The international workshop on "Peace and Stability in Kyrgyzstan”, organized by the Center for International Conflict Resolution at Yalova University (CICR), the Center for Strategic Research at Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SAM) and Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency (TIKA) was held on Wednesday December 15, 2010 at Yalova Thermal Hotel with the participation of academicians, politicians, journalists, and guests from Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkey. The workshop, co-sponsored by Yalova Chamber of Commerce and Industry, aimed to analyze the conflict that broke out in Kyrgyzstan in June 2010, which affected prospects for peace and stability in the regional and global levels as well, and to offer solutions.

In the workshop, factors that threaten peace and stability in Kyrgyzstan were analyzed in depth, with their socio-economic, historical, cultural, and security dimensions, the implications of the problem for regional security dynamics were examined, and the potential contributions Turkey can make to the solution of the problem were discussed. In this context, the following views were expressed concerning the underlying causes of the conflict:

* The failure, following Kyrgyzstan’s independence, to create a supra-identity and a natioanl ideology that would cover all the different ethnic elements,
* The lingering problems created by the transition from planned economy to free market economy,
* Kyrgyzstan’s economic isolation,
* High levels of public sector foreign debt,
* Inequalities in income distribution, and the high rate of unemployment,
* The relatively disadvantaged position of Kyrgyzstan in geo-economical and geo-strategical terms, and lack of energy sources,
* The weakness of sea, land, and railroad transportation and the negative effcts of this situation on national economy,
* Rise of radical elements,
* The artificial nature of the boundaries in the region, the multi-ethnic make-up of the societies, micro-nationalism, and the process of nation-state formation which is still under way,
* The bureaucratic structure in Kyrgyzstan, the inability to create an efficient management system after 19 years of independence, and the systemic problems encountered following the transition from the presidential to a parliamentary regime,
* Policies of powerful actors like the US, China, and Russia towards the region,
* The geographical position of the country, located on a major drug traffic route, and
* The lack of a unified education policy were identified as the major obstacles in the way of reaching peace and stability in Kyrgyzstan.

Based upon the analyses made, the following solutions were offered:

* Signing multi-party agreements between countries in the region, and increasing inter-dependency,
* Creation of a political system that aims for more democratization, taht gives proiority to values like transparency, accountability, and human rights, and that is based upon equal citizenship denouncing radical nationalism,
* Continuation of multi-directional foreign policies,
* Formation of an independent UN research mission to investigate the conflicts in southern Kyrgyzstan,
* Offering more micro-finance opportunities to alleviate economic problems,
* Allocating a larger portion of the state budget for social assistance, health, and education
* Signing multi-party agreements among the countries of the region and working on models of economic integration,
* Making sure that the projects to be developed for stabiility in the region do not solely focus on stakes and benefits, but contain a normative side as well,
* Development of a common vision for future by exploring opportunities for cooperation both amongst the countries in the region, and between Turkey and these countries,
* Benefiting from Turkey’s long experience with parliamentary system in the construction of the newly adopted parliamentary system and the formation of the required legal infrastructure, and
* Seeking assistance from the Union of Municipalities of Turkey on issues like the appointment or election of governors and mayors, the organizational structures of local governments, and the creation of major mjunicipal service branches (like technical services, sewage and water).