{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022455805064500716, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011944577161968466, 'mean_word_length': 5.140762463343108, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Neo-liberal and communal civil society in Tajikistan: merging or dividing in the post war period?

As others have written in this edition, civil society is a highly debated term and it is being translated in different ways and forms throughout Central Asia and the Caucasus. Among all the countries examined herewith, Tajikistan is undoubtedly the furthest from the states of Western Europe where the concept had its origins in 18th century modern thought. Eight years after the signature of the General Agreement on the Establishment of Peace and National Accord, which put an end to the country’s five-year civil war, Tajikistan is successfully moving towards full peace implementation. Yet many problems remain. With the lowest per capita GDP amongst the former Soviet countries, Tajikistan is considered the poorest country in Europe and Central Asia. Poverty, inequality, unemployment and social exclusion risk becoming a source of future armed conflict. Infrastructure collapse and plummeting access to quality medical and educational services, threaten the country’s nascent economic growth, which was close to 10% in 2002 and 2003. Corruption, weak rule of law enforcement, lack of public participation and poor access to diversified sources of information, sustain an increasingly centralized and autocratic presidential regime. In this environment what forms of civil society can take hold and prosper? Previous studies of civil society in Tajikistan have tended to describe it as divided and weak. Some have gone so far as to claim that, ‘the civil society discourse is not a useful discourse through which to examine present day Tajikistan’. Akiner and Roy argue that while the appearance of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has often been equalled with the emergence of an indigenous civil society, NGOs are of peripheral importance in the country. Both authors call for more attention to be paid to ‘local partners who matter’ who are active in a civil society that ‘is predicated on the social fabric as it exists and is Central Asian Survey (September 2005) 24(3), 225–243