In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Environmental NGOs and the Development of Civil Society in Central Asia Kate Watters Environmental NODs have played a significant role in the development of civil society in Central Asia. Within the NOD community, environmental groups are among the strongest organizations; they have the longest history and have made significant contributions, not only to improving the environment, but also to building a society in which citizen participation is becoming a reality. While democratic reform has yet to reach most Central Asian governments, the increasingly influential NOD sectors in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan have created democratic mechanisms for addressing social, environmental, and other problems within their societies. Environmental NODs have taken on challenging issues that governments have neither the ability nor interest to address and have focused attention on topics that do require government input but, for whatever reason, have not received it. In a movement that is less than ten years old, the progress made by environmental NGOs toward constructive dialogue and concrete activity within society is striking. However, the effects ofrepressive governments, economic hardship, and limited funding possibilities, not to mention the legacy ofthe Soviet system, continue to place serious limitations on the movement's influence. Additionally, the environmental movement continues to rely on outside sources for the lion's share of its funding; currently, without Western assistance the development ofthe sector would slow significantly. This essay will provide a briefhistory ofthe Central Asian environmental movement, including the efforts ofU.S. and other international donor agencies. It will then look at the political situation for environmental NODs, discussing some ofthe issues that have limited their ability to have broad-reaching social impact, and then focus on four broad areas which, in my opinion, demonstrate the impact that environmental NODs have had on the development of civil society in Central Asia-and the obstacles they have faced in their efforts. I wish to thank Megan Falvey, Michelle Kinman, Muazama Burkhanova, Yusup Kamalov, Sergei Kuratov, and Yuri Skochilov for their valuable contributions to this paper. Additionally, I am grateful to Eliza Klose, for many discussions on the topic of NGO sustainability and support for NGOs in Central Asia, which contributed to many of the ideas expressed here. Any mistakes are my sole responsibility. 85 86 Kate Watters History of the Central Asian Environmental Movement In the fIrst days ofthe glasnost period, in many regions ofthe then Soviet Union, environmental concerns provided a focal point for opposition to the communist regime. Because the green movement was one ofthe few areas of nongovernmental activity not directly controned by the government, it attracted activists interested in social change as well as environmental protection. Since environmental activities were viewed by governments as less sensitive than other, overtly political issues, activists were able to gain momentum as the Soviet legacy of environmental degradation became more widely known to the general public. And, in the course of their work on environmental issues, Soviet activists increasingly realized the pressing need for political reform to guarantee certain basic human rights such as freedom ofspeech and the right to organize. Environmentalism in Central Asia followed a path similar to that of other regions ofthe former Soviet Union. The fIrst grassroots environmental groups formed between 1988 and 1990, and, simultaneously, popular movements grew around massive environmental issues. In Ukraine, citizens rallied around Chernobyl , and in Kazakhstan, around the nuclear testing at Sernipalatinsk. Those were heady days; a ground swell ofpopular support for championing such environmental issues led to the election ofsome leaders ofthese mass movements to the republican and national soviets. As People's Deputies, they spoke passionately to the USSR Supreme Soviet about the environmental catastrophes in Central Asia, drawing attention to such crises as the desiccation ofthe Aral Sea and the nuclear testing at Sernipalatinsk, creating hope in the environmental community that their concerns would be addressed.1 Environmentalism became a rallying cry that gave citizens the feeling that they could rise up against the old Soviet structure. In a stunning victory, the Sernipalatinsk testing ground was closed in 1991,2 but the exalted rhetoric of government leaders failed to translate into a more inviting climate for grassroots NGOs, and the fall ofthe Soviet Union also did little to improve the political situation for NGOs in Central Asia. It remained difficult for NGOs to register, and outright harassment by the government diminished the size, strength, and effectiveness ofthe environmental movement. NGOs that had previously benefited from the anti-Moscow rhetoric oftheir republican leaders now found their environmental and...

Share