The former prime minister noted that the reasons for the breakup of the tandem could be quite serious.
In light of the recent dismissal of Kamchybek Tashiev from his position as head of the security bloc of Kyrgyzstan, the public has begun to actively discuss the true reasons behind this decision, as well as the possible consequences for his political alliance with Sadyr Japarov and the entire power system as a whole. To assess the situation, the editorial team of Vesti.kg turned to Felix Kulov, a former prime minister with experience in similar tandems, as he himself was part of the well-known alliance of Bakiyev - Kulov ten years ago.
- Felix Sharshenbaevich, in your opinion, what could be the real reasons for Kamchybek Tashiev's departure, if we set aside the official versions: is it a personal decision, pressure, elite conflict, loss of trust, or part of a broader restructuring of power? Which option seems most plausible to you?
- Questions about the real reasons for Kamchybek Tashiev's dismissal, as you understand, will not be disclosed, and this is quite normal practice for decisions of this level. However, it is obvious that this was not a spontaneous step by the president. The breakup, which had long been considered stable and confirmed by Tashiev himself, could only have occurred for serious reasons.
This is also confirmed by a number of decisions made: the dismissal of his deputies, the reorganization of the GKNB, and the separation of the Border Service into a separate entity. All of this indicates a systemic, rather than personal, nature of the decision made.
Without delving into conspiracy theories, one can assume that questions arose regarding the balance of power and subordination in the relationships between "the boss and the subordinate." In such situations, the President, as the guarantor of the Constitution and the unity of the vertical of power, is obliged to act decisively and proactively, even when it involves influential figures.
Thus, the decision made speaks not of the weakness of power, but of its maturity and ability to respond adequately to changes in governance with consideration for the long-term interests of the country, rather than the personal merits of individual officials.
- How do you see the political prospects for Kamchybek Tashiev after his resignation: can he participate in the presidential elections and compete with the current president?
- By law, Kamchybek Tashiev, like any citizen of Kyrgyzstan, has the right to participate in the presidential elections. However, he has repeatedly stated that he does not aspire to the presidency, preferring to ensure stability over personal ambitions.
Of course, the political situation can change, and such a scenario cannot be completely ruled out. However, from a state perspective, it is much more important to avoid a split among the people and destabilization of the political situation. Tashiev himself called for this while serving as the chairman of the GKNB.
In these circumstances, the most reasonable and responsible behavior would be to avoid conflict with the current President and to maintain a constructive dialogue and respect for the current authority. This aligns with the interests of the state, the expectations of society, and the principles of state discipline that Tashiev himself had previously declared.
- Given the current situation, could Tashiev decide to return to Bishkek in the near future, and are there real legal or political risks for him, including the possibility of prosecution or arrest, or is this just speculation?
There are no significant grounds for concern about serious risks. Kamchybek Tashiev's return to Bishkek and his further actions will depend primarily on his own decisions and political line. If he does not take confrontational steps, there is no reason to expect any prosecution.
From the state's perspective, applying pressure or using force against a former high-ranking official would be impractical, as it would create unnecessary tension and could negatively affect the overall political stability in the country. It is clear that the current authority is interested in maintaining calm and manageability, rather than actions that could strengthen political opponents.
In this context, discussions about a possible arrest or prosecution are more in the realm of speculation and lack real grounds.
