Of course, the story about masterpieces in miniature would be incomplete if we did not mention the money featuring unique animals that inhabit Kyrgyzstan, with the famous snow leopard being the first among them. These beautiful animals are mainly hunted by experienced trappers from zoos, who catch them alive and send them to zoos both nearby and far abroad. However, hunting the snow leopard is fraught with enormous difficulties and surprises because it is very elusive, cautious, and lives high in the mountains, in remote and wild places. Its strength, feline agility, and precision of jumps give it an advantage in competition with any beast, even with ibexes and argalis.
Hunting with a golden eagle is an ancient traditional activity of the Kyrgyz. Even now, you can see this proud bird sitting on a powerful branch in the yard of a house, near a yurt. It waits for its moment when the eagle hunters go out into the snowy expanses, and the drivers, spotting a fox, will remove the cap from the bird's head and toss it up. The powerful wings, which can reach two to two and a half meters in span, quickly gain altitude; with a few more flaps, the eagle dives after the fox, slicing through the frosty air with a whistle. One eagle can catch dozens of foxes in a season. It is also used to hunt hares, marmots, grouse, roe deer, and young wolves. The chicks of these birds are often taken from the nest for training, which puts the species at risk.
A true adornment of the new banknotes is the image of the noble deer, or maral. This animal has been revered in Kyrgyzstan since ancient times, and one of the clans even came to be called the Bugus. Bugus is the male, adorned with antlers intended for tournament fights, not for killing. Very rarely, as an exception, antlers grow on females, but for this, they pay with infertility. In Ch. Aitmatov's story "The White Steamship," the magical mother-deer is adorned with sprawling antlers, resembling the branches of autumn trees.
As we can see, the folklore tradition endowed female deer with antlers not only out of a desire to highlight them in a special way: behind the myth lies reality. Even at the beginning of this century, the range of the maral in the Tian Shan almost coincided with the range of the fir tree. Now, the deer has disappeared everywhere and remains only in the fir forests of the upper reaches of the Naryn River, where a special reserve has been created. Its image on the money should remind us every time that this animal is listed in the Red Book and that special care should be taken for its survival.
New Money - Hopes and Problems The heated debates about the introduction of the national currency have mostly subsided, but the exchange of opinions will continue for a long time, although many understand that the new money did not appear out of anyone's malice, but is a forced measure caused by a whole complex of circumstances. The issue is that the mechanism for introducing the new money was not sufficiently well worked out, and this fact was not detailed enough in agreement with partners in the ruble zone. Today, it is necessary to soberly weigh all the pros and cons in order to implement economic, social, and organizational measures that would stimulate the viability of the national currency and strengthen trust in it among economic entities, the population, and foreign partners.
So, let us once again pose a series of questions and try to answer them.
1. To what extent will these goals be realized with the introduction of the national currency - the som?
Dependence on Russia for the issuance of money and the provision of cash will be eliminated. However, the national currency is non-convertible and can only circulate within the republic; moreover, it does not have commodity backing to become solid. "The 400 million US dollars that our foreign 'donors' lend us will provide some confidence in the som for a while, but part of the dollars will leave the republic as payments to foreign suppliers. The republican treasury will need to be constantly replenished, and again with debt. Until when?
It is good that the loans are concessional, with deferred payments, which allows for some relief in carrying out reforms, but they should be used precisely for the real revival of the economy, and one should also incur debts wisely: we cannot make our children and grandchildren hostages. The real solidity of the national currency can only be ensured by a decent state of the republic's economy, its resources, and capabilities.
It is clear that Russia has more resources and opportunities to make the ruble solid faster. Today, it also lacks proper commodity backing for its money, but it has reserves to achieve this faster than we can. If we follow our example of ensuring the solidity of the ruble through dollar loans, then Russia can do this more reliably. The vast country is slowly and heavily rocking in the fight against inflation, but when it gathers strength, the reduction and elimination of inflation will be large-scale, and the speed gained will be significant. It is unlikely that today, and even more so tomorrow, the som will weigh more than the ruble.
With the introduction of the new currency, it may be possible to mitigate the influence of Russian inflationary processes on the economy of the republic, but it is impossible to completely get rid of this, because the cause of inflation lies not in the national currencies themselves, but in the state of the economy. It is known that the state of Kyrgyzstan's economy is no better than that of Russia; moreover, the republic imports many goods and means of production from there, therefore, the indirect influence of the ruble on the value of the national currency, on economic policy as a whole, and particularly on pricing, remains. We simply have no alternative partner.
Another important point: what will be the value of the som in relation to the ruble, dollar, and other foreign currencies?
The exchange rate of the som to the ruble is set at 1:200. This "number" will work within the republic. But will Russia agree to such a ratio in mutual settlements? And if it establishes a ratio on its territory - one ruble will be equated to 1000 soms or will completely refuse ruble and som payments? Will we, with the introduction of soms, orient ourselves to the level of world prices for resources, products, goods, and means of production? If so, to what extent do productivity and quality of labor meet world standards, and to what extent are our products competitive, and will they be bought?
Or will there be internal consumption prices and export prices? Or, by importing at world prices or close to them, will we export at much lower prices and increase the external economic deficit, practically not earning currency, while further increasing our debts?..
Of course, the content of the som in relation to stronger currencies of other states, especially to convertible currencies, will force us to live within our means, seek ways of self-salvation, limit imports, and create a model of autonomous economic self-sufficiency. And this process is now associated with a further doomed decline in production, which, combined with a miserable commodity supply, will determine the insignificant content of the som.
As we can see, none of the goals associated with the introduction of the national currency are fully achieved and do not yield a positive effect.
2. What negative consequences may arise from the introduction of the national currency?
Firstly, it may lead to further disintegration of economic ties with Russia and other former republics of the Union. Supplies of means of production, machinery, fuel and energy materials, metals, timber and other building materials, fertilizers, etc., and consumer goods and food will decrease. They will not be sold for soms, nor for rubles, nor for other local national currencies. Trade will proceed in convertible currency at world prices.
Russia may not supply products for soms, as they are of no use to it, nor for "Soviet" rubles, as it has its own money. Hence, the "Soviet" rubles collected in the process of exchanging for soms will settle with us. We will have to pay in convertible currency. Ultimately, Russia may refuse to accept what it receives from us faster than we find other partners. We cannot refuse its services; this is reality.
It is clear that our capabilities are limited. As a result, the decline in production, which is already significant, will intensify, and the economic crisis will deepen. The possibilities for commodity supply of the national currency will not increase but will sharply decrease. And this is given that they are extremely meager: there is simply no normal commodity supply for our new money.
Of course, the content of the national currency can be ensured by convertible currency, but we will not earn it in sufficient quantities. We will have to borrow. But can we, is it not burdensome to constantly support the som with convertible currency borrowed from a kind uncle? After all, the supply and acquisition of the goods we need is not a one-time but a constantly recurring and renewing process. This means we will always be borrowing convertible currency, and this currency will constantly go to suppliers, partners of the republic. The size of the debts will increase, and the question arises: who will lend them? Meanwhile, we are buying much more than we are selling in convertible currency.
Secondly, the further decline in production and its intensification will inevitably lead to an increase in unemployment. For Kyrgyzstan, which is characterized by high birth rates and an excess of labor resources, this is one of the explosive problems. Moreover, the decline in production and the reduction of jobs will intensify the emigration flow.
Thirdly, the decline in production and unemployment will lead to a further decrease in the standard of living of the population. All this, as they say, are additional "effects" of the introduction of the national currency, which, apparently, will continue to be supported by borrowed convertible currency.
3. For what purposes and in what amounts is convertible currency needed?
Firstly, for payments to suppliers of machinery, equipment, raw materials and materials, fuel and energy resources, consumer goods from near and far abroad.
Secondly, to provide the population with freely convertible currency, for the purpose of communication among people within the former Union, as the desire for communication among people is indestructible.
Thirdly, for the purchase of national currencies of countries near and far abroad*.
Fourthly, and this is the most important: it is not the som that will ultimately revive the economy, but structural restructuring, which needs solid and abundant financing. If all this is taken into account, what amount will the debt amount to, and who will lend? What amount can we cover ourselves and from what sources?
4. Was the introduction of the national currency inevitable? Was there an alternative?
With the introduction of new Russian money, which may become the national currency or a transitional currency to it, the restriction on the issuance of "Soviet" rubles and the rise in prices for their sale, and the introduction of ready money in other republics of the former Union, the introduction of our own currency may have become inevitable. Although we will have to pay for it with the very undesirable economic, social, and political consequences mentioned above.
Was there an alternative? Yes, there was, if we entered into confederative relations with Russia, with which we still have some economic ties, close military-defense cooperation, and a common scientific and cultural space that cannot and should not be severed. Why not close these close past ties and political cooperation into a normal confederative form of relations, assuming a single currency with Russia? It is clear that here the desire of Kyrgyzstan alone is not enough; good will from a partner who would be interested in good-neighborly relations even now, with different national currencies, is needed.
New and recent history does not give us grounds to regard Russia and the Russian people with suspicion: sympathy, compassion, and mutual assistance, even with all the past costs, were much greater. And in the Great Patriotic War on Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian soil, the blood of Kyrgyz sons was also shed. Moving away from the historically doomed communist system should not undermine good interethnic and interstate relations. For that would be barbarism, a flight from civilization.
5. What should be done to ensure that the national currency justifies hopes and revives the economy?
One could sell one or two gold deposits, not the land, but specifically the deposits until the complete extraction of the metal. It would be possible to lease areas for tourist and health complexes for the long term. A certain part of these funds could be included in the development of the sold or leased natural resources, and together with the buyer or lessee, act as a "productive functionary" and receive from productive investment, in addition to the already received proceeds from the sale, an additional, "reflected" effect.
It is wrong to think that the introduction of the som is explained by the demands of foreign sponsors, who otherwise refuse to provide loans. They dictate how privatization should be carried out, what form of social structure and what path of development we should choose. It turns out that we are not only getting into a debt bondage but also into a political and economic one, losing the freedom to choose our paths of development. This does not correspond to reality.
It is necessary to establish order and discipline in the economy, stimulate production, because only this is the reliable guarantee of the solidity of the national currency.
Analyzing all possible consequences of the introduction of the national currency, one can conclude: this step is forced at the moment. Difficult times await us, full of the struggle for survival, which may eradicate the psychology of dependency within us, awaken the instinct of self-preservation, and a sense of responsibility for our fate. We must endure hardships and live within our means, work and work, accumulate resources and capital, preserve science and education under difficult conditions, protect the population from diseases and extreme deprivation - this is what we must prepare for.
The som is not our enemy, but one of the means in the struggle for economic revival. Its effectiveness ultimately depends not only on the President, the Supreme Council, and the Government of the republic but also on how we, the citizens of the republic, learn to work and live in new conditions, on our psychology and conscious understanding of the situation.
Conclusion
When, at the suggestion of N. S. Khrushchev, we all rushed towards the final realization of the communist idea, some hotheads suggested: why sell goods for money? Let’s give away food, clothing, and other industrial products for free, widely open the doors of theaters and cinemas. After all, in the Soviet Union, everyone produces something: miners produce coal, metallurgists produce metal, collective and state farms produce meat, milk, fruits, vegetables, and raw materials for industry, textile workers produce fabrics... Dreaming in this way, people forget that their desire alone is not enough to distribute material and cultural goods without limits, regardless of the results of labor; abundance of everything people need is required.
However, this thesis is also far from the truth. Let’s take a look, even through television, into the shops and stores of one of the Western countries; the shelves are bursting with a variety of goods. However, they are far from communism, as far as the earth is from the sky, and many people there are generally satisfied with the system in which they live. They happily spend their earned money and do not even think of cursing it, let alone destroying it, because money provides them with a variety of services.
Money has played a huge role in the development of humanity, no less than the steam locomotive, the railway, the telephone, and the computer. They have saved a lot of labor and time. No matter how advanced machines are, they cannot perform as much work and save humanity as much effort as paper notes and metal coins.
Money has divided labor among nations, contributed to the development of industry and agriculture, and economic and cultural ties between countries. Money has freed people from attachment to one place, giving them the opportunity to obtain spiritual and material sustenance wherever there is an opportunity to work, exchange products of labor, and trade.
But money does not tolerate unreasonable handling. They cannot be printed just anywhere and anyhow. It must be kept in mind that paper money has no value by itself. They must be backed by the state’s gold reserves. To issue more than the gold held in the bank, and the money will depreciate, leading to inflation.