Asel Doolotkeldieva

Recent calls for a less Eurocentric IR and political science once again look to- wards area studies (AS) to help “globalize”disciplinary knowledge production. At the same time, AS has been evolving in some places, with researchers pushing for a new, multidisciplinary and “multicentric”epistemology, explicitly rooted in and building on local knowledges beyond the “core West”( Rehbein 2020 ). This “new AS”does seem to promise a way out of entrenched disciplinary Eurocentrisms, posit- ing AS as lead discipline for an epistemically just rethinking of the social sciences. But this overlooks the fact that there is a potent intersection of global and local political economies of knowledge production that perpetuate familiar hierarchies and distinctions within AS adjacent to political science and IR, particularly for local researchers “outside the core West.”Current debates in Central Asian studies point Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/isr/article/26/1/viad056/7502609 by guest on 18 January 2024
8 Contextualizing the Contextualizers
to inequitable power dynamics, from access to academic gatekeeping positions to hierarchies between Western grant holders and local researchers, often with the effect of reducing or erasing the voice of local scholars and centering Western con- cepts and framings ( Marat and Aisharina 2021 ). There is considerable pressure on local scholars to shape their research to conform to Western interests and “ways of knowing and being”( Kaczmarska and Ortmann 2021 ). There is undoubtedly work to be done at the global level, challenging disciplinary hierarchies and a persistent downgrading of “particularistic”AS knowledge to give more voice to local researchers ( Kuzhabekova 2020 ). However, epistemic hierar- chies are not the only factor impeding the production of knowledge—and theoriz- ing from that knowledge—that is truly contextualized and localized, not simply re- producing a Western gaze on the “non-West”( Kamal 2020 ). The case of Central Asia shows how the development of autochthonous critical scholarship can be impeded by a complex interaction between Western-centric global epistemic structures and local constraints. Local socio-economic conditions, but also political pressures in authoritarian and semi-authoritarian societies, are entangled with global epistemic politics in ways that undermine locally rooted critical theorizing. After the Soviet collapse, the combination of Western theories and scientific development initia- tives, Soviet colonial legacies, and local authoritarian contexts impeded the growth of critical social science scholarship in Central Asia. That said, there have also been continuous attempts by local scholars to conduct critical work, and we propose ways in which the preconditions for localized and contextualized autochthonous theo- rizing in Central Asia could be strengthened.

This article introduces readers to the Special Issue on the politics of popular revolts in Kyrgyzstan and outlines the rationale for a renewed empirical and theoretical debate that would focus on more equitable production of knowledge. The existing literature, namely the scholarship on patronage and “color revolutions,” downplays citizens’ agency and neglects the democratic beginnings of Kyrgyzstan’s popular uprisings. These ontological misrepresentations foment epistemic injustice against the tens of thousands of citizens who have participated—and sacrificed their lives—in struggles against dispossession and inequalities. Based on ethnographic material and documented stories, the present article uncovers popular voices with the aim of drawing attention to local idioms of change. It proposes to read popular revolts as disruptions of the constituted order and hence the return of the political. Popular uprisings thus constitute deeply democratic moments, as they seek to destabilize th...

The parliamentary elections in Kyrgyzstan in October 2015 garnered widespread approval from commentators for the level of fairness and freedom maintained throughout the campaign. However, the results of the vote do not provide a clear indication of the current state of affairs of parliamentarism in the republic. Focusing on the commercialization of party lists, we argue that neither identity politics nor the logic of neopatrimonialism adequately explain the dynamics of political competition in Kyrgyzstan. Instead, we see perpetual uncertainty emerging from contradicting yet increasing attempts to harness the capital of privatized party lists and to impose discipline. Eventually, and beyond short-term threats of an emerging super-presidentialism, Kyrgyzstan risks suffering from hollow parliamentarism, with political parties persistently failing to supply legislative initiatives with substantial agendas and adequate professionals. The weakly institutionalized political parties and the...

The inability of the state to maintain security and the rule of law for the purposes of foreign direct investment and industrial production is often taken as a sign of its weakness. However, such judgments say little about the actual functions of the state for global extraction industries and local political forces which demand their share of the pie. Whilst coercive state power may have decreased since Kyrgyzstan became independent, more important is the fact that the state itself has been transformed under the ruptures of, on the one hand, economic and political liberalization and, on the other, the effects of so-called ‘revolutions' of 2005 and 2010 which led to the wholesale restructuring of national structures of clientelism. Based on ethnographic research conducted in Talas province, documentary sources and interviews with gold mining companies and state officials, the paper investigates the state's shifting roles with respect to Kyrgyzstan's gold mining sector. Firstly, it explores the state as a source of rents for officials who grant and rescind licences in exchange for formal and informal payments from foreign investors, often via offshore vehicles. Secondly, it considers the role of the state as mediator between foreign investors and their access to sites. Finally, it identifies the state as performer of its status as sovereign power despite its inability to prevent uprisings and actually guarantee the promised access to its territory.

The day after the election night, on October 5th of 2020, several thousand Kyrgyz citizens poured in the direction of the main square of the capital Bishkek to denounce fraudulent elections. An estimated 1,250 people were injured, and one young person died. This third violent change of government in Kyrgyzstan’s short history of independence can be best understood as a combination of three distinct stories coming together under an unprecedented external shock produced by the coronavirus. First, a genuine citizen mobilization was triggered by the pandemic-related economic decline and rigged elections. Second, the initial peaceful protest was hijacked, to the surprise of the many, by a populist leader capitalizing on long-existing societal polarization. Third, the spectacular unfolding of the intra-opposition struggle downplays an important process of oligarchization, underlying the shaky grounds of patronal presidentialism in pluralist systems.

Kyrgyzstan has experienced a rapid and diverse expansion of religious educational offerings in the past two decades and presents a fascinating regional case study of the development of Islamic education. Based on a rich ethnographic study, this article explores recently developed processes by which madrasa-based knowledge is established and transmitted. In revealing these processes, the article draws attention to political struggles for control over the transmission of religious knowledge between state and non-state actors on the one hand, and religious actors on the other. It further delves into the material and spiritual world of madrasas as perceived by students motivated to gain education and their families. In the final section, it uncovers how different madrasas use religious education, under the varied concept of ‘service to community’, to establish and maintain networks of graduates, which are necessary to the further rooting of Islamic fellowships into society, politics and...

The parliamentary elections in Kyrgyzstan in October 2015 garnered widespread approval from commentators for the level of fairness and freedom maintained throughout the campaign. However, the results of the vote do not provide a clear indication of the current state of affairs of parliamentarism in the republic. Focusing on the commer-cialization of party lists, we argue that neither identity politics nor the logic of neopat-rimonialism adequately explain the dynamics of political competition in Kyrgyzstan. Instead, we see perpetual uncertainty emerging from contradicting yet increasing attempts to harness the capital of privatized party lists and to impose discipline. Eventually , and beyond short-term threats of an emerging super-presidentialism, Kyrgyz-stan risks suffering from hollow parliamentarism, with political parties persistently failing to supply legislative initiatives with substantial agendas and adequate professionals. The weakly institutionalized political parties and their shortsighted electoral strategies undermine both the parliamentary system and its political pluralism.