2023•Region Regional Studies of Russia Eastern Europe and Central AsiaRequires access

Varieties and Degrees of Authoritarianism in Central Asia: "Established" vs. "Networked" Patronal Authoritarianism in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan

İdil Tunçer-Kılavuz

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this article is to understand the varieties and degrees of authoritarianism in Central Asia. It argues that the concept of "patronal authoritarianism" well describes the regimes there. We may further distinguish between the "established" patronal authoritarianism of Turkmenistan (the most authoritarian country in the region), and the "networked" patronal authoritarianism of Uzbekistan (the second most authoritarian Central Asian country). In the latter, founding president Islam Karimov (in power 1989-2016) relied on a coalition of elite networks, which necessitated balancing power among these factions—a consideration irrelevant to Turkmenistan, where founding president Saparmurad Niyazov (in power 1985-2006) won a clear-cut victory against his opponents and effectively monopolized power. This could explain why the established patronal regime of Turkmenistan under Niyazov was more authoritarian than the networked patronal authoritarianism in Uzbekistan under Karimov. This article also argues that these respective governance structures appear to persist in the two countries.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract: The purpose of this article is to understand the varieties and degrees of authoritarianism in Central Asia. It argues that the concept of "patronal authoritarianism" well describes the regimes there. We may further distinguish between the "established" patronal authoritarianism of Turkmenistan (the most authoritarian country in the region), and the "networked" patronal authoritarianism of Uzbekistan (the second most authoritarian Central Asian country). In the latter, founding president Islam Karimov (in power 1989-2016) relied on a coalition of elite networks, which necessitated balancing power among these factions—a consideration irrelevant to Turkmenistan, where founding president Saparmurad Niyazov (in power 1985-2006) won a clear-cut victory against his opponents and effectively monopolized power. This could explain why the established patronal regime of Turkmenistan under Niyazov was more authoritarian than the networked patronal authoritarianism in Uzbekistan under Karimov. This article also argues that these respective governance structures appear to persist in the two countries.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this article is to understand the varieties and degrees of authoritarianism in Central Asia. It argues that the concept of "patronal authoritarianism" well describes the regimes there. We may further distinguish between the "established" patronal authoritarianism of Turkmenistan (the most authoritarian country in the region), and the "networked" patronal authoritarianism of Uzbekistan (the second most authoritarian Central Asian country). In the latter, founding president Islam Karimov (in power 1989-2016) relied on a coalition of elite networks, which necessitated balancing power among these factions—a consideration irrelevant to Turkmenistan, where founding president Saparmurad Niyazov (in power 1985-2006) won a clear-cut victory against his opponents and effectively monopolized power. This could explain why the established patronal regime of Turkmenistan under Niyazov was more authoritarian than the networked patronal authoritarianism in Uzbekistan under Karimov. This article also argues that these respective governance structures appear to persist in the two countries.

Key concepts: Authoritarianism, Victory, Elite, Central asia, Power (physics), Political science, Corporate governance, Political economy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Varieties and Degrees of Authoritarianism in Central Asia: "Established" vs. "Networked" Patronal Authoritarianism in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan — Research Paper | ScholarLens