Document sans titre





Dynamiques du sud

Les pays du Sud

Le système Sud



Pôles et océans







Royaume Uni



Pays Bas





Republique tcheque



Europe Nordique




Les iles de Méditerranée:








Asie Pacifique








Asie centrale;


Océanie , Océan Indien


Pétrole au Moyen Orient

Histoire du Moyen Orient





Arabie Saoudite



Geopolitique du Maghreb




Afrique Occidentale francophone

Cote d'Ivoire


Afrique occidentale anglophone



Afrique orientale

Afrique australe











Etats Unis

USA: géographie, histoire

USA: Politique et Société

USA: Diplomatie

USA Economie





Recherche rapide,

Recherche avancée

Comment s'informer


Sources Biblio

Sources Internet

Google Scholar

Search by location

Les Wiki par categories



Chroniques sur Internet

Espaces sur Internet

Themes sur Internet

Liens externes


 Generalités  Chroniques  Geographie   Institutions   International  Economie   Secteurs   Société  Idées   Perspectives

Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


SOURCES   Asie centrale sur Internet

Asie centrale

Tensions Asie centrale Caucase



«Dictionnaire de l'Asie centrale», Catherine Poujol, Edition Ellipses, 352 pages, Paris, 2001

«Asie centrale, champ de guerres», Ahmed Rashid, Editions Autrement, Collection Frontières, mars 2002, Paris

«L'ombre des talibans», Ahmed Rashid, postface de Olivier Roy, Editions Autrement, Collection Frontières,

redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


Georgia  Georgia  Armenia     Armenia


Kazakstan Kazakhstan Turkmenistan Turkmenistan 
Uzbekistan Uzbekistan Kyrgyzstan   Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan  Tajikistan  

Mongolia  Mongolia

Soviet Union (former)


redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)



    Epopée du monde turc

    L'Empire Mongol

    • Une région qui fut longtemps source de puissance, d'agression et de destabilisation:

      • Gengis Khan , Tamerlan, Mogols, Turcs ottomans..

    • Une région encadrée depuis cinq siècles par des empires voisins: Chine, Russie, Empire britannique

    • Une région destabilisée par les décolonisations des grands empires coloniaux

    • Une région aujourd'hui destabilisée et destabilisante par la religion et les conflits tribaux


    • ASIE CENTRALE Dix ans après http://www.courrierinternational.com/actual/analyse.asp L'année 2001 marque le dixième anniversaire de l'indépendance des républiques méridionales de l'ex-Union soviétique. Cette indépendance, qui n'avait pas été sollicitée, a donné lieu à une courte période d'ouverture et d'euphorie. Mais aujourd'hui, dans la plupart de ces nouveaux Etats dirigés par d'anciens apparatchiks, l'absence de démocratie demeure patente...

    • - "Geopolitique de la nouvelle Asie centrale", par M.-R. Djalili et T. Kellner, ed. PUF. Il s'agit d'une presentation remarquablement complete du Kazakhstan, de l'Ouzbekistan, du Kirghizstan, du Turkmenistan et du Tadjikistan. Cinq Republiques de l'Union sovietique devenues independantes a la suite de l'auto-implosion de ce regime, le 8 decembre 1991. En depit de retouches cosmetiques, les auteurs y voient depuis le maintien de systemes politiques generalement autoritaires et la metamorphose du sovietisme en un nationalisme officiel. A l'heure ou l'Afghanistan voisin s'embrase, il importe de les connaitre. http://www.diploweb.com/p4djke1.htm

redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)



redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)



    • Tensions Asie centrale Caucase

    •  La crise terroriste de 2001

    • Dix ans après http://www.courrierinternational.com/actual/analyse.asp L'année 2001 marque le dixième anniversaire de l'indépendance des républiques méridionales de l'ex-Union soviétique. Cette indépendance, qui n'avait pas été sollicitée, a donné lieu à une courte période d'ouverture et d'euphorie. Mais aujourd'hui, dans la plupart de ces nouveaux Etats dirigés par d'anciens apparatchiks, l'absence de démocratie demeure patente...

    • Central Asia's New States: political developments and implications for U.S. interests. by Jim Nichol. U.S. Congressional Research Service, CRS Issue Brief. May 18, 2001. http://www.cnie.org/nle/inter-76.html In response to the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on 11 September 2001, the United States and a broad though informal coalition of allies and like minded states are building up a military capability in Central Asia that will in all likelihood strike inside Afghanistan. The ruling Taliban and Osama bin Laden, who has taken refuge in Afghanistan since 1996, are expected to be primary targets.

      The five Central Asian nations - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan - are now at the centre of a major diplomatic and military effort against terrorism. This will have an enormous impact on a region that is already showing worsening signs of instability. Precisely what that impact eventually proves to be will depend importantly on a number of factors that cannot yet be adequately weighed. These include whether the anticipated military action proves to be of long or short duration, whether it is relatively surgical and precise in its conduct or produces many innocent casualties and refugees, and whether or to what degree U.S. forces remain in the region after conclusion of their primary mission. Managing the impact and minimising the risks of instability across the region, however, will have to be a prime consideration of the United States and the other coalition participants.

      The leaders of all the Central Asian nations quickly condemned the attacks in America. Anti-terrorism is a concept to which the Central Asian states are sympathetic in principle. Before 11 September, they were already attempting to mobilise against what they considered to be their own regional terrorist threats through a series of summit meetings, international agreements, and even a joint anti-terrorist centre to be established in Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan. The main vehicle for this activity is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), which includes both Russia and China as well as Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and has as its central platform anti-terrorism and opposition to radical Islam. Authoritarian tendencies in the member governments, however, have given a quality to some of the rhetoric and action taken by SCO states in the name of anti-terrorism and supervision of Islamic activity that is not consistent with the values of the societies that now seek their assistance.

      So far the responses to calls for specific cooperation against terrorism have varied. Uzbekistan has been the most enthusiastic as it would welcome a strike at the Afghanistan-based Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), which it considers its own deadly enemy and sees the situation as an opportunity to extract economic and political concessions from the West. U.S. aircraft and personnel are reported to be in the country already.

      Tajikistan has offered support but remains concerned about the impact on the shaky secular-Islamic coalition that rules the country. Like Uzbekistan, it is anxious about the risk of refugees fleeing across the border with Afghanistan.

      Kazakhstan will allow use of its air space but is otherwise somewhat removed from the possible conflict. Kyrgyzstan has been lukewarm about supporting the U.S., again considering the possible impact of refugees on its faltering economy.

      Turkmenistan operates under a system of neutrality and isolation that precludes overt cooperation with the West.

      Two decades of conflict in Afghanistan have already had a major impact on Central Asia. During the Soviet period, Central Asia bore a heavy burden of casualties from the war in that country. In more recent years, the IMU, which is supported by the Taliban, has carried out incursions into Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan from bases in Afghanistan. Refugees from the Afghan civil war have been a major problem for Tajikistan. Indeed, all the countries are concerned that war may spill over into their territory. Moreover, much of Afghanistan's drug production flows to Europe through Central Asia.

      While Central Asian cooperation in the current highest priority efforts against terrorism is welcome, the political, social and economic situation in these countries suggests that the international community should consider carefully the long-term impact of its diplomatic and military efforts in the region. These nations were in a precarious state even before the current crisis. Economic development has lagged, democratic reforms have been mostly stillborn, and the governments are often viewed by their overwhelmingly Islamic populations as deeply corrupt, unrepresentative, and repressive. The region has been dangerously destabilised by drug trafficking, is riven with ethnic rivalries and divided by disputes over borders and resources.

      Central Asian governments have been inclined to repress even moderate and non-violent religious groups for fear that they will become a significant source of opposition. By forcing most political opposition underground, however, nations like Uzbekistan have made extremism more attractive to broader sections of their populations. It is also easy to understand that societies dominated by corruption, crime and Mafia-like economic elites might find attractive the message of discipline and order carried by Islamist groups.

      All of these countries continue to struggle with widespread poverty and difficulties in implementing market reforms. The 55 million people of Central Asia have shown themselves increasingly dissatisfied with their political and economic circumstances. In this environment, strategic partnerships between the international community and the current governments in the region may produce dangerous and unintended consequences.

      Any military action by the United States-led anti-terrorism coalition in or from the region thus needs to be accompanied by concerted long-term efforts to stabilise Central Asia politically and economically. This will require a delicate balancing act between the demands of authoritarian regional leaders and the aspirations of the people. It will also involve juggling the interests of the four nuclear-armed countries - Russia, China, India and Pakistan - that surround the region as well as other players such as Iran. It will certainly require considerably more diplomatic and financial resources than have been committed in the decade since these countries became independent from the Soviet Union.

      This briefing considers regional concerns and, in particular, the individual perspectives of each of the five states and the potential impact of the current crisis on their societies. Consideration is also given to the role of Russia in the region, its take on dealing with the current terrorism challenge, its strategic stake in Central Asia and how it has responded to U.S. efforts to more closely engage the Central Asian states in a military response against Afghanistan.



  • AMERIQUE: Assez nouvelle venue dans cette région, l'Amérique s'y intéresse:

    • pour combattre l'expansion soviétique (soutien aux talibans contre les Russes )

    • pour éliminer les talibans afin d'éliminer les militants d'AlQaida

    • pour récupérer le pétrole d'Asie centrale sans passer par la Russie ni par l'Iran

    • US and Asia  

    • Central Asia's New States: political developments and implications for U.S.interests. by Jim Nichol. U.S. Congressional Research Service, CRS Issue Brief. May 18, 2001. http://www.cnie.org/nle/inter-76.html 'SUMMARY After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States recognized the independence of all the former Central Asian republics and established diplomatic relations with each by mid-March 1992. The United States also supported their admission to the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and other Western organizations, and elicited Turkish support in countering Iranian influence in the region. Congress was at the forefront in urging the formation of coherent U.S. policies for aiding these and other new independent states (NIS) of the former Soviet Union, and approved the Freedom Support Act and other legislation for this purpose. The former Clinton Administration emphasized forging closer U.S. relations with the Central Asian states. U.S. policy goals included fostering stability, democratization, free market economies, free trade and transport throughout the Eurasian corridor, denuclearization in the non-Russian states, and adherence to international human rights standards. An over-arching U.S. priority was to discourage attempts by radical regimes and groups to block or subvert progress toward these goals. Clinton Administration policy also aimed to integrate these states into the international community so that they followed responsible security and other policies, and to discourage xenophobic and anti-Western orientations that threatened regional and international peace and stability. 

      The former Clinton Administration's policy goals in Central Asia reflected the different characteristics of these states. U.S. interests in Kazakhstan included promoting the removal of strategic nuclear weapons located on its territory (the last were removed in 1995) and the security of other nuclear materials. The United States pursued some economic and business interests in Central Asia, particularly in oil and natural gas development in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. The United States initially forged expanded ties with Kyrgyzstan because it appeared committed to democratization. The Clinton Administration was concerned about human rights and civil liberties problems in all the states. In Tajikistan, U.S. humanitarian aid focused on alleviating the effects of civil war and on other urgent needs. For FY2001, the Administration emphasized security assistance for counter-narcotics, non-proliferation, border and customs, and defense programs. Some observers call for different emphases or levels of U.S. involvement in Central Asia. Some have called for strengthening conditions linking aid to progress in improving human rights or in making adequate progress in democratization and the creation of free markets. Some dispute the importance of energy and other resources to U.S. national security interests. Others point to civil and ethnic tensions in the region as possibly endangering U.S. lives and investments. Heightened Congressional interest in Central Asia was reflected in passage of 'Silk Road' language in late 1999 (Consolidated Appropriations; P.L. 106-113) authorizing enhanced U.S. policy attention and aid to support conflict amelioration, humanitarian needs, economic development, transport (including energy pipelines) and communications, border controls, democracy, and the creation of civil societies in the South Caucasian and Central Asian states.

      Beijing's central Asia strategy Central Asia is assuming greater strategic and economic prominence and competition has intensified among powerful regional powers keen to enhance their influence. JID's regional correspondent assesses Beijing's strategy. [Jane's Intelligence Digest - first posted to http://jid.janes.com - 1 October 2003]


redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


  • Potentiel de développement Important: 70 millions habitants pour l'Asie centrale; fortes ressources énergétiques + coton

  • Inconvénients des "économies de rente". pouvoirs économiques entre les mains des alliés du gouvernement. déficits publics pour aides fiscales aux "amis"

  • lente libéralisation des entreprises (retard notable en Ouzbekistan)

  • La Russie reste un partenaire important

  • Souhaitent investissements étrangers, notamment pour le pétrole et le gaz


redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


  • le pétrole et le gaz fournissent l'essentiel des ressources (Azerbaidjan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan); Appel aux investisseurs étrangers. poblèmes de l'expédition par le Nord du Caucase (voie russe), le Sud (voie turque favorisée par les USA) ou même par l'Iran "libéral" Pétrole au Moyen Orient

  • le coton , quasi monoculture en Ouzbekistan

  • système bancaire fragile

  •  L'eau en Asie centrale : incidences d'un nouveau contexte geopolitique, par Jeremy Allouche, doctorant.  1 ere partie: Le bassin de la mer d'Aral L'assechement de la mer d'Aral est sans doute la plus grande catastrophe ecologique du XX e siecle. Cette region est, pourtant, une zone riche en eau. Le probleme vient de la surexploitation des ressources, due au developpement d'une agriculture intensive pour la culture du coton encouragee pendant l'occupation russe, puis sovietique. Les consequences de cet assechement ont ete tres nuisibles pour les deux Etats riverains, l'Ouzbekistan et le Kazakhstan. Les ports de peche ont ete abandonnes. L'economie locale est devastee.  

redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)


redbar.gif (1205 octets)Fleche_haute60E0.gif (891 octets)

{ }
Google search
Web http://www.geoscopies.net/GeoCMS/