Uzbekistan's Window of Opportunity

The massacre of peaceful demonstrators in the city of Andijan, Uzbekistan on the 13th of May is a tragedy without end. No closure is possible: for the bereaved, who are still denied the truth of their loved ones' deaths; for the survivors, many of whom have fled across the border into Kyrgyzstan; for the Uzbek people as a whole, repressed and confined by a government that refuses to tell them what happened; and the democratic members of the international community, unable to establish normal relations with a state operating by rules of violence and lies.

With each passing day it becomes more difficult to reach the truth about the brutal Andijan killings. There are still no exact, reliable figures of how many people died and exactly what happened. The Uzbek government in Tashkent has rejected multiple requests for an independent investigation; support from its strong Russian and Chinese neighbours has even emboldened it to accuse western governments of inciting revolts against Islam Karimov's regime.

The "attempt to overthrow the constitutional regime" -- embodied in article 159 of Uzbekistan's criminal code -- is used as the prime legal weapon against Uzbek dissidents; they are routinely also charged with "extremist, terrorist activities" or with membership of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) or Hizb-u-Tahrir opposition groups.

The Uzbek government regards being a dissident as evidence of the intention to overthrow the government, install a Taliban-like theocracy, and breed terrorism. The circle around Islam Karimov -- helped by western-educated children of the ruling elite and expensive PR companies -- portrays any opposition as Islamist. As a result, perhaps 6-7,000 people (according to United States state department or Human Rights Watch figures) are in jail in Uzbekistan for being dangerous subversives, extremists, terrorists and Islamists.

An argument based on a choice between Karimov and the Taliban can count on more than Russia's and China's support. The excuses offered by some analysts after Andijan -- that Karimov "needed to use force to clamp down on terrorists" -- echo persistent views of influential westerners like Henry Kissinger, who in 2002 praised Karimov for "his great contribution to the struggle with international terrorism".

Karimov was at the time also an honoured guest at George W Bush's White House. His visit was organised by members of the Bukharan Jewish community, most of whom had long ago left the collapsed economy of their ancient city for Israel and the United States. Rafael Nektalov, a native of Samarkand who edits the Bukharian Times, confirmed to me that Bukhara's Jews stand firmly with Karimov. When I asked him if he considered killing 173 civilians (the figure the Uzbek government admits to) a crime, he said the numbers do not matter: Andijan was done in the name of "greater stability."

Who are the Uzbek opposition?

Those who think like Rafael Nektalov believe Karimov's claim that the only alternative to his regime is fundamentalist Islamic rule. The enemies named by the Uzbek regime in connection with the Andijan uprising -- the IMU and Hizb-ut-Tahrir -- do not offer clear evidence to support this argument. The IMU in the early 1990s did carry out armed attacks on the government, but later merged with the Taliban and shared the latter's defeat and dispersal in November 2001.

Hizb-ut-Tahrir have never been convincingly associated with military action. Its London headquarters deny any participation in the Andijan uprising, and told me that they advocate creating an Islamic caliphate solely by peaceful means.

Members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir arrested in Uzbekistan are almost always charged under article 159 and tried in groups. They are routinely accused of distributing flyers (written in Arabic) calling for a central Asian caliphate while in possession of bullets (very rarely actual guns). The clumsiness of many such charges is apparent: Ismail Odilov, a human-rights activist, reported a case where the police planted leaflets and a bullet on a blind man.