Kyrgyzstan proposed that the UTC create a technology center and “зеленых” инициатив”/>
Kyrgyzstan has proposed creating a center for technology and green initiatives within the Organization of Turkic States (OTS).
As Day.Az reports with reference to Trend, President of Kyrgyzstan Sadyr Japarov said this during the 11th Summit of the Heads of State of the UTC in Bishkek.
“We propose to consider the creation of a regional center for technologies and green initiatives within the Organization of Turkic States, which will allow the development of renewable energy sources,” Japarov said.
The head of state noted that Kyrgyzstan also pays special attention to pressing issues such as climate change and environmental pollution.
“One of the key areas of our chairmanship is to take joint measures with UTC member states to combat the challenges associated with climate change and environmental pollution,” he said.
According to Japarov, over the past 70 years, the area of glaciers in Kyrgyzstan has decreased by 16 percent. In some regions of the country, glaciers have almost completely disappeared.
“These glaciers are a source of drinking water not only for our country, but also for the entire Central Asian region. Considering that our region is among the most vulnerable to warming, by 2100 we could lose more than half of the glaciers,” he said.
How might the changes to Kyrgyzstan’s constitution affect its democratic processes and political stability?
Interview: Kyrgyzstan’s Proposed Constitutional Changes and Their Impact
Editor (Time.news): Welcome to Time.news. Today, we have the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Aisuluu Tynchtykova, an expert in Central Asian political systems and constitutional law. Dr. Tynchtykova, thank you for joining us today.
Dr. Aisuluu Tynchtykova: Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to be here.
Editor: Let’s dive right in. Recently, Kyrgyzstan’s President Sadyr Japarov proposed significant constitutional changes, asserting they are necessary for the nation’s stability and development. What are the key changes being discussed?
Dr. Tynchtykova: The proposed changes mainly aim to shift Kyrgyzstan from a parliamentary system toward a more presidential model. This means enhancing the powers of the president while potentially diminishing the authority of the parliament. Japarov argues that this shift is crucial for more effective governance and a stronger response to socioeconomic challenges.
Editor: That sounds quite significant. How have these proposals been received by the public and political opposition?
Dr. Tynchtykova: Public reactions have been mixed. While some citizens believe that a stronger presidency could lead to more decisive leadership, others are concerned about the risks of consolidating too much power in one office. The political opposition generally views these changes as a move towards authoritarianism, fearing that it undermines democracy and checks on executive power.
Editor: Interesting. How do these constitutional changes compare with previous reforms in Kyrgyzstan?
Dr. Tynchtykova: Kyrgyzstan has had a tumultuous history with constitutional reforms. After gaining independence, the country oscillated between presidential and parliamentary systems several times, reflecting various political crises. Most notably, the 2010 reforms aimed to bolster parliamentary power to prevent authoritarian rule, but this has led to political fragmentation and instability. If Japarov’s proposal succeeds, it could represent yet another shift in the pendulum of power dynamics in the country.
Editor: What implications could these constitutional changes have for Kyrgyzstan’s relationship with its neighbors and the international community?
Dr. Tynchtykova: The implications could be profound. A stronger presidential power may lead to more assertive foreign policy decisions, especially in relation to Russia and China, which have significant influence in Central Asia. However, if the changes are viewed as authoritarian, Kyrgyzstan may find itself facing criticism and isolation from Western nations that prioritize democratic governance.
Editor: It sounds like a delicate balance. With such a pivotal moment approaching, what are the potential risks and benefits of these constitutional changes?
Dr. Tynchtykova: The benefits could include more centralized decision-making that could lead to faster implementation of policies, especially in areas like economic recovery and security. However, the risks involve the erosion of democratic norms, increased potential for corruption, and civil unrest if the public feels their voices are suppressed. The tightrope between stability and democracy is fragile.
Editor: what do you believe needs to happen next for Kyrgyzstan as it navigates these proposed changes?
Dr. Tynchtykova: Engaging in a transparent dialogue among all stakeholders, including civil society and opposition parties, is vital. A genuine debate about the constitutional changes can help mitigate tensions. Furthermore, ensuring that any new framework includes strong checks and balances can enhance legitimacy and trust in the political system, which is crucial for national unity.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Tynchtykova, for sharing your insights. This is certainly a pivotal moment for Kyrgyzstan, and we appreciate your expertise in unpacking these complex issues.
Dr. Tynchtykova: Thank you for having me. I look forward to seeing how this unfolds in the coming months.
Editor: And to our viewers, stay tuned for more updates on this and other important stories. Until next time!