Doubts over real target of Uzbek 'terror' blast
By Andrew McGregor
A mysterious blast on a vital Uzbekistan rail route on November 17 has been
followed by a stranger Uzbek disinterest in repairing the damage or sharing
details of the investigation into the incident. The Tashkent government formed
a commission to investigate the bombing of the railway bridge when news of the
bombing first appeared in the Uzbek press two days after the incident.
The blast, described as a ''terrorist act,'' occurred at a railway bridge on
the line connecting the Termez terminal at the Uzbekistan-Afghanistan border
and the city of Qurghonteppa in southwestern Tajikistan. More precisely, the
attack came in the Surkhandarya region between the Galaba and Amu Zang stations
along a stretch of line that runs parallel to the Amu Darya River. Afghanistan
lies on the southern side of the river. The roughly 250-kilometer rail line is
an important commercial outlet for Tajikistan, which has lately had differences
with Uzbekistan over the administration of their mutual border.
Termez is the southern terminal of the Northern Distribution Network (NDN), the
supply network for US and International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) troops
in Afghanistan. Supplies must be offloaded from the rail system at Termez and
transferred to trucks for the final lap into Afghanistan. The United States
negotiated an agreement to use Termez in 2008, though the German military has
quietly leased an air base there since 2002.
Attacks by Islamist militants in Uzbekistan have become rare in recent years,
partly as the result of a relentless government campaign against any activity
that remotely resembles any form of religious extremism. Security services cast
a wide net in their search for militants and there are numerous reports from
human-rights organizations that detention can mean severe treatment and even
death. A closed-door trial is currently underway in Tashkent of 16 Muslims
charged with participation in ''extremist religious, separatist, fundamentalist
or other banned organizations''. Uzbekistan's Security Service (SNB) has even
gone so far as to issue a November 12 warning to Uzbekistan's writers, artists,
dramatists and filmmakers to avoid the use of any kind of religious theme in
their works.
If the bombing was the work of Islamist militants wanting to disrupt the NDN,
their choice to attack the line to southwestern Tajikistan rather than the main
line running north from Termez seems odd. The absence of any claim of
responsibility if the bomb was indeed the work of Islamist militants is also
very unusual. Such groups typically make maximum political value of every
attack against the state or its institutions.
Though the blast occurred in Uzbekistan, the greatest harm has been inflicted
on Tajikistan's rail system, which incurred losses in finding alternative
transportation for stranded passengers in Uzbekistan and now has hundreds of
freight cars loaded with goods in Uzbekistan unable to cross back into
southwestern Tajikistan.
According to a Tajik rail official, the Uzbeks would normally have the
capability of repairing such damage within a day. Instead, a Tajik offer of
assistance went unacknowledged and no timetable has been set for repairs.
Shipping goods through another line to Dushanbe and then onward by truck
through mountain passes to southern Tajikistan would be prohibitively
expensive, so any prolonged interruption to the Termez-Qurghonteppa rail line
would have a severe effect on the Tajik economy.
Relations between Uzbekistan and the smaller and more isolated Tajikistan have
been strained for at least a decade by a number of issues, most notably
Tajikistan's ongoing construction of the massive Rogun hydroelectric dam
project, which Uzbekistan claims would damage that nation's vital cotton
production industry.
The latest blow to Uzbek-Tajik relations came on November 13, when an Uzbek
border guard was shot and killed by Tajik border guards who were allegedly
helping narcotics smugglers bring 3.84 kilograms of heroin into Uzbekistan.
Tajik authorities initially denied the involvement of Tajik border guards in
the incident, which allegedly included personnel from the Tajik Main Border
Directorate's Sughd regional department. A spokesman for the Tajik Border
Guards later admitted that a Tajik border guard had killed one of his Uzbek
counterparts, but only did so after the Uzbeks had crossed into Tajik territory
to protect the smugglers. The spokesman insisted that no drugs were found at
the scene.
Uzbekistan's SNB has demanded an unbiased investigation by Tajik authorities
regarding the Border Guards' involvement in drug trafficking while warning of
tough measures to counter future attacks. The drugs were apparently concealed
inside electric heaters and the SNB invited their Tajik counterparts to examine
the remaining heaters to see if drugs were concealed within them. Uzbek
officials have, however, conceded that the Tajik border guards may have been
deceived into helping smuggle electric heaters rather than narcotics, a
scenario based on the claim that the guards received a far smaller payment than
is normally associated with assistance in drug smuggling.
On the same day as the railway bridge bombing, Tashkent issued a strong warning
to Tajikistan to avoid a repeat of the November 13 border incident: ''Should
the Tajik side act like this again, the Uzbek side retains the right to take
the toughest and most resolute measures in line with the norms and practice of
international relations in order to crack down on aggressive provocations on
the border, to ensure the security of citizens and Uzbekistan's territorial
integrity in full''. In Tajikistan, however, there are now suggestions that the
railway blast may have more to do with Uzbekistan's opposition to the Rogun dam
project than with terrorism.
(This article first appeared in The Jamestown Foundation. Used with
permission.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
