A polling station in the Osh region. Photo: Michael Andersen/IMS

On Sunday voters in Kyrgyzstan cast their votes after the freest and fairest election campaign ever in the country. Ahead lies a huge challenge in forming a new government, reports Michael Andersen from Bishkek

The elections, which took place Sunday 10 October, followed an election campaign which has been by far the most free and fair ever to be seen in Central Asia. The fact that Kyrgyzstan has been able to stage such an open election - clearly to the dismay of its neighbours who have all tried to interfere, as has the Kremlin - is all the more remarkable and impressive. Both international (OSCE/ODIHR/European parliament) and local observers agree that the elections have been overwhelmingly fair and free.

In the run-up to the election on Sunday, lampposts, gates, walls and often trees of even the smallest town have been covered with election posters. As opposed to previously, one could hear people engaged in discussions on politics everywhere, in the street, in busses, at the huge number of public meetings conducted by the parties themselves. Often the parties transport people in for these meetings, in many cases actually paying them to show up, always preceding their candidates appearance with a show of singing and dancing by well-known entertainers. And indeed, many 'voters' seem to come more for the show than for the politics.

Daily media coverage of elections

Kyrgyz television and radio have on a daily basis brought election programmes similar to programmes known from the West. This is a new feature in Kyrgyz TV-history, and on top of that it has been surprisingly well-done and given the voters a real chance to get acquainted with the party leaders.

However, very little real political content or plans for the future has been presented to the voters and most parties’ claim to power is mainly justified highlighting the 'brilliance' of their leader/owner. In fact, party advertisement disguised as journalism has dominated most of the printed press: political parties bought space in the newspapers, and the papers presented these 'interviews' as news often even as front-page news, only noting with the smallest possible print at the end of the article that this was in fact paid for by the party leader 'interviewed'.

Insecurity still looms

The general feeling of instability and not least the violence in Osh in June has meant that practically all parties limit themselves to slogans such as ('we are for') 'stability', 'order', 'friendship', 'strong leadership' in varying order.

Nationalist slogans have increased throughout the campaign, and at various election meetings, shouts of 'Uzbeks out' have been heard. Tragically, Western media coverage of the outburst of violence in Osh in June had a backlashing effect, as it resulted in a 'siege mentality' amongst some segments of Kyrgyz voters, which more jingoistic parties have been quick to capitalise on for their own benefit.

The explanation is that during the violent attacks on Uzbeks in the southern city of Osh in June, many Western media hastily and wrongly labelled events in Osh a 'genocide'. This frustrated and angered many ethnic Kyrgyz, who had themselves not participated in attacks on ethnic Uzbeks.

Political environment

Polarized and biased media are a reflection of how the political scene works in Kyrgyzstan. On Sunday 29 parties were running for seats in parliament including the “Party of Afghanistan Veterans”, “The Green Party”, the “Party of 7 April and Youth” (the day of the latest revolution this year) and the “Party for Restoring the Soviet Union”.

Almost all of the main contenders share a common feature that they are built around their leader who is in most cases in fact the 'owner' of the party. Most parties in Kyrgyzstan are established and run by one man – now women lead a party – and in most cases, leaders are rich business men with close connections to the previous, now discredited Presidents Bakiev (2005-2010) and Akaev (1992-2005).

Some media outlets have courageously covered this issue filing stories about the fact that being a party 'owner' is a lucrative affair. Based on the media reports, it seems that prospective candidates often pay for a good position on the party list – sums of half a million up to a whole million dollars are mentioned. If the party is successful and gets into government, this is a good investment as government ministers in Kyrgyzstan traditionally have been able to – as part of the game and the reason why most go into politics – award their own or their family's and clan's companies big government contracts, or more simply siphon off money from the budget of their ministry.

Voters question the meaning of voting

No wonder that many voters in Kyrgyzstan have questioned the meaning of voting. This counts especially for the Uzbek minority in the country as the following exchange demonstrates:

Why should I bother voting?", the young Uzbek man in Osh said to me, "anyway, the corrupt Kyrgyz will divide the power and the country between them as they always do".

"Of course, we have to vote", said his mother, a school teacher, standing next to her son, "I am voting for stability and justice".

At the time of writing, Monday – the morning after the election - only three things seem certain: First of all, the elections were to all accounts fair – a first in Central Asia, ever.

Secondly, five parties seem to have cleared the 5 % threshold, making certain that the government will be a coalition between two or more parties.

Last but not least, what happens from now on is utterly unpredictable. Which parties will be able to form a coalition, how will their hinterlands take to that, and how will the rest of the parties react in this land of revolutions, and indeed how will the population react – seems up in the air.