Isaac McKean Scarborough's, Moscow's Heavy Shadow fills a critical gap in our understanding of the transition from Soviet Tajikistan to the independent Republic of Tajikistan. As someone who experienced this transformative period firsthand in Tajikistan, I found the book to be an invaluable resource, offering answers to longstanding questions about the key political actors and events of the time. Scarborough's accessible writing style and use of unique source material make this book a compelling read that sheds light on crucial aspects of Tajikistan's history in particular and Soviet history in general.
Scarborough's work is notable for its ability to provide both historical context and insights into Tajikistan's current political landscape. Given the sensitivity surrounding the rise of the existing leadership and its connection to the Tajik civil war, interviewing individuals on this matter is challenging. The author managed to conduct oral history interviews and accessed the Communist Party Archive and the Central State Archive of Tajikistan to research this subject. These archives remain largely inaccessible for most academics.
The author argues that reforms to the Soviet Union's economic and political system undermined Tajikistan's previous stability, giving rise to a new class of populist politicians and ultimately leading to the outbreak of civil war in 1992. Scarborough traces the historical relationship between Russia and Tajikistan, emphasizing how Soviet-era policies and institutions continued to shape Tajikistan's trajectory during the transition period of the 1990s. This approach successfully contextualizes Tajikistan's civil war within the broader framework of violence in the former territories of the Soviet Union following its collapse.
Moscow's Heavy Shadow not only connects the civil war in Tajikistan to factors such as nationalism, regionalism, and political incompetence but also highlights the economic chaos of the period. The author observes that during this time, the sense of Tajik identity among the population was weak, with many Tajik people taking pride in being part of the Soviet Union. Scarborough's argument suggests that Gorbachev's perestroika disrupted the established order, which most Tajiks were generally satisfied with both materially and socially. Gorbachev's endorsement of entrepreneurial endeavors and introduction of a “pseudo-market” aimed to stimulate economic expansion and increase consumer goods production. However, these abrupt reforms not only caused disruption but also provided avenues for expressing popular dissatisfaction, ultimately contributing to the instability and violent outbreaks seen during this period.
While the author correctly acknowledges that the civil war in Tajikistan was not solely driven by local factors, a deeper analysis of regionalism, influenced by country's geography and the Soviet national delimitation project, would enrich the discussion. A significant aspect of the conflict in Tajikistan stemmed from perceptions among certain populations that the Central Party favored the northern region of Tajikistan. This bias manifested in the disproportionate representation of northerners in top positions of power, such as Emomali Makhkamov and Rahmon Nabiev. Residents of Kulyab, Garm, Pamir, and less developed regions held grievances regarding economic and infrastructure disparities between their areas compared to northern Tajikistan (now the Sugd region) and the capital city, Dushanbe.
To comprehensively analyze the causes of the conflict in Tajikistan, it is essential to trace how the Soviet government delineated the borders of the Central Asian countries and managed resource allocation. Furthermore, it's crucial to examine how these intertwined realities became unsustainable following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Drawing more extensive parallels with conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh and other instances of violence in the former Soviet Union could further strengthen the author's arguments regarding the complexities of post-Soviet transitions and their impact on regional conflicts.
The book's examination of female political leaders, such as Gulrukhsor Savieva, adds another layer to our understanding of this period, particularly in a context where information about such figures is often scarce. While the book provides a wide-ranging account of the transition from Soviet Tajikistan to independence, there are areas where additional background information would enhance its effectiveness. For instance, a brief and somewhat misleading statement about Abdumalik Abdullajonov's reputation for corruption, juxtaposed with sparse information about his political career, left me desiring more context. As someone with limited knowledge about this politician beyond encountering him at a political rally in Khujand in the 1990s, such assertions demand further elaboration to provide a clearer understanding.
Moscow's Heavy Shadow is a thought-provoking and illuminating study that significantly contributes to our understanding of the relations between Russia and former Soviet Union countries. Scarborough's rigorous scholarship and nuanced analysis offer a rich exploration of the enduring influence of Moscow on Tajikistan's past, present, and future. This book is essential reading for anyone interested in present-day Central Asian geopolitics, post-Soviet transitions, and the dynamics of great power politics, including Russia's aggressive actions in Ukraine and beyond.
