Regime Transition in Central Asia: Stateness, Nationalism and Political Change in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan by Dagikhudo Dagiev

Author:Dagikhudo Dagiev [Dagiev, Dagikhudo]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: International Relations, Ethnic Studies, Social Science, Political Science, Regional Studies, General
ISBN: 9781134600694
Google: zTfhAQAAQBAJ
Goodreads: 20843246
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2013-10-30T00:00:00+00:00

6 Patrimonial nationalism in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan

The discourse of patrimonial nationalism has been employed by post-Communist leaders in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan as an unofficial state ideology through which these leaders have been able to emerge as national champions. It is neither civic nor ethno-nationalist, but operates between the two, incorporating elements of both. They have been able to rebuild new identities upon their Soviet-era titular identities, and have established ‘modern states’ in their respective countries. The use of patrimonial nationalism has subsequently led to the emergence of presidential personality cults in these two countries. It is through this ideology that elites have created a powerful propaganda machine with the support of academics and the state media to foster and encourage a national consciousness, whilst the presidents as the national leaders have been posited at the apex of these nation- and state-building projects. This chapter argues further that the leadership in post-Communist Central Asia, with the collapse of Communist ideology, felt that there was a need for a new ideology that would provide a stronger sense of national identity in order to cement the unity of their states and societies and prevent any breakaway attempts by ethnic minorities, neighbors, or even the penetration of such alien ideologies as Islamic radicalism, fundamentalism and terrorism.

Following the declaration of independence and the re-establishment of the modern Tajik and Uzbek states, patrimonial nationalism played a vivid role in the establishment of authoritarianism. The authoritarian political model created in post-Soviet Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, through the employment of the discourse of patrimonial nationalism, features the leader as the only political actor. Sovereignty is, to a large extent, rooted in the authority of the president, who exploits the wealth of his country and rules according to his will. The presidents’ authority over the central administration is almost absolute. Current political circumstances in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan suggest that loyalty should be to the state ideology, i.e. nationalism, whereas in reality this loyalty automatically passes to the persons of Presidents Karimov and Rahmon as national leaders. Through the employment of patrimonial nationalism as a state ideology, the ruling elites attempt to signify the ruler as a savior of the nation’s unity as well as the stateness of the country, or the founder of the modern nation-state who is often portrayed as a father figure, similar to post-Ottoman Atatürk in Turkey.1

In this vein, patrimonial nationalism provides the leader with enormous power over the state and its institutions. As Kanchan Chandra observes, ‘individual voters and elites in patronage-democracies are motivated by a desire for either material or physical goods or some combination of the two.’ Further, she asserts that there are ‘instrumental actors who invest in an identity because it offers them the best available means by which to obtain desirable benefits, and not because such identification is valuable in itself.’2 The elites in this category of states must be indigenous since ethnic identity plays a key role in legitimizing and protecting their own rule. A small group of people, often the

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.