What follows is an English translation of the post that originally appeared on the Russian-language version of neweurasia Uzbekistan blog.

A post regarding the tragic fate of civil society in Uzbekistan was recently published on the English-language version of this blog. Without going too much into detail I would simply like to note that though the factual description of events might be true, however, the very interpretation of those can only make one sigh.

In short, the post talks about some organization created at the initiative of the government under a pathetic name of the NANNOUz, which stands for the National Association of Non-state Non-commercial Organizations of Uzbekistan. This body is said to have been founded with the sole purpose of spying on the local NGOs and exercising overwhelming control over their activities.

Dear nonprofits, the present situation does not surprise me after all since the single most important function of the Uzbek government is to suppress any initiatives “coming from below”, and this is no secret but rather an unfortunate reality of our everyday lives. However, there is something else that upsets and bewilders me about this whole situation.

The question I keep asking myself over and over again is: when shall we learn to analyze a situation not only from the position of a passive victim that has been repeatedly abused and insulted by some evil force from above but in such a way as to admit own our fault at letting things happen that way? Do we ever admit, at least to ourselves, that had we not faltered here and there and had we put more effort and determination in this and that, they wouldn’t have been able to wipe out all our efforts so easily?

I wonder whether in the 12-13 years of its existence the civic sector in Uzbekistan has nothing to be proud of, other than a bunch of useless, good-for-nothing projects designed and implemented for the sole purpose of getting the money out of foreign donors and the effect from which does not extend any further than some insignificant injection into the local service sector? What has been the supposed benefit from all the loud clamoring that Uzbek NGOs have been engaged in over the past years? What has been the worth of the so-called public benefit organizations?

In my opinion, to ascertain the death of civil society would be at least premature at this time since civil society per se never actually existed in Uzbekistan even back during the “golden era” of international presence when foreign foundations would generously hand out subsidies to almost any NGO wishing to receive support. The whole struggle for the formation of a “strong, independent and sustainable” civil society has in fact turned into the hunting for grants and fierce competition among NGOs where NGO leaders would not spare any dirty methods and engage in various machinations in pursuit of personal enrichment. And it is NGOs themselves that opposed and resisted any consolidation of civic organizations at the associational level thereby weakening the overall potential of the entire NGO community because of the low materialistic interests entertained by individual nonprofit leaders. So what has come of all advocacy trainings, capacity building programs and so on and so forth? Isn’t it only natural then that at a time when the government is conducting its ruthless campaign against civic organizations we are unable to stand up for our cause? This is nothing but downright self-betrayal…

But what if Uzbek NGOs had devoted more time and effort to making their activities truly viable and useful to their beneficiaries by rendering social services to the vulnerable segments of population and making their impact felt in the long term? Wouldn’t that have helped NGOs to actually become the third most powerful sector along with the state and the private sector? Doesn’t that in turn mean that the interests and energies of such a strong actor would have been much more difficult to ignore and diminish?

It seems that Russians have ended the civil society debate by clearly holding that after 10 years of pseudo-democratic rhetoric there is no civil society in Russia, hence the death of this foreign concept would not make much sense. This is what V A Gutorov noted in his report entitled “MODERN CONCEPTIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY”:

In a situation where there is practically no professional union movement and no pressure groups capable of protecting the interests of dispossessed citizens it is, in my opinion, premature to talk about the formation of civil society.

What about Uzbekistan in this respect then? It sounds more like a rhetorical question now.

I feel ashamed and hurt for all of us for we are acting before the international community like we are innocent, noble and virtuous thus masking the weakness of our spirit and convictions. Sooner or later we will eventually have to deal with this “passive victim mentality” and quite seriously too, otherwise the whole idea of the revival of our nation will for long remain an unlikely prospect.

I only hope that it won’t be too late since there is a risk that this pattern has already become an integral part of our self-consciousness, of our, so to say, “national identity”. This is all I would want to convey to my dear fellow colleagues and friends, former NGO activists. It seems that we had enough of this whining about how bad the guys up there are while we are locked up here, poor victims, and solemnly and proudly carry our heavy burden. This refrain is rather outdated and the international organizations are now less likely to buy in to this kind of pleading unlike before. So it seems like it is exactly the time to admit, first to ourselves, that deep inside we are all weak and hypocritical and when talking about democracy and respect for human rights today we easily forget about our commitment to the said sacred ideals the next day when action is needed or as soon as we are offered something more beneficial in terms of filling our pockets and less dangerous to our livelihood.

This is the kind of sad impression I have about Uzbekistan’s NGO community and the mere fact that the authoritarian state is conducting a campaign against it does not lend much credit to it and won’t make me believe in its righteousness and utility to society. Rather this shows how irresponsible and disgusting our attitude towards our obligations and duties before the society has been so far. To talk about the efficacy of civic organizations that act outside the context of local problems and have no interested beneficiaries on the ground without any healthy mechanisms of interaction with the state is clearly absurd. It seems that the Uzbek NGOs have consciously done all in their power to delay reaching maturity and sustainability thereby wishing to further qualify for foreign subsidies and donations. Instead it would have been more logical to achieve some real sustainability and independence over this period, for example, by promoting legislative initiatives on the introduction and development of an organized system under which NGOs would be able to bid on state contracts for rendering services to the most vulnerable population groups which could also include other mechanisms such as state grants and purchase orders or various business activities to support their nonprofit programs. However, Uzbek NGOs have chosen absolute dependence on external funding which has predictably led the domestic civic sector to the present state of complete degradation.

As a result, we get what we have, that is the absence of any leverage over public opinion and total inability to take any consolidated action in protest of barbaric rules imposed by the government.