KYRGYZSTAN’S BORDER RIDDLE

The
second half of this spring could be characterized as the period of unveiling
different secret documents between Kyrgyzstan and its neighboring states. Just
a month ago, at the end of April, the Bakiev-led government was forced to
denounce the Kyrgyz-Uzbek secret memorandum on regulating a legal basis of the
state borders delimitation between Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. The memorandum
has provoked a lot of negative attitudes towards the government, the Prime
Minister in particular, and its policies. Discussions on the memorandum
hadn’t even abated before another secret deal was discovered. This time the
document was concerned with the Kyrgyz-Chinese border.

Recently
many articles devoted to the 1999 secret agreement signed by Kyrgyz President
Akaev and Chinese President Jiang Zemin appeared in the Kyrgyz mass media. In
an interview to RFE/RL, the deputy head of the committee on defense and
security issues, Ismail Isakov reported that the document obliges Kyrgyzstan
to give up 90,000 hectares of rich grasslands near the Uzengi-Kuush rift in
return for control over the once disputed icy 7000-meter peak Khan-Tengri, the
second highest peak in the Tien Shan massif. As in the case with the
Kyrgyz-Uzbek memorandum, the Kyrgyz-Chinese agreement on the exchange of
territories produced hot discussions in the parliament.

There
are two issues about the secret deal that outraged some parliamentarians to
such an extent that calls are being made for the impeachment of the president.
The first issue is that the land, which president Akaev agreed to hand over to
China, contains three border military posts with all necessary communication
technologies. According to the newspaper Delo Nomer’s sources, the
land that the document assigns to China, in addition to one of the three
border posts, includes in itself the only highway that connects three border
posts. As it will be impossible to get from one remaining border posts to
another without crossing Chinese territory, the whole border protection
activity will be paralyzed.

The
second issue that many parliamentarians see as unacceptable is that this deal,
much as the Kyrgyz-Uzbek memorandum, was signed secretly without informing the
citizens of Kyrgyzstan, and was not discussed in the parliament. The newspaper
Obshestvenni Rating states that neither the president nor the
government ever consulted the parliament about the deal. In his interview to
the newspaper Delo Nomer, the deputy head of the committee on
judicial and legal issues Azimbek Beknazarov accused Akaev of violating the
constitution by classifying the deal and not informing the Kyrgyzstani people
and parliament. According to the Kyrgyz Constitution, the parliament is the
only governmental body that can decide on alterations of the country’s
borders. 

Beknazarov
expressed concern over the words of the head of the governmental national
border delimitation committee, Alamanov. The latter confirmed the existence of
the Kyrgyz-Chinese agreement, signed by both sides, and reported that due to
the fact that the delimitation process was over, the demarcation of the
Kyrgyz-Chinese border would take place as soon as the weather conditions would
allow. Beknazarov emphasized the fact that the agreement cannot be considered
legitimate as it was conducted with big violations of the constitution. He
directed attention to the fact the parliamentarians would do ‘everything
possible to prevent the demarcation process from beginning’.

On
May 10, Isakov and Beknazarov told RFE/RL that a group of deputies from the
Legislative Chamber of the Kyrgyz Parliament intends to declare impeachment
procedures against Akaev. In their view, the president has overstepped his
authority and violated the law by putting his signature under a document that
undermines the integrity of Kyrgyzstan. According to Beknazarov, the deputies
are currently collecting the accusations, evidence and facts required for the
declaration of impeachment against the president. 

The
procedure of impeachment is very complex. The Legislative Chamber of the
Kyrgyz Republic has to initiate it, by bringing evidence of the president’s
direct involvement in a crime. Then the declaration should be backed up by two
thirds of the deputies and finally ratified by the Constitutional Court (if
the latter does not ratify the declaration, elections for a new parliament are
called). As many observers note, this stipulation could pose a serious
obstacle for the deputies’ intentions. According to an IWPR correspondent,
the Constitutional Court ‘had never carried out any verdict that goes
against the interests of current ruling elites’. It was the Constitutional
Court that interpreted the constitution in such a way that made it possible to
eliminate possible rivals to President Akayev in the 2000 presidential
elections and to prolong president’s term in power. Some analysts warn that
since there is almost no possibility that the Constitutional Court will back
up the deputies, the parliament risks to be dissolved.

By Maria
Utyaganova, department of international Relations, American University of
Kyrgyzstan.