DUSHANBE, December 2, 2015, Asia-Plus — An article “As Tajikistan Limits Islam, Does It Risk Destabilization?” that was posted on Radio Liberty’s website on December 1 notes that seeing the rise of Islamic State and other extremist groups in recent years, Tajik authorities have done their best to eliminate outward displays of what they see as dangerous, imported aspects of Islam in recent years.
This has put women who dress in Islamic attire traditionally worn in Tajikistan, as well as men who wear long, bushy beards, in the spotlight.
Men have been detained on the street and forcibly shaved at police stations. And when President Emomali Rahmon used a Women”s Day speech in March to publicly chastise those who wear “foreign” dress, saying that outsiders were using clothing to develop an “extremist” trend in Tajikistan, it was taken as a warning.
The look of Dushanbe”s streets has changed as a result. Whereas solid-colored black or brown hijabs had become a common sight, today anything but officially acceptable and traditional Tajik head scarves — colorful and tied behind the head — are a rarity.
But even if the government”s approach has succeeded in preventing Tajiks from displaying their religiosity in public, it has also raised fears that it risks deepening divides between secular Dushanbe and conservative Muslims. Rather than deterring Tajik Muslims from turning to brands of Islam outside the state”s control, observers note, repression could have the opposite effect — and even push them onto a dangerous path.
“The kind of repressive measures they are using both deter and encourage radicalization,” says John Heathershaw, an expert on Tajikistan at the University of Exeter. He warns that, just as some people may be intimidated by the measures and fall into line with state-sanctioned guidelines for Islam, others could respond by going underground and becoming militant.
Fears of Islamic militancy run particularly high in Tajikistan, a country still scarred by a civil war in which Islamists, allied with democrats, fought pro-Soviet authoritarian forces just 20 years ago. The war killed as many as 100,000 people.
Experts note that after the war, the situation has still not entirely stabilized. There are always some fault lines, some regions, where political antagonism, regional antagonism, are still there.
In 2010, Islamic militants who had been given lengthy sentences broke out of jail and fought for two weeks with government troops.
More recently, in 2012 and 2014, local groups which the government accused of being Islamic militants fought with security for
Since the 1992-97 civil war, moderates have held the upper hand among politically active Muslims after a peace deal resulted in the country”s only Islamic party having a place in government. But Dushanbe”s banning of the Islamic Revival Party of Tajikistan (IRP) earlier this year, and the arrest of its moderate leadership, has raised the danger that the moderates could now be sidelined, allowing more extremist elements to take their place.
Local experts note that if the IRP continues its operation as an underground movement, it would be more radical.
Discontent over the increasingly authoritarian governing style is made potentially more dangerous considering widespread unhappiness over the dire economic situation in Tajikistan.
One-in-six working age Tajiks cannot find employment in country and instead go to Russia to earn money to send home. A recent World Bank report called Tajikistan the world”s most remittance-dependent country, noting that the country”s economic growth has dropped significantly along with Russia”s slowdown and the depreciation of the ruble.
Discontent over the economy, charges of regionalism, and political Islam all played their role in sparking civil war immediately after Tajikistan”s independence.
At that time, grievances centered upon the monopoly over power and the economy by one region and old-guard former Soviet bosses.
A common complaint in Tajikistan today is that all the best jobs are held by people from Rahmon”s region and that people from other regions have no choice but to work as migrant laborers abroad.
All this makes for a dangerous cocktail as Rahmon appears intent on pursuing an increasingly authoritarian line that particularly marginalizes conservative Muslims. However, he appears to be betting that his country is unlikely to slip into armed conflict again and that he has sufficient support from secularists to continue.
