Manipulations and conjectures of a Tajik journalist about the causes of the conflict on the border and what does Japarov and Tashiev have to do with it
The day before, on September 19, the Tajik agency “Asia-Plus” published an article stating that the creation of the image of an “aggressor” and “enemy” in the person of Tajikistan is beneficial to the President of Kyrgyzstan Sadyr Zhaparov and the head of the State Committee for National Security Kamchybek Tashiev. The author was journalist Bakhmaner Nadirov.
The material begins with a quote from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Tajikistan “Kyrgyzstan is spreading blatant lies in order to create the image of an “aggressor” in the face of Tajikistan.” With this, as well as the appeal of the head of state Zhaparov to the border guards with the words “courage and heroism in repulsing the enemy“, the Tajik journalist smoothly leads the reader to the fact that “the Kyrgyz leadership uses the image of an external enemy for personal political purposes and politicizes the border issue to maintain the image.” According to Nadirov, “this is not news to him and the Tajik experts.”
As “evidence” the author cites the words of a certain international journalist and expert on border conflicts, Negmatullo Mirsaidov. The latter states that the main task of the Zhaparov-Tashiev tandem is to undermine the image of the most influential political parties and their leaders (in Kyrgyzstan – ed.), and expand their electorate.
Mirsaidov also argues that the border conflict allows you to play on the national-patriotic feelings of the Kyrgyz people, which allows you to increase the ratings of the president and the chief security officer.
What’s wrong with this statement?
As you know, on the first day of another conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border, President Sadyr Japarov flew to Samarkand for a summit of the SCO member states. As we wrote earlier, the administration of the head of state kept silent all three days conflict, and especially on September 16 – in most intense day of clashes. Myself Sadyr Japarov was tasting Samarkand food and performed on the fields of the SCO with talking about friendship.
Only after 17:00 did the Japarov administration report that the presidents of the two countries had talked about the situation on the border.
We also wrote that there were no comments from Kamchybek Tashiev, but it is known that he was in the Batken region throughout the entire conflict.
The day before, on September 19, the Secretary of the Security Council of the Kyrgyz Republic, Marat Imankulov, said that the President did not fly to his homeland on September 16, since the SCO is an important international event, but Zhaparov “gave instructions from there.”
These facts indicate that it was hardly possible to earn – a political image and loyalty of the electorate to the president and the head of the State Committee for National Security in this way. Thus, the statements of the author are conjectures and assumptions.
Further, the author of the article cites the words of political scientist Sherali Rizoyon from his publication on the website of the Information and Analytical Center of Moscow State University about the cause of the conflict on January 27 on the border of the two countries. She, according to Rizoyon, was the publication of the investigation of the Temirov Live YouTube channel, where the main defendants are the chairman of the State Committee for National Security of the Kyrgyz Republic Kamchybek Tashiev and his relatives.
Temirov Live journalists really released an investigation “How to earn 37 million soms in two days? Sadyr Zhaparov and the Tashievs’ scheme” on January 20 of this year. Literally two days later, the police and people in masks came to the investigators’ office with a search. Bolot Temirov himself was detained that same evening, and all sound recording equipment and The same evening they detained, and all sound recording equipment and computers were confiscated.
Thus, Bahmanyor Nadirov, for the purpose of manipulation, cites as facts the events that took place almost eight months ago and entailed internal political processes. Moreover, a week passed from the moment the investigation was released before the shootout between the border guards of the two countries, and the conflict itself lasted from the evening of January 27 to 4.00 am on January 28, when it became known that the border services of the Kyrgyz Republic and the Republic of Tajikistan were able to agree on a ceasefire.
Manipulation on the part of Bahmaner is also the fact that Sherali Rizoyon cited the Tashiev investigation as one of a number of reasons for the conflict, and not as the only trigger.
In conclusion, Bakhmaner Nadirov discusses what is more important internal political struggle OR the interests of the people. and that similar conflicts that have left HUNDREDS dead and more than Thousands wounded have been going on since 2011.
“A reasonable question arises: why does Kyrgyzstan sign agreements and then itself violates them? Why does Kyrgyzstan provoke a conflict and always blame Tajikistan for starting a conflict? Is it really more important to keep high positions in the political struggle or to establish peace on the border?” the author asks.
In this section, the author manipulates rhetorical questions, as well as the number of victims and the fact that border clashes have been going on for more than 10 years.
At the same time, this part has nothing to do with the original application of the article, indicated in the title as “Why is it beneficial for Zhaparov and Tashiev to create the image of an “aggressor” and an “enemy” in the face of Tajikistan”.
In conclusion, the author gives data on what is happening at the border at the present time.
Conclusion: in his publication on the Asia Plus website, the Tajik journalist Bahmaner Nadirov uses assumptions, conjectures and manipulations. And most of the material does not relate to current events at all and does not correspond to the stated topic.