Sergey Saenko, international columnist

President of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon said not so long ago that the border problems between the two states can be solved only through negotiations and only through diplomacy. The Kyrgyz side also calls for peace as the main condition for resolving the conflict. Kyrgyz President Sadyr Zhaparov last month indicated that 308 km of the 972 km of the joint border remained to be agreed by the parties. He complained that the approval process is slow. At the same time, the head of Kyrgyzstan did not offer his plan to achieve peace in conditions of such high conflict.

It is clear to the wave that the heads of state are talking about the importance of dialogue – otherwise they simply cannot talk. But for some reason, conflicts do not stop and issues on the border have not been resolved for many years. The current conflicts, we emphasize, are far from the first. The number of incidents on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border has exceeded 150 in the last 12 years alone. It is generally believed in the media that clashes on the border between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan began after the collapse of the USSR. But this is a mistake. Clashes took place back in the 1930s, and they continued later. For example, residents of the Kyrgyz village of Ak-Sai fought over water with residents of the neighboring Tajik enclave of Vorukh in 1975 and 1989. And over the past two years, conflicts have begun to occur not just between residents in the border area, but between the military of the two countries, which is very dangerous and alarming, because the risks of a full-scale military clash remain.

Recall that the largest conflict since the independence of the two states was an armed clash on April 28-30 last year. In that conflict, heavy machine guns and artillery pieces were fired, as a result of which 154 people were injured on the Kyrgyz side, 36 were killed, including two children. Tajik authorities have officially announced 19 dead and 87 wounded. Almost a year later, on April 12, 2022, there was another shootout between the border guards of the two countries. It became the third since the beginning of this year. As a result of these shootings, there were also casualties on both sides.

It is believed that there are a number of reasons why conflicts constantly arise on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border. Firstly, the disputed plots are located in a densely populated area where there is not enough water and land (for sowing and pasture). Secondly, smuggling should be mentioned. The presence of unregulated sites allows local residents to deliver goods bypassing customs. Control over such facilities and the fight against competitors in the smuggling business often become the real causes of outbreaks of aggression. Thirdly, poverty must be taken into consideration. The deplorable socio-economic situation of the population increases the conflict potential of the territory. Fourth, politics should be taken into consideration. For example, the opposition to Sadyr Zhaparov in Kyrgyzstan prevents him from resolving the border issue with Tajikistan. Fifth, demographics should be mentioned. The number of Tajiks living near the border in Kyrgyzstan is growing from year to year. At the same time, the number of representatives of the Kyrgyz ethnic group is decreasing, which in the future may lead to the actual loss of Bishkek’s control over the territory. Sixth, the external factor should be considered. In recent years, the embassies of the United States, Great Britain and a number of EU countries have been increasing their influence in the border territories, including by increasing the loyalty of local opinion leaders, security forces, officials, and media representatives.

Summarizing the above, it can be argued that the conflicts on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border are the result of the impact of several factors at once: poverty, water scarcity, opposition activity, etc. And all the promises of Bishkek and Dushanbe to resolve the border issue through negotiations remain at the level of the declaration. Apparently, without an external arbitrator interested in stability in Central Asia, clashes on the border of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan will continue. Bishkek traditionally blames Dushanbe for the lack of progress in the relevant process, and the latter, as usual, the opposite side.

At the same time, experts from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan agree that in order to effectively resolve disputes on the border, both sides need to make concessions. In the meantime, unfortunately, this is not observed. Not only the leadership of the two republics is not ready to give in, but there is no such readiness in the local communities themselves – each side appeals to such concepts as “our historical land”. And it is not yet possible to break down this wall of distrust and mutual accusations.

In this regard, Russian experts believe that the very existence of the Kyrgyz-Tajik border conflict is provoked by both sides in their internal interests. It is believed that this conflict is even beneficial to the leadership of both states to a certain extent, since it distracts attention from internal problems and allows consolidating society on an aggressive nationalist basis. So, in Tajikistan, this is the upcoming, as expected, rapid transit of power from Emomali Rahmon’s father to his son Rustam. In Kyrgyzstan, the country’s new president Sadyr Zhaparov is building a rigid vertical of power and demonstrating a “strong hand”.

According to domestic experts, it is necessary to create a demilitarized zone on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border and withdraw all military formations from both sides. But in order for it to work effectively, someone has to control it. It should be noted that at one time Russia offered mediation in resolving the conflict. In particular, in February of this year, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Rudenko said that the Russian authorities are ready to assist Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in the delimitation and demarcation of the Kyrgyz-Tajik border. However, both sides refused Moscow’s services.

There is the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which proved its effectiveness during the January crisis of this year in Kazakhstan, and could also introduce some kind of peacekeeping mission monitoring compliance with the demilitarization regime. Moreover, the CSTO Secretary General Stanislav Zasj previously stated that this association is ready to provide assistance to Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. But the parties did not agree to this either.

In the current situation, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with the participation of China could play a mediating role. In this case, the Chinese military could monitor compliance with the demilitarization regime. When this regime will operate in all disputed areas and there will be no military formations on one side and on the other side, then tensions will subside, after which it will be possible to proceed with the delimitation and demarcation of the border by peaceful methods. Without the creation of such a trilateral platform and external arbitration, the war on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border can continue indefinitely, experts say. It is the influential SCO that could become such an arbiter, especially since both Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are its members.