The Foreign Service Journal, April 2003

all months of the year (with January named after him- self), are the subject of much ridicule, but actually obscure the seriousness of the situation. In spite of its gas wealth, the people of Turkmenistan are increasingly impoverished and isolated, and health care and education are collapsing. Niyazov slashed higher education to two years, and made the Rukhnama the focal point of school instruction. For weeks at a time, pupils are taken away from school, for example, to harvest cotton fields. No legal oppo- sition exists in the country, but many of his former aides have joined the exiled opposition. Niyazov’s rule is becoming increasingly paranoid: he moves high officials every six months and constantly purges key offices to prevent the emergence of any rivals. Some suspect a failed assassination attempt on Nov. 25, 2002, was staged. It is impossible to speculate on the prospects for Niyazov’s regime, as even Central Asia experts know very little of what is actually going on inside Turkmenistan. But it is safe to say that the situation is not viable. Tribal divisions are very strong, and the country’s position between the Caspian Sea and Afghanistan, as well as its large gas reserves, invites foreign meddling. Though the U.S. presently lacks significant leverage to influence the country, the situation developing in Turkmenistan should be a major concern. Regional Trade and Development A final but important challenge is the need to revive the stagnant economies of the entire region, including Afghanistan and Pakistan. Kazakhstan (and, in the future, Turkmenistan) may have large energy resources, but these capital-intensive indus- tries are not a sound base for the economy of the region, and will certainly not generate enough jobs. In addition, Central Asia is landlocked, and still over- whelmingly linked to Russia and Baltic seaports for its foreign trade. This Soviet legacy is clearly unnat- ural, given the relative proximity of the Arabian Sea and the port of Karachi, which is Central Asia’s his- toric link to the world. Babur, the founder of the Mughal empire, wrote in his memoirs about how the pistachio nuts of Fergana were of such high quality that they were exported all the way to Hindustan — in the 16th century. However, the British-Russian standoff in Afghanistan that began in the early 19th century forced Central Asian states into an isolation from their southern neighbors that intensified under Soviet rule and lasts to this day. Afghanistan’s general lawlessness and the preoc- cupations of the Taliban regime made the use of that country as a transport corridor impossible. The fall of the Taliban generated great hope in Central Asia for the opening up of routes that could help this wider region restore its traditional trade links to the South, which is indispensable for its economic devel- opment. For this purpose, the reconstruction of major highways, bridges and tunnels through Afghanistan and the improvement of their links to Central Asian infrastructure are crucial. If these major repairs are undertaken, and a modicum of security and stability persists in Afghanistan, restora- tion of a significant part of the great Silk Road has a chance of gradually being accomplished. To promote the economic development of Central Asia, reduce poverty, and thereby address one of the principal roots of Islamic radicalism, then, the U.S. needs to keep its focus on advancing regional cooper- ation in the transportation field. Conclusion The United States is in no position to dictate the policies of the Central Asian states. Nor should it try to do so. But the maladies of faraway lands in the heart of Asia can and do affect the interests and the very security of the United States, as was so tragical- ly shown by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The U.S., however, is in a position to have a signifi- cant influence — perhaps the most significant exter- nal influence — on the course of Central Asia’s polit- ical future. Some of the issues it will have to confront are discussed above. More generally, U.S. policy toward Central Asia has in the past been characterized by a measure of unpredictability. The sheer power of the U.S. made its potential role in the region well understood by all actors, but America’s failure to clearly outline and determine its interests and policies toward the region was destabilizing, as different actors and states had different assumptions regarding America’s role. In formulating a long-term policy in Central Asia, America’s focus on clarity and consistency will be cru- cial to its success. F O C U S 24 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / A P R I L 2 0 0 3