Evaluation of the National Democratic Institute (NDI) in Kyrgyzstan

The country's political environment is deteriorating rapidly due to the Government of Kyrgyzstan's (GOK) backsliding on democratic reforms, the repression of political activists challenging the present GOK, the suppression of media outlets reporting on controversial political issues, and the entrenchment of existing political elites. A citizen movement for democratic change has been empowered during the last year, but its ability to seriously challenge the GOK remains quite limited. Given this difficult political environment, NDI has performed commendably. In particular, NDI has gradually come to play an important role in Kyrgyzstan as one of the international organizations most aggressively acting to keep the country's political space from further closing. NDI's most significant accomplishments to date have been in its support of the Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society. Through its assistance to this local NGO, NDI has helped support a citizen movement for democratic reform that is at present one of the strongest obstacles in the country to the GOK's apparent intention to close off all avenues to political pluralism and citizen participation. In addition, NDI has helped parliamentarians establish themselves as a partial balance to executive power and has played a role in generating public political discussion, particularly through its support for the public affairs television show Nashe Vremya (Our Time). NDI has also tried to help various political parties promote competing political viewpoints, but the results of this assistance have been limited by the political environment, as is demonstrated by the GOK's disqualification of several political parties from the 2000 elections. NDI efforts to promote women's participation in the political process have shown few results. On the management side, NDI has frequently been untimely in its workplan and quarterly report submissions, and its aggressive approach has at times blinded it to the contribution of other international organizations that, while not as aggressive as NDI in challenging the GOK, also play an important role in the long-term development of democracy in the country. Finally, NDI's positive contributions are tempered by a poor partnership with USAID that results in wasted energy and a limited view of the long-term goals of USAID's strategy. In its comments on the draft report, NDI acknowledged these problems and stated it would work to resolve them. Given the political trends in the country, NDI's program is now at a watershed point. By all accounts, democratization in Kyrgyzstan must now be viewed as a long-term endeavor. NDI must carefully consider its short-term goals in this long-term perspective. While this situation does not require extensive change in the recipients of NDI's assistance, it may require alteration in the emphasis and content of this assistance. At present, extensive assistance to political parties would be mostly futile. NDI's work with political parties over the last 2 years has had little impact, and at present only political parties that at least implicitly support the GOK can operate actively. Continued support to parliamentarians and civic groups must also be viewed in a long-term perspective. NDI should focus less on immediate, but unattainable goals, and more on strengthening groups and individuals devoted to change so that the latter may work to keep the political space from further closing and play a pivotal role when that space eventually opens up. To assist in this longer-term goal, NDI must also develop a better partnership with USAID and other USAID implementing partners. (Author abstract, modified)