Where does fiction collide with reality?
Author: Sherali Rizoiyon, Candidate of Political Sciences (Tajikistan)
Recent developments in global politics and contemporary processes in Central Asia have lifted the veil on many geopolitical constructs and interpretations. Certain phenomena and trends, whose existence or nonexistence, authenticity or artificiality, had previously been the subject of speculation, are now increasingly revealing their true nature.
One such phenomenon is the geopolitical construction of narratives and meanings in pursuit of long-term strategic objectives. This activity — involving both self-promotion and the demonization of rivals — is aimed at securing hegemony and is practiced by all actors engaged in Central Asian affairs. Against the backdrop of such “information operations,” it becomes extremely difficult to distinguish truth from propaganda, as each side and its media instruments portray themselves as advocates of progress and prosperity for the countries of the region, while depicting their competitors as obstacles to that goal.
For a long time, a defining feature of the information space was the rivalry and mutual demonization between the Western powers and Russia. They created both positive and negative narratives not only about one another, but also about their respective allies and adversaries.
Today, it appears that Turkey has also activated its own propaganda mechanisms to shape narratives favorable to its interests. An attentive reader may ask: what significance does all of this have for us, the Tajiks, and what consequences might it bring?
At this stage, it is still premature to speak definitively about the significance and consequences of this phenomenon, since the “propaganda playbooks” themselves have not yet fully emerged in an open and complete form. However, it is already becoming increasingly evident that existing models and approaches commonly employed by other major powers are being utilized.
Perhaps in the coming months, as information campaigns expand, the true nature of these “manuals for constructing meanings and creating narratives” will become clearer. This is undoubtedly a subject that deserves attention and discussion, so that we may learn to distinguish truth from propaganda.
Today, three particularly visible and significant elements of this process can be identified.
The first is the demonization of rivals. This approach is used to cultivate negative perceptions of other powers, as well as of their political approaches and strategies across different periods of time. To some extent, it resembles attempts to direct and control the processes of “decolonization” within our society.
It is still difficult to determine how successful these efforts will ultimately be. What is already clear, however, is that numerous narratives based on distrust and negative perceptions will be created and disseminated. Such phenomena inevitably influence public opinion, and it can be argued that the first signs of this impact are already becoming visible.
Why should we take this phenomenon seriously and study it? At the very least because our society’s attitude toward Russia, China, and Iran is our own concern, and we should not allow any external power to interfere in this sphere. Even when someone presents themselves as our ally or supporter, such declarations often conceal other objectives and interests.
In other words, no independent and politically mature state that understands its own national interests would replace one hegemon with another. The primary task is to maintain a balance of power and free oneself from external domination.
The second element is the use of religion and its elevation above national identity. For Muslim societies, religion has traditionally been one of the most effective instruments for influencing public opinion. The negative consequences of such manipulation have led to serious crises in many countries. For decades, numerous traps have been created for Muslim societies to foster hostility toward “others,” particularly Muslims belonging to different religious schools and traditions. Over time, under the influence of extensive propaganda, such attitudes became deeply rooted and evolved into enduring social perceptions.
The pioneers of such narratives employ two seemingly contradictory tools in their propaganda activities. On the one hand, they emphasize the supremacy of religious identity, declaring: “We are all Muslims and servants of God; before the Almighty, it does not matter to which nation or race a person belongs,” and similar slogans.
On the other hand, these same actors simultaneously engage in the demonization of Muslims who belong to other religious sects and schools of thought. Social media users have repeatedly encountered such phenomena, making specific examples unnecessary.
Why should we take such narratives seriously and study them? First and foremost, because the Muslim identity of the majority of our people is beyond question. We have been Muslims for more than a thousand years, we remain Muslims today, and we will continue to be Muslims in the future. However, the instrumental use of our religious feelings and beliefs by other states will ultimately harm our country.
This situation resembles the old folk wisdom that one should never mistake a wolf for the shepherd of the flock. The events of the past year in Iran, including the two wars waged against the country by the United States and Israel, have demonstrated that for states with Islamic political systems—as well as for those that present themselves as defenders of Muslims worldwide—current political, economic, security, and alliance interests often take precedence over both religion itself and the fate of Muslims.
Therefore, being Muslim and remaining Muslim is, first and foremost, important for us ourselves. Any state or power that seeks to use this card or factor inevitably pursues its own political, economic, security, and hegemonic interests.
The third element is the so-called “exposure” of Turkophobia within society. Unfortunately, over the past century, numerous narratives with an anti-Turkic orientation have emerged in the country’s information space. This serves as a vivid example of the well-known Roman principle of “Divide and Rule” (Divide et Impera).
We, the Tajiks, are among the peoples who have suffered significant losses within our historical homeland because a portion of our educated elite fell under the influence of Pan-Turkist ideas. The consequences of those developments have not yet been fully overcome, and the wounds they inflicted have yet to heal completely.
Regrettably, even today, some of our compatriots in the virtual sphere engage in the creation of positive narratives in favor of Turkey and effectively act as conduits of Turkish informational influence within our society. The lessons of the 1920s demonstrate that the greatest damage to our people was caused not by Turkic nations themselves, but by members of our own society who embraced Pan-Turkist views.
Nations that possess institutional memory never allow history to force them to relive the same negative consequences. Despite all of the factors mentioned above, our people are not inherently hostile toward Turkic peoples. On the contrary, society as a whole generally maintains a positive attitude toward Turkey and other Turkic-speaking states. The opinions and statements that may be described as “Turkophobic” and that occasionally appear on social media are, in reality, reactions to Turkey’s current official policy and strategy. Such debates have intensified against the backdrop of the fact that Turkey today officially refers to Central Asia as “Turkestan.”
In recent years, there have also been attempts within the Turkic-speaking world to rewrite history and appropriate the legacy of renowned scholars and thinkers of Iranian origin. Given these circumstances, accusations of Turkophobia directed at us resemble the well-known folk saying: “The powerful thief not only steals the cow but also ties up its owner.”
In other words, people are merely expressing their attitudes toward ongoing developments, sometimes using language that may not be the most careful or refined, but nonetheless reflects their concerns about the processes taking place around them.
Why should we take this problem seriously and seek ways to overcome it? Because the spread of hostility toward other peoples and states becomes, in itself, a source of vulnerability and creates favorable conditions for external actors seeking to exploit such sentiments for their own purposes. As long as such phenomena persist, the conditions remain in place for the application of the well-known Roman principle of “Divide and Rule” (Divide et Impera).
At the same time, in recent years, the information space has also witnessed the spread of negative narratives directed against Turkey and Turkic peoples by various external actors. This is a separate issue that deserves its own comprehensive and independent analysis.
In conclusion, it can be noted that every action generates a reaction, and geography is destiny. Therefore, it is critically important for us to understand the strategic interests of our own country and to place the independence and prosperity of our homeland above all else.
The ability to distinguish artificially constructed perceptions from real processes, as well as an understanding of the propaganda objectives pursued by various external actors, provides an important opportunity to free ourselves from the traps of hostility, prejudice, and bias toward other peoples and states.
