Tajikistan: Cultural Faux Pas or Nation Building? · Global Voices
Ben Paarmann

Once Turkmenistan's former dictator Saparmurat Niyazov, or Turkmenbashi (“Father of all Turkmens”), died last December (as covered by Global Voices), the other Central Asian strongmen stood suddenly deprived of the “ne plus ultra of Central Asian dictators.” As such, Ian of Beyond The River says…
…the other leaders could always point to him when poked in the ribs by Western governments and NGOs over human rights issues.
Tajikistan especially is making headlines these days that seem to ring the Turkmenbashi bell. It all began back in 2006, when President Rakhmonov (more on his surname later) ruled that state employees should not have golden teeth anymore. Vadim of neweurasia quoted the president as saying…
“Once I met a Tajik in Switzerland” – recalls the president, “How did I know that he was a Tajik? Because he had a shiny mouth. It was shameful. He thought it was beautiful. People in the world are laughing at us. It shows the lack of culture.”
The stride of new cultural legislation went on: In March 2007, Rakhmonov decided that his name should actually be Rakhmon, thus scrapping the Russian suffix. Several bloggers detected a Turkmenistanisation in this move. As Bonnie Boyd of the Foreign Policy / Great Decisions Central Asia Blog noted:
This extension of presidential preference over private considerations is very reminiscent of the late Turkmenistani President, Saparmurat Niyazov’s rule.  Niyazov dictated what would be approved in the way of facial hair, dental work, educational curriculum, and relationships between husband and wife.  It heralds the beginning of a contingent dictatorship, where people are forced to change civic and private behavior mid-course due to the whims of its leader.
James of neweurasia cited more evidence for the shift in Rakhmon‘s cultural policies:
The latter regulation got extended by a new dresscode for students yesterday.
What is to make of this flurry of new legislation? Teo Kaye at Registan.net has the (witty) answer by posting a cartoon from his fellow colleague Tom Wellings:
It's quite clear what Rakhmon tries to achieve with these moves: He wants to distract from a dismal economic situation.
However, even Teo thinks that several initiatives shouldn't be laughed at and are actually quite normal for an independent country. In the comments to the post at Registan.net, he says:
As someone who taught a year of university in Dushanbe, I mostly agree with Rahmon’s latest rulings. Cellphones and silly clothes were something teachers regularly came to blows over with students. De-russification makes plenty of sense, even if it was possibly timed carefully and overall slightly impractical.
Lastly, what do Tajiks themselves have to say about the changes? Gulru, writing at neweurasia, comes to the following conclusion:
Are these changes positive or negative? Well, let the people decide. From my own observation, few people want to change their last name; however, according to Asia Plus, the Department of Justice is already envisaging the change of Russian ending “-ov,” “-ev,” into “-zoda,’ “-pur’ and etc.
Thus, the biggest mistake in these laws might well be in the tradition of Turkmenbashi, then. Despite some sense behind the moves, it would be best to let the people decide for themselves. But choice is a freedom Central Asian leaders only seldomly award their citizens with.