of school in Jalalabad and send her off to the capital Bishkek to study at a private Turkish-run institution. Now the second of her three daughters is having trouble.

    “The heads and teaching heads won’t listen … I see this as a kind of purge,” she said.

    Seventeen years after the Soviet Union collapsed and people began to practice their faith more freely, religion remains a contentious issue in the predominantly Muslim Central Asia republics, where secular governments are fearful of Islamic extremists.

    The Muslim woman’s headscarf continues to embody the tensions between governments and their more devout citizens. The battle is being played out at universities and in the workplace, but most of all in the schools where the authorities have greater powers to enforce a dress code.

    Neither side appears ready to give ground. IWPR interviews in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan revealed uncompromising stances on either side, backed by a whole set of attitudes and grievances about the other. Muslim women who want to wear headscarves believe their human rights are under threat from abusive state officials, while to many officials, outward signs of adherence to Islam reflect an unreasonable and potentially extremist state of mind.

    In Kyrgyzstan, IWPR looked primarily at the situation in the schools, where the issue arises every autumn at when a new school year begins and girls turn up wearing headscarves. In the past, schools tolerated the practice, but last year many of them began insisting that scarves did not count as part of the prescribed uniform and warning that anyone who broke the rules would be excluded. (See Kyrgyzstan: Hijab Row as New School Year Begins, RCA RCA No. 511, 04-Oct-07.)

    The debate became more acute this year following a set of instructions issued by the Kyrgyz education ministry to reinforce the school uniform rules. The ministry says the document is more of a recommendation than a rule-book, but schools are interpreting it as an outright ban and girls are being excluded for flouting it.

    In the education sector in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, “hijab” – the requirement for modest dress which can include both a headcovering and a long over-garment – usually means only a headscarf tied under the chin. To complicate matters, the looser headscarves tied backwards that are commonly worn by women in the region are considered “non-religious” and therefore acceptable by the authorities.

    Tajikistan imposed a formal ban on hijab in both schools and universities in autumn 2005. At the time, Deputy Education Minister Farhod Rahimov said girls who disobeyed would be expelled. Education Minister Abdujabor Rahmonov has equated wearing hijab with conducting “propaganda for religious ideas in a secular society”, while his officials have explained that the ban was needed because of the growth of radical groups which want to use Islam as an instrument to undermine the state.

    EXCLUDED FROM SCHOOL FOR WEARING HIJAB

    When Ayjarkyn Kamaldin Kyzy took to wearing a headscarf one month ago, she was immediately excluded from her secondary school in the southern Kyrgyz city of Jalalabad.

    Ayjarkyn recalled what happened when her mother was called in to discuss the issue. “The school head made fun of me in front of my mother, saying the next thing would be that I’d come in wearing a ‘paranja’,” she said, referring to a long-obsolete Central Asian version of the Afghan burka.

    “The head of studies Alla Vladimirovna and some of the teachers accused me of wearing the headscarf for fashion reasons. That was offensive.”

    Unlike many other wearers, Ayjarkyn is not supported by her parents. Her father Kamildin says she took to praying and wearing conservative dress after a summer job at the market where she worked alongside devout Uzbek girls.

    “We aren’t against praying, but why wrap yourself in a headscarf?” he asked. “We’re worried our daughter has fallen under the sway of extremists.”

    “Grown ups don’t understand,” responded Ayjarkyn. “I want to go to school, but I can’t.”

    Ayjarkyn belongs to a Kyrgyz family. Although strict adherence to Islam was traditionally more common among the sizeable Uzbek minority of southern Kyrgyzstan, in recent years the wearing of Muslim-style headscarves has become more popular among Kyrgyz women as well.

    In Kyrgyzstan, the headscarf dispute is most apparent in the south, and although it is hard to assess the scale, Jalalabad’s education department estimates that there are seven or eight cases in each of the city’s 20 schools.

    Local teacher Mukarram Muminova says her observations suggest there are up to 15 girls in each school who want to be allowed to wear hijab. “In addition, many have simply stopped coming to school because of the headscarf issue,” she added.

    Zilola Akbarhojaeva, who is Uzbek, is in seventh grade at a school in Jalalabad in the south of Kyrgyzstan. She has been wearing a headscarf for the last four years and is a good student but every year it is getting tougher.

    At the start of the academic year on September 1, the school authorities said she was at the wrong school because of where she lives and would have to go somewhere else. But as the argument progressed, it quickly became apparent that the real reason for attempting to get her to leave was her headscarf. After her parents discussed the matter with the local education department, an uneasy compromise was reached where Zilola can wear the scarf on a temporary basis on the grounds that she has a sore ear.

    “We are not against the uniform – we have bought everything the school asks for,” said her mother Saida. “The only thing we’re asking for is that they let our daughters wear headscarves. We bought white ones that look nice and don’t make them look very different from the other kids. But the school has banned even this.

    “They treat them very badly at school; they humiliate them and insult our religious sensibilities.”

    The ban on hijab in Kyrgyz schools extends to teachers as well as pupils. A male head teacher who asked to remain anonymous, disagrees with the ban but says it is being widely applied in Jalalabad region.

    “It goes against religious convictions and also local custom, which requires married women to wear headscarves,” he said. “A school… recently refused to take on a young teacher who wouldn’t remove her headscarf.”

    IWPR found similar cases in Tajikistan, where religion plays a similarly contentious role. Mamnuna Karimova complains that her 13 year old daughter Mavzuna faces outright discrimination at her school in the northern Sogd region,

    “My child wears a headscarf not because it’s fashionable but because of the religious views of our family,” she said. “Now she gets a lot of humiliation at school. The children see how negatively the teachers view these girls – making them take their headscarves off in public or barring them from lessons – and that behaviour naturally provides [schoolchildren with] a motive for mistreating them.”

    The Garm valley of eastern Tajikistan, where Islam has traditionally had a strong hold, has seen many girls dropping out of school because of the headscarf ban.

    Local teacher Halima Yunusova claims pupils’ insistence on wearing hijab is a pretext. “After the collapse of the Soviet Union, many girls stopped going to school after [the penultimate] year nine, mainly because of early marriage and concerns at home. Now they’re campaigning to wear hijab because then they’ll be officially banned from going to school,” she said.

    TAJIK BAN EXTENDS TO UNIVERSITY

    However, claims that women are deliberately trying to drop out of education are clearly not true of those who go on to university. Malohat Sobirova, who comes from a remote village in southern Tajikistan, found it impossible to continue at university because of the general hostility to her insistence on wearing hijab.

    “I really wanted to get a higher education, have a career and be a useful member of society, but unfortunately I was excluded because I wear hijab,” she said. “It got to a point where I felt like an outcast. I couldn’t keep on fighting for my rights so I had to go back home to my village. I abandoned my dream of higher education and now I’m unemployed.”

    She insists she was right not to give in, “I grew up in a traditional Muslim family and I regard it as an obligation to wear hijab. I can’t appear in public without my head being covered; that’s unacceptable for a true Muslim woman.”

    Last year, student Davlatmo Ismailova brought the first and so far only court case against the education ministry and the Institute of Foreign Languages, which had excluded her for wearing hijab.

    She lost her case, and remains bitter about it. “Under the constitution, all citizens of Tajikistan are supposed to be equal, but my case showed that if spiritual values don’t coincide with spiritual ones, girls like me have no chance of getting a good education and working anywhere prestigious,” she told IWPR.

    By contrast, another student, Rahima Davronova, has opted for a compromise with the authorities at Khujand State University in the north of Tajikistan. Outside the premises, she can tie her scarf under the chin to fulfil the hijab requirements, but when she goes in she knots it behind her head to make it into the traditional Tajik headscarf with no religious connotations. “I just use a big scarf,” she explained.

    OFFICIALS DENY EXISTENCE OF BAN

    Unlike Tajikistan, where the hijab ban is official, education officials in Kyrgyzstan are quick to insist no instructions have been given to schools, merely a recommendation.

    According to Chyrmash Dooronov, head of the education department for Jalalabad city, school heads “have no right to stop children attending classes”, since the order issued by the education ministry does not explicitly ban headscarves, but simply fails to mention them in the list of required uniform items.

    Kylym Sydyknazarova of the national education ministry’s schools department says the document is really only a set of general guidelines.

    “The education ministry recommended that schools opt for a single school uniform themselves; in other words, that parents and teachers decide what the uniform should be and set this down in the school rules,” she said. “We can neither allow or forbid the wearing of headscarves.”

    Abdumalik Sharipov of local human rights group Spravedlivost says the ministry document does not say anything about headscarves, so “everything that isn’t forbidden by law should be allowed”.

    “None of the schools in Jalalabad that we asked could produce a copy of the order. It isn’t clear what they are basing their ban on…. If the order did ban the wearing of headscarves, we’d contest it in court,” he said.

    Attempts by local government education officials to blame the schools for the hijab ban may be disingenuous. One school headmaster confirmed that local officials were exerting verbal pressure on schools to change their internal rules. “We couldn’t initiate that by ourselves as the parents wouldn’t back this kind of change to the rules,” he said.

    EQUATING HIJAB WITH ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

    As officials argue their case, the subtext to the dispute rapidly becomes clear – they are hostile to headscarves because they regard Islamic clothing as an external sign of radical extremist views.

    In both Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, their main concern is Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a group that advocates the removal of Central Asian secular governments and the creation of an Islamic state. Although members insist it is non-violent, regional governments have blamed it for a number of attacks over the years. Despite sweeping arrests in Uzbekistan, and smaller numbers of detentions in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the group still attracts new members, in part because its messages speak to socially and economically marginalised groups in a way that governments seem unable to do. (For more on this, see Islamic Group Quietly Builds Support in Kyrgyzstan, RCA No. 516, 16-Nov-07.)

    Unlike other regional states, the Kyrgyz criminal code does not explicitly ban Hizb-ut-Tahrir membership, although the country’s Supreme Court issued a ruling prohibiting the group from operating in 2003, and the constitution prohibits faith-based political parties in general.

    In Dooronov’s view, in some cases Hizb ut-Tahrir has “addled parents’ minds”, while in others it is the children themselves who are drawn towards the group. In the former case, he would like to see “irresponsible” parents prosecuted for depriving their children of an education.

    Damira Alimjanova, who used to head the regional educational department and now serves as deputy governor of Jalalabad, is a well-known opponent of headscarves in schools. Like other officials, she says schools should not exclude wearers, but she remains extremely suspicious of them.

    “I don’t want to accuse all headscarf-wearers of extremism, but how can one be sure there aren’t some among them?” she asked.

    The activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir worry the opponents of hijab in Tajikistan, too. But some like Gallia Rabieva, a member of Tajikistan’s parliament, also look back to the 1992-97 civil war, in which the opposition force was led by Islamic guerrillas. “We’ve already been burnt by that one…. We are always afraid these religious organisations will try to drive the thin end of the wedge in somewhere else,” she said. “We fear the secular nature of our state will be placed under threat.”

    Recalling Soviet-era campaign against the veil or “paranja”, Rabieva said, “Our grandmothers risked their lives to throw off the paranja in the 1920s….they fought for women’s freedom, so when I see a young woman dressing herself like that of her own free will, it makes me feel ill.”

    Mainstream Muslim groups disagree strongly with such views. They oppose extremists, and say it is wrong to lump all devout people together with radicals.

    In Tajikistan, the Islamic Rebirth Party, the civil war-era armed opposition referred to by Rabieva, is now a legal political party and has taken up a number of hijab cases where women felt their rights were being abused.

    The head of Kyrgyzstan’s official Islamic establishment, Mufti Murataly-Ajy Jumanov, says his local representatives are dealing with requests for help they have received from hijab wearers.

    At the same time, the mufti says the Kyrgyz intelligence services have good reason to be concerned about extremist groups. “You have to understand them; they have a job to do,” he said.

    By contrast, the muftiate’s representative in Jalalabad, Abibilla-Aju Bapanov, is more outspoken in his opposition to the way the state authorities are handling the headscarf ban. “In a country where the overwhelming majority of the population are Muslim, you can’t just copy the Europeans. That might have been possible 15 years ago, but not now, because Islam has taken deep roots in people’s consciousness.”

    Bapanov’s predecessor as chief cleric in Jalalabad, Dilmurat-Ajy Orozov, goes even further, saying, “The state doesn’t respect its citizens’ rights, the [parliamentary] deputies don’t see that there’s a problem, and the president isn’t paying any attention.”

    Tursunbek Akun is Kyrgyzstan’s human rights ombudsman, and well known as a defender of Muslim rights. On a recent visit to southern Kyrgyzstan, he described the headscarf ban as a “gross violation of human rights”, and promised to make the national authorities aware of the concerns expressed by local people.

    MORE NUANCED APPROACHES NEEDED

    Some analysts interviewed for this report were more concerned about the spread of Islamic practices than the rights of those who want to wear headscarves. Manuchehra Jumanova, a political scientist in Tajikistan, for example, thinks the authorities there are basically doing the right thing by placing restrictions on what .

    “After all, we have a secular state, not an Islamic one where all women wear hijab,” she said.

    Experts in Kyrgyzstan, however, warn that this issue is potentially explosive and the government should therefore try more subtle approach than simply banning – or appearing to ban – the wearing of headscarves.

    “It’s a very sensitive issue that requires a delicate approach,” said Sania Sagnaeva, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group. “There’s a risk of conflict [even] if there are no other motives for this. This is about society’s tolerance overall. Headscarves are a symbol of belonging to one religion, but officials see the issue as an attempt to dictate terms.”

    Sharipov of the Spravedlivost group added, “There’s no point in unnecessarily creating problems where there aren’t any. They need to allow those who want to wear headscarves to do so and set general guidelines for this,” he said. “Haven’t we enough things engendering popular discontent already – the energy crisis and price rises?”

    He added, “People are already saying openly that all this is directed against Islam generally. If the problem isn’t resolved once and for all, parents will demand that new schools be set up where the children can dress according to religious precepts. That would divide society along religious lines.”

    Spravedlivost’s leader, Valentina Gritsenko, says her group is planning legal action against Kyrgyz officials who stop girls wearing headscarves and expel them from school.

    “The [local] education departments are breaking two rights at once – the girls’ right to religious observance and their right to receive an education.”

    If the authorities in Kyrgyzstan fail to move, some are warning of growing social tensions.

    “People are planning to hold protest rallies,” said Bapanov. “We are restraining them and asking them to keep the peace until the matter is resolved through legal channels.”

    Jamal Frontbek-Kyzy, who heads the Mutakallim women’s group, has succeeded in getting the authorities to sit up and take notice. Last week, she wrote to President Kurmanbek Bakiev and the Kyrgyz parliament, and a subsequent meeting with officials resulted in a promise to resolve things “in a positive manner”.

    Having already won a four-year battle for women to be allowed to keep their headscarves on in passport photos, Frontbek-Kyzy is confident about this campaign.

    “I am sure the outcome will be positive, as the headscarf ban was thought up by officials who are not only ill-informed about Islamic issues, but also have a poor knowledge of the constitution,” she said.

    Abdumomun Mamaraimov is an IWPR-trained journalist in Jalalabad, and Saodat Asanova is IWPR Tajikistan Country Director.