| This dissertation examines the divergent outcomes of transition from authoritarianism in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The former has emerged as the most democratic of the Central Asian republics, while the latter has reverted to authoritarianism. The study modifies conventional elite-centered approaches to transitions. It views negotiated transition as an interactive process between governmental and opposition elites which is influenced by societal and external factors. The analysis compares events and processes such as ethnic and political violence over housing and land rights, departization and proliferation of new political groups, and expressions of cultural and political sovereignty, and freedom of the press, and elite and societal group reactions. The findings demonstrate the significance of external interference, military support, the effects of mass mobilization on the outcome of elite interaction, and the critical role that reformist elites play within existing institutions.; In Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Uzbekistan were either neutral or sided with the forces of change, whereas in Tajikistan, these states supported the conservative elites who opposed transition. Internally, key military and security elites in Kyrgyzstan were, for the most part, reformist or neutral in the process. On the other hand, in Tajikistan these elites tilted the military and coercion balance in favor of the opponents of change. Highly mobilized masses and a radicalized opposition did not bode well for transition in Tajikistan. Finally, the composition of the counter elite and new societal groups and the balance of power among the various factions of ruling elite were very significant in determining the outcome of transition. In Kyrgyzstan, a large number of reformers in parliament were able to form an alliance and elect a pro-change president. In contrast, Tajik reformers in parliament were very few and were quickly purged. Confrontation and polarization further radicalized the opposition in Tajikistan and made the conservatives even more intransigent. With the Russian and Uzbek governments and official media painting the Tajik opposition as Muslim "fundamentalist" extremists, the conservatives in Tajikistan refused to negotiate and compromise. Supporters and opponents of change rallied traditional regional bases of support, which resulted in the civil war. |
