Today, called Tajikistan “a remarkable success story,” highlighting how far it has come since the dark days of the Civil War and calling for increased activity to attract international investment. (all quotes from speech)

True, the country has taken steps towards internationally-assisted poverty reduction, and increased investment might help support commerce (though it might be more the big businesses like the Mongolian über-corporation MCS).

However, the government still basically does whatever it wants, the upcoming elections are a foregone conclusion (with Iskanderov’s prosecution), the drug trade has gotten worse and the human rights situation is abominable (and civil rights are in jeopardy). Moreover, Tajikistan’s support from Iranmight create geopolitical tensions and put the United States in a difficult diplomatic position.Not to play the pessimist, but the reality is that Tajikistan is still in dire straits, and I’m not convinced that investment will be Tajikistan’s panacea.

The sharpest point was made over corruption:

A lot really comes down to the issue of corruption, doesn’t it. President Rahmonov has said heis [sic] serious about decreasing corruption in Tajikistan. And yet it can never be “talked away” or “ordered away.” The government can help the president by legislating sensible business regulations that are fair for all, fairly implemented, and enforced by independent and impartial courts. When that is done, not only will corruption decrease, but also the economy will grow.

He correctly traced one of the primary roots: the Byzantine laws and regulations governing everyday commerce that force commonplace people into situations in which a bribe becomes the only practical option for getting things done. Interestingly, Ambassador Hoagland drew largely on the modernization theory of democratization (summarized succintly: “I am convinced prosperity will continue to grow. Prosperity is a “fertilizer” for democratic evolution. In the end, prosperity and democracy will be the twin guarantors of Tajikistan’s long-term stability.”) However, this may not be the case if the right business environment is not created. While the development of factories and the specialization of labor might have helped create Europe’s middle class, unless the Tajik government makes dramatic changes in its laws to prevent graft and corruption, the ordinary merchants and farmers will not enjoy any of the benefits. Moreover, his specific recommendations went only as far as particular policies for achieving the Tajik government’s goal of “[decreasing] opportunities for corruption, not [creating] new opportunities.” Rather than calling on the Tajik people to demand more accountable governance or on the network of (US-supported) NGO’s to press the government further, he only outlined particular laws, giving as the only incentive the hope of greater investment and trade in the distant future, small consolation in a country where commonplace people barely survive day to day…