Letter of US Ambassador

The sense of duplicity, insincerity brings out a feeling of distrust to a person reading the letter of US Ambassador Mr. Purnell on Andijan events to the “Narodnoe slovo” newspaper published on July 18.

From one hand Mr Purnell writes that USA openly condemned the fact of “attacking the prison, police and military units following by seizure of the building of local Administration” (words are translated from the letter).

Having used evasive phrases, the US Ambassador calls all these unprecedented in terms of impudence and cruelty armed bandit activities accompanied by the shooting of soldiers and police officers standing on their sentinels, capturing hostages, harassing and murdering them, as well as seizure of many submachine guns and other weapons as a “use of violence by the group in Andijan”. It is instead of assessing all these actions as a banditism and terrorism.

As American mass media have proclaimed all over the world, these crimes and barbarism could not be committed by peaceful women, children and elder people who had never handled arms, could they?

I wish I knew, how armed attacks on military sites and prison would had been assessed, if similar thing would had happened in USA where more than 600 prisoners had been released and submachine guns and grenades had been handed over to them.

It is not difficult to assume what titles would appear in newspapers and TV in that case: “unprecedented terrorist aggression”, “a challenge to the constitutional order”, “insolent terrorist attack on America”, to find and disarm Bin-Laden and etc.

It is possible suppose how many departments of security agencies, and national Guards, as well as armoring machinery, helicopters, US Air Force aircrafts would be used in order to eliminate a threat of the similar scale.

Now, talking about holding of so called international inquiry and the reason of US diplomats not being able to take part in the task force for monitoring the investigation.

As Mr.Ambassador writes, US Embassy does not posses experienced personnel who could participate in the task force for monitoring the investigation of events in Andijan, in which representatives of Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, and Tadjikistan participate.

First of all I would like say, that the USA is not a country that would post an accidental and unqualified person to any country as a diplomat. Consequently, an operative work in collecting and reporting of the precipitated information on events in Andijan is well organized in the embassy.

Secondly, are we talking about mere monitoring or objective control over the investigation, which is supposed to be taken by qualified specialists, as well as prosecution, investigation and forensic agencies of the country, where the events took place.

It is difficult to imagine that prosecution officers of USA and Europe, having no idea about the state of affaires and situation in the region, are able to conduct the investigation of these tragic events instead of own skilled investigators and experts amenable to the Constitution and national laws of the Republic of Uzbekistan.

We have a reasonable doubt that the organizer and “script writers” of bloody acts took place in Andijan, and those who guided and financed them, will seriously concern so called independent experts.

Talking about an independent investigation, Mr. Ambassador, why should not we conduct investigations of such facts of illegal and disproportional use of power, as, for example, bombardment of bridges in Yugoslavia by NATO and USA air forces, while passenger trains were passing them, bombardment of peaceful villages in Afghanistan, where a crowd gathered to celebrate the wedding was assumed to be terrorists. Or should we finally find out how many civilians were perished in Al-Faludga in Iraq, where US military forces using armour and aviation fought against Al-Kaida terrorists.

Such cases, that stimulate emergence of very serious issues compute to hundreds.

To a great regret, matters and requirements to conduct so called independent international inquiry only arise when states pretending to the world leadership are interested in it.

In conclusion I would like to say frankly that instead of verbally assuring us in faithful friendship and devotion, it would be better to show us by specific examples, where and when USA demonstrated its sincere altruistic solidarity and support in solving those complicated problems that Uzbekistan faces.