When the poor, central Asian nation of Kyrgyzstan descended into
ethnic bloodshed in early June - resulting in carnage that
caused the deaths of some 400 people and the displacement of
400,000 - many of those familiar with the country expressed
surprise. Kyrgyzstan, though still far from being a liberal
democracy, has always been the least despotic of the former
Soviet republics in the region, and the most auspicious
candidate for some form of decent government. Relations between
the country's Kyrgyz majority and the Uzbek ethnic minority (who
suffered the brunt of the violence ) had been peaceful, barring
riots in 1990 that had less to do with ethnic grievances than
controversy over post-Soviet land distribution. And Kyrgyzstan
has long had an active civil society, open media and raucous
political culture.  But looking back on the turbulent events
that this country - which I have visited twice in the past five
months - has experienced, I realize that a foretaste of the June
disturbances was already evident i