The article addresses this fateful question: Jihadism in Central Asia: A Credible Threat After the Western Withdrawal From Afghanistan? ..The author's introductory paragraphs are here:
The article's conclusion is here:Central Asian governments view with alarm and pessimism the withdrawal by the end of 2014 of most of the Western troops that have been present in Afghanistan since a NATO-led security mission began in 2001.Kabul’s neighbors expect the already-unstable situation in Afghanistan to deteriorate and threaten their own security and stability. They fear that a radical Islamist regime in Afghanistan will emerge from a Taliban military victory—a scenario that many Central Asian leaders and analysts believe is inevitable and will spill over across Afghanistan’s northern border.
CONCLUSION
The gradual withdrawal of NATO-led forces from Afghanistan is currently the most widely debated political event in Central Asia. Governments, diplomats, and security analysts are constantly speculating about the consequences of the drawdown for Central Asian societies. It is simplistic to assert that the departure of Western troops will have no negative impact. Until Afghanistan is truly stabilized under a political actor who is strong and willing enough to target and eliminate Central Asian jihadism and its allies, Kabul’s problems will have an effect on the country’s northern neighbors.
However, the idea that jihadist forces wishing to target the Central Asian regimes will sweep into the Fergana Valley on January 1, 2015, and turn it into a new tribal area or a new Afghanistan is sheer fantasy. The Taliban have been able to count on ethnic and tribal structures as well as on Pashtun nationalism, which made it possible for the movement to have a lasting impact.
The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and the Islamic Jihad Union are indeed dangerous groups. But so far, they have not had the same impact on Central Asian nations as the Taliban. The IMU and the IJU are well trained and closely connected to transnational jihadism and al-Qaeda, and they have the professionalism required to strike in their post-Soviet homelands. But a massive spillover from Afghanistan and Pakistan that would destabilize the region’s leaders is a pipe dream.
In fact, the impact of these groups will be as significant as the Central Asian regimes allow it to be. The jihadists that threaten them are doomed to remain small groups, as Central Asian societies are clearly unwilling to follow the militants’ extremist political path.
The governments of the region have a great opportunity after 2014. The regimes must institute the necessary police and border-control operations to avoid incursions. At the same time, they must get serious about the other problems emanating from Afghanistan, including drug trafficking, and work within the framework of international bodies such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to stabilize their southern neighbor. And they must resist the temptation to disproportionately assert the jihadist danger abroad. Above all, they must focus on developing domestic policies that take full account of the social and economic issues that could provide the jihadists with new recruits in the future.
Central Asian leaders need to learn from their own past mistakes, and from those of Arab authoritarian regimes, and adopt a reformist mind-set in the way they deal with political and religious affairs. It will probably take a generational change for this lesson to be truly understood. Repression of opposition and the promotion of local Islam have worked in the short term, but such tools might not be enough in the longer term.
Unfortunately, as the issue of Afghanistan is so close to home, Central Asian leaders might not have the luxury of time to change their ways. After 2014, the region’s governments will need to decide whether to stay the course or to adopt a more reformist path. The latter choice could help safeguard Central Asia’s stability while Afghanistan gradually rebuilds itself.
Jihadist groups operating in Central Asia pose a real threat, but they are not the only or even the primary danger facing the region’s regimes.
The states of Central Asia—Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan—are closely watching the political situation in Afghanistan, a neighbor with whom three of them share a border. This situation concerns them very deeply.∼∼∼∼∼∼∼∼∼∼
Blog author's comments:
Here is a map of South and Central Asia:
Here is a map of present and potential members of the Turkic Council:
Central Asia is more important to you than you might think.
The countries named are all Turkic-speaking. Four of them have joined Azerbaijan and Turkey in the Turkic Council, an intergovernmental agency dedicated to further deepening comprehensive cooperation among Turkic Speaking States, as well as making joint contributions to peace and stability in the region and in the world. Member States have confirmed their commitment to democratic values, human rights, the rule of law, and principles of good governance.
The Union will in time become something like the European Union. Trade barriers between member states have been eliminated, and they are now engaged in joint military exercises.
Turkey has the strongest military in the Middle East.
Much of Central Asia is awash in petrochemicals, and is vigorously courted by the US, China, and Russia. NATO is currently scheduled to withdraw from Afghanistan by the end of this year; think of that with NATO's new agreement to become involved in Syria and Iraq, because of Islamist activity there. The West is unlikely to cede Central Asia to Russia and China without a contest of wills.
Please take a look at the article; see what you think.