On September 27, Uzbek Foreign Minister Bakhtiyor Saidov met with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in New York. Subsequent publications from both parties highlighted different aspects of their discussions.
During the meeting, the two sides “Underscored the importance of commitment of states to the principle of non-interference to each other’s internal affairs for strengthening mutual trust,” wrote Saidov in a Teleram post. “We agreed to continue our constant dialogue in the spirit of alliance.”
However, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ website made no mention of non-interference. Instead, it noted that “particular attention was paid to the need to counteract manifestations of intolerance on interethnic grounds.” In her Telegram channel, the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, also emphasized countering the “manifestation of intolerance on interethnic grounds.”
This all happened days after a scandal involving a teacher at a Tashkent public school who hit a student for allegedly asking the class to be held in Russian. The Russian MFA asked for an “official explanation” from Uzbekistan.
What Happened?
On September 23, during a Russian language class, a 6th-grade student allegedly “talked back” to the teacher. According to a now-deleted Facebook post by the student’s mother, the boy had requested that the class be conducted in Russian. In response, the teacher reportedly pulled the student from his seat, slapped him, and shoved him forcefully. Video footage of the incident quickly went viral on social media.
The Preschool and School Education Department of Tashkent City said that an investigation over the incident was underway and that “the student was not injured.”
Zakharova soon weighed in, stating that the Russian Foreign Ministry was “keeping this issue under a close attention.” In a Telegram post, she stated that the Russian ministry had formally requested an official explanation from their Uzbek counterparts.
In response, Alisher Qodirov, chairman of the National Revival Party and a deputy speaker of the Legislative Chamber, fired back, noting that Russia should mind its own business.
“It would be right if they go about their own affairs full of problems instead of racking their brain over our internal affairs,” he wrote, after emphasizing that the violation of the rights of an Uzbek citizen’s child will be addressed in accordance with the laws established by the people of Uzbekistan.
It did not end there.
Following Qodirov’s remark, deputy chairman of the the Federation Council Committee on International Affairs and senator of the Russian Federation Andrey Klimov did an interview with a local Russian media outlet, Lenta.ru. “What was done by this so-called teacher is at the very least an offense, maybe even more. What the chairman says is at the very least puzzling,” Klimov said, after noting he disapproves of the quick escalation of statements by the two sides.
Klimov then moved to threaten Uzbekistan with Ukraine’s fate. He said that there are many people who want to put Central Asia against Russia and against each other. “There was already one country that behaved this way for quite a long time. Now it finds itself in a very difficult situation,” he said, presumably referring to Ukraine. He also added that it is the constitutional right of Russians to care about the rights of their “compatriots,” alluding to the incident in Uzbekistan.
A day later, Qodirov took it to his Telegram channel, responding to Klimov he said, “In the case of Ukraine, Keosyan’s threat was more colorful, it is best to let the professionals do the job.” He added that he was more concerned about losing Russia as a market.
Tigran Keosayan is a film director and journalist from Russia with Armenian origin who was sanctioned by the European Union, Canada, the United Kingdom, and a number of other countries for spreading anti-Ukraine propaganda in the Russian media. In April 2022, he provoked a response from Kazakhstan’s Foreign Ministry after appearing to threaten the country, saying in a video critical of Astana’s decision to refrain from holding a May 9 Victory Day parade that year, “Look at Ukraine carefully, think seriously.”
Who Is Alisher Qadirov and Why are His Statements Important?
In recent years, Qodirov, a 49-year-old former presidential candidate, who currently serves as the chairman of the National Revival Party (Milliy Tiklanish) and a deputy speaker of the Legislative Chamber, has emerged as a prominent critic of Russian chauvinist claims and of the Soviet legacy.
When a Soviet flag was raised at a concert – “Songs of Victory” – organized in Tashkent on May 1, 2021, Qodirov called it an insult and provocation.
“We consider it an insult to the Uzbek people that the flag of the invading Soviet state, stained with the blood of progressive Uzbek intellectuals and our pure-hearted ancestors, is raised high in the heart of the capital of our country,” his post at the time read.
Following the invasion of Ukraine, as inquiries on which side Uzbekistan supported started circulating, Qodirov criticized Uzbeks who sided with the Kremlin. “Is this the result of the Russian mass media brain-washing?” he wrote.
Russian chauvinism, which usually targets Kazakhstan given that the country shares the longest border with Russia, lately started targeting Uzbekistan, too. In December 2023, Zakhar Prilepin, co-chairman of the Fair Russia – For Truth Party, speaking about migrant workers, said that the territories “from where migrant workers come to us [Russia], should simply be annexed entirely.” He specifically mentioned Uzbekistan.
Officially, 1.8 million Uzbeks are currently working in Russia, making them the largest group of migrant workers in the country. However, informal estimates suggest the actual number could be significantly higher.
A month later, nationalist Russian historian Mikhail Smolin claimed that the Uzbek nation did not exist before the 1917 revolution, nor did the Kazakh or Azerbaijan nations. In response, Qodirov called for reducing the use of Russian language in education, media, and other spheres.
“Lately we hear nothing but chauvinistic statements in Russian,” he stated, suggesting that Moscow seems interested in this kind of rhetoric. As a practical measure to amend the situation, he urged attention to the disproportionate use of the Russian language in education and media, noting that only 3 percent of Uzbekistan’s population are Russian.
Uzbekistan is home to over 130 ethnicities and nationalities. A national census has not been carried out since 1989; however, official estimates state that 84.4 percent of the population are ethnically Uzbek while only 2.1 percent are Russian. Despite that, the Russian language is taught at public schools as part of mandatory secondary education. The Tashkent branch of Rossotrudnichestvo (the Russian Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States Affairs, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation) claimed that one-third of Uzbekistan’s population speak Russian, but this may be an overestimation. Many people can understand Russian, but that is not the same as being fluent in it or preferring it.
Qodirov later clarified that he is not a Russophobe, rather a “Sovietaphobe”: “True that the Soviet state is our history, but it should remain in the black pages of our history and should not be part of our future.”
In early September, Qodirov called for a ban on the promotion of Soviet-era propaganda, ideology, and symbols.
“The Uzbek people were discriminated against and humiliated by the USSR administration and are still healing the wounds of that period,” Qodirov wrote, arguing that any approval or glorification of the Soviet era should not be criminalized, but viewed as “a betrayal of our people and our ancestors who became victims of the bloody regime.”
His remarks came in response to a recent court decision sentencing a 74-year-old man to three years of restricted freedom for a Telegram post in which he claimed that “Uzbekistan’s independence is superficial and the former Soviet Union has not officially dissolved.”
Uzbek politicians rarely make bold remarks, especially in regard to Russia where millions of migrants work and send remittances from and with which Uzbekistan has close relations. The mere fact that the Uzbek government is allowing a politician to speak this freely about Russia should send a signal to Moscow that Tashkent is not going to tolerate or even entertain the absurd chauvinistic claims made by Russian propagandists, even if Moscow insists these voices do not reflect its official stance.