|
|
|
|
|
|
CIAO DATE: 08/04
Turkmenistan
Victoria Garcia
Center for Defense Information
January 2004
Background
Turkmenistan is a Central Asian republic that gained its independence from Soviet rule in 1991, and obtained constitutional provisions that officially established a democratic government. However, Turkmenistan’s democracy is more authoritarian than democratic. President Saparmurat Niyazov has headed the country since 1985, and under Turkmen law, he may continue to do so until his death. The sole political party in the country is the Democratic Party, and the executive branch dominates both the judiciary and parliament.
The human rights situation in Turkmenistan is quite grim. According to the U.S. State Department, Turkmenistan is a one–party state in which citizens do not have a right to change their government, as all opposition political activities are strongly repressed. The Turkmen government severely stepped up human rights abuses after an armed attack against President Niyazov on Nov. 25, 2002 was deemed an attempted coup d’état. Suspects were tortured, due process was violated, and many relatives of those implicated in the plot were detained and physically abused.
Prison conditions are poor, and security forces abuse suspects and prisoners. The government restricts privacy rights, freedom of speech and of the press; academic freedom, freedom of assembly and association, religious freedom, labor rights, freedom of movement, and limits the activities of non-governmental organizations. The government limits marriages between foreigners and Turkmen citizens, and both women and ethnic minorities are heavily discriminated against.
U. S. Military Assistance Prior to Sept. 11, 2001
Turkmenistan’s armed forces are estimated at 17,500 active personnel. Turkmenistan’s military expenditure is approximately $90 million, which accounts for 3.4 percent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). According to the U.N. Register of Conventional Arms, from 1993 to 2001, Turkmenistan did not report any major exports or imports of U.S. conventional weapons. According to U.S. government data, between 1990 and 2001, Turkmenistan received $1.25 million in Foreign Military Sales, $625,000 in Direct Commercial Sales, $1.8 million in International Military Education and training (IMET) and about $2.9 million in Foreign Military Financing (FMF).
U. S. Military Assistance Since Sept. 11, 2001
Turkmenistan has sided with the United States in the “Global War on Terror” by providing land corridor and over–flight rights for humanitarian assistance shipments to Afghanistan. In the 2002 fiscal year (FY 02) budget, Turkmenistan was granted approximately $7.4 million in Freedom Support Act (FSA) funding and $388,000 in IMET. Turkmenistan was allocated an additional $4 million in FSA through the FY 02 Supplemental Appropriations request. For FY 03, Turkmenistan was given $450,000 in IMET, $700,000 in FMF, and $7 million in FSA. For FY 04, $450,000 in IMET, $700,000 in FMF and $8 million in FSA has been pledged for Turkmenistan.
Case Study Profile
| Country | Turkmenistan |
| Government Type | Republic |
|
Infant Mortality Rate
(per 1,000 live births–2003 estimate) |
73.17 |
|
Total Armed Forces
(2000 estimate) |
17,500 |
|
Military Expenditure
(U.S.$, millions) (FY 99) |
$90 |
| Military Expenditure % GDP | 3.4% |
|
Imports/Conventional Arms Transfers
(U.S. $, millions) (FY 01) |
0 |
| Human Rights Record 2002 | extremely poor |
| Turkmenistan’s Submission to the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms | |
|---|---|
| 1993 | n/a |
| 1994 | n/a |
| 1995 | 0 |
| 1996 | 0 |
| 1997 | 0 |
| 1998 | 0 |
| 1999 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 |
| 2001 | n/a |
| Fiscal Year | IMET | FMF | FSA | ESF | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1991 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1992 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1993 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1994 | $50,000 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $50,000 |
| 1995 | $118,000 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $118,000 |
| 1996 | $213,000 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $213,000 |
| 1997 | $262,000 | $500,000 | $0 | $0 | $762,000 |
| 1998 | $336,000 | $450,000 | $0 | $0 | $786,000 |
| 1999 | $261,000 | $600,000 | $0 | $0 | $861,000 |
| 2000 | $313,000 | $600,000 | $0 | $0 | $913,000 |
| 2001 | $258,000 | $699,000 | $0 | $0 | $957,000 |
| 2002 | $388,000 | $0 | $7,398,000 | $0 | $7,786,000 |
| 2002 ERF | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2002 SUP | $0 | $0 | $4,000,000 | $0 | $4,000,000 |
| 2003 (request) | $450,000 | $700,000 | $7,000,000 | $0 | $8,150,000 |
| 2004 (request) | $450,000 | $700,000 | $8,000,000 | $0 | $9,150,000 |
| Total | $3,099,000 | $4,249,000 | $26,398,000 | $0 | $33,746,000 |
Sources
“Human Development Report,” United Nations, 2002.
“Human Rights Report 2002,” U.S. Department of State, March 31, 2003.
“Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbook,” Appendix 5C, Register of the transfer and licensed production of major conventional weapons, 2001.
“The World Fact Book,” U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, 2003.
The U.S. Mission to NATO list of “Allied Contributions in the War against Terrorism”.
“United Nations Register of Conventional Arms,” U.N. Department for Disarmament Affairs.