THE CONVINCING majority in Kyrgyzstan’s constitutional referendum is a welcome affirmation that the troubled country remains, albeit tentatively, on a course of democratic reform despite the violence that has claimed at least 300 lives in recent weeks. More than 90 per cent have backed a new constitution replacing its presidential system with a parliamentary one and paving the way for October elections. Polls will be held five-yearly and the president limited to a single six-year term in what is set to become central Asia’s first parliamentary republic.
Even allowing for a turnout of 65 per cent, and substantially lower in the country’s Uzbek minority, the vote, acknowledged by international observers as democratic, gives a clear mandate and legitimacy to reforms designed to cleanse the system of the endemic cronyism which fed the April 7th uprising and overthrow of President Kurmanbek Bakiyev. Russia’s president Dmitry Medvedev has expressed fears the constitution will be a platform for divisive ethnic and Islamist politics. But such concerns are exaggerated, not least because the constitution also bans religiously and ethnically-based parties, and may well reflect more Mr Medvedev’s commitment to democratic institutions than anything else.
The referendum, although no panacea for the country’s deep divisions, enshrines a degree of regional autonomy which should help restore calm by easing Uzbek fears of domination by the majority Kyrgyz. It should also legitimise the authority of the country’s interim leader, Roza Otunbayeva, who took power after the uprising and should now be better placed to exercise real control over the country’s military and to initiate genuine, healing investigations into the causes of the interethnic violence that forced over 100,000 into exile.
But the lull in violence that has seen most return from neighbouring Uzbekistan surprisingly quickly, though many remain internally displaced, should not be taken for granted. Feelings are still raw. Accusations are flying about who started the killings, whether the army was involved, and what role Uzbek nationalists and the ex-president’s son played, although in the end Uzbek communities seem to have come off worst. The smallest of incidents could trigger a renewed bloodbath.
In this tinder box atmosphere consideration should be given urgently by the UN Security Council to the possibility of an international stabilisation mission to provide security for the displaced to return home and space for the beginnings of reconciliation.