Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Notes on Tajikistan

mattlakeman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 412 posts

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#41

Post by DEADMINCE »

ranni_ending wrote: post #30
nradov wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At one point the government of Kazakhstan threatened legal action over Borat and Sacha Baron Cohen hilariously responded in character. “I fully support my government’s position to sue this Jew.” https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/bor...

yeah at another point he distanced himself from making racist movies about country he has 0 idea about. then you bring up an example of him trying to hide behind his Jewish identity to be above criticism as a "joke". it's trivial to punch down and then act like a victim by bringing up your own identity. People who find it easy to make fun of others while being extremely thin-skinned themselves: https://www.timesofisr…

He's not punching down or hiding behind an ethnic identity, he's mocking the idea of someone being upset over a parody/mockery/comedy.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#42

Post by wavefunction »

geoka9 wrote: post #11
OutOfHere wrote: post #5

Tajikistan looks to be an interesting case of Islam being kept in check without resorting to either extremism or terrorism. But this is neither free nor assured, and it probably requires constant wilful effort. In the long term, I can see it bleeding more territory to China due to the significant difference in military power and aggression. This is so long as there isn't a NATO-like structure to keep Chinese aggressi…

I think there's more danger of bleeding territory to the Taliban, at least it has been the case until recently. Especially if Russia (who has had a big military base there forever) becomes irrelevant.

The article mentions that China has a military base in the east of Tajikistan and touches on Chinese attitudes towards islam and their behavior internally (in Xinjiang for example) and externally in Tajikistan. Russia appears to be unable to prosecute their own defense let alone the defense of "allies" as Armenia found out.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#43

Post by ashilfarahmand »

geoka9 wrote: post #14
kylehotchkiss wrote: post #8

I wanted to go once but heard that either the taliban or al queda were in the area, which is unideal as an American citizen. Is that not the case anymore?

Taliban (across the Panj river) has been a threat until recently. But for now they seem to be friends with Russia and Tajikistan has always been a Russian client state.

I think they were on high alert up until recently and are now in the process of trying to figure out how to get along with them. On the border areas, there were a handful of markets in the mountain villages where they allowed Afghans to cross the border to sell products. These markets were shut down once the Taliban took over but have recently been re-opened (within the last month or two).

As of last year but probably since the Taliban came to power, Tajikistan has has military checkpoints along the border. Also, I don't know about for all seasons but during the summer, the river seemed too fast to be crossable along most parts of the border.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#44

Post by ashilfarahmand »

rvense wrote: post #18
geoka9 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taliban (across the Panj river) has been a threat until recently. But for now they seem to be friends with Russia and Tajikistan has always been a Russian client state.

Have the Taliban ever conducted any operations in Tajikistan? I know people go back and forth over the river (I went to Badakshan once and saw them swim across!), so there's contact, but I don't think the Taliban have a habit of going to Tajikistan to take hostages or anything like that?

> Have the Taliban ever conducted any operations in Tajikistan? I know people go back and forth over the river (I went to Badakshan once and saw them swim across!), so there's contact, but I don't think the Taliban have a habit of going to Tajikistan to take hostages or anything like that?

I don't think they have. It also wouldn't really make sense for them to do that. The Taliban mostly have issues with Iran and Pakistan so you will see conflicts with these nations most often in the news. I've never heard of them in conflict with any of the other stans. Badakhshan is also quite distant from the core of Taliban power which is mostly in the South. Northern Afghanistan is traditionally Northern Alliance territory.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#45

Post by hagbard_c »

mkoubaa wrote: post #28
OutOfHere wrote: post #5

Tajikistan looks to be an interesting case of Islam being kept in check without resorting to either extremism or terrorism. But this is neither free nor assured, and it probably requires constant wilful effort. In the long term, I can see it bleeding more territory to China due to the significant difference in military power and aggression. This is so long as there isn't a NATO-like structure to keep Chinese aggressi…

Saying "Islam being kept in check" in this way sounds an implication that religion (or perhaps just this one) ought to be suppressed. This sort of attitude and policy coming from it is like gasoline for religious extremism, and the fact that Tajikistan exports extremists should be enough evidence for that

Islam does have a specific problem in this regard since its scripture explicitly calls for violent struggle to spread it over the world. Ignoring this fact does not make the problem go away and only serves to undercut those who attempt to start an 'islamic enlightenment'.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#46

Post by rvense »

ashilfarahmand wrote: post #44
rvense wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have the Taliban ever conducted any operations in Tajikistan? I know people go back and forth over the river (I went to Badakshan once and saw them swim across!), so there's contact, but I don't think the Taliban have a habit of going to Tajikistan to take hostages or anything like that?

> Have the Taliban ever conducted any operations in Tajikistan? I know people go back and forth over the river (I went to Badakshan once and saw them swim across!), so there's contact, but I don't think the Taliban have a habit of going to Tajikistan to take hostages or anything like that? I don't think they have. It also wouldn't really make sense for them to do that. The Taliban mostly have issues with Iran and Pak…

The Taliban might be keeping more of an eye on the border than the previous Afghan government did, though, for that reason.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#47

Post by lye »

culebron21 wrote: post #39
ranni_ending wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah at another point he distanced himself from making racist movies about country he has 0 idea about. then you bring up an example of him trying to hide behind his Jewish identity to be above criticism as a "joke". it's trivial to punch down and then act like a victim by bringing up your own identity. People who find it easy to make fun of others while being extremely thin-skinned themselves: https://www.timesofisr…

I live in Kazakhstan as expat, and locals are brought up patriotic pretty much like in America -- national anthem at school every day (I shivered when I learned about it, both about KZ and America), told they're the richest post-soviet country. So the movie that plays the anthem and highlights so much that he's from Kazakhstan (although he looks nothing like a Kazakh), looks like a serious insult. (edit: to be exact,…

Maybe this has changed in recent years, or it's different in the south or the west of the country where more "ultra-patriots" live, but it wasn't my experience at all in the middle of 2000s. We had to listen to the national anthem several times per year on national holidays, and perform other token gestures like that, but nobody took it seriously and these actions were relentlessly ridiculed.

Not because of lack of patriotism, but because of the synthetic and bureaucratic feeling of the whole deal.

So the parody misses the mark.

Borat is really about the US society anyway, they could have picked absolutely anything else and it wouldn't make a difference.

> But Borat is the only thing people utter when I say where I live now

Own it and as soon as people see you don't care, they drop the subject. The joke was old ten years ago.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#48

Post by pythonguython »

lye wrote: post #34
pythonguython wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the central Asian “stan” countries have a Muslim majority and Tajikistan is actually the most extreme of them. But Kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Turkey and Iran are all examples of islam without extremism (although Iran has fundamentalism)

Kazakhstan has a problem with Islamic extremists and the government is very much worried about it and spends a lot of money fighting it. They put cameras in every mosque, for example, and work their people into every religious group of any significance. There's not much info on it in English, but here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Aktobe_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Aktobe_shootings https:/…

It’s certainly on the governments radar, and they do have an interest in preventing it. Kazakhstan banned hijab in schools and engages in anti terrorism like you mentioned. But overall, the country has a large secular population (due to the Soviet Union) and the country practices a moderate form of Islam called Sufism. I would attribute this to their nomadic culture, which meant the Quran was more of an oral tradition for Kazakhs in the past. The difference between Kazakhstan and Tajikstan is that you can actually find daesh cells in the pamir valley of Tajikistan, while that’s not really a thing in Kazakhstan. Extremism in KZ has manifested as a few isolated attacks and a small amount of individuals who chose to travel to fight in the Syrian war. I spent 9 months in KZ last year and - visited mosques, talked to many locals in various cities and feel comfortable saying that Islamic extremism is rare there.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#49

Post by culebron21 »

lye wrote: post #47
culebron21 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Kazakhstan as expat, and locals are brought up patriotic pretty much like in America -- national anthem at school every day (I shivered when I learned about it, both about KZ and America), told they're the richest post-soviet country. So the movie that plays the anthem and highlights so much that he's from Kazakhstan (although he looks nothing like a Kazakh), looks like a serious insult. (edit: to be exact,…

Maybe this has changed in recent years, or it's different in the south or the west of the country where more "ultra-patriots" live, but it wasn't my experience at all in the middle of 2000s. We had to listen to the national anthem several times per year on national holidays, and perform other token gestures like that, but nobody took it seriously and these actions were relentlessly ridiculed. Not because of lack of p…

I didn't mean he parodied the patriotism. I mean to serious patriots, this is a slap in the face, even when in fact it says nothing of Kz at all.

Re: Notes on Tajikistan

#50

Post by jajko »

wavefunction wrote: post #42
geoka9 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's more danger of bleeding territory to the Taliban, at least it has been the case until recently. Especially if Russia (who has had a big military base there forever) becomes irrelevant.

The article mentions that China has a military base in the east of Tajikistan and touches on Chinese attitudes towards islam and their behavior internally (in Xinjiang for example) and externally in Tajikistan. Russia appears to be unable to prosecute their own defense let alone the defense of "allies" as Armenia found out.

Russia has no allies. Every single 'compatible' nation ran the hell away from them as soon as it become marginally possible in late 80s, and in typical russian victim fashion west and US specifically is to blame.

Just look at what they are doing to their supposed brothers in Ukraine, for one old man's greed and twisted view on reality and his legacy, 0 other reasons. This is how they treat everybody, including other russians.

What they have are temporarily aligned forces who see some benefit in such action, nothing more. Most of them would take over russian territory and its mineral riches without blinking an eye if they could.

Post reply on HN