The recent elections in three of the five Central Asian states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan) over the past two years have raised some concerns over the path that the states are taking in respect to democracy and the effect such will have on the environmental policy of the region. A brief view of the existing situation and how it appears to be evolving in the near future leads to the conclusion that the environment has become a priority area for the leaders of the Central Asian republics. The question remains whether the international community is providing necessary assistance and support.

Daphne Biliouri is an environmental policy consultant and analyst for Eurasia. She is currently based in the UK and is working on a variety of projects in the Central Asian region. She can be contacted at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

The democratisation process that has followed the collapse of the Soviet Union has transformed the existing economic order and political system within the five Central Asian republics. This past decade, newly elected Central Asian heads of state have had to deal with economic challenges, the collapse of social welfare systems, high levels of corruption, and, most importantly, a damaged environment and a non-existent environmental protection record. However, despite these daunting problems, the new aura of independence, along with the assistance of the international community has brought the hope of political stability and economic prosperity. Unfortunately, the recent elections in Kazakhstan in 1999 and Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan in 2000 have reinforced the authoritarian hold that the existing presidents have on their people and increased Western concern over undemocratic practises, including manipulated electoral processes in the region.

Criticism from the west, with the US at the forefront, has intensified during the recent regional parliamentary and presidential elections. The dream pursued by the US and large international organizations, such as the OSCE, envisaged a Central Asia with a thriving free market economy, a strong civil society, and an extensive democratic regime. Many perceive that this vision can be realized with the assistance of foreign aid and the inclusion of international donor agencies in the national and regional strategy of the Central Asian states. Yet, despite these international perceptions, there is growing concern from within the region that the republics are following the wrong path of development. Furthermore, much of the Central Asian leadership believes that double standards are being set with respect to how each individual state is being dealt with by the international community. On the one hand, states like Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, with an abundance of natural resources in the Caspian Basin, have attracted the business interest of the US and other western states, who have shown eagerness to ensure that democratisation and modernization of the political and economic climate occurs. On the other hand, because they have little to offer in return, states like Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are battling to attract much-needed foreign investment. Based on this division, it can be argued that the west is ready to turn a blind eye to many of the undemocratic tendencies expressed by Kazakh President Nazarbayev, while Kyrgyz President Akayev's re-election faced a disproportionate amount of criticism from the international community.

Based on this predicament, the following sections will address the current state of national environmental policy in the Central Asian states after recent elections.

Kazakhstan

While the new political regime allowed the development of political ties with states that could provide Kazakhstan with modern environmental technologies, know-how, and advanced environmental legislation and policy, the same 'donor' states have been prioritizing their economic interests above environmental protection. In January 1999, Nazarbayev was re-elected president in a landslide victory. Based on the Law on the First President of Kazakhstan passed in June 2000, Nazarbayev has been granted powers for life. After the parliamentary elections in November 1999, the new government established a National Security Strategy effective until 2005 covering the military, economic, political, social, environmental, and public sectors. The new government hopes to maintain balanced economic development by enhancing the reform process and increasing foreign investment in the form of "solid investors". Nazarbayev is an authoritarian ruler who is not afraid to crack down when he feels it necessary. His model is that of a prosperous Asian state, expanding economically while remaining politically stable. Nazarbayev has professed admiration for South Korea and Singapore, both of which followed authoritarian styles of government. While repression is not as great as in other Central Asian states, such as Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, it appears as though Kazakhstan will remain authoritarian throughout the foreseeable future.

After the elections in 1999, Nazarbayev has continued to pursue a reformist approach regarding environmental legislation. Since its independence in 1991, Kazakhstan had to cope with a destructive environmental legacy left by the USSR while at the same time pursuing an economic policy based on increased natural resource exploitation. Radioactive and toxic chemical sites associated with former defense industries and test ranges are found throughout the country and pose serious health risks. The nuclear site of Semipalatinsk is one of the largest threats to the environment. Over the years, it has attracted the interest of the international community, and gradually, efforts have been taken to minimize the environmental threat that it poses. However, the issue of nuclear and toxic waste remains a problem, as a growing number of radioactive materials are being sold and transported to other countries.

With reference to particular environmental problems, it is worth expanding on the situation in two areas of growing national and international interest: the Aral Sea and the Caspian Sea. The Aral Sea is fed by the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya rivers, which pass desert areas that have been turned into irrigated farmland. In the 1950s and 1960s, massive schemes to bring water to rice and cotton crops were put in place to divert most of the fresh river waters feeding the Aral Sea. Only 10 per cent of the water that once fed the Aral now reaches it, now bringing with it large amounts of pesticides and other chemicals. As a result, the Aral, once the fourth largest inland sea, has lost over half its surface area since 1960 and continues to shrink. It is estimated that if immediate measures are not taken to control the drying of the Aral Sea, it will disappear by 2025. Islands have formed and the sea has split into several separate water bodies. The loss of this body of water has also changed the climate, leading to below average, freezing winters and summers where temperatures can soar to well over 40ºC. All of this has subsequently taken its toll on human health.

The Caspian Sea has also attracted the attention of the international community for over a decade partially due to its large deposits of oil and gas, and partially because it is the breeding ground for sturgeon, the source of caviar. Oil drilling and growing pollution (due to industrial and toxic waste released from the river Volga) has led to the steady decline of the production of sturgeon. More importantly, the discovery of major oil deposits in the northern Caspian will lead to heavy exploitation and development of the area with potentially serious environmental consequences. Efforts to ensure environmental protection of the Caspian are dependent on the legal status of the Sea. As long as debates continue over the division of the Caspian amongst the littoral states, measures on ecological security will not likely be taken anytime soon. The escalating pollution of the Caspian Sea has had a devastating effect upon its ecology, as reflected by the dwindling numbers of seal and fish. For example, in September 2000, eight tons of dead fish were retrieved from a lake near Petropavlovsk-they had been poisoned by a chemical used as a weed killer in cotton production.

Uzbekistan

Due to an abundance of natural resources and environmental issues in common with Kazakhstan, such as the Aral Sea and water distribution, Uzbekistan faces similar problems. President Karimov's re-election in early 2000 indicated that despite the people's concern that he was responsible for the economic crisis facing their country, he is perceived as the lesser of two evils. In an attempt to offset discontent, Karimov has called for the development of a stronger national ideology in order to cope with internal changes. He therefore prioritized areas such as the achievement of a multiparty climate, battling of corruption in public life, the freedom of the media, the facilitation of NGO operations, and the continued integration of Uzbekistan into the international community. Meanwhile, in an effort to ensure the democratic nature of his government, Karimov signed a decree on legal reform aimed at enshrining individual, social, political, and economic rights. However, reform will be gradual without radical, immediate change. His style of governance resembles the old-guard communist approach with the government being highly centralized around the president and a small circle of advisers and officials.

Regarding environmental issues, the biggest problem facing Uzbekistan has been the drying up of the Aral Sea caused by poor water management over an extended period. The large amounts of salt and dust that are blown from the exposed seabed have caused health hazards for the surrounding population, extending as far as the Pamir Mountains. International efforts have commenced, but the implementation of concrete measures is still not evident. Apart from the loss of water supplies, remaining water resources are also faced with increasing levels of pollution from agricultural chemicals and industrial waste carried to the Aral Sea via the river network. In an effort to battle the negative effects of the disappearance of the Aral Sea, the government has implemented and supported the Aral Sea Programme, aiming to address long term water and land use management problems of the region while providing, on a short term basis, support towards the immediate needs of the populations within the worst effected areas.

Kyrgyzstan

Kyrgyzstan, unlike the other Central Asia states addressed above, has insignificant reserves of natural resources and is highly dependent on its neighbours for its energy supply. It is, however, an upstream country, allowing it to develop its use of water resources for the development of hydroelectricity. Currently, hydroelectricity meets one fourth of the country's energy needs, though estimates say more can be generated with the proper infrastructure and economic assistance.

The political climate that prevails in the country has characterized this small and fairly poor state-in comparison to its neighbours-as an 'island of democracy' within the Central Asian region. Over the past decade, President Akayev has demonstrated signs of progressive leadership, and although the reforms that have been implemented over the years were more on paper rather than in real terms, Akayev is likely to continue with these reforms. Akayev's victory during the course of the 2000 presidential elections conducted in October was tarnished by reports of widespread election violations. The OSCE, the US and the European Union were quick to criticize the undemocratic nature of the elections and question the liberalism that Akayev had shown so far, as he himself has started to question the democratic process. Despite this, following his electoral victory, President Akayev addressed the nation calling for "fundamental" reform of the state administration system to allow for further political and economic development. He stated that at least 30 per cent of all civil servant jobs would be cut to fight incompetence and corruption. Furthermore, Akayev noted that he plans to introduce a system of local self-government with more power and funding going to local authorities.

This factor is of particular importance to the development of a plausible environmental strategy, as the status of the existing governmental agencies for environmental protection has proved inadequate and tarnished by unclear distribution of authority. An additional positive factor in Kyrgyzstan that has been missing from the existing national strategy in the other Central Asian states that were mentioned above has been the rapid increase in the number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) since 1998, operating mainly in the areas of education, women's issues, and the environment. Environmental NGOs have been created with the assistance of grants from international bodies and have demonstrated the potential for effective work, particularly in their efforts to change people's attitude towards environmental problems. Needless to say, NGOs are also faced with a long list of problems, such as the lack of dissemination of information and cooperation between existing interest groups, causing duplication of efforts amongst NGOs and competition for external financial support.

In reference to specific environmental issues, the main Kyrgyz concern has been the poorly maintained water reservoirs-a legacy from the Soviet period-that have contaminated the water supply, spreading waterborne diseases that affect the health of the entire population. Additionally, the lack of protected areas and the increasing levels of illegal hunting and trading of endangered species along with deforestation have led to the loss of bio-diversity. However, the incident that most attracted the interest of the international community was the cyanide spill in Lake Issyk-Kul in May 1998. Caused by an accident involving a truck carrying sodium cyanide for the Kumtor gold mine, the spill led to the poisoning of 2,500 people. Similar accidents have taken place and continue to occur without receiving the appropriate publicity or governmental attention.

Regional Approach

Overall, what these brief overviews of the Central Asian states indicates is that despite a relatively diverse economic and political stance, they all have become increasingly aware of the importance of incorporating environmental strategy within the realm of economic development. They have all established, or are in the process of establishing, a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) for environmental protection. Kazakhstan has been in the lead with a plan for sustainable development introduced as a priority in the government's Development Strategy while its NEAP has been widely publicized and integrated in the social and economic reform process. The NEAP has set four priority sectors: creation of a safe environment, balanced use of natural resources, conservation of bio-diversity, and environmental education. The NEAP is envisaged to develop in four stages: 1998-2000; 2001-2010; 2011-2020; and 2021-2030.

Uzbekistan is also currently preparing, with the assistance of the World Bank, a NEAP. Major components of Uzbekistan's Action Plan will be a strategy to sustain bio-diversity and a focus on unified planning in the promotion of environmental protection. The NEAP will set three tasks: improvement of environmental conditions in order to ensure sufficient social and health conditions for the people, effective use of natural resources, and protection of vulnerable ecosystems. Finally, on similar lines, a Kyrgyz NEAP exists and will be reassessed in the aftermath of the presidential elections to ensure coverage of natural resources sustainability and the protection of bio-diversity.

In addition to the national programs, the Central Asian states have also invested in the development of environmental strategies at a regional level. Although the states have diverse economic prospects for future development, most of the environmental issues that prevail in Central Asia are regional in nature. A regional approach regarding environmental action is ready to be implemented alongside a country-specific line of action. This also shows once again the willingness of the existing leaders to cooperate in certain areas that may enhance further political and economic stability.

Despite criticism from the West, it is possible that the existing government regimes will ensure the faster implementation of environmental strategies within the short and medium term. Corruption, inadequate legal structures, economic constraints, and the limitations of environmental government agencies to cope with existing problems, however, may be some of the factors that delay further development. These reasons are why a regional approach has been gradually developing and has finally become a reality this year. The realization of a regional scheme was seen in the formation of a Central Asian Regional Environmental Centre (CAREC). On this basis, western donors have committed modest funds to create the regional centre. However, the interest of the donor agencies has itself been more based on rhetoric than action. Since 1998 when the decision was reached to create the CAREC, it has taken 2 years for the CAREC to establish its headquarters in Almaty, Kazakhstan. A board of directors, consisting of representatives from the five states, the scientific and the NGO community and the donor agencies, has been aiming to establish and carry out its working plan for 2000-2001 as soon as the legal issues regarding its formation are finalized.

The Role of International Donor Agencies in Promoting the Environment

Environmental problems in the region have created an opportunity for western states to intervene, because both the international community and the leadership of the Central Asian states recognize the need for assistance in tackling existing environmental problems. Therefore, efforts have taken place over the past decade to address the desiccation of the Aral Sea and minimize the possibility of regional conflict over the distribution of freshwater resources. Projects initiated by USAID (United States Agency for International Development) were perceived by the US as the leading component in ensuring regional co-operation and facilitating the exploration of energy resources in the Caspian Basin. It is obvious that such interest over the regional environmental issues was predicated on the economic interests of the US. Eager to show its commitment to stability in Central Asia, it set up projects to improve water quality and public health conditions in the hardest hit regions near the Aral Sea. As part of these efforts, the State Department opened a regional environmental office in Tashkent, Uzbekistan to coordinate US environmental efforts. Nevertheless, no concrete improvements have been observed in the region. Once it was ensured that economic advancement could proceed without the necessity for environmental resolutions, concrete measures to address some of the most serious environmental issues were abandoned or postponed.

The World Bank Group has prepared this year a new environmental strategy that will integrate environmental concerns into its mainstream efforts to alleviate poverty and ensure economic development. How and whether this new environmental strategy will be implemented in Central Asia will have to be seen in the next few years. The strategy will try to combine advancements in living and health conditions of the populations by addressing environmental issues, such as air pollution, toxic waste disposal and water management. It will also try to reduce environmental risks created by natural disasters, such as drought and desertification. Similar approaches based on the alleviation of poverty in conjunction with environmental protection have been established by other international donor agencies. For example, the Asian Development Bank aims to complete within 2001-2002 a project on institutional development and capacity building that will allow the assessment and restructuring of existing national environmental strategies to cope with the increasing degradation of the Central Asian natural environment. Emphasis has been given to the incorporation of environmental sustainability into the economic activities of any body involved in the economic development of the region. However, once again, concerns have been expressed about how sincere these efforts have been particularly since some of these international agencies have been constantly criticized for funding projects that have negative effects on the environment. Additionally, any positive results that may arise from the implementation of aid projects are overshadowed by the pressure posed to the governments of Central Asia to repay the loans that were granted to them to facilitate economic development and modernization. International donor agencies must take measures to integrate environmental considerations into their lending practises and allow the states to reach a sufficient level of economic development that will allow them to proceed safely with the repayments of any loans.

Conclusion

Based on the evidence that has been provided over the years concerning the ruling regimes of the Central Asian states and on the results of recent elections, it is only natural to assume that regional environmental strategies will not achieve their goals in the near future. Saturated by deficiencies in education, technical implementation and policy structure and inefficiencies concerning economic resources, environmental protection is still an idea presented on paper that will slowly evolve into action. Despite their inadequacies and controversial courses of action, the existing governments will intensify their efforts to address environmental questions both on a national and regional level. The stakes are too high, and with economic development becoming increasingly dependent on environmental stability, a concrete strategy must be developed and implemented. The fact remains, however, that nothing can be achieved without the support of the international community and its financial and technical assistance. Pilot projects emphasizing natural resources management will have to continue to be designed, implemented, and evaluated, while a growing need to promote stronger public support for better management and commitment to the environmental improvement will be an essential and integral part for any success story.