CC BY
20
since we lack elections and imitation of democratic elections exists by us".
"Kavkazski uzel v geopoliticheskih prioritetah Rossii",
M, 2010, p. 153-181.
M. Akulova,
cand. of sciences (philosophy) THE WORLD DEMOCRACY AND TAJIKISTAN
The world democracy exists as conflictive integrity consisting of many parts. These are the countries of the world democracy in America, Europe, so-called sovereign democracy of the Russian Federation, the different alliances of some countries in Europe, the new states of EU and NATO and so on. At the same time the world democracy under reservations also includes the CIS countries, the countries of Central Asia being officially voted democratic though sometimes the politicians, for example, of USA and the other countries name the countries of Central Asia as authoritarian regimes or even dictatorships in their analytical notes. Often many countries name them as hydrides being the democratic moments and authoritarianism and also half-authoritarian regimes in the analytical literature. Having the first romantic hopes for near democratization the political elite of the world democracy was enthusiastic: coming mass transfer to democracy seemed to be inevitable. M. Lipman writes that "it concerns not only a communist block. Beginning from the last quarter of XX century a political regime relaxation affected in varying degree about thousands countries. It began from the right-wing dictatorship fall in Spain, Portugal and Greece and then in Latin American countries the elective civil power changed the army juntas; in the middle of 80-ss
authoritarian regimes in the South-East Asia were relaxed and then velvet and non-velvet revolutions came in the Eastern Europe and the USSR dissolution came next but during the last years one notes some relaxation of the political mores n the South of Africa and even somewhere in the Middle East".
In spite of geopolitical feuding and contradiction which like a shadow continue feuding of the cold war dividing it into the West and the East; nevertheless there was some progress in transformation of societies and states to a formal democracy in the world beginning with the USSR dissolution. "But only 20 countries among this thousand, -M. Lipman writes, - can boast about democratic achievements. These are, in particular, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and also Estonia and Slovenia, Chili and Taiwan. Slovakia, Mexico, Brazil, Philippines, the South Korea and some others continue move to democracy".
Ad interim approximately 80 countries were on the point of directing towards democracy but soon they hold up: backward motion to dictatorship (like in Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan) is seldom but democratic achievements aren't great".
The American politician T. Karozers describes such regimes in the following way: "A political process is somehow democratic as there is a relative freedom of actions for opposition parties and independent civil society and also regular elections and democratic constitution. But at the same time... the citizen rights are presented badly; their political activity is insignificant and practically is limited by a participation in elections; state power often violate the law, election legitimacy is doubtful, the citizen trust for state institutions is at a very low level but the state itself isn't effective. So, we can say that a world is divided not only into democracy civilization and non-democratic countries but also into democracy civilization and the countries being differed in their regime character from totalitarianism and authoritarianism up to half-
authoritarianism proclaiming democracy building, i.e. formally democratic.
Tajikistan officially identifies itself as a legal, secular, democratic and social state based on its Constitution. However, it isn't officially a reason to number the country among the world of advanced democracy. Considering itself as the country of democracy Tajikistan distinguishes itself from the countries of Euro-Atlantic region as the country not having advanced form of democracy. The most important arguments for the ideologists of official Dushanbe are the facts of centuries-old development of democracy in Europe and America.
Nevertheless, a constitutional declaration of democracy in Tajikistan and the intention to build its advanced forms in the country give ground to speak about correlation of the world democracy and Tajikistan as the whole and its part taking into account, of course, the qualitative difference between the whole and its part. There emerged the problem in Europe on its attitude towards the countries of Central Asia and the CIS countries during the period of becoming independent of the post-soviet area countries and one decided to include them into the European process in the system of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. This resolution was dictated, in all probability, to begin approaching of non-communist post-soviet area with Euro-Atlantic region concerning the security problems in order not to distance the CIS countries from Europe and to preserve the countries of Central Asia from slipping into unpredictable relations with non-democratic world - the Islamic world and China. A. Malashenko in his book "How are we to democratize Islam?" writes: "Absolute external control over the situation within the Moslem ummah and also its isolation and parallel development with the West are impossible. The idea of convergence being once popular and used to a socialist camp is more productive here which was also considered as a way to secure
itself against communism aggression". These words are completely applied to Tajikistan where the population is the Moslems having the Islamic mentality and culture.
Democracy by the way of democratic solving of state and social problems is the way Tajikistan follows. As a whole the peace was developed in the country all around based on democracy principles. For example, it concerns interethnic relations in the country and international relations in the world when we mean the Tajikistan policy.
In Tajikistan the Uzbeks, the Kirghiz, the Turkmen, the Russians and the Russian -speaking and the other nationalities live together with the Tajik. The relations between the Tajik and the Uzbeks are also based on admission of the national-cultural interests of the Uzbeks in Tajikistan on the base of the Constitution. The languages and culture of the national minorities in Tajikistan aren't infringed upon but are freely developed. The state language using in the office work is a measure of the state language protection not being something more vigorous in comparison with the other countries. The Uzbek children go to the Uzbek schools and learn the native language and there is a cultural-national community of the Uzbeks. The interests of the different regions are taken into account in the interregional relations with the national interest priority.
In Tajikistan the population is represented not only by the regions and the different nationalities but also by the different confessions, political groupings - the communists, the Islamists, the different democrats, the atheists and the ethnic Moslems, the Tajik, the Uzbeks, the Kirghiz, the Russians and the Russian-speaking, the Turkmen and the others. Having this diversity one should build such relations which would exclude extremism and extreme. The unity of diversity is achieved on the base of the country Constitution protecting the relations from infringement. One built all these various relations
during the peace establishing in Tajikistan and these relations correspond to the democratic Constitution of Tajikistan according to the legal law. In order not to strain relations between Tajikistan and Uzbekistan one built up these relations in such a way in order not to interfere with the relations between the Tajik and the Uzbeks in Uzbekistan but the government of Uzbekistan doesn't interfere with the relations between the Uzbeks and the Tajik in Tajikistan.
Under these conditions the Tajik feat is one-sided respecting the Uzbek rights in Tajikistan unlike respecting the Tajik rights in Uzbekistan based on the Constitution of Tajikistan. One can't observe non-admissible extremes in Tajikistan according to the principles of peaceful democratic process. The important ground of the existing moments and fragments of democracy in Tajikistan is the principle enunciated by the President of Tajikistan, E. Rakhmon that nobody has the right to dictate his way of living and behavior for the others by force if they don't proceed from the human values and democratic rights and laws.
It's the important principle and so the country's internal policy and the political forces are peaceful. The Islamists, the communists, the democrats adhere to their own way of living and behavior of the democratic countries. One can also notice this principle in the citizen figures of Tajikistan: there are people in the yashmak, there is the youth without it but nobody makes the others being unlike them as the object of persecution; everybody lives peacefully.
Today the world democracy as the integrity uses the results of the peaceful principles of supreme power in Tajikistan but for the present doesn't set up these principles as the norms of the international law. The president's principle could be included into the international legal documents even if in Asia. In this case authoritarianism and half-authoritarianism's influence was weakened in many countries. Policy
democratization in the West is to be associated with the problems of its geopolitical beginning. If it's impossible as soon as possible then the problems of geo-policy beginning are to the foreground.
Tajikistan being a proclaimed part of the world democracy is in the space of this policy of the West which refused from immediate democratization of its regime in the name of the strategic advantages for some time owing to this half-authoritarian regime in the struggle against the Afgan taliby. The success in this walk of life, i.e. taliby's repression, gives USA and NATO a possibility to advance policy of the Anaconda's Ring against Russia and China and half-authoritarian states in Central Asia.
In the ratio of the whole and its part meaning the democratic world as the integrity and Tajikistan one should dwell on the issue such as freedom dimension. What is freedom and what is it for this world? Many scientific studies devoted to freedom problem pay attention to freedom dimension asking a question: freedom from somebody and from what and freedom for somebody and freedom for which purpose? It's a fundamental dimension of any liberation movement including mass movement and the political mass and a personality. The problem concerning freedom from what and somebody and freedom for something and somebody was also solved in the Tajik events of 90-ss of the last century. For the forces nationally tinged it was the problem on freedom for the nation development, the cultural development, the Tajik language protection from its supplanting from the official sphere. For the religious forces it was the problem on freedom from the state atheism and religion protection from the elimination Islam policy from the people life. For the democrats it was the problem on freedom from totalitarianism. But all the named forces sought to be free from the mentioned points. However, there were substantial differences concerning future problem. Everybody would like to have freedom of
conscience as freedom for from the state atheism but those who wanted freedom for the political Islam of the radical persuasion leading to a religious statehood were only in the depths of the religious forces. Of course, the freedom of conscience giving freedom for religion and the half-religious way of living and atheism depending on personal liberty was out of the question in such perspective.
Outstanding characteristics of democracy became more distinct in modern Tajikistan: the basics of legal statehood are being built and foundations of the civil society are established; authorities is voted and changed at the high and the local levels; there are mechanisms of indirect democracy (referendums) and there is a system of division of powers in the state; the main rights of a person are guaranteed (freedom of conscience, word, meetings, organizations and etc.); officially legal agencies aren't dependent of the executive authority; there is no leading ideology and political party; there emerges a free and competitive market having various forms of property; there is external independence (political and ideological) of mass communication and information media.
So, the country is in the power space of the world democracy and all the non-democratic forces have to take it into consideration adopting a democratic constitution and a formal democracy at least at the level of declarations. But this official democracy contains actual democratic structures and spheres one can't deny.
"Sovremennye gumanitarnye issledovaniya ", M, 2010, N3, p. 265-269.
