The Kyrygyzstan soap opera has reached a new pitch in recent weeks. President Bakiyev recently addressed the parliament to denounce their squabbling and corruption, saying that the parliament is, “turning into an arena for political squabbles, and becoming the source of an atmosphere of instability in the country.”

“Quit your vodka-selling businesses — by the way, it’s against the law for members of parliament. Then you won’t need bulletproof vests,” Bakiev said. “Stop breaking the law. Shut down your businesses, legal or illegal. Stop fighting competitors using your authority as parliament deputies — and sleep in peace.”

He also dropped a hint that he could disband the parliament, but then insisted that he would never do such a thing.

“In my meetings in the regions, I often have to answer the following question: ‘Why is the parliament preventing the president and the parliament from doing their work? Why don’t you dissolve it?’ I hear such questions wherever I go,” Bakiev said.

In response, parliament Chairman Tekebayev said, “[Bakiyev] has become a laughing stock, a dog. If he is a man, he should hang himself.”

Now the parliament is discussing Tekebayev’s resignation.

Another revolution?

Some are pointing to the recent scandals and tomfoolery in Kyrgyzstan as a sign of rough times to come, even that the country will slip into civil war like Tajikistan and Afghanistan.

Given all these circumstances, one hears more and more often the view that the country is swiftly moving towards a tragic finale where it becomes patently apparent that Kyrgyzstan has not developed into a fully-fledged nation, and peace-keeping forces are brought in from the outside. The greatest pessimists predict that the country will split in two – one part joining Uzbekistan and the other Kazakstan.

Another possibility is a slip toward increasing authoritarianism, a la Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. Bakiyev’s recent comments about people demanding that he dissolve the parliament seem to support this view, as do the government’s increasingly suspicious eye toward NGO’s.

… Kyrgyzstan will revert to a harsh authoritarian system which justifies its existence by arguing that citizens are no longer capable of taking part in the democratic process. One might see a single strong leader emerging, or a junta formed by the police and security agencies. As a result, one would see a fresh wave of revolutions and counter-revolutions, each one followed by a repressive crackdown.

Not so fast…

It seems that observers are so used to bad news coming out of Central Asia that they have forgotten to see the flipside of the intrigue going on in Kyrgyzstan right now. The country has a boisterous opposition that is openly challenging the central authority. While corruption is rampant, all parties are aware this and are at least addressing it. Kyrgyzstan’s Freedom House rankings actually improved this year. What other countries in Central Asia can boast any of this? And yet Kyrgyzstan is the one slipping toward anarchy? Maybe, but doubtful.

Observers should remember to take a look at the Western press. The shenanigans in Kyrgyzstan are notable because of their absence in the country’s geographic neighbors; in the rest of the world, scandals, grandstanding in congress or parliament, and political maneuvering are common place. America is currently wading through the Abramoff scandal, and Britain is famous for the public and energetic verbal warfare between the Prime Minister and the rest of parliament.

Obviously, Kyrygyzstan has a long way to go, but perhaps Kyrgyzstan’s neighbors could use a bit more (relatively) healthy chaos, and Kyrgyz politics are not as bad off as they appear.

Gene at Registan has an alternative, but well-reasoned perspective on Kyrgyzstan’s prospects.