Development in Kyrgyzstan : Failed State or Failed Statebuilding?

This chapter examines the tensions present in approaches to development in Kyrgyzstan. It argues that development in this small post-Soviet republic has been approached primarily as formal statebuilding (Marquette & Beswick 2011), implying a belief that domestic political institutions and processes are the primary cause of fragility and that the adoption of democratic institutions and free market economic policies will result in development. The consequences of this inherently normative endeavour are explored in terms of the local political economy that has developed since independence and especially in the 2000s. Centrally, it is demonstrated how the competing interests and priorities of donors and local elite have undermined development efforts. On the basis of this analysis, it is suggested that rather than being framed as a failing or failed state, Kyrgyzstan is better understood as a case of failed statebuilding that cannot be remedied by the adoption of the current principles for development in fragile states situations, as adopted by the international community. Instead, the focus needs to be on facilitating the rebuilding of state-society relations both locally and internationally with a view to beginning to check the marketization of the state that has occurred