The Yellow Revolution which is considered to be the outcomes of the civil revolution experienced in Georgia and Ukraine is concluded with the complete control of the opposition in the country and flee of the President Aksar Akayev. While the Transition Government already established is making every effort to secure and stabilise the country, the consequences of the revolution in terms of regional balances are still being discussed. The potential developments in Kyrgyzstan are of great importance in view of the regional stabilisation. Therefore, the approaches of the regional powers such as Russian Federation, People’s Republic of China and the USA against yellow revolution raise particular importance gradually. On the other hand, the civil revolution includes scenarios which may have domino effect and such scenarios affect the attitude of the Turkic Republics against the revolution.

Russian Federation : Controlled Co-Operation  

Moscow, experiencing difficulties arising from the consecutive civil revolutions within the former Soviet geography as defined to be the domain area, has shown controlled attitude in Kyrgyzstan. Prior to the elections, Moscow declared her support for Akayev but also negotiated with the opposition, has voiced her hesitations regarding the form of the revolution but avoided to display sharp reactions. The Russian President Vladimir Putin has declared Russia’s intention “to establish positive relations with the new power” soon after opposition’s taking over the control of the country, which reveals the Moscow’s resolution to keep her domain power on Bishkek. Likewise, those who are in power in Kyrgyzstan at the moment are familiar to Moscow. The Transitional Prime Minister Kurmanbek Bakiyev  who is the most influential personality of the opposition, is invited to Moscow just before the elections. The other name invited to Moscow before the elections  is one of the most colourful figures of the revolution and who is now acting as the Secretary of State, namely, Rosa Otunbayeva. Otunbayeva, received by the Russian Security Secretary, is well aware of the fact that such a movement in Kyrgyzstan can not achieve its targets where Russia is excluded. as in the case of other leaders of the opposition. The Moscow’s sympathy for Akayevs administration has not obstructed establishing relationship with the opposition and Moscow is awarded with positive scores for such an attitude.

USA : Clear Support

The USA, being the invisible hero of the revolution, has clearly supported the Kyrgyz opposition as so expected. The statement made by the U.S. Ambassador to Bishkek, namely Stephen Young, engaged  in active efforts for encouraging the opposition, as “We support the activities of the opposition” has been regarded as the most important cause of such a  swift revolution. Likewise, it was that Stephen Young who first celebrated the transitional Prime Minister Bakiyev on behalf of the U.S. Government.  It should be noted that it is true on saying that the US  has long been prepared the infrastructural aspects of the revolution.I t is known that the activities of the Kyrgyz civil societies have been financed by the US foundations and the International Development Agency of the USA. At least 170 civil society organisations, responsible for the democratic developments and introduction of democracy have been established through the USA or such organisations have been financially supported by the USA. The US Secretary of State has been running an independent publishing house in Bishkek since the year 2002. The said publishing house provides distribution of the 60 different opposition papers  of serious nature to the Kyrgyz people. The statement made by Rosa Otunbayeva, one of the leaders of the opposition as “Yes, We are supported by the USA” clearly indicates the US involvement in the revolution. As in the case of other Turkistan republics, Kyrgyzstan which lacks natural resources that may attract US attention and as a transit country, which is not such worth, raises concerns in view of its geopolitical status. Though it has no border with Afghanistan, the Manas American base established theoretically for supporting Bagram base in Afghanistan, should be evaluated as a measure against the ever increasing threat, namely China. The military base which owes its existence to its psychological suppresses against China serves to US interests in China, not in Afghanistan. The first target to establish open societies and administrations which serve US policies in the region has been Kyrgyzstan.

People’s Republics of China: Perception of Clear Threat from Kyrgyzstan

In perspective of People’s Republic of China, the developments in Kyrgyzstan have turned out to be a perception of direct threat. For China which has shares significant borders with Kyrgyzstan, any security wise void is of great importance in view of its reflections towards East Turkistan, currently administered by China. Therefore, China expressed its dissatisfaction due to the developments in the country from the date on which demonstrations took place.  The measures taken by China at the second step is that China closed the border gates between Kyrgyzstan and East Turkistan, administered by China. Beijing tried to prevent any leaping of the developments to the region where Uighur Turks are settled by closing the Irkesham border gate.

Chinese investments in Kyrgyzstan are suffered due to the looting activities in Kyrgyzstan. Though the attitude of China towards the new government is yet not clear, People’s Republic of China perceives that the civil revolution in Kyrgyzstan is a part of the encompassing policy of China. China is aware of the fact that the USA is gradually increasing its suppress over China day by day. Any US Patented revolutions in Turkistan region  which is considered to be an important extension area, makes it strongly possible that China may enter into new initiatives rather than “wait and see” policy in the following term.

Central Asian republics: Is Domino Effect Possible?

Due to the civil revolutions, while the leaders of Former Soviet geography which is currently experiencing a tough period are excessively worried by the developments, it can be concluded that the opposition activities in these countries are now at hand. It is noted that the revolution in Kyrgyzstan may be experienced by the other Central Asian republics in the form of a domino effect. This possibility is strengthened due to the fact that the Central Asian republic will witness elections one after another in the years 2005 – 2006. However, regarding the developments in Kyrgyzstan, the implication made by Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbeyev on “power weakness” is the basic indicator for this. It is clear that, when compared with Akayev, the other central Asian leaders are acting in a controlled and measurable manner.

It is evident that the other Central Asian Republics will experience such changes. However, the process in the other Central Asian Republics will not be as “soft” as the one experienced in Kyrgyzstan. While the powered regional leaders make every effort to control the opposition, they increase their measures against the external factors as well. However, the activities of the oppositions in the other Central Asian republics and the presidency elections should be monitored carefully.

The civil revolution nearby China which has strategically important status and hosting US and Russian military bases will have fundamental consequences over regional balances. The success of Kyrgyz example is of great importance for the other Central Asian republics. At this stage the attitude pf the opposition will be important. If the opposition goes through joint attitude and no spat is to be experienced in presidency elections, the success of the change will prevail.