Causes and Consequences of Ethnic Conflicts in the Ferghana
Valley: Uzbek Perspectives on the “Ferghana Events”
The Soviet government’s longstanding policy of deporting ethnic groups it con-
sidered undesirable had increased the number of ethnic groups in Uzbekistan.
Archival records indicate that by 1950 some 184,122 people had been deported to
the Uzbek republic, not counting the Crimean Tatars, Turks, Koreans and Greeks
deported there during World War II. These included 5,860 “kulaks,” 842 Vlasovites,
126,114 Crimean Tatars, 41,885 Georgians, 7,788 Germans, 884 people from the
North Caucasus, 746 Kalmyks, and 3 Moldovans.
31
During the war, 110,000 Turks
had been forcefully deported from their homeland of Meskhetia in the southwest
of Georgia,
32
as were 183,155 Tatars from their homeland in the Crimea.
33
These
peoples were resettled mainly in the Ferghana cities of Kokand, Kuvasai, Margilan,
as well as other areas of the valley, with a few also in the Tashkent area.
Because Uzbeks and Meskhetian Turks shared similar languages, cultures and
religion (both were Sunni Muslims), they related well to each other and even inter-
married. Good relations reigned for more than half a century. Even at the height of
the confrontation, large numbers of Uzbeks sheltered Meskhetian families in their
homes. But when Gorbachev’s program of perestroika started instituting sweep-
ing reforms, everyone in the multi-national country began looking to the interests
of his own group or nation. Those peoples who had been involuntarily deported
began preparing to return to their native lands and restore their national cultures.
Crimean Tatars did this, and so did the Meskhetian Turks. They petitioned local
officials for permission to return to their homeland, then turned for redress to the
THE FERGHANA VALLEY DURING PERESTROIKA 189
newly established Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR,
34
specifying the
areas in Georgia to which they laid claim.
35
When both administrative levels ignored
their requests, the Meskhetians’ leaders Tashtan Aslanov, Obbos Khakhutadze, and
Dursun Ismailov ratcheted up their campaign.
36
Professor Kh. Bobobekov argues that the main cause of the Ferghana conflicts
was the region’s impoverished economic and social environment.
37
The Meskhetian
Turks were primarily involved in relatively prestigious jobs in trade and consumer
services, while most local Uzbeks in the Ferghana Valley remained in poorly paid
agricultural jobs. As the economy deteriorated, this inevitably engendered resent-
ments. The local populace raised demands of its own for better wages, jobs for youth,
and an end to what they considered their subordinate inter-ethnic status. Activist
youths were joined by members of the older generation, who combined around
the demand to “Raise Cotton Prices!” One demonstrator expressed his discontent
by saying that “Many nationalities live in the Ferghana Valley—Turks, Crimean
Tatars, Jews, Germans, and others. But they all seem better off than the Uzbeks. Is
it our fault that we are forced to live in the countryside and grow cotton?”
38
Professor Sh. Ziamov explains the conflict very differently. He argues that the
KGB encouraged the conflict in order to demonstrate to the public that without
strong leadership from Moscow, lawlessness, turmoil and violence would ensue.
39
There is solid evidence that many participants in the turmoil came in from else-
where,
40
while photographic evidence shows people of other nationalities who had
dressed in Uzbek national garb.
41
Ziamov argues that the fact that the mass riots
started in Ferghana city, continued in Margilan two days later, and then flared up
in Kokand
42
demonstrates that the conflict had been engineered.
The press tended to repeat still another version, namely that “People in cars
without license plates came to the homes of Russians and Tatars and showed them
photographs of burned corpses, demanding they speedily leave the valley.” Accord-
ing to this view, “The Uzbeks wanted to set the Turks against the Russians, and
when the Turks refused, the Uzbeks went after the Meskhetians themselves.”
43
In
yet another vein, the press reported that “it started when a dispute erupted between
a Russian lad and a Tatar; when some Uzbeks stood up for the Russian and a few
Meskhetian Turks for the Tatar, fighting flared up.”
44
Again, they claimed, it was
the KGB that wanted to complicate matters for Meskhetian Turks attempting to
return to their homeland. On May 23, 1989, fighting in Kuvasai between younger
Uzbeks and Meskhetian Turks resulted in the death of 56 people, the burning of
more than 400 homes, 116 vehicles, 8 businesses, and several schools, as well as
650 wounded.
45
With their homes in flames and their lives threatened, the Meskhe-
tians gathered in the Provincial Party Committee’s building on June 4 and asked
for protection. Over the following week troops evacuated 4,981 men and women
and 1,765 children to a nearby military base.
46
On June 4 the Supreme Soviet of the Uzbek Republic in Tashkent imposed a
curfew from 10
p
.
m
. to 6
a
.
m
., banned demonstrations and gatherings, and forbade
the subletting of houses.
47
Arrests were made and volunteer militias established
190 SHOZIMOV, BESHIMOV, YUNUSOVA
in many towns. In Kokand, more than a thousand young people assembled from
Rishtan, Tashlak, and Uzbekistan districts, many of them armed. When they re-
ceived no response to their demands for the release of all those arrested and for the
immediate repatriation of all Meskhetian Turks, they stormed the building of the
Provincial Party Committee and were repulsed by forty armed police. Frustrated,
the rioters intensified their protest. Seeing this, the head of the troops from the Min-
istry of Internal Affairs gave orders to fire on the crowd with sub-machine guns.
48
When the rioters seized various factories and the railroad station, the Ministry of
Internal Affairs’ troops regrouped around the banks and communication offices.
During these “Kokand events” five people died, ninety-three suffered various in-
juries, and sixty were hospitalized.
49
The young demonstrators eventually released
the sixty-nine prisoners they had taken. Three days later, on the seventh, some
3,000 protesters gathered outside the Provincial Executive Committee in Rishtan,
demanding the release of all those arrested in Ferghana and Kokand, higher prices
for cotton, jobs, and housing. At Kurashkhon near Namangan 400 people took part
in a similar demonstration.
In the wake of these conflicts, fully 200 “investigators” who had been studying
the inter-ethnic conflicts that had just occurred in Armenia and Azerbaijan arrived
from Moscow to carry out a speedy examination of the causes of the Ferghana
tragedies.
50
Some fifty-six criminal cases were filed against participants in the June
4 events, and more than forty criminal cases were instituted against participants
in the June 21 riots.
51
Thirty murder cases were also resolved,
52
and many small
arms confiscated.
53
The Communist leaders of the republic declared that the conflict had arisen
“out of strawberries at a bazaar.”
54
The stance of Rafik Nishanov, first secretary of
the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Uzbekistan, caused discontent
among some deputies at the newly formed Supreme Soviet of the USSR. An Ar-
menian deputy addressed Nishanov directly: “Rafik Nishanovich, I’ve been fear-
ful for several days and must chastise you. The press reports that the situation in
Uzbekistan is perilous but you, the First Secretary . . . are sitting here calmly and
telling us ‘Don’t fear, comrades, everything will work out.’ . . . My suggestion to
you is immediately to leave for Uzbekistan.”
55
Earlier, Nishanov had reported to a Party group that the young Ferghana rioters,
impelled by “nationalism,” had engaged “not only in ethnic conflict, but also in
acts against the Soviet way of life.”
56
Meanwhile, the investigative commission
concluded that while the conflicts had started as the accidental result of confron-
tations among youngsters, they nonetheless had social and economic roots. The
commission blamed the fighting on a “fierce nationalistic disposition” among the
local population that sought to set group against group.
57
Equally, it noted, the situ-
ation had been complicated by official indifference in the Ferghana Valley “to the
actions of the Meskhetian Turks, some of whom attempted to fan the situation in
order to hasten their return to the southern areas of the Georgian Republic.”
58
Still in June, Nikolai Ryzhkov, chairman of the Council of Ministers of the
THE FERGHANA VALLEY DURING PERESTROIKA 191
USSR, announced that those Meskhetian Turks residing in refugee camps near
Ferghana city were free, as a temporary measure, to move to the Black Earth region
of Russia, and that “all [other] measures necessary for the resettlement have been
started.”
59
Ryzhkov’s “solution” was disingenuous. Between 1959 and 1979 Rus-
sia’s rural areas had lost 13 million people. Everything connected with agricultural
production was in decay.
60
As farmers departed for the cities and for Central Asia,
the number of collapsed houses in the more remote countryside reached 900,000.
61
Now Ryzhkov proposed to revitalize these deserted villages by settling there “an
industrious Turkic people, able to restore agriculture.”
62
To cover the costs of this
ill-advised move, as well as its own expenses, another special commission from
Moscow raided the budget of the Ferghana province.
63
By June 10, 1989 thousands
of Meskhetian Turks had been settled in places as distant from one another as Bel-
gorod, Kaliningrad, and Orel. Once there, the Meskhetians found that the housing
that had been promised them did not exist.
64
But by the end of June, 16,282 people
from the Ferghana Valley had been resettled in Smolensk, Orel, Kursk, Belgorod,
and Voronezh provinces in Russia.
65
On July 5, 1989 the Uzbek republic’s Council of Ministers granted construction
material for rebuilding destroyed homes, as well as compensation for damages
inflicted on the Meskhetian Turks. Graduated one-time payments were also made
to Meskhetians who lacked insurance, leaving the local government to restore and
sell any houses remaining.
The events that took place in Osh and Jalalabad regions of the neighboring
Kyrgyzstan doubtless helped aggravate the socio-political conditions in Uzbekistan
at the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s. The bloody strife of the
“Osh events” did not spread throughout Kyrgyzstan, although it was Uzbeks who
had lived there for many years who were most directly affected. Nor can one view
the intense conflicts in the Uzbek cities of Ferghana, Buka, Parkent, and Naman-
gan as separate occurrences. All were integral components of the gathering social
and political crisis in the region that found public expression in the unleashing of
democratic currents during perestroika.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |