Alchynbek Meimanov

IR-5

The Chinese foreign policy precedences in Kyrgyzstan

Kyrgyzstan is a province of the Central Asiatic part. Its state of affairs has of import geopolitical and geo-economic significance as a span linking West and East, every bit good as North and South. At the present clip Kyrgyzstan is in a period between a communistic yesteryear and a democratic hereafter politically, economically, and ethno-historically. Kyrgyzstan, as with the other provinces of Central Asia, is a topographic point where four civilisations converge: European, mediated through Russia, Arabic-Muslim, Persian, and Chinese. On the one manus this has created favourable conditions for the development of bilateral and many-sided cooperation in different countries ; on the other manus it underlines the necessity for a flexible and balanced foreign policy. Kyrgyzstan is quickly developing diplomatic and other dealingss with the bulk of states of the universe. The KR receives practical way and comprehensive care from cooperation with planetary and regional organisations. Foreign policy activities of the Kyrgyz Republic are enriching.

Bilateral diplomatic negotiations is an of import tool for implementing foreign policy. For that, the important necessity is a varied attack in choice of the waies with the best chances, that meet the cultural, ethno-historical, geopolitical and geo-economic features of the state, that allow chase the national involvements of the Kyrgyz Republic with maximal effectivity. To supply for the territorial unity of the Kyrgyz Republic, every bit good as its security and economic development, attending to the Central Asiatic part is of high precedence.

Kyrgyzstan is a portion of the “ Eurasiatic civilisation ” that was formed around Russia that has geopolitical, economic, cultural, religious and lingual dimensions. The Interlocking involvements of Kyrgyzstan and Russia predestine a high degree of political partnership. Strengthening military-political cooperation with the Russian Federation is an of import component of Kyrgyzstan ‘s security. Critical economic involvements connect the state with Russia every bit good. All of this underlines the demand to construct a strategic partnership with Russia.

Relationss with The People ‘s Republic of China are a really of import facet of the foreign policy of Kyrgyzstan. The precedence given to China is determined by its turning influence in universe and regional personal businesss, its important economic and demographic potency, every bit good as its geographical propinquity to Kyrgyzstan. Development of good-neighbor dealingss with China is an indispensable constituent of Kyrgyzstan ‘s security, an of import status for development of communicating to the South and East, every bit good as development of a reciprocally good trading partnership.

Political cooperation between Kyrgyzstan and China during this period was characterized by positive interaction and stable kineticss of visits at assorted degrees. This has bit by bit led to an ambiance of common apprehension and trust. The trade turnover has been steadily turning ; a new transit substructure was created, while the old 1 has been improved ; and cooperation between the two states in other Fieldss has besides reached a important degree. Bishkek and Beijing have actively cooperated in international and regional organisations, among which the most of import was the Shanghai Five, which was later re-organized into the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

Most topical issues between the two states, which hampered bilateral interaction and, to a big extent, the continued progressive development of dealingss, were settled during the period before 2005 – when the sensitive boundary line job was solved, and the chief political papers, the “ Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighborliness and Cooperation, ” was signed.

Despite the bing serious concerns from both sides, the dramatic events of 24 March 2005 in Kyrgyzstan, which led to the sudden alteration of top state leading and the triumph of resistance forces, did non go a cause for important chilling or extremist re-examination of bilateral dealingss. They merely they caused a certain intermission in the dealingss.

The possible accumulated in during the old bilateral interactions has allowed both sides to get the better of the troubles of the current state of affairs. However, it should be recognized that the ambiguity and precariousness of the political state of affairs in Kyrgyzstan after the “ Tulip Revolution ” and, as a effect, the vagueness and unstable character of foreign policy orientations of the new Kyrgyz leading ab initio caused some tenseness between Kyrgyz-Chinese dealingss and the cautious attitude on the portion of Beijing. The leaders of the P.R.C. , harmonizing to Chinese experts, did non anticipate such major disturbances in the adjacent state. The concern, on Beijing ‘s portion, pertained to the new governments in Kyrgyzstan instantly after the “ Tulip Revolution. ” These can most likely be explained by a figure of fortunes, among which we can stipulate the followers:

instability of the political state of affairs in Kyrgyzstan and the deficiency of integrity on the cardinal issues of the state ‘s development scheme non merely between the subdivisions of power, but even inside the new governmental squad ; instability of the political state of affairs in Kyrgyzstan and the deficiency of integrity on the cardinal issues of the state ‘s development scheme non merely between the subdivisions of power, but even inside the new governmental squad ;
coming to power of some resistance leaders who before supported anti-Chinese thoughts ; coming to power of some resistance leaders who before supported anti-Chinese thoughts ;
volatility in the foreign policy precedences of the new leading the deficiency of a clear sequence, common attacks, and the deficiency of integrity refering the dealingss with China, particularly on sensitive for the official Beijing issues ; volatility in the foreign policy precedences of the new leading the deficiency of a clear sequence, common attacks, and the deficiency of integrity refering the dealingss with China, particularly on sensitive for the official Beijing issues ;
unfavorable judgment of the accomplishments and signed pacts and understandings in the old period of the Kyrgyz-Chinese dealingss ( 1992-2005 ) by single Kyrgyz politicians ; unfavorable judgment of the accomplishments and signed pacts and understandings in the old period of the Kyrgyz-Chinese dealingss ( 1992-2005 ) by single Kyrgyz politicians ;
possible hazards of destabilization in the Xingjian Uyghur Autonomous Region under the influence of the state of affairs in Kyrgyzstan ; possible hazards of destabilization in the Xingjian Uyghur Autonomous Region under the influence of the state of affairs in Kyrgyzstan ;
Strengthening of external, particularly American, influence on Kyrgyzstan. Strengthening of external, particularly American, influence on Kyrgyzstan.

Taking into history these factors, Beijing did non coerce the events and took a wait-and-see attitude, therefore allowing the right of enterprise to the Kyrgyz side. It is singular that during a twelvemonth after the mentioned events at that place had non been common visits at the highest degree between the two sides, and the political contacts between the top leaders of the two states were limited to short protocol meetings within the model of many-sided forums. There was a meeting of the Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiev with the Chinese President Hu Jintao during the SCO acme in Astana in July 2005 and a meeting of the Kyrgyz Prime Minister Felix Kulov with the Prime Minister of the State Council of the P.R.C. Wen Jiabao during the SCO meeting of the caputs of authoritiess in Moscow in September 2005.

It should be noted that those meetings were more of an introductory, “ gauging ” character and could non take to the full Restoration of dealingss. Beijing was still cautious because the place of Kyrgyz leading in a figure of cardinal issues for China was non rather clear. Besides, some Kyrgyz politicians, including high functionaries, still supported the thought of re-examining the relationship with China and particularly the Kyrgyz-Chinese understandings on boundary line issues.

In that state of affairs, both parties focused on readyings for the visit of the President Kurmanbek Bakiev in China, which took topographic point on June 9-10, 2006, believing that it would take bing concerns, strife and jobs in the bilateral relationship. Each side had its ain ends and outlooks of the visit. Beijing ‘s outlooks of the visit were connected chiefly with the political constituent of the cooperation. The top leading of China hoped non merely to understand the place of the President of Kyrgyzstan on the cardinal issues of the bilateral dealingss and Kyrgyz regional and international policies, but besides to acquire verification of its soundness and stableness in the foreseeable hereafter. In general, the most of import thing for Beijing was the possibility of reconstructing a clime of political trust between the two states. In the Kyrgyz-Chinese dealingss the grade of political trust between the leaders and the degree of cooperation in the field of security have ever determined and will go on to find the kineticss of the

dealingss in other countries, particularly in trade and economic dealingss, and in the execution of major economic undertakings. Beijing ‘s willingness to reconstruct full cooperation depended on the place of the Kyrgyz leading on the undermentioned issues:
the Taiwan and Tibet issue ; the Taiwan and Tibet issue ;
the joint battle against Xinjian segregation, extremism and terrorist act ; the joint battle against Xinjian segregation, extremism and terrorist act ;
continuity and committedness of the Kyrgyz leading to the antecedently signed bilateral pacts and understandings, particularly of political nature and those deciding the boundary line issue ; continuity and committedness of the Kyrgyz leading to the antecedently signed bilateral pacts and understandings, particularly of political nature and those deciding the boundary line issue ;
the U.S. military presence in Kyrgyzstan ; the U.S. military presence in Kyrgyzstan ;

The above issues to changing grades were included in the docket for the negotiations between the President Kurmanbek Bakiev and the top political leading of China and were reflected in the joint Declaration after the visit signed by the caputs of the two states. Confirmation of continuity and steadfast committedness from the new Kyrgyz leading to the earlier signed understandings ( political in nature and those deciding the boundary line issue ) , were the chief concerns to the content of Kurmanbek Bakiev ‘s visit in China.

There had been concerns that the deficiency of a clear place of the new Kyrgyz leader on those issues during the dialogues could do Beijing uncertainty about the stable place of Kyrgyzstan and its sincere involvement in keeping and developing friendly dealingss with China ; which could hold frozen the good dealingss between the states. The official statement made by the new President of the Kyrgyz Republic on its house committedness to the old understandings and the understandings reached during his first visit to China, despite the being of serious domestic political oppositions, was seen by experts from both states as a important measure on the portion of Bishkek to reconstruct common political trust and assurance in full.

In a joint Declaration the parties confirmed their attachment to the rules, declared in the political paperss signed and published during the period of 14 old ages ; expressed their satisfaction with the advancement achieved since the constitution of diplomatic dealingss in political, economic, human-centered and security Fieldss ; and agreed that the Kyrgyz-Chinese friendly relationship meets the cardinal involvements of the peoples of the two states and besides contributes to the development and peace in the part.

The parties committed themselves to purely stay by all the understandings and paperss on boundary line issues between the two provinces and do active attempts to turn the province boundary line between the two states into a zone of ageless peace and friendly relationship, maintained from coevals to coevals. Officially, Bishkek reaffirmed its committedness to the one-China policy. It confirmed that it opposes any signifier of “ Taiwan independency, ” including “ legalisation of Taiwan independency, ” and it is against the efforts to make “ two Chinas, ” “ one China, one Taiwan. ” Furthermore, it is against Taiwan ‘s engagement in any international organisation, to which merely sovereign provinces can be parties. The Kyrgyz side stated that it would non set up any official dealingss with Taiwan and would non keep official contacts with it. For its portion, Beijing confirmed its support for the attempts made by the Kyrgyz Republic to guarantee its independency, national sovereignty and territorial unity, strengthen internal stableness and develop national economic system ; Beijing besides praised the part of Kyrgyzstan to stableness, security and cooperation in Central Asia.

As for the issue of battling terrorist act, extremism and segregation, the caputs of the two provinces confirmed that they would beef up coordination and cooperation between the jurisprudence enforcement bureaus and security organic structures of both states. Equally good, both promised to go on within the model of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to take effectual steps to jointly battle all signifiers of terrorist act, including the terrorist forces of “ East Turkistan, ” in order to guarantee peace and stableness in the two states and in the part. The caputs of the two states stressed that the battle against terrorist forces of “ East Turkistan ” is an of import portion of the international anti-terrorist battle. Kyrgyzstan and China will keep and develop the contacts and cooperation between military bureaus of the two states. The issue of the American military presence in Kyrgyzstan was besides one of the most of import minutes in the political docket of Kurmanbek Bakiev ‘s visit in China. China has repeatedly stated that it understands and portions the place of Kyrgyzstan, which provided a land Air Force base for the Anti-terrorist alliance to battle terrorist forces in Afghanistan. The old leading of KR had coordinated this determination with its spouses in the CSTO and SCO.

However, China steadfastly and strongly supports the thought of finding clip restraints for operation of the airbase in “ Manas ” and opposes the enlargement of its authorization beyond the anti-terrorist operation in Afghanistan. Apparently, during the negotiations, the Chinese leading succeeded in carrying the President Kurmanbek Bakiev and enlisted his support. In the joint Declaration, Kyrgyzstan and China stated that they “ will non let the 3rd parties to utilize its district at the disbursal of national sovereignty, security and territorial unity of the other side, and will non let the constitution on its district and the activities of the organisations and associations, presenting a menace to the sovereignty, security and territorial unity of the other side. ”

In general, the visit of the Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiev in China was mostly political in nature and, as acknowledged by both sides, was aimed chiefly at the decision of the intermission in bilateral dealingss after the events of March 24, 2005. Despite the deficiency of discovery solutions in the economic field ( to anticipate a discovery would hold been unrealistic ) , it must be recognized that the purpose – the constitution of working contacts with top political leaders of China and Restoration of political trust between the two states – was, in rule, reached. This could be considered the most of import result of the visit of Kurmanbek Bakiev. Therefore, since the 2nd half of 2006, as a consequence of the visit of the Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiev to China, the bilateral cooperation between Kyrgyzstan and China has been bit by bit restored.

Kurmanbek Bakiev clearly stated one time once more that the Kyrgyz side had no purpose of reviewing and would purely adhere to all the antecedently achieved understandings and pacts. The President of the Kyrgyz Republic chiefly expressed his involvement in the development of trade and economic cooperation with China and execution of joint undertakings in countries such as: hydropower ; transit and substructure ; telecommunications ; geographic expedition and development of mineral, oil and gas sedimentations ; development of visible radiation and nutrient industries ; agribusiness ; and touristry.

In contrast to the words of the President Kurmanbek Bakiev, the President of China Hu Jintao, officially holding with the proposals of his Kyrgyz co-worker nevertheless, highlighted the cooperation in the domain of security as a precedence in bilateral Kyrgyz-Chinese dealingss. The caput of China stressed that his state to the full supports Kyrgyzstan in its attempts to battle the “ three immoralities ” – terrorist act, segregation and extremism – every bit good as in its desire to lend to regional security. As the undertakings, prioritized by Kyrgyzstan – the building of the railroad China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan and export of electricity from Kyrgyzstan to China – the parties once more were unable to make a common determination and one time once more sent the undertakings for farther survey by Governmental experts from both states.

In 2008 the Kyrgyz-Chinese dealingss continued to develop bit by bit.

In decision, it should be noted that after a brief intermission in bilateral dealingss, which was caused by the rapid and unexpected alteration of power in Kyrgyzstan after the events of 24 March 2005, the cooperation between Kyrgyzstan and China has been bit by bit restored and returned to a familiar format. Harmonizing to the estimations of higher functionaries, today, the bilateral dealingss between China and Kyrgyzstan are friendly, and there are no serious political jobs that could impede their farther development.