Paper long abstract:

Kyrgyzstan is accepted as the most democratic country in Central Asia. After its independence Kyrgyzstan had five presidents, two of whom were ousted by popular revolts, when they sought to shift to a more authoritarian rule. Kyrgyzstan upholds democratic multi-party elections, and it is ruled by coalition governments, which are unique in Central Asia. This study aims to answer, why or when illiberal presidents are being ousted. It is also worth to mention, what mechanisms were operational in maintaining the stability after successful revolts without falling into chaos. These questions are sought to be answered by analyzing the post-independence period of Kyrgyzstan through published materials and interviews in a multidisciplinary approach. In answering the first question it is argued that regionalization based upon geographical divisions, traditional clans, multi-ethnic demographic structure, post-independence election system and liberal economic reforms with privatizations resulted in the fragmentalization of power creating a plurality in Kyrgyzstan. Additionally central authority is not in a position to consolidate is power by distributing state revenues among loyal elites to develop extensive cliental relations, which urges the rulers to preserve their power in a permanent process of conflict and bargaining. Before both successful popular uprisings, presidents were trying to centralize their power, which alienated most of the elites, who in turn united with the disenchanted local people to overthrow the incumbent president. It is argued here that a popular revolt is only successful, when the president's policies are against both the elites as an outcome of limited power sharing and the local people suffering from pauperization. The vertical bonds between the elites and the local people, and then horizontal links of national parties led by the elites help the protests to turn into a broader, nationwide issue spreading to the capital and deposing the president. Thus, successful revolts started as bottom up local movements, but they were nationalized, when they were associated with more organized elite's interests. This study brings top down and bottom up approaches in order to obtain a more holistic understanding of Kyrgyzstan's successful revolts and established stability afterwards. It may present an example about popular revolts removing illiberal regimes and preservation of plurality and stability in a relatively democratic country.