By CKR
Some good coverage of the situation in Kyrgyzstan is emerging, although not in American media.
Much of the commentary anticipates that the Bush administration will try to take credit for another democratic revolution. I must admit to the same concern, although I tried to keep it out of yesterday's post because, frankly, I get tired of the repetition.
There has been no official statement yet, at least not posted as a White House news release.
On the other hand, Vladimir Putin has issued a statement that he is ready to work with the new Kyrgyzstani leaders.
The Financial Times reports on the current situation.
Asia Times gives some of the background for the revolution as a response to bad economic conditions and a corrupt election.
Eurasianet provides a detailed commentary on possible outcomes. The revolutionaries in Kyrgyzstan seem less organized than the revolutionaries in Ukraine and Georgia, perhaps even dividing into groups with conflicting interests.
As I argued yesterday, many dissatisfactions have led to these revolutions. For US news consumers, the issues are being simplified to the idea of a wave of democracy sweeping the former Soviet Union. (Newsweek: Another People's Revolt) The speculation about the marketing symbols (tulips, this time?) takes first place.
Whatever the US may have contributed, openly or clandestinely, for better or for worse, was a small factor in reaching the tipping point. It's possible, however, that George Bush would prefer not to comment until he sees that the revolution will turn out the way he'd prefer. Or maybe he's just too busy with other things.
Update: A report from Elnura Osmonalieva in Bishkek, with photos.