"Who is the best president of Kyrgyzstan?"

"Who is the best president of Kyrgyzstan?": about economics, politics and the difficulties of teaching modern history of Kyrgyzstan. Dedicated to the 33rd anniversary of independence and the 100th anniversary of the Kara-Kyrgyz Autonomous Region.

Finally, after many years of decline and then, in fact, stagnation at the level of poverty, Kyrgyzstan has moved to a trend of stable and dynamic development. This generates much more enthusiasm in research, teaching, and simply in life. And in these conditions, it becomes much easier to answer both complex and even seemingly naive and simple questions from students, such as "Who is the best president of Kyrgyzstan?", which in the past drove people into a stupor due to their ambiguity.
But first things first:
In history lessons I am often asked: "Who is the best president of Kyrgyzstan?" I have never considered it appropriate to give a direct answer to this question due to several factors. On the one hand, a teacher/lecturer must teach their students to think, arming them with the appropriate tools so that in the future these guys do not bend to the current situation, but can give balanced and well-founded judgments, even if sometimes they run counter to the opinion of the majority; on the other hand, it should be taken into account that many of those who ask such a seemingly naive, but sometimes quite provocative question, ask it already knowing their "correct" answer, since they are not in an "airless" environment, but have absorbed certain ideas from their environment, and having said their categorical "that one is bad, this one is good", the teacher will simply close the window for dialogue, leaving the student with his own, very often quite biased opinion; I will also note that in the past in the history of independent Kyrgyzstan, with presidents who fled and sometimes shot at the people, it was very difficult to point to someone as a good one; but ultimately, I believe that everyone should have the right to their own opinion, which he/she will form independently, based on certain principles and objective information.
Therefore, in my classes I always tried to provide maximum information about each of our leaders and invite them to draw their own conclusions. Until 2022, Almazbek Atambayev and Roza Otunbayeva were always among the leaders of class discussions. It is understandable. R. Otunbayeva, the only female president in the history of Central Asia, did her best to stabilize Kyrgyzstan after the bloody events of 2010, with the brutal suppression of the April 7 square with the help of firearms by the previous government and the Osh events, provoked to a large extent by both external and a number of internal forces. She is a person who did not cling to power, but handed it over to the next, democratically elected Almazbek Atambayev.
A. Atambayev's authority is based on the fact that under his rule the first steps were taken to transition to a state development policy. The construction of roads, infrastructure facilities, including the Datka-Kemin power line, schools, and hospitals was intensified under his rule. But given the country's dependence on external sources of financing, these volumes could not have been very significant. Also, due to the level of corruption and the power of criminality inherited from the first two presidents, Askar Akayev and Kurmanbek Bakiyev, the development policy, without serious structural changes, similar to those that President Sadyr Japarov and his team are currently conducting, could not have brought more significant results than it did.
Under A. Atambayev, Kyrgyzstan joined the EAEU, launched a policy of active infrastructure investments, and resolved border issues with Kazakhstan (which was once highly praised by the current First Deputy Prime Minister Kamchibek Tashiev, who is also involved in border issues with Tajikistan and has resolved them with Uzbekistan). The creation of the Russian-Kyrgyz Development Fund, as well as the first initiatives to digitalize the economy, also date back to the period of his rule.
There were, of course, shortcomings and mistakes. For example, A. Atambayev himself noted one of them: he missed the personnel policy; although he did not allow relatives to power, he trusted his "driver" Ilmiyanov too much. For which he apologized to the people later. As a result, the ability to admit mistakes can also be recorded as a strong point of the fourth president of Kyrgyzstan.
Unfortunately, many of A. Atambayev's achievements were leveled during Sooronbay Jeenbekov's rule. Perhaps, not because S. Jeenbekov had deliberate negative intentions, but did not realize the degree of importance and, accordingly, the level of consequences of each step (or inaction) of the president. Rather, he did not do enough good for development, having become carried away by the fight (or allowed his subordinates to get carried away by it) with his predecessor Almazbek Atambayev. At the same time, he forgot about the economy and did not cope with COVID to the required extent.
At the same time, I do not think that S. Jeenbekov should be scolded for his weak achievements and said that he is bad. Rather, he tried to the best of his ability, but was probably not decisive enough and not qualified enough for this high position of the president.
Those who really deserve criticism for their actions are the first two presidents of Kyrgyzstan, Askar Akayev, who, through the implementation of neoliberal policies, allowed the collapse of the republic's economy and corruption at all levels of power, right up to the seventh floor of the "White House" (which he himself once stated, as if with surprise, as if he himself was "not involved" and suddenly discovered corrupt officials around him) and Kurmanbek Bakiyev, who strengthened the governance of the country through corrupt mechanisms. The latter is also actually guilty of the death of 87 people on Ala-Too Square, since he gave the order to shoot at peaceful protesters in April 2010.
Fortunately, the consequences of all this decline and devastation of the 1990s and 2000s, coupled with the rise of crime and lawlessness that took place under the first two presidents, have gradually been leveled out in the last three years. Kyrgyzstan has had stable development dynamics in recent years. Thus, in 2021, GDP growth was 6.9%, in 2022 and 2023 by 7%, the first half of 2024 - 8.1%. The share of industry in the economy shows steady growth, reaching 40% of GDP for the first time in the history of independent Kyrgyzstan, with targets of 60% by 2030.
This year, in honor of the 100th anniversary of the Kara-Kyrgyz Autonomous Region, 100 new enterprises and 100 social facilities are planned to be built in Kyrgyzstan. Of these, about 80 new enterprises have already been opened by Independence Day. And these are not some small workshops, but enterprises that are really significant for the republic in the extraction and processing of minerals, processing of agricultural products, production of electricity, and enterprises in the automotive industry. And all this contributes to the growth of production and employment in the republic, and determines a further increase in wages.
The state is pursuing a policy of gradually increasing pensions and salaries for civil servants, teachers, doctors, and creating new enterprises and social infrastructure facilities.
So, regarding pensions, from October 2024, there will be no pensions in Kyrgyzstan below 6900 soms. Of course, one can say that this is not enough. But given that for years people's minimum pension reached 1000 soms, from July 1 it became 3500, and now it will be no less than 6900, the positive dynamics are quite obvious. And with good rates of economic development, this state will be able to raise pensions and salaries further, since it realizes that the solvent demand of the population is one of the important sources of economic development and the construction of a stable and prosperous society.
The growth of the population's welfare is already affecting many sectors of the economy. One of them is the construction industry. Housing construction in Kyrgyzstan in 2023 broke everything, including Soviet records. Thus, according to the National Statistical Committee, if in 1985 1 million 96 thousand m2 of housing were built in the Kyrgyz SSR , and in 1990 - 1 million 560 thousand m2 , then in 2023 - 1 million 587.5 thousand m2 . The state mortgage policy with the provision of mortgage loans for up to 25 years at 4% per annum for civil servants and at 8% per annum with a 30% down payment for other people in need plays an important role in the growing construction boom. Such conditions for mortgage loans today in the post-Soviet space, perhaps, cannot be found anywhere. Moreover, the state mortgage program is expanding rapidly, contributing to both the growth of social security for the population and stimulating economic development in the republic.
In 2023, 105 schools were put into operation, compared to 50 in the record years of 1968 and 1987. Hospitals, first aid stations, clubs, and theaters are being built and renovated.
We continue to observe active road construction throughout the republic. Thus, by 2024, it was planned to build and repair a record 837.5 km of roads for independent Kyrgyzstan, of which 658 km will be paved. Of course, perhaps many are irritated by the dug-up roads and traffic jams resulting from repair restrictions, but after the repair is completed, I think everyone will forget about summer traffic jams and will enjoy driving on smooth roads, contemplating the beautiful facades of buildings. (What I am personally not particularly excited about is the elimination of trolleybus lines. I would like to hope that at least some of them will remain. After all, this is the most environmentally friendly and very economical transport, and from my feelings in a number of cities, including our close Almaty, I do not have the feeling that it somehow interferes or creates an unsightly appearance in the city)
For the first time in the history of independent Kyrgyzstan, we have begun construction of the Balykchy-Kochkor-Karakeche railway, which, taking into account the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway project that will be launched in the near future, will connect northern and southern Kyrgyzstan by rail, and will also save the republic from the fate of a transport dead end, reviving the branch of the "Great Silk Road" through Kyrgyzstan at a modern level. The conjugation of these two railway projects will bring a huge positive economic effect to the republic. (By the way, many infrastructure projects have been given the opportunity to develop due to the correct arrangement of foreign policy priorities, as well as due to the maximum resolution of border issues with neighbors, in particular with Uzbekistan, with which all borders have already been determined, and with Tajikistan, with which the delimitation process is proceeding very steadily).
I would like to note that the state has changed its economic policy as a whole. If earlier the state could not invest in its own economy in the absence of dollar reserves due to the "neoliberal bondage" caused by agreements with international financial institutions, today the state independently finances many projects in the national currency. And most importantly, the state today has a clearly formulated development strategy. Even if some elements of it are still being developed, in general the strategy already exists, and it is being implemented. That is why we have stable economic development.
As part of de-dollarization, Kyrgyzstan is actively accumulating gold in the National Bank reserves instead of the dollar (there are already more than 52 tons of it in the National Bank reserves) and therefore in recent months there has been a significant strengthening of the national currency rate, which will probably have to be adjusted somewhat in the future to improve export conditions. But at the current moment, when we are actively importing equipment from outside, a strong national currency is more of a plus than a minus, since the equipment is cheaper.
In the context of creating a favorable climate for economic development, the state is actively fighting crime and corruption. All major criminal authorities and corrupt officials within the country have been eliminated, and an active fight against smaller ones (but no less dangerous in the long term) continues. Kyrgyzstan, despite unprecedented external pressure, is pursuing a truly sovereign policy, guided exclusively by national priorities.
In fact, today we are developing a policy of state capitalism, which took place in Korea, Japan, Singapore and Malaysia. Speaking about neighbors, perhaps the closest example of state capitalism is Uzbekistan, which has always had strong state institutions, and which today is increasingly developing the conditions of a market economy. That is, if Uzbekistan is adding more and more market mechanisms to the working state apparatus, then Kyrgyzstan is moving from working market mechanisms to adding an effective state. As a result, we can find much in common between the economies of Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. And if earlier only Uzbekistan was the most diversified and rapidly growing in the region, today Kyrgyzstan has every chance for rapid development.
In the context of such changes in the republic today, I would like to return to the question of the best president, raised at the beginning of the article. As I emphasized, I think it is inappropriate to immediately express my point of view on the best president of independent Kyrgyzstan "off the cuff" in the process of teaching. It is much more important to present all the facts regarding the activities of our leaders. And then it will definitely become clear that the first two presidents brought the greatest problems to the country, having created a system that served, as the chairman of the cabinet of ministers noted, the interests of transnational corporations headed by the comprador bourgeoisie. Perhaps for someone, in the end, Askar Akayev will not be so bad, since he did not shoot and gave information that allowed Kumtor to be returned, for others his activities will be unforgivable, in view of the many, many people who plunged into poverty, drank themselves to death, died much earlier than their appointed time or were forced to emigrate from Kyrgyzstan. But Bakiyev and his clique, I think, will forever remain absolute evil. At the same time, the period after 2010 as a whole, I think, will be seen by those studying history to a greater extent as the beginning of a positive trend. (I would like to point out that we should not try to highlight the bad, denigrate and hush up the good of some of our leaders and selectively show only the good of others, since such approaches trap the country in history, making each subsequent leader increasingly worse in people's perception... and for long-term sustainable development we need to cultivate in the younger generations a sense of pride in the country and an understanding that the state strives for the best for its people... I am personally glad that the current leadership understands such risks and, unlike some past leaders, does not engage in denigration and the fight against their predecessors... This should be understood by history teachers, and leaders at all levels, and ordinary people. After all, if we want to build a stable and prosperous society, then we need to work on all fronts, economic, political, personnel, general education, and, in particular, with the minds of our young and adolescent fellow citizens)
When analyzing the policies of the presidents after 2010 in this light, the most striking positive mark for the majority I expect to see from the presidents (I name them in chronological order) Roza Otunbayeva, Almazbek Atambayev and Sadyr Japarov
Taking into account the current grandiose structural changes in the republic, today in my classes I most often hear the most positive responses about the current president Sadyr Japarov. I will note that three years ago I myself did not consider Sadyr Japarov the best president. There were no facts to give a more balanced assessment. At the same time, even then, in 2020-2022, there were many who considered him the best. But over the past few years, as a person who is suitable from an economic point of view when assessing most phenomena and processes, based on the results of my activities, I am convinced that the most positive changes in the republic over the past 33 years in the republic were made by President Sadyr Japarov and his team. This is confirmed by the results of many surveys on the degree of trust in him on the part of the population, including surveys conducted in Kyrgyzstan from the outside, for example, by the International Republican Institute (International Republican Institute , IRI ), which in the latest study showed that most people in Kyrgyzstan (37%) trust him (in second place was Kamchibek Tashiev, also with a very high level of trust, 22%). According to research by the CIO BSU, trust in general in President S. Japarov increased from 82.6% to 86.7% by August 2024.
At the same time, the ability not to push one's role forward, but to create a team in which everyone works, as it seems to me, is also a great merit of President S. Japarov. Humanity, which is felt even through the screen, the ability to work with people, the ability to delve into the essence of problems, the ability to empathize with other people and, most importantly, Love for the Motherland (which was visible even in the garbage collection in the mountains, which happened spontaneously, not "showily" on camera, in gloves ... but simply, involuntarily ... because he saw this garbage where he himself was ...) significantly contribute to the effectiveness of our president's work. And his activities for the good of the country will leave a bright mark in our history.