All five officially registered political parties nominated their candidates for president of Uzbekistan. Dilorom Tashmuhamedova will run for presidency from the Adolat party, Ahtam Tursunov from Fidokorlar, Hoshid Dosmuhamedov from Milli Tiklanish, and Asliddin Rustamov from the People's Democratic Party of Uzbekistan. The Uzbek Liberal Democratic Party in its turn nominated Islam Karimov.

Will the election become a sham, an imitation of the expression of will? Will the international community recognize its validity? Will the incumbent head of state remain in the driver's seat for another term of office? And what will it mean for the Uzbek people, if yes?

Ferghana.Ru will faithfully cover the presidential campaign in Uzbekistan. Here are comments offered by Ferghana.Ru experts and independent analysts who specialize in Uzbekistan but live abroad.

* * *

"I'd say that there are more interesting things than offering comment on Karimov's election (because this is what will happen in Uzbekistan on December 23)," Vremya Novostei observer Arkady Dubnov said. "There is no intrigue or suspense in the campaign. Everything is thoroughly predictable. The presidential race in Uzbekistan is anything but serious or even captivating and that cannot be helped in Uzbekistan as it is these days. Regrettably, developments in this country show that a vast Eurasian part of what used to be the Soviet Union is still living by the laws people have been accustomed to since the days of Lenin, Stalin, and Brezhnev. Leaders like Emomali Rakhmon, Nursultan Nazarbayev, or Karimov will never step down of their own volition. What happened in Turkmenistan is apparently the only option of devolution possible there... Unfortunately, Russia does not differ that much from its Central Asian neighbors - from this standpoint, that is. We've all seen how Vladimir Putin's associates and confidants convinced Putin himself and the whole electorate that Russia needs Putin, that it cannot manage without him, and that he is essentially irreplaceable. All of that bolsters the confidence of leaders like Karimov, Rakhmon, and Nazarbayev in the safety of their own political futures."

According to Dubnov, all sorts of elections that are proclaimed and arranged in Eurasia emulate the democratic procedures and thus enable post-Soviet countries to feel themselves part of modern trends of development of the international community. "No wonder the forthcoming parliamentary election in Russia is all but officially proclaimed a "referendum on faith in Putin". In short, what is happening in Uzbekistan therefore may be as easily and trustfully called Karimov's election," Dubnov said.

Neither does Ferghana.Ru expert Sanobar Shermatova, member of RIA-Novosti Expert Council, expect any intrigues from the forthcoming election in Uzbekistan. "This campaign will differ from the previous ones in nuances," she said. "The president himself handpicked his rivals back in 1991 and 2000. It was Muhammad Salih of the Erk [Will] party, a prominent poet and opposition activist, in 1991, and Abdulhafiz Jalolov of the People's Democratic Party of Uzbekistan in 2000. Both alternative candidates in these campaigns polled but a pittance in terms of votes (Jalolov, for example, came in with just over 4%). Their performance was supposed to demonstrate the incomparable level of support the incumbent president was enjoying."

"It will be slightly different this time. We will see several alternative candidates at once instead of just one. Moreover, one of these candidates is a woman, the first woman to run for president in the history of Central Asia. Political Council of the Adolat [Justice] party nominated Tashmuhamedova. As a matter of fact, all these alternative candidates were nominated by political parties represented in the parliament. There is, however, one other candidate, one nominated by a spearhead. He is Akmal Saidov, Chairman of the Committee for Democratic Institutions, Non-Governmental Organizations, and Self-Government Bodies of the parliament," Shermatova said.

"This scenario is more complicated than the previous ones. It is clear that this scenario expected to convince the West, the principal critic of the Uzbek authorities, of the commendable level of political culture in Uzbekistan," the expert continued. "Official Tashkent has problems to address. It wants the European Union to lift the sanctions it slapped on Uzbekistan in the wake of the tragedy in Andijan. Tashkent needs the elections organized in such a manner as to draw as little criticism from European capitals as possible. The question therefore comes down to the extent of Karimov's preparedness to meet his Western opponents halfway. His counterparts Nazarbayev (elected in 2005) and Rakhmon (2006) were compelled to make certain concessions and compromises to ensure recognition of their election. I'm not saying, of course, that they were forced to liberalize their regimes. These national leaders merely ordered rapprochement with the West in the energy export sphere (Kazakhstan) and cooperation with the United States and EU in the sphere of state border protection (Tajikistan). For some reason, it never occurred to the international community to question the fact that these particular leaders had been running their respective countries for years already and fully intended to remain in charge for years to come."

"Uzbekistan is a strategically important Central Asian state and the one that wields more political and economic clout in the region than anyone else," Kyrgyz politician Ishenbai Abdurazakov said. "Hence the hopes entertained by politicians in other countries that the political and economic reforms in Uzbekistan will gain velocity. After all, absence of the reforms and stability in Uzbekistan has a thoroughly negative effect on security, economy, and policies of other Central Asian countries."

Abdurazakov is convinced that a free and fair - and transparent - election will be the first element of the reforms and their facilitation. Moreover, it will serve as an indication of political security.

"Unfortunately, not a single Central Asian country could boast of transparent democratic elections all through their post-Soviet histories," Abdurazakov shrugged. "Even Kyrgyzstan, the country the West extols as an "island of democracy", emulates democratic elections at best because what elections take place there are not truly free and fair. That's a dangerous tendency, one that strengthens authoritarian regimes."

Kyrgyz political observer Ganijan Halmatov claims in the meantime that the so called presidential election in Uzbekistan will be jut a political show.

"I know that the Uzbek opposition in exile and all progressive forces in Uzbekistan itself hoped that Karimov would step down, allow the successor to take over, and therefore launch a gradual reorganization of the country and permit the opposition to finally participate in the political life of the country. Karimov did not live up to the expectations. Presidential election in Uzbekistan (and elections elsewhere in the region, for that matter) is like a show where every character is playing his own part. It is a political show. Pocket ruling parties nominate candidates for president who in their turn urge the population to vote Karimov. We saw it in the previous campaign. It's a political absurdist theater, nothing more," Halmatov said.

Uzbek human rights activist Egamnazar Shaimanov is a political refugee living with his family in the West. As far as Shaimanov is concerned, rumors and speculations on the presidential election are a corollary of encroachments on the people's right to objective information.

"Most citizens of Uzbekistan view Karimov as an idol, someone who must rule the country without stepping down. As a matter of fact, they are convinced that the very security and stability of Uzbekistan depend on Karimov alone," Shaimanov said. "The regime owes this state of affairs to successful transformation of the national media into a machine for indoctrination. In fact, this transformation was one of the most important accomplishments of the regime. A lot of Uzbeks even support Karimov's action in the episode in Andijan on May 13, 2005. "Having terrorists in Andijan mowed down, Karimov protected stability and security of the country" is what they say. The situation being what it is, I do not expect the forthcoming election to be even remotely democratic."

Kyrgyz political scientist Jarkynbek Kasimbekov warns in the meantime that the presidential election in Uzbekistan may foster destabilization.

"Story of Askar Akayev teaches us that state power must change hands every once in a while. New people with new ideas and new political views should have their chance in the corridors of power too. This is how the state gets the impetus for development, you know. Karimov's authoritarian regime has proved its inadequacy and disinclination to launch the reforms. Another term of office may foment mass discontent because economic situation in the country is undeniably deteriorating. All in all, it may destabilize Uzbekistan," Kasimbekov said.

"Repressions cannot worsen without end. The so called "third forces" may eventually try a takeover," Kasimbekov said. "Making use of the restiveness of the population, religious extremists from organizations like Hizb-ut-Takhrir and Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan will become noticeably more active. This turn of events will make security of Uzbekistan questionable."

According to the political scientist, Karimov may avert this turn of events. He should demonstrate political will and step down. "Permitting a successor to take over, Karimov will clear the way for the reforms and enable the opposition to emerge and start taking part in the political life," Kasimbekov said. "It will be the best step he could take in the name of security and unity of Uzbekistan."

Yadgar Turlibekov, Uzbek human rights activist and political refugee, does not think that the opposition stands a chance at this point.

"The irreconcilable opposition has been forced to flee the country," Turlibekov said. "Purges in Uzbekistan became outright ruthless on the eve of elections. The only activists of the opposition who remained in the country were those who could keep their mouths shut. Even they, however, are ever in the focus of attention of Karimov's secret services. Some opposition activists were assassinated, many others arrested and imprisoned (unless they fled from Uzbekistan altogether, that is). No, I do not think the opposition stands a chance at this point. Even should it nominate someone for president, the regime will do everything to crush him. Karimov will only run for president against the people he himself handpicked."