UZBEK FOREIGN MINISTER: HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT MAY

C O N F I D E N T I A L TASHKENT 000307

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SCA/CEN AND DRL

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/12/2018
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL UZ
SUBJECT: UZBEK FOREIGN MINISTER: HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT MAY
SET BACK RELATIONS AGAIN

Classified By: POLOFF R. FITZMAURICE FOR REASONS 1.4 (B, D)


1. (C) Summary: On March 12, the Ambassador was summoned to
a meeting with Foreign Minister Vladimir Norov at the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs in response to the release of the
2007 U.S. State Department Human Rights Report on March 11.
Norov was swift to condemn the report, which he characterized
as "an unfriendly act" and a return to the use of "double
standards" in the United States' relations with Uzbekistan.
He argued that the report was subjective, as it cited what he
claimed to be unreliable internet reports and human rights
activists who lacked credibility. Most significantly, Norov
suggested that one result of the report's release is that
President Karimov may now decide to decline an invitation to
attend the upcoming NATO Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council
(EAPC) summit in Bucharest on April 2 - 4. The Ambassador
reminded the Foreign Minister that the current report only
covered up to the end of calendar year 2007, and therefore
did not include the small but significant steps on human
rights the government had undertaken so far in 2008, such as
the amnesty of some political prisoners and the agreement
with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on
prison visits. The Ambassador emphasized to Norov that if
this continued then the 2008 report would likely be more
positive. More urgently, the Ambassador noted that both the
EU and the U.S. were facing decisions in late spring on
possible punitive measures, and the recent progress, if
reinforced by significant additional steps, could influence
these decisions. In the end, Norov's negative reaction was
probably more Central Asian-face saving than genuine
indignation over the depiction of Uzbekistan in the report,
which differed little from previous years and should have
come as no surprise. End summary.

FOREIGN MINISTER QUICKLY CONDEMNS REPORT
--------------


2. (C) On March 12, the Ambassador was summoned to a meeting
with Foreign Minister Vladimir Norov at the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs in response to the release of the 2007 U.S.
State Department Human Rights Report on March 11. Norov was
swift to condemn the report, which he characterized as "an
unfriendly act," "counterproductive," and a return to the use
of "double standards" in the United States' relations with
Uzbekistan. He argued that the Human Rights Report was
subjective, as it cited what he claimed to be unreliable
internet reports and human rights activists who lacked
credibility. Most significantly, Norov suggested that one
fall-out from the report's release is that President Karimov
may now decide to decline an invitation to attend the
upcoming NATO Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) summit
in Bucharest on April 2 - 4.


3. (C) Norov noted that President Karimov had been made
aware of the release of the report, which he said also had
been reported on by international news outlets reaching
Uzbekistan, including the satellite news station Euronews.
During the meeting, the Ambassador handed to Norov a copy of
the Human Rights Report and a Russian translation.

SAYS REPORT LIKELY TO BOLSTER RUSSIA'S HAND IN UZBEKISTAN
-------------- --------------


4. (C) Norov noted that relations with the United States
were improving "step-by-step," but warned that the report's
release had the potential to set back relations again and
strengthen Russia's hand in the region. While the United
States criticized Uzbekistan's human rights record, Norov
said that Russia was seeking to improve relations with
Uzbekistan. In particular, Norov noted the Russian company
Gazprom had signed an agreement favorable to Uzbekistan this
week, guaranteeing that the company would purchase gas from
Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan at "European prices." Throughout
the meeting, Norov said that his government simply "did not
understand why" the United States was seeking to set back
relations with Uzbekistan again through undue criticism of
its human rights record.


SAYS UZBEKISTAN OPEN TO HONEST DISCUSSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
-------------- --------------


5. (C) Norov said that his government was open to honest
discussion on human rights with the United States and
non-governmental organizations, claiming that many
"international experts" had praised recent moves by the
government, such as Uzbekistan's abolishment of the death
penalty and adoption of a "habeas corpus" law transferring
the power to issue arrest warrants from prosecutors to the
judiciary. He also stated that foreign experts from South
Korea, Pakistan, and "other Muslim" countries had printed
articles praising Uzbekistan's December 2007 presidential
elections as free and fair.


6. (C) On the other hand, Norov claimed that individuals who
had criticized Uzbekistan's human rights record displayed
little knowledge about the realities on the ground in
Uzbekistan. He cited Human Rights Watch Director Kenneth
Roth and International Crisis Group (ICG) Vice-President
Alain Deletroz by name, claiming that their organization's
reports were biased and much harsher on Uzbekistan than
neighboring countries. Norov appeared to take particular
offense at an International Crisis Group report (released in
August 2007) which characterized Uzbekistan as a potential
failed state, noting that political instability was much
worse in neighboring Tajikistan. In contrast, Norov
maintained that preserving political stability was one of the
chief goals and major human rights accomplishments of the
Uzbek government. Norov also questioned the objectivity of a
February 14 ICG report which blamed Uzbek security services
for the murder of Kyrgyz journalist (and ethnic Uzbek)
Alisher Saipov in October 2007 (Note: Page six of the ICG
report implies that the U.S. should have actively supported
efforts to topple the Karimov regime after Andijon in 2005.
End note.) He also criticized as biased the reporting of
local human rights activist Surat Ikramov by name.

CLAIMS U.S. IS HYPOCRITICAL IN REGARDS TO TORTURE
-------------- --------------


7. (C) Norov suggested that the United States was being
hypocritical in its claims that torture was still practiced
in Uzbek prisons. Norov brought up President Bush's veto of
legislation that would have made the use of certain
interrogation tactics illegal. He denied that torture
occurred in Uzbek prisons, something which he said was even
forbidden during the Soviet era. He also stated that
Uzbekistan's incarceration rate compared favorably with that
of neighboring countries and the United States. The
Ambassador drew on Department's guidance to reply that
President Bush's veto of the legislation in no way indicated
that the United States tolerated the use of torture.

ARGUES OTHER STATES HAVE MUCH WORSE HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD
-------------- --------------


8. (C) Norov also argued that Uzbekistan fared worse in the
report than other states which had what he believed to be
much worse human rights records, including China, which Norov
claimed executed thousands of prisoners a year. In
comparison to its neighbors (which he did not name),Norov
also claimed that Uzbekistan did not rely upon public
relations firms to bolster its image in the West (Oxus Gold,
which is connected to the President's daughter, paid the
Washington Post to recently run a full-spread advertisement
on Uzbekistan).

RAISES RECENT INTERVIEW WITH U.S. AMBASSADOR TO KYRGYZSTAN
-------------- --------------


9. (C) In general, Norov appeared to be most upset that
Uzbekistan was viewed less favorably in terms of human rights
than its neighbors. Norov provided the Ambassador with a
copy of a March 8 story from the Neweurasianet website
covering a recent interview conducted by the Gazeta.kg

website with U.S. Ambassador to Kyrgyzstan. Norov claimed
that in the interview, Ambassador Yovanovitch called
Kyrgyzstan the leading democratic state in Central Asia,
which Norov firmly disputed (Comment: Reading the article, it
is clear that Ambassador Yanokovich's words were taken out of
context by Norov. As reported by Newseurasianet, Ambassador
Yovanovitch appeared to be stating that Kyrgyzstan had long
been in the forefront of democratic progress in Central Asia,
but that it had begun to backtrack after recent events,
including the recent flawed Parliamentary election. End
comment.) Norov suggested that the United States' "praise"
for Kyrgyzstan was political and directly linked to the
Kyrgyz government's continued willingness to grant the U.S.
military access to the Manas air force base, which he said
was in jeopardy.

SAYS UZBEKISTAN SEEKS TO IMPROVE RELATIONS WITH TURKMENISTAN,
DESPITE ITS HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD
-------------- --------------


10. (C) In regards to Turkmenistan, Norov noted that the
Turkmen government has begun to seek an end to its long
isolation under President Berdymuhamedov, but otherwise it
has not substantially improved its human rights record.
Specifically, he argued that Turkmenistan still refused to
allow its Uzbek minority to open up cultural centers or study
their native language in schools. Despite Turkmenistan's
lack of human rights progress, Norov complained it was
getting a "pass" from the U.S. while Uzbekistan was slammed
(Comment: Norov observed that President Karimov had publicly
spoken well of Turkmenistan during President Berdymuhamedov's
March 10 - 11 state visit to Tashkent, only in order to lay
the foundation for, and encourage, positive steps on reform.
The irony that Uzbekistan might serve as a source of guidance
on reform was clearly lost on Norov. End comment.)

DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND COMMUNAL RIGHTS
-------------- --------------


11. (C) In criticizing the report, Norov argued that the
West used a different definition of human rights, which
emphasized individual rights, than Asian countries like
Uzbekistan, which emphasize communal and economic rights.
Norov argued that Uzbekistan had a different culture and
would never accept making individual rights paramount over
one's duty to family and community. In contrast, Norov
argued that the Uzbek government had, by its own definition,
a solid human rights record, as it provided for political
stability and the economic welfare of its citizens.

AMBASSADOR'S REPLY TO NOROV'S CLAIMS
--------------


12. (C) During the meeting with Norov, the Ambassador
reminded the Foreign Minister that the current report only
covered up to the end of calendar year 2007, and therefore
did not include the small but significant steps on human
rights the government had undertaken so far in 2008,
including the amnesty of some political prisoners and the
agreement with ICRC on prison visits. He emphasized to Norov
that if this continued then the 2008 report would likely be
more positive. More urgently, the Ambassador noted that both
the EU and the U.S. were facing decisions in late spring on
possible punitive measures, and the recent progress, if
reinforced by significant additional steps, could influence
these decisions. The Ambassador cited more amnesties,
implementation of the agreement with ICRC, and unblocking of
additional websites, as further steps the government could
take. He encouraged the GOU to develop a strategy involving
more progress on human rights as well as greater
transparency. In particular, he suggested that inviting a
couple of serious Western journalists into Uzbekistan could
result in more nuanced coverage of the country in the
international press.

AMBASSADOR ANNOUNCES REPORTS RELEASE TO MFA ON MARCH 10
-------------- --------------



13. (C) The meeting with Norov on March 12 followed a
meeting on March 11 that the Ambassador arranged with MFA
Americas Division Chief Mamajanov to notify the Uzbek
government about the release of the Human Rights Report in
Washington later that day. The Ambassador simply told
Mamajanov that he expected the report to be similar to last
year's hard hitting report. The Ambassador pointed out that
the clamp-down on travel by Embassy officers last fall had
not helped the Uzbek case. Mamajanov regretted that the
improved dialogue on human rights that had gotten underway
last fall following the Ambassador's arrival had apparently
not produced more progress on the human rights report, but
declared that the GOU was ready to work with us on a
forward-looking strategy to improve the reality and
perception of Uzbekistan's human rights situation.

COMMENT
--------------


14. (C) Norov's negative reaction to release of the Human
Rights Report was probably more Central Asian-face saving
than genuine indignation over its depiction of Uzbekistan.
The Uzbeks are rightfully slammed in the annual Human Rights
Report each year, and there is no reason why they should have
expected the report to be any different this year, despite
the modest (and continuing) progress it has made since
January. Much of what Norov told the Ambassador was nothing
new and has been long recycled by the Uzbeks in meetings with
U.S. government officials over the years. What is unclear is
whether, and to what extent, the Uzbeks will retaliate to
what they labeled "an unfriendly act."
NORLAND