Mr. Chairman, I applaud you for organizing these hearings, especially so soon after the events we will be discussing today in detail.

As is clear from the series of revolutions in Georgia, Ukraine and now Kyrgyzstan, the post-Soviet political order is shaking and may be on the brink of total collapse.  Most likely, many governments will be calling for stability above all.  But the main lesson I draw from these events is that stability is possible only through democracy.

It is striking how quickly the regime of President Askar Akaev collapsed.  From one day to the next – when many still doubted that the protests would extend from Kyrgyzstan’s southern cities to the north – the country’s authorities in the capital Bishkek just melted away.  A relatively small group of demonstrators quickly managed to bring down the government, leading Askar Akaev and his family to flee. Almost no one could be found to defend his regime.  His officials deserted him and the law enforcement apparatus opted not to take on the demonstrators.  We can only conclude that he had lost all support in Kyrgyzstan. 

Throughout my years of involvement with the Helsinki Process and the work of this Commission, I have paid special attention to the problem of corruption.  For that reason, I would like to take note of widely-reported resentment in Kyrgyzstan over the rapacity of the Akaev family.  His children and relatives, notably his son-in-law, were notorious in the country for seizing all economically profitable sectors of the economy.  Businessmen complained bitterly about their inability to grow beyond a certain level without attracting the acquisitive eye of a member of “The Family,” who would appropriate the concern or make the owner an offer he couldn’t refuse.  It is not surprising that looters reportedly targeted stores they believed were owned by the Akaev family, although this in no way justifies their excesses.

The stunning speed of the government’s collapse in Kyrgyzstan raises serious questions about the stability of neighboring regimes, all of which are authoritarian and corrupt.  Is it reasonable to assume that they are as fragile as Kyrgyzstan and would topple as quickly if given a push?  If so, what are the implications for U.S. policy in the region?

In the meantime, Kyrgyzstan must develop its democratic and economic potential.  I look forward to hearing from our witnesses what obstacles must be overcome and how the United States can help.