Uzbekistan: Media Reports on Parliamentary Elections

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 TASHKENT 002292 SIPDIS DEPT FOR SCA/PPD, SCA/CEN E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PREL SCUL KPAO UZ SUBJECT: Uzbekistan: Media Reports on Parliamentary Elections REF: 09 TASHKENT 1651 ¶1. (U) Summary: In the run up to the elections, minor differences among parties were covered by both state and independent media to an extent never seen before. Coverage of the election results dominated media reports following the elections. State media highlighted high turnout among voters, while independent media questioned the accuracy of such reports. State media carried numerous reports on international observers' positive assessment of the elections, while independent media declared the U.S. criticism of the election weak. Independent media described the elections as "theater" and some reported that the results were predetermined. President Karimov's public comments on the elections reflect his belief that Uzbekistan is the right model of gradual democratic reform. Parties Publicly Criticize One Another in Lead-Up to Elections ¶2. (U) Media reports prior to the parliamentary election discussed differences between the four pro-government parties (Adolat, Liberal Democratic Party of Uzbekistan, Milliy Tiklanish, and the National Democratic Party). Through the media, parties criticized each other's platforms. Such criticism was seen in both state and independent media sources. The scope of the criticism was limited mainly to social issues, and did not include any criticism of executive branch policies. Nonetheless, such criticism is noteworthy; in no previous elections have parties offered such explicit public criticism of each other. Extensive, If Not Incisive, Coverage of Election Results ¶3. (U) News of the elections saturated media markets on the day of the elections and the two days following the elections. Uzbek Television First Channel (the country's most prominent television channel and part of the Uzbek State Television and Radio Company) devoted significant airtime to the elections. It broadcast a live news briefing by the chairman of the Central Electoral Commission (CEC),interviews with foreign observers, footage of President Karimov addressing journalists from a polling station, a 60 minute speech by President Karimov regarding the elections, and a special program devoted to the elections. Newspaper, radio, and internet media covered the elections in a similarly extensive manner. High Turnout Emphasized by State Media, Questioned by Independent Media ¶4. (U) State media reported prominently on the alleged high turnout among voters. Uzbek Television First Channel carried coverage of the CEC chairman's assertion that the turnout was close to 88%. Uzbekistan National New Agency (UzA) also highlighted the high turnout. (Note: The high turnout was questioned by Embassy personnel who observed the elections. Reftel.) Independent media were skeptical of the high turnout. According to Uzmetronom.com, an independent website blocked in Uzbekistan, only 14% of people surveyed in Tashkent three days prior to the election said definitively that they would vote. Voice of America in Uzbek reported that voters whom they interviewed submitted ballots on behalf of family members, thus inflating election turnout. It also reported that human rights activists who visited polling stating in Jizzakh region found identical signatures on ballot lists, signifying that one person had signed to collect ballots for multiple people. (Note: This reporting corresponds to the observations made by Embassy personnel.) State Media Highlights International Observers' Positive Appraisal of Elections ¶5. (U) State media outlets reported extensively on international observers' reactions to the elections. Not surprisingly, the reactions selected for inclusion in the reports all positively assessed the elections. UzA carried comments made by observers from the Commonwealth of Independent States, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, Egypt, Japan, India, and the EU. Many of the comments which UzA included hailed Uzbekistan's "progress" and "development." An Uzbek Television First Channel report featured interviews with international observers, including two Americans: Boris Pincus and Julia Khersonsky. Mr. Pincus was quoted as saying that under the direction of its president, Uzbekistan would soon be a world leader. Ms. Khersonsky was quoted as saying that she had "a very good impression" of the early voting. State media did not request nor report on the official U.S. reaction to the election, despite the inclusion of Embassy personnel among election observers. TASHKENT 00002292 002 OF 002 Independent Journalists Question International Appraisal of Election ¶6. (U) Independent journalists' assessment of the international response to the elections was quite different from their state counterparts'. Many online articles from independent media included sections of PAS guidance on the elections. In particular, it was noted that the U.S. believes that for elections to be truly democratic, they need to include parties beyond those which reflect the government's viewpoint. It was noted that the U.S. did not believe Uzbekistan met that standard in this election. Despite including such comments, most independent journalists suggested that the U.S. criticism of the elections was much weaker than it should have been. RFE/RL's Ozodlik declared that the U.S. only cautiously criticized the elections as it needs Uzbekistan's assistance for its efforts in Afghanistan. The Voice of America in Uzbek also stated that other strategic interests influenced the U.S. response to the elections. Uzmetronom.com declared that the international community's "positive assessment" of the elections was due to the global political situation. Elections as Act for International Community ¶7. (U) PAS hosted its end-of-the-year Press Gap on the day following the first round of elections. (PAS hosts monthly gatherings during which local media can meet with American speakers in an informal setting.) During this event, journalists expressed their private views on the elections. Many expressed their skepticism of the electoral process, suggesting the election was nothing but an "act" for the international community. Such comments were reflected in the reporting of Voice of America and Ozodlik, both of which compared the elections to a "play" designed to convince others that Uzbekistan was a democracy. Reports of Predetermined Results ¶8. (U) Implying that the election results were predetermined, independent website Harakat.net reported that some candidates began celebrating their electoral victories prior to the CEC's announcement of the results. The article also stated that some candidates who had been told they would become deputies were later informed that the list of deputies had been changed at the last minute. The Voice of America also reported that election results were predetermined, and that voting was irrelevant as everybody already knew who would be elected. (Note: Evidence to support such findings were not found during Embassy teams' observations at polling stations.) Uzbekistan's Gradual Reforms as Model for Others ¶9. (U) In his remarks to the press, President Karimov said that Uzbekistan's experience developing its parliamentary system could serve as a model to be followed by other countries. According to media reports, President Karimov believes international experts are studying Uzbekistan's electoral experience because of the way in which the Uzbekistani system has developed "gradually." Karimov conceded that the 2009 elections were only "first steps" but said he was confident the next parliament would take more confident steps and be among those parliaments that function in line with democratic principles. Likely drawing on such statements, Interfax (Moscow) reported that President Karimov envisions a path of "evolutionary development" for Uzbekistan. Norland NORLAND