Could we have another revolution on Russia's doorstep?

After civilian uprisings in Georgia and Ukraine, Kyrgyztan could be following the same path.

The reason that this is very important is because this could spark a similiar chain of events in Capian Sea countries. If this were to happen then the geopolitical impact on Russia would be huge because then it would start to lose influence in it's former Soviet territory and this could spark change within Russia itself.

It also helps the West get hold over the resources in that region.

Kyrgyztan: Is it another Ukraine or Georgia

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiap ... index.html



Protestors seize government buildings in Kyrgyztan.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... rnational/

REVOLUTIONARY MOMENTUM BUILDS IN SOUTHERN KYRGYZSTAN

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/i ... 2105.shtml

Kyrgyzstan on the brink

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/GC23Ag01.html



Fergana's ghosts haunt Central Asia

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/GC24Ag01.html



CENTRAL ASIAN LEADERS REACT TO DEVELOPMENTS IN KYRGYZSTAN

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/i ... 205a.shtml



Dual Power Scenario Takes Hold of Kyrgyzstan

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/i ... 2205.shtml

I agree. This will have major repurcusions.

Caspian Sea is supposed to alleviate our dependence on Middle East.
Well, by gosh... Caspian region is just as violatile.

Armenians don't get along with the Turks in that region. You have states with dictators like Kazakhstan and you have fledging democracies.

Even if the pundits are right and that PO is not right around the corner, our oil is in very dangerous political waters.

Kyrgyz president's palace overrun



Analysis: Why Kyrgyzstan matters

I am not so sure this is good for US.
US military bases are on high alert.

The oil picture may change yet again.

Stu, What is the geopolitical significance of Kyrgyztan? oil? military bases? I know they have a border with china, pipeline possibilities?

You need to keep this activity in perspective with regards to the activity around the whole area of the Caspian Sea.
I'm a bit surprised at the lack of response, so far, by the Soviets. Their most modern naval fleet is based in the Caspian. This whole area backs right up against Russia, there is no buffer zone, it is the buffer zone.
You cannot look at what's going on in this region without seeing the hand of the US deep in it.
Russia and/or China are going to have to respond soon.

Secret report of the U.S. Ambassador to Kyrgyz Republic.

Where did you get that?

Holy sh*t. Is that real?

Man, I hope that's fake. I don't need any more crap to worry about right now, I've got enough as it is.

Please let that be fake. Please let that be fake.

Found the full text here, including that same image. That page is just the conclusion; read the whole thing:

http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news4/kabar1.html

[URL=http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/30311.htm]Ambassador Stephen M. Young
officially

Ambassador Stephen M. Young's
Interview in "Argumenty i Fakty"[/URL]
On January 27, 2005, Ambassador Stephen M. Young
met with Gennady Pavliuk, Editor-in-Chief of Argumenty
i Fakty, in the library of [URL=http://www.usemb-bishkek.rpo.at/amb_interview.htm]the U.S. Embassy in Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan[/URL], for an interview, which was published
in the newspaper’s February 2 issue.

[URL=http://antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=1526]National Endowment for Democracy:
Paying to Make Enemies of America [/URL]
by Rep. Ron Paul
October 11, 2003
(Ron Paul is a Republican Congressman from Texas.
He was the 1988 Libertarian Party candidate for President.)
The misnamed National Endowment for Democracy [NED)
is nothing more than a costly program that takes US taxpayer
funds to promote favored politicians and political parties abroad.
What the NED does in foreign countries, through its recipient
organizations the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the
International Republican Institute (IRI), would be rightly illegal
in the United States. The NED injects "soft money" into the
domestic elections of foreign countries in favor of one party
or the other. Imagine what a couple of hundred thousand dollars
will do to assist a politician or political party in a relatively poor
country abroad. It is particularly Orwellian to call US manipulation
of foreign elections "promoting democracy." How would Americans
feel if the Chinese arrived with millions of dollars to support certain
candidates deemed friendly to China? Would this be viewed as a
democratic development?

In an excellent study of the folly of the National Endowment for
Democracy, Barbara Conry notes that:
"NED, which also has a history of corruption and financial
mismanagement, is superfluous at best and often destructive.
Through the endowment, the American taxpayer has paid for
special-interest groups to harass the duly elected governments
of friendly countries, interfere in foreign elections, and foster
the corruption of democratic movements...

"...the controversy surrounding NED questions the wisdom of
giving a quasi-private organization the fiat to pursue what is
effectively an independent foreign policy under the guise of
'promoting democracy.' Proponents of NED maintain that a
private organization is necessary to overcome the restraints
that limit the activities of a government agency, yet they insist
that the American taxpayer provide full funding for this initiative.
NED's detractors point to the inherent contradiction of a publicly
funded organization that is charged with executing foreign policy
(a power expressly given to the federal government in the
Constitution) yet exempt from nearly all political and administrative
controls...

"...In the final analysis, the endowment embodies the most negative
aspects of both private aid and official foreign aid – the pitfalls of
decentralized 'loose cannon' foreign policy efforts combined with the
impression that the United States is trying to 'run the show' around
the world."

The National Endowment for Democracy is dependent on the US
taxpayer for funding, but because NED is not a government agency,
it is not subject to Congressional oversight. It is indeed a heavily
subsidized foreign policy loose cannon.
NED News Watch

Trojan Horse
"The National Endowment for Democracy was set up in
the early 1980s under President Reagan in the wake of
all the negative revelations about the CIA in the second
half of the 1970s. The idea was that the NED would do
somewhat overtly what the CIA had been doing covertly
for decades, and thus, hopefully, eliminate the stigma
associated with CIA covert activities."
-- William Blum, American historian