As others, I continue to refresh my news sources for Kyrgyz details. While reading all I could find, I noticed that Sarah’s post was quite unique. What struck me was how Registan can’t help but be the anti-FP blog. To be more specific, the fact that FP has two stories that seem to see the same data and draw different conclusions:
It’s not a revolution – Joshua Keating
Kyrgyzstan’s Analog Revolution – Evgeny Morozov
Keating’s piece does include this fair representation of events:
Outside observers have fallen into this trap before, Quinn-Judge, who was Time magazine’s Moscow bureau chief from 1996-2006, noted. “The ‘Tulip Revolution’ wasn’t a revolution. It was we journalists who called it that, or at least allowed our editors to call it that, who are to blame for that distortion of history.”“It was a fairly well-crafted, concerted extra-constitutional reshuffle of the government whereby some key former members of the government pushed out the government.”
Quinn-Judge says the discontent with Bakiyev’s government that led to today’s events has been building for weeks, and was driven less by political repression than by bread and butter issues.
I understand that the Tulip Revolution had little in common with the other color-coded movements, but wouldn’t the events in Kyrgyzstan today be more like the “real thing?” I don’t assume that the Russian Revolutions (yes, more than one) of the teens of the twentieth century were devoid of violence and senseless looting. Some journalists point to the looting and say, “Not a Revolution,” that it’s being fueled more by hungry thugs looking to steal flatscreens from the parliament hall. Might that just be the consequence of the failure of the rule of law? That failure itself IS the revolution’s beginning, no?
Morozov’s piece accepts that it is a Revolution, and also that it is as I said – more like the real thing. However, part of his evidence goes in direct opposition to Sarah’s piece – targeting the lack of social media and networking buzz.
In short: why is there no Twitter revolution in Kyrgyzstan? Becuase there is no one to hype it up.
I am in agreement, but I think we should be more suspicious of those situations that ARE hyped up, like his model of the Iranian Election twitter blow up. Look to Tehrangeles and the Californian Iranian population first. The same might be said of any and all newsworthy Armenian stories. Not that there is no news, but that the news does not proclaim itself on FOX, MSNBC, CNN, etc. The news that is important to its viewers – that is the stuff that makes the news crawler and commentary shows.
What Kyrgyz diaspora is going to come to the defense of the situation? Perhaps the hordes of Kyrgyz workers in Russia – but they might be too busy dodging punches from Russian nationalists.
Morozov goes on to remind us of his expertise…
I’ve also omitted any discussion about the regional dimensions to this revolution, for the example, the split between Kyrgyzstan’s North and South and how both regions were communicating with the capital, and how what happened in each reinforced/undermined developments elsewhere. I’m well aware of that.
Well aware, but not sure it has anything to do with your article’s thesis? If someone wanted to comment on whether or not these events were a Revolution, they’d better go back to 1991 at least, and chart the rise and fall of various power zones in the region, and in the various oblasts inside the country itself.
I myself am waiting to see Kazakhstan’s and Uzbekistan’s reaction to this — and mayhaps Tajikistan’s as well?
