THE FERGHANA VALLEY AND THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY 379
reducing the demand for drugs among youths.
28
One program in Tajikistan and
Uzbekistan seeks to combat trafficking in persons across Central Asia as a whole.
The phenomenon of enclaves is a major factor in inter-governmental relations in
the Ferghana Valley. Besides the undeveloped nature of international law in this
area, the existence of enclaves gives rise to many social and economic issues that
are the subject of other USAID projects. Typical was a 2003 initiative to provide
drinking water to the Kyrgyz village of Charbak near Batken and to Khushiar
village in Sokh district of Uzbekistan.
29
A similar project, which involved Swiss
aid as well, addressed the issue of water supplies to neighboring villages on either
side of the border in the Ferghana Valley. At the initiative of several communities,
this project also improved water supplies to the Uzbek enclave of Vorukh and the
nearby Rabot village in Tajikistan.
30
The EU’s projects in Central Asia also take a regional approach. Among these
are a program for improving border management, another for reducing the spread
of
narcotics, an intergovernmental commission promoting the development of
transport links from Europe to China (Transit Corridor Europe-Caucasus-Asia,
TRACECA), a program for energy transport, and general humanitarian assistance.
From 2003 to 2005 the EU funded a regional project on emergency preparedness
in the Ferghana Valley that worked with local authorities to train the population
to deal with natural disasters. Some forty-eight villages in all three countries were
selected on the basis of their exposure to potential disasters, with special emphasis
on cross-border situations and enclaves.
31
Governmental institutions and both civil
and business groups all participated.
The EU’s 2007 Central Asia strategy notes that “the Ferghana Valley best re-
flects both the problems and prospects of Central Asia. In this connection, the EU
is ready to assist the Central Asian countries sharing joint borders in the Ferghana
Valley with projects aimed at stability, prosperity, and sustainable development
in the region.”
32
Under the framework of the Technical Assistance
for the CIS
program (TACIS) the EU has engaged regional states in programs in a variety of
areas,
33
but for the Ferghana Valley the main foci have been border management,
environment, transport, and drug control.
34
Since 1992 the EU has carried out programs aimed at reducing both drug traf-
ficking and consumption in the Ferghana Valley. It has equipped border posts along
major drug routes, especially in the areas of Osh and Isfara-Batken,
35
and with
the Uzbek government now expanding the effort to include such Uzbek towns as
Sokh, Vuadil, and Madaniiat. These initiatives form part of a larger EU-funded
program of the UN that has worked since 1992 to upgrade all aspects of border
management in the region, so as to facilitate the movement of goods and people
and to reduce illicit trade and border tensions. (Border Management Programme
in Central Asia; BOMCA). Three of the four posts on which it has concentrated
are located in the Ferghana Valley: the Tajik-Kyrgyz
border on the road from
Isfara to Batken, the Uzbek-Kyrgyz border, and the Tajik-Kyrgyz border in Osh,
with Kokand on the Uzbek-Tajik border and Karasu on the Kyrgyz-Uzbek border
added later. To encourage the Uzbek government to remove mines on border areas
380 BOBOKULOV
with Tajikistan, the program built a further border post at the enclave in Sokh in
2007.
36
Such integrated border posts reduce the duplication
of procedures and
allow frontier guards and customs officials of both countries to be housed in the
same building. Thanks to these efforts, the Committee on the Protection of State
Borders in Uzbekistan could remove mines in the Ferghana Valley and provide
modern training and equipment to border troops.
37
It is worth noting that EU programs seek to strengthen stability within Central
Asia and at the same time neutralize various challenges to the EU itself. Several of
the projects enumerated above strive to reduce threats to the EU that might arise
from Central Asia.
For all their good intentions, most of these many projects have fallen short in
terms of their long-term impact. Projects funded by separate donor countries are often
poorly coordinated, regional governments sometimes have lacked the political will
to push the efforts forward, and many projects get dropped after a few years for lack
of sustained support. Thus, for example, much has been learned about preventing the
spread of radioactive waste, but little actually has been done to prevent it.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
