In Batken they speak about one thing only today: will official Tashkent, at last, hear the appeal of Kyrgyzstan for uplifting mines on the border? Or, maybe, it will pass over to us the charts of mine fields laid out on a number of terrains the state frontier between Batken province and Ferghana viloyat stretches along? On February 23 this death-dealing toy carried away one life more. The affliction happened to the citizen of Kyrgyzstan on the territory of Tajikistan makes not difference - the plot was stuffed with dangerous iron by Uzbek sappers.
The subsequent resolute steps of Bishkek seemed “to have stirred” Tashkent. Yet on February 27 the press-secretary of the outward policy department of Uzbekistan Kadyr Yusupov stated in reference to the requirements of the Kyrgyz party that his country leaves the right for themselves in so far as the protection of its frontiers is concerned; it will resort to necessary measures as long as the threat on the part of international terrorists exists. These were the considerations by which the diplomat condoned the existence of mine fields. As for the charts Kyrgyzstan MFA insisted on they were refused from being given as well. But already on March 10 Kyrgyzstan representative in EurAsEC Bazarbay Mambetov informed journalists that Uzbekistan was ready to accord the charts to Kyrgyzstan. Herewith, the high rank official alluded to the telephone talks which had taken place between the heads of the governments - Nikolay Tanayev and Utkir Sultanov. A month had ensued, but Kyrgyzstan didn’t get the documents in question. And now it is unknown when it may be …
The history of the malignant counter-infantry mine fields on the Kyrgyz-Uzbek and Uzbek-Tajik borders is widely known. They were laid out by the Uzbek side after the first Batken war. Hereby, the neighbours accounted for their actions by the necessity of defence from encroachments of international band formations. To put it briefly from the militants of the then Islamic movement of Uzbekistan (now IMU altered its name into the Islamic movement of Turkiston). Mines were laid out on the undermarked strip having caused further controversies. Thus, the state administration of Batken province considers that installing mine barriers around Sokh and Shakhimardon enclaves and also near Rishtan (Uzbekistan) the militaries of the contiguous state “wedge” in some places into the territory f Kyrgyzstan for the distance of 100-150 metres. Over the following years the disguised weapon caused a series of accidents. There were almost fifteen explosions. Two local residents of Kyrgyzstan perished. Some people suffered being mutilated, children inclusive. Over hundred cattle heads were blown up. Local authorities estimate a direct material damage making up six and a half million soms (about 140 thousand USA dollars). But how can one estimate the anguish of people, families who lost their dearest and nearest, who were bereaved of breadwinners?
“Since the first day of Batken province formation we move demands towards the authorities of Ferghana viloyat and - through our government - to official Tashkent to neutralize the mines being of especial danger for peaceful population”, governor Mamat Aybalayev says. And the appeals to the regional authorities of Uzbekistan are senseless, because everything is solved by Tashkent - it is the assertion of analysts from non-governmental organizations and representatives of international institutes working in the region. The administration of Batken province announced not once about their intention to bring a lawsuit against Uzbekistan to make it reimburse the damage caused by explosions. The materials for submission to the International economy court were prepared. But they were of no result - experts explained that the incidents didn’t pertain to the realm of economy relations. And, subsequently, they are not liable to consideration in this instance. Only diplomatic methods remained, this is up to diplomats to decide. On the great score the matter didn’t dwell exclusively on charts-diagrams. The main this was how to clear off the common border from the dangerous arsenal, to consolidate mutual confidence and collaboration. Tashkent hasn’t signed yet the principle document of Ottawa convention on the prohibition of counter-infantry mines usage. But allocation of this type of weapon in bordering areas goes counter both to international and bilateral instruments. For example, to the Treaty on eternal friendship between two neighbouring countries. Consenting with the borderline being not demarked yet Tashkent proceeds with asserting that “protective measures” are executed within the boundaries of the administrative frontiers. And it implies one thing: mine danger will be in force until the parties get commonly down to clearing off the plots on either side of the officially specified and ratified borderline.
Bishkek started to act since July 7, 2001 yet. KR government adopted the enactment on determination of mine dangerous areas on the territory of Batken province and measures aimed at neutralization of mines. A special commission on neutralization was formed being in charge of Tayan, Sai, Fakel plots. Foe one day, August 12 of 2001, 30 hectares were cleared of mines in Chon-Gara place. But then the jobs were suspended. Quoting the officer of law-enforcement bodies under Batken provincial state administration Valery Kolesov, these were Uzbekistan mines. They decided to remove them without consulting the charts because the locality was smooth and they simply used mine-sweeps. But it is much more difficult when you deal with mountainous relief! There you won’t do without diagrams. On the other hand, Kyrgyzstan is known to have restored to this weapon in the period of Batken was as well. However, the author of these lines was declared last year in the press-service of KR Ministry of defence that “the mines laid out by our sappers had been uplifted long ago”. Meanwhile the information about those who suffered “in the outcome of the explosion of an undefined object” were appearing in press from time to time. In the opinion of military analysts, these were repercussions of battles - as a rule, such ESs take place in Batken and Chon-Alay rayons where military skirmishes with band formations had been happening…
So, the danger is obvious and the origin of the weapon threatening people is of no difference. Why have we remained alone with our alarms and apprehensions? The explosion of a counter-infantry mine occured on April 23 cut short the life of 42-years-old shepherd Abdisattar Shamshiyev from Batken rayon, as we informed already it had taken place at the junction of the three countries territories, nearer to the Tajik land. This republic is known to have suffered the heaviest casualties from the weapon in question; over fifty people perished, hundreds of people were inflicted injuries. The Tajik powers applied to international organizations for assistance in obviation of danger. Financial aid is rendered. Kyrgyzstan doesn’t enjoy such considerateness for the time being relying on the availabilities of its own. Anxiety was displayed only by the Red Cross International Committee which recently presented its programme “Informativity of Population on Mine Danger” in Batken. The project envisages an organization of explicatory work in educational institutions and people’s residence by Red Cross volunteers jointly with statal frameworks. We mean also warning tablets bound to be pitched on mined spots. Local authorities welcome the initiative but don’t rely any hopes on it. Firstly, they asserted, it is no easy matter to designate dangerous plots having no charts. Secondly, you can’t put indicators between all the spans of half hundred steps in length. Into the bargain, not all children grazing cattle in these places can read. And what is to be done with herds?
Mine danger notably darkness the air in bordering villages and complicates the interactions between the regional authorities of the parties. Population’s disaffection is patent. Restless correspondence between two governors, the same non-effective demarches of the diplomatic department don’t fortify confidence in state structures. “They retreat being afraid of the big neighbour, they can’t defend us” - this is the proverbial opinion of common Batken citizens. But mine fields are hardly imaginable to explode the situation in the region (the Ferghana valley is implied). The information of some MM about the incidents and ESs beset with mine explosions to intensify the tension in interethnical relations and those ones between nations is obviously exaggerated. “Nobody transfers claims on ESs occasion to the Uzbek people, on either side of the borderline people preserved mutual good feelings:, -says Zhusubali Saikalov, deputy head of Batken provincial administration. “Citizens got used to this sort of incidents there is no great noise about them, but, of course, people are resentful, they can’t be quite indifferent to it, - he adds. But as for anti-Karimov moods, reluctance towards official Tashkent, they are noted by many observers (NGOs, human rights defence organizations, employees of international frameworks) being in charge of bordering areas monitoring.
The persistence in proceeding with mine fields preservation in hardly explicable. The arguments dwelling on rendering resistance against band formations of IMU type have lost actuality after the latters’ bases in Afghanistan were eliminated. A potentiality of breakthrough on the part of militants from the territory of Tajikistan is hardly real. Even being offended by Tashkent official Dushanbe which controls only some parts the country will never resort to this adventure; the reputation of terrorists’ patronizer is not to anybody’s liking now. And finally, even if we imagine the worst variant of events to develop, mine fields - the situation in Batken showed - is a weapon of low efficacy, not a single militant was blown up for the two wars in the south. If to mean security and benefit of today’s official Tashkent, mines are not the thing to add comfort for anyone. On the other hand. The allegations of some of our politicians asserting that in this way Tashkent wants to fortify its possession over controversial terrains are non-serious either. Another half of scales is much weighter - that one of political losses of Uzbekistan. The relations of Tashkent with its nearest neighbours is far from cloudless without all the rest. Does it need prolonged intensification of distrust, moreover, hostility towards itself which would diffuse among the population in other states?
The criticism of its undertakings towards bordering states has been reinforcing in the latters’ MM which are forming public opinion being to Uzbekistan disadvantage. Moreover, some Kyrgyzstan MM having become a practised hand in savoring false patriotic motives portray diligently the image of the unfriendly country. Tashkent drives itself into isolation. And it goes counter to our common interests - to Tashkent, Bishkek, all Central Asia. “From the military point of view Uzbekistan will gain no benefit from mine fields, -considers Leonid Bondarets, military analyst, employee of the International Institute of strategic researches under KR President. It’s a pity that this country ignores intentional agreements prohibiting counter-infantry mines. But the problem of mine fields is quite soluble. One should only proceed from the assumption of good-neighbourly relations. After all, Uzbekistan is also a member of Shanghai organization of cooperation. What kind of neighbours are we not to settle such questions?”, - he says. Recently Kyrgyzstan MFA moved a proposal to the Uzbek side to sign a Memorandum of confidence measures on the borderline aimed at regulation of many issues. Meanwhile, a final solution of mine fields problem is associated by experts with the termination of the process of demarcation and delimitation of the Kyrgyz-Uzbek borderline. How to accelerate it is another pair of shoes already… The danger doesn’t lie in bordering zone controversies. One needs long-term mechanisms of their settlement - that’s the matter politicians should be preoccupied with.