A Decade After Islam Karimov: Continuities and Contested Reforms in Uzbekistan
Ten years after the death of Uzbekistan’s first president, Islam Karimov, the country continues to grapple with the legacy of nearly 30 years of authoritarian rule. While Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s government has introduced a number of reforms, observers and critics say key characteristics of the political system and patterns of repression have persisted.
By Clémence Desjardins
1,038 views
Roughly a decade after the death of Islam Karimov, the first president of independent Uzbekistan, the country still bears the imprint of his nearly 30-year rule. Karimov presided over the formation and consolidation of the post-Soviet Uzbek state, an era in which state institutions and national structures were built around a highly centralized and authoritative leadership style. Alongside state-building, his tenure was marked by what many observers describe as entrenched authoritarian governance and pervasive political persecution.
Karimov’s death opened a new chapter in Tashkent’s political life when Shavkat Mirziyoyev assumed the presidency. The transition in leadership created expectations of change at home and a recalibration of Uzbekistan’s international posture. Since coming to power, Mirziyoyev has initiated a series of measures that his government has presented as reforms. These steps have been framed domestically and abroad as attempts to modernize the administration, adjust state practices, and address some long-standing grievances that accumulated under the previous regime.
Despite official claims of reform, the legacy of Karimov’s governance continues to shape Uzbekistan’s political environment. Human rights advocates and independent analysts have cautioned that many of the underlying features of the political system remain intact. While the rhetoric and some administrative practices have shifted, critics argue that the state's intolerance for organized political dissent, limits on freedom of expression, and patterns of repression have not been fully dismantled.
The question of how much has truly changed is central to assessments of Uzbekistan’s recent trajectory. For survivors of past political persecution, for families of victims, and for civil society actors constrained under both presidencies, the pace and scope of reforms are measured not only by decrees or institutional reshuffles but by tangible protections for basic civil liberties. The persistence of familiar governance patterns raises concerns about the depth of systemic reform and the prospects for durable improvements in human rights.
International and regional observers have watched the developments in Uzbekistan with cautious interest. The country’s strategic importance and internal dynamics mean that even limited openings can carry significance for economic ties, migration flows, and regional stability. Nonetheless, the broader human rights environment—encompassing issues such as political freedoms, press freedom, and the treatment of dissent—remains a central barometer for how far the country has moved away from its authoritarian past.
Ten years on, Uzbekistan’s story is thus one of partial change amid considerable continuity. The death of a longstanding leader and the arrival of a successor created an opportunity for reform, which has produced visible shifts in some areas. But for many observers and rights advocates, the essential structure of political control and the risk of political persecution continue to shape daily life for activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens. The unresolved tension between opening and authoritarian holdover will be a defining element of Uzbekistan’s political evolution in the years ahead.
This reflection comes from reporting and commentary by Azattyk, the Kyrgyz service of RFE/RL, which underscores the ongoing human rights questions tied to leadership transitions and the struggle to transform entrenched systems of power into accountable governance.
