Yes, Uzbekistan

By Dr. Chris Seiple on 17 September 2001

As our leaders and diplomats build a global coalition against terrorism, two tough questions remain: 1) Who can actually facilitate US ground troops for strikes against Afghanistan? and 2) Can it be done in such a way that does not realize Usama bin Laden’s real objective, that is, mobilizing Islam against the US and West? One country provides an answer to both of these questions: Uzbekistan.

Uzbekistan is a natural point of departure for sustained US military efforts. With Afghanistan at the center, consider the clockwise alternatives. From twelve to twelve-thirty is Uzbekistan. From twelve-thirty to two o'clock is Tajikistan. Despite being the only example of a coalition government that includes a previously armed Islamic opposition, Tajikistan is a failed state on a bad day and a Russian province on a good one (Russia's 201st Motorized Division never left this former Soviet province).

From two o'clock to seven o'clock is Pakistan. Given their previous support for the Taliban and the tremendous public sympathy for bin Laden and the Taliban, we cannot place significant troops in this environment. The forces needed to protect our troops would have to be bigger than the force conducting operations in Afghanistan. From seven to ten o'clock is Iran. While it is time for a new relationship with that country, Iran has sponsored terrorism and would not host US forces. From ten to twelve is Turkmenistan. It is a closed-society, a 17th century khanate in no rush to participate in the 21st Century.

Uzbekistan, on the other hand, is poised to provide more meaningful support than facilitating the small contingent of US troops reported to be in country. It has four airports (Tashkent, Jizzak, Churchik, and Termez) capable of enabling most US operations in Afghanistan. Critically, Uzbekistan also offers access to human intelligence, the linchpin of special operations. There are two million Uzbeks in northern Afghanistan and Uzbekistan has consistently supported them and the Northern Alliance with humanitarian aid. Most importantly, Uzbeks are genuinely warm to Americans and want to be connected to us. Uzbekistan provides what our forces need: stability, relative safety, and access.

A nation of moderate Muslims practicing the most liberal form of Islam (Hanafi), the Uzbeks are no strangers to radical Islamic terrorism. On February 16, 1999, the capital of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, was rocked by several bomb blasts meant for President Karimov. The perpetrator, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), has used every summer since then to infiltrate and attack Uzbekistan from Afghanistan. Its goal is to establish a Taliban-style government in Tashkent. It is no surprise that President Karimov has twice called for an international coalition against terrorism (at the December 1999 OSCE Summit in Istanbul and at the UN Millennial Summit in September 2000) or that the U.S. Department of State has designated the IMU a terrorist organization.

Critical to the IMU's longevity has been an accessible Afghan sanctuary, a lucrative drug-running operation to Russia and China, and a strong relationship with Usama bin Laden. This summer, the IMU and bin Laden officially joined the Taliban army. And while Uzbekistan has sometimes violated human rights in combating this threat, partnering with Uzbekistan is a practical opportunity to both strike back against terrorism and keep religious freedom and other human rights on the agenda of US-Uzbek relations.

Uzbekistan knows our enemy. It is eager for support in its fight against terrorism and is in a position to provide real military access for ours. And it is a necessary ally. For if we receive only rhetorical, diplomatic, intelligence, and airspace support from other Muslim countries -- as now seems likely from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia -- then bin Laden can more easily frame our response as an attack against Islam. At this critical juncture, the US simply cannot afford to ignore such a strategic partner.

Last updated 12 January 2009