The confrontation in the information space between the current government of Turkmenistan and the democratic opposition is gaining momentum. A media campaign began against the leader of the resistance movement against the regime, Murad Kurbanov, with the aim of denigrating him and the entire movement. Thus, materials are published in which false characteristics are attributed to Kurbanov, and the opposition to the authorities is discredited.
A material entitled “How Turkmenistan is fighting foreign subversive activities” was distributed across many media outlets. It is worth noting that the article did not receive a large number of views on any of the published resources, and there was no reaction on social networks. However, it is also impossible to ignore the stuffing, so let’s analyze this material.
The material begins with traditional propaganda clichés about certain “Anglo-Saxons” who, apart from Turkmenistan, have nothing else to do in a troubled world: “Without waiting for the population of the Anglo-Saxon world to drown in a stream of disinformation thrown in by the unsystematic opposition from the trenches somewhere in Turkey or in Paris regarding political and other processes taking place in Turkmenistan, local authorities have made a number of very successful attempts to stop its subversive activities to rock the boat in a “closed” prosperous state.”
Only a person who does not understand modern issues can call Turkmenistan, with its poor and suffering population, a prosperous state. You can find a lot of materials about the disastrous socio-economic situation of the country, both on our resources and in any other independent media.
The hint about Paris and Turkey looks even stranger. The most obvious falsehood about Turkey looks even more ridiculous if you continue to read the article: “At the same time, they themselves are “barred” from both Ashgabat and Ankara: many are categorically prohibited from entering there. Therefore, they try to manage their wards from Western countries, not forgetting to use there all the benefits and comfort of modern civilization provided to them.”
If you try to believe what is said in the material, a question arises based on elementary logic: How is the opposition in Turkey if it is prohibited from entering there? However, any arguments are suitable for misinformation. Further, without any arguments to justify the terrible standard of living in Turkmenistan, there is an attempt to denigrate opposition leader Murad Kurbanov:
“What is it worth, for example, the so-called oppositionist Murat Kurbanov, who squeezes out American government money by criticizing the Turkmen government… He and his comrades did not find anything better than choosing a white dove as a symbol of their organization, guided by the motto of overthrowing the current leader of the country it doesn’t matter how, even if it means a lot of bloodshed within the country.”
It is quite difficult to understand why a white dove is bad. Knowing the principles of Western democracies in relation to authoritarian regimes, we can confidently state that of all the possible options for contacting society, Western leaders always give preference to the most liberal candidates, with the best reputation and biography. The political work of Murad Kurbanov confirms this, while Ashgabat is in no hurry to improve relations with Washington – despite the strategic importance of the entire Central Asian region, neither American investments nor the attention of the strongest and richest country in the world are directed there.
It is the lack of democratic power in Turkmenistan that is the reason why the country is in voluntary isolation – while the whole world is moving by leaps and bounds towards globalization, cooperation, exchange of technology, finance and the best personnel, Ashgabat wants to remain mothballed almost in the 19th century, because the situation is still worse than it was even at the time of independence.