Community development in Kyrgyzstan

Kyrgyzstan is a totally absorbing country of chunky mountains, rocky roads and (in summer) dusty villages. The Kyrgyz people are hugely generous, hospitable and self-effacing. The population, now predominantly Sunnis but with a nomadic tradition and many subtle influences from the silk road, experienced two generations of Soviet rule before their independence 15 years ago and a minor revolution last year.

As muslim nations go, this is strikingly liberal. Gender inequalities, while noticeable in various little ways, still seemed less pronounced than they often are in the UK. Lone women routinely hitch lifts between villages on the busy roads even after dark, although very few drive. But there are no women among nationally elected representatives. For me the general level of respect and civility felt quite powerful and reflects a nation pretty much at ease with itself, in spite of the huge problems they face.

Education is taken seriously but the economy is still very weak and much of the infrastructure is either unfinished or unmaintained. Agriculture lacks mechanisation and irrigation. Much of what we saw being processed during harvest was manual and to some extent this leaves the country’s resources at the mercy of exploitation by more developed neighbours. Across the south we saw people hand-drying plums on their roofs or hand-drying sunflower seeds on the road (unproblematically closing one carriageway to do so). Plums are worth 8 soms / kilo fresh but dried they sell at 100 soms / kilo. Having no drying facilities, people tend to sell fresh to merchants from neighbouring Uzbekistan, although one village self help group we visited had bought drying facilities to help local people enter the market. (You can see the drying equipment in the picture).

The serious terrain and the humbling landscapes – these mountain ranges are right up against everyday life, and much of the country is barren and inaccessible – suggest three other development needs: hydro-electric power, eco-tourism, and online communications. People were well-aware of the potential of all three but lack of investment holds the country back and may threaten stability.

Among the lasting features of the Soviet legacy I’d list the regrettable architecture and often crass public art; and the minimal sense of influence resulting from classic symptoms of low motivation or innovation.

In spite of that, and largely as a consequence of the input of US agencies such as Counterpart International and USAID, civil society is afloat: it’s not yet sailing and couldn’t weather a storm, but many interesting people are on board and there’s a sense of momentum. I was travelling on an ad-hoc ‘study tour’ of half a dozen Brits, including my daughter (now a student of anthropology). As guests of Counterpart-Sheriktesh we visited two regional development agencies and four local community projects. The travelling was tough. On one day we had a 13 hour journey over stunning mountain passes on bum-numbing road surfaces: we wanted remote and we got it. We also got to see some inspiring examples of local self-help groups.

I’ll reflect on some of the local initiatives here when I have time. I may also offer some thoughts on the options for a programmed community development study tour in the future, which I have been invited to organise. In the meantime please contact me if you’re at all interested or if you have relevant experience that might help.