From today’s Wall Street Journal editorial page, edifying news that Kyrgyzstan’s Tulip Revolution is still blooming one year later:

‘Island of Freedom’

By ROZA OTUNBAYEVA
March 24, 2006

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan — As protesters in Belarus demand a rerun of last Sunday’s presidential poll, and the people of Ukraine enjoy their recently won freedom at parliamentary elections there this weekend, my country celebrates the anniversary of the first peaceful transfer of power in Central Asia. A year ago today, the era when not just the president of the country, but also his entire family, stood above the people came to an end. From now on every new Kyrgyz leader knows that his term is decided and limited by the people he serves.

The Kyrgyz expect a lot of their leaders. In 1990, demonstrations of unhappy citizens forced the then-Communist Party chief out of office. The new president, a youthful academic named Askar Akayev, embodied the hopes and demands of the people to democratize and overhaul the country’s stagnant Soviet-style economy.

Fifteen years later, the Kyrgyz rose up again because President Akayev did not fulfill those aspirations. Poverty, corruption, clan-based politics, pseudo-democracy and the concentration of the country’s resources in his family’s hands eroded his legitimacy.

Some alleged “well-wishers” for my country maintain that our “Tulip Revolution” was nothing more than a coup d’etat. This term is used by those who want to rule forever or at most engineer a dynastic succession. Supporters of the previous regime, in order to discredit the Kyrgyz population’s honest desire for peaceful political change, claim the looting that occurred — which was in fact organized by them — was the true spirit of that popular uprising.

These same people relentlessly propagate the idea that the Kyrgyz revolution was funded by foreigners. This is nonsense. The revolution was born of popular outrage at the tyranny, political immorality and hopeless poverty into which Kyrgyzstan had descended. The authors of the uprising, and the resources that made it possible, were the Kyrgyz people.

Our revolution broke the model of “managed elections.” Until last year, authorities ingenuously manipulated election technologies to win any election. In the 21st century, Stalin’s dictum holds true in most post-Soviet countries: What is important is not how votes are cast, but how they’re counted. We were forced to resort to revolutionary methods in order to end this never-ending fraud.

The revolution we made has dramatically changed the mentality and worldview of our citizens. The Kyrgyz people are no longer willing to live by the old rules and will not tolerate power being usurped again. This is why the issue of constitutional reform and the creation of a stronger parliament, elected on the basis of party lists (rather than single member mandates), are being so keenly debated in Kyrgyzstan.

In this past year we have seen greater freedom of press and television, and freedom of assembly has been won back. The political arena has been considerably broadened, creating increased opportunities for the development of political parties and youth organizations. Nongovernmental organizations remain dynamic and influential. The authorities and the society understand the role of political opposition better.

Kyrgyzstan is an island of freedom and democracy in Central Asia. Students from neighboring countries including Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan seek to study in our universities. Our independent printing press, brought by Freedom House, continues to publish independent newspapers from around the region.

Of course, many pressing problems created in the previous 15 years haven’t been solved. Regional factionalism, clan-based politics, ethnic tensions, pervasive corruption and organized crime haven’t gone away. Small and medium-size enterprises, as well as foreign investors, require a better economic environment in order to create enough new jobs. The judiciary, police, tax and customs agencies require serious reform. The current president, Kurmanbek Bakiyev, needs to embrace a government based on checks and balances, which is more stable and safer for everyone, including him.

And yet we have a historic opportunity. What a waste it would be to miss it. The new government has the time and needs to find the will to renew and refocus its efforts.

After the revolution the country needs stability, but not at the cost of authoritarian rule. The achievements of last March can only be sustained by deepening our commitment to pluralism, political freedom and competition, and not allowing the state to again dominate the society. The people of Kyrgyzstan will accept nothing less.

Ms. Otunbayeva, a former Kyrgyz foreign minister, is co-chairperson of the Asaba Party.

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114314937975906726.html