The incidents in Kyrgyzstan are beyond the extent of a tragedy and have reached to a level of genocide. Civil war carries the risk of spreading to the area of Kyrgyzstan and especially to the capital city Bishkek and also to the whole region including Uzbekistan. An authority having both the capability and the intention to cease this situation does not exist at all. A calculation should be made to decide who shall take the required measures.

 

Initially, we should mention that Turkey taking over the CICA term presidency just as last week and Kazakhstan currently carrying out the OSCE presidency have failed in the incident in Kyrgyzstan. Turkey had handed over CICA term presidency in order to interfere in such situations. However, an attitude is prevalent in Turkey as if we had not taken over the presidency of such an organization and as if these situations are taking place in a distant African land.

 

When the blood of a brother is shed in Kyrgyzstan Turkish President and the term President of CICA Abdullah Gul is on a visit to Korea and he did not even make a serious statement about the issue. Besides, the president of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey is on a visit to Iran, though the prime minister himself is in Turkey his agenda is still locked up to Gaza, whereas our press and our agenda are busy with the discussions on the  shift of axis.

 

As Turkey unnecessarily and generously wasted its chance of UN Security Council Temporary membership on behalf of Iran, now it fails to act despite the screams from Kyrgyzstan. Similarly, we have not yet activated CICA and the Organization of Turkish Presidents Summit. In the face of a crisis to which Turkey has caught unprepared and inadequate, Minister of Foreign Affairs Ahmet Davutoglu has not visit Bishkek, Astana and Tashkent yet and has contended with a statement about sending a sub-level delegation to Kyrgyzstan. This reveals an axis preference of Turkey instead of an axis shift. Therefore, it seems improbable that Turkey shall/want to take the initiative for the settlement of the conflict in Kyrgyzstan. However, the irrelevance of Turkey to the region shall have severe consequences in the long term.

 

 

Aside from Turkey, what should other states should do also be examined. The call of the Roza Otunbayeva, the President of the temporary administration of Kyrgyzstan, from Russia for an intervention is rejected by Kremlin. It looks like that Moscow was unwilling for a new adventure including Uzbekistan.

 

Another regional organization Shanghai Cooperation Organization neither has much to do. Yet, this organization has lately become a field of competition between Russia and China. Russia will be unwilling to insert a military unit involving China to the Middle East. However, this does not mean that this gate is completely closed.

 

Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) can be accepted as an organization most likely to intervene. CSTO is the sole organization that can send troops to the region. However, to the initial request, this organization made a statement that they remain against the intervention to the internal conflicts. Yet, as the incidents deteriorated, CSTO comprising Russia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Armenia as member states, convened in Moscow. The Secretary of Russian Security Council Nikolay Patruşev maintained that they are evaluating all the alternatives including sending peace-keeping troops to the region. Maintaining that all the measures will be coordinated within the shortest time the Russian authority pointed out that they reached a consensus on a preventative measure package. If CSTO decides to send peace-keeping forces to the region it should carry out this act in coordination with the United Nations. In such a situation Turkey should instantly get involved. As a temporary member of UN Security Council, Turkey should conduct an emergency meeting with the permanent members Russia and the USA. It should not be claimed that Turkey has already confronted with the UN and US on Iran problem and should not get involved in this matter. Yet there exists no room for grudge and hostility in diplomacy.

 

There are many reasons under these conflicts. One should not look for only one motivation. One of the most important reasons is (as we have already mentioned persistently on our previous analysis) that Roza Otunbayeva is not a typical Middle Eastern rigid leader. Under the leadership of soft and weak president Otunbayeva, such clashes were in any case expected.

 

Another reason can be the support of the proponents of the overthrown leader Kurmanek Bakiyev and the Uzbeks for Otunbayeva. Thus for that reason, Bakiyev who is very powerful in South should be recalled to attend the elections and the he should calm down his supporters. Bakiyev should be brought back and he should get to South as an ordinary citizen and control his supporters.

  

The criminal situation in the region should not be neglected. The main criminal organizations in the Middle East are placed in this region. Besides, it should also be remembered that drug trafficking going abroad also follows this route

 

These conflicts may also be about the referendum to be hold on June 27. This referendum will be hold for Interim Government President Roza Otunbayeva to serve until 2012 without an election.

 

The rapid rise of Uzbek population in Kyrgyzstan brings the perception of this as a threat of south becoming Uzbek. The flight of Uzbeks in the region after the clashes erupted to the neighbor Uzbekistan and the easing of this by the local administration may prove this thesis right.