DEBUNKING THE LATEST RUMOR

Manas Airbase 

by Patrick Armstrong

ISSUE: Manas Airbase. In 2001 the USA leased part of the Manas airfield in the Kyrgyz Republic to support US and Allied operations in Afghanistan. This month, President Bakiyev announced that he would seek to close the base. The Kyrgyz Republic Parliament will discuss the issue on 19 February.

INTERPRETATION: Many in the West saw Bakiyev as a puppet and the closure being orchestrated in Moscow so as to embarrass President Obama. “Bakiyev Pleases Moscow” (Jamestown Foundation) “Under Vladimir Putin, Russia has been trying to reclaim the influence it once had in the former Central Asian Soviet republics, so Russian pressure on Kyrgyzstan is not unexpected.” (BBC) “"I think that the principal motivation is to reassert Russian influence and get visible U.S. presence out of former Soviet republics," said retired Adm. William J. Fallon” (Huffington Post) “Russia Offers Kind Words, but Its Fist Is Clenched” (NYT). Most of these accounts mention Bakiyev’s objections but seem to regard them as a cover for Russian machinations.

COMMENT: But Bakiyev has long been frustrated with the relationship with Washington. “The president said he had repeatedly suggested that the US side should review the airbase agreement and raise the leasing fee for the airbase, but the suggestion was ignored. He added that the base closure was also caused by violations of law by US military personnel, including the killing of a Kyrgyz national by a US soldier in December 2006.”

There are other reasons why the issue has become a significant challenge:

•  The possibility that US forces might use the base to attack Iran or gather intelligence on China. 
  
•  The lack of the “trickle-down” benefits that may have been expected.
  
•  Concerns over the initial, possibly corrupt, agreement with the former President of the Kyrgyz Republic.
  
•  Growing scepticism about the effectiveness and length of the Afghanistan operation.
  
•  The conviction that Washington regards the Kyrgyz Republic as a third-rate country to be taken for granted. Media treatments that assume Bakiyev is Moscow’s puppet will not help this impression.
  

CONCLUSION: To regard Bakiyev’s decision (which may yet be reversed) as something planned in Moscow is to grossly oversimplify the issue and make the common error of singling out Moscow as the only party to the decision.

FURTHER READING: John CK Daly: “The Manas Disillusionment”. 

Photo source: www.defendamerica.mil 

Comments

[Patrick Armstrong]

Note that in the new agreement (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090623/twl-kyrgyzstan-allows-us-to-keep-using-b-2802f3e.html) Bishkek appears to have got most of what it wanted:
1. A lot more money, not just three times as much for the annual rent but another $100 million for other programs.
2. The promise that the base "will be used for the transport of non-military goods of a commercial nature, including construction materials, medicine, fuel, water and clothing"; in short, nothing to do with Iran or China.

So, Bishkek has effectively negotiated an improvement from its point of view.