It mentions the closure of Global Involvement through Education (Глобальное сотрудничество через образование), CAFÉ in Kokand and Ferghana and two Korean NGOs, the «Institute of Asia Culture and Development» (Институт азиатской культуры и развития) and the «Korean Foundation for World Aid» (Фонд Всемирная корейская помощь), on the grounds that their use a humanitarian cover to proselytise (which, in these cases, is mostly true BTW).

“You can see the effect already”, Volosevich says. “The ‘patrols’ of Jehova Witnesses, a familiar sight a while ago, disappeared from the streets of the capital”. Volosevich tries to explain the causes of this rather recent and increasing anti-evangelist campaign: “Why are peaceful Christians being treated the same way as radical Islamists?”

According to him, the fact that they ‘spread alien Western values’ or ‘help foster Orange revolutions’ are only excuses. He suggests that since a few years, the Tashkent regime understood that that fact that while it cracked down on every independent expression of the Islamic faith, evangelists could openly proselytise, caused a lot resentment and inter-confessional hatred that can turn against the regime.

“почему христианам в Узбекистане разрешено заниматься миссионерской деятельностью, а мусульманам не разрешается пропагандировать даже свою собственную религию? Получается, что в исконно мусульманской стране практикуется дискриминация мусульман?..”

And while it can not, and will not, make any concession towards Islam and the Muslims because it is convinced that Islam, by nature, is violent, extremist and out to overthrow the regime and take state power anyway, it decided to take on the Christian sects.

Any views on this?

I do not agree though that the present harassment of Christian sects can be equalised with the persecution of Muslims in Uzbekistan. The latter was, and is, a much larger and much more vicious move that affects larger sways of the population than the former.

Some people may argue that militant Islamists are far more violent and far more of a threat than Christian evangelists. Well, the first are much more noisy and spectacular indeed — and the “threat” they pose has often been inflated for political reasons (besides, not all violence by Muslims, where it occurs, aims at an ‘Islamic state’, ‘the restoration of a caliphate’ and other fantasies; Muslims have the right to defend themselves against aggression and brutal oppression if there are no other means).

Even if evangelists may not be violent, the social damage they cause is there and much more subtle. Some do good things and are inspired by faith without actually proselytising indeed. Yet several others are sects. And sects do what they do: brainwashing vulnerable youth and women (it’s no coincidence that many focus on orphanages, for orphans are easy prey); the destruction of families by consciously setting up youth against their folks; luring people into conversion with promises of money, scholarships in the West and jobs; even semi-forced conversions (especially employers’ pressure, like I know one example in Taraz, Kazakhstan); also, for years, certain regimes and embassies were in cahoots with evangelists (most obvious in Kyrgyzstan under the former regime).

BTW, I found *part* (not all) of the Western(-oriented) aid and diplo community to be always *very* double-standarded towards the persecution on Muslims in Uzbekistan; that’s why I can not suppress a little Schadenfreude now that they get *a bit* of a taste of it themselves.

We (as I work for a secular NGO) have no real hidden agendas. Ok, these are not all NGOs, that’s sure. Our approach is theoretically oriented according to the basic needs of vulnerable people and we are free of any religious or ideologic overkill. But even for CAFE (despite their missonaric intention), they have real projects that try to improve the lives of people (like orphanages in Tashkent) and are not all “bad” or “importative”.

NGOs must have a clear and as much as possible neutral mandate, otherwise it does not work that well. And it must be clear that we should work for the people and not some screwed up directors or parties. If there is not announced need from people, bad luck, then we have to leave.

Beside all of this. Uzbekistan does not have any kind of media left that can truely report about the situation there. So maybe another function of NGOs can be to show a very naive way of “international solidarity”.

On one hand, yes: many of the Western NGOs which are given the boot promote non-viable, even alien, Western concepts; do have hidden agendas which I don’t like as well (eg. CAFE and CADA are basically cover-ups for evangelist sects); often, in no way represent what Olivier Roy called ‘civil society as it is’; and an overkill of NGO’s and aid projects is just not healthy for a society because it strengthens a culture of dependecy and handouts (just take a look at Kyrgyzstan, for example).

This said, the whole move in Uzb is in no way something that is to ‘facilitate economic growth’, ‘affirm independence’ or ‘not wanting to be treated like a third world country’. I mean, the regime and its goons are not that ‘patriotic’ and ‘independent-minded’ when it comes to pocket IFI and IO $$$€€€. It’s all about a doomed regime anxiously trying to safeguard raw power — nothing more, nothing less.

“for obligations the Uzbek government does not fullfill (e.g. the Child Rights Convention that Uzbekistan signed but still pushes childen every year into the harvesting of cotton that is a clear breach of this convention).”

Look, Uzbekistan and other Southern Soviet republics have signed tons of conventions, cooperation agreements and what all. The reality is that, by doing so, their ‘power elites’ basically continued what they did under de USSR: pay lip service to the party line, make sure the stats and reports are what they want to read, and cash in the subsidies/granst/IFI loans etc.

Also, this is a region were formal institutions and agreements have no value at all when push comes to shove. That IFIs and IO’s have obviously not understood that by now is either a matter of bad will or hallucinating gullibility and outlandishness of their country reps and HQ desks.