Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Democracy at LargeElectoral Observation and NGO Coalitions in Kyrgyzstan

Democracy at Large: Electoral Observation and NGO Coalitions in Kyrgyzstan [On March 23, 2005, the picture of a horse rider storming his way into the heart of the Kyrgyz presidency amid a raging crowd made its way round the world. This former Soviet republic suddenly became one of the major headlines on global media coverage during the popular insurrection labeled “the Tulip Revolution.”2 After Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan was the next to experience an original form of political transition in the postsocialist space. Each time the same scenario seemed to be replayed: during elections a coalition of opposition parties along with a coalition of NGOs claiming to be spokesmen of civil society, private media, and a youth movement succeeded in delegitimizing the results in favor of the incumbent power leading to its abdication. In the Kyrgyz case, the deposed president, Askar Akayev, having sought refuge in Moscow, immediately spoke of an “armed takeover” (perevarot). He denounced the interference of international organizations and American NGOs working for the promotion of democracy in his country to account for his defeat. On the contrary, one of the principal leaders of the insurrectional movement, Edil Baisalov, president of the NGO Koalitsia,3 congratulated himself on the event, seeing in it evidence of the vitality of civil society and local democratic forces. A similar polarization could be noted between powerful states and international institutions: on the one hand, Russian and Chinese authorities and the Shanghai cooperation group denounced the rebels’ armed takeover and insisted on the respect of sovereignty of states; on the other hand, the Western chanceries and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) supported the new government of Kurmanbek Bakiyev as the expression of a popular movement aspiring to democracy.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

Democracy at LargeElectoral Observation and NGO Coalitions in Kyrgyzstan

Part of the The Sciences Po Series in International Relations and Political Economy Book Series
Editors: Petric, Boris
Petric, Boris
Democracy at Large — Nov 11, 2015
Download PDF
25 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/democracy-at-large-electoral-observation-and-ngo-coalitions-in-PMOGCNSlD4

References (17)

Publisher
Palgrave Macmillan US
Copyright
© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Nature America Inc. 2012
ISBN
978-1-349-44124-2
Pages
49 –74
DOI
10.1057/9781137032768_3
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[On March 23, 2005, the picture of a horse rider storming his way into the heart of the Kyrgyz presidency amid a raging crowd made its way round the world. This former Soviet republic suddenly became one of the major headlines on global media coverage during the popular insurrection labeled “the Tulip Revolution.”2 After Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan was the next to experience an original form of political transition in the postsocialist space. Each time the same scenario seemed to be replayed: during elections a coalition of opposition parties along with a coalition of NGOs claiming to be spokesmen of civil society, private media, and a youth movement succeeded in delegitimizing the results in favor of the incumbent power leading to its abdication. In the Kyrgyz case, the deposed president, Askar Akayev, having sought refuge in Moscow, immediately spoke of an “armed takeover” (perevarot). He denounced the interference of international organizations and American NGOs working for the promotion of democracy in his country to account for his defeat. On the contrary, one of the principal leaders of the insurrectional movement, Edil Baisalov, president of the NGO Koalitsia,3 congratulated himself on the event, seeing in it evidence of the vitality of civil society and local democratic forces. A similar polarization could be noted between powerful states and international institutions: on the one hand, Russian and Chinese authorities and the Shanghai cooperation group denounced the rebels’ armed takeover and insisted on the respect of sovereignty of states; on the other hand, the Western chanceries and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) supported the new government of Kurmanbek Bakiyev as the expression of a popular movement aspiring to democracy.]

Published: Nov 11, 2015

Keywords: Civil Society; Transnational Actor; Shanghai Cooperation Organization; Youth Movement; Democracy Promotion

There are no references for this article.