Here is an interview with two political scientists and professors of the Kyrgyz-Russian Slav University: Vice President of the Foundation of International Research Programs (Bishkek) Nur Omarov and Alexander Knyazev.

Question: What is your opinion of appearance of a new Constitution in Kyrgyzstan?

Alexander Knyazev: My condolences to the Kyrgyz people. November crisis is resolved, but the tactical victory is the president's. Generally speaking, all of that makes me sad. The Constitution broadens the powers of the parliament but weakens the whole system sapping its adequacy. Low level of political conscience, an emphasis on parochial interests - all of that may foment another crisis, even more serious than the November predicament was. Moreover, efficiency of the parliament will go down and, figuratively, hit the bottom. Our parliament is not exactly an example of efficiency as it is, but the new arrangement will slow down the making of even simple decisions.

Nur Omarov: I agree with my colleague. I'd like to add that the business undertones of the issues the parliament is supposed to discuss are not going to improve its efficiency either. In general, I wouldn't say anything has changed with adoption of the new Constitution. And neither will anything change yet because the problem remains unsolved.

Alexander Knyazev: The Cabinet, parliament, and government retained their powers. Discord and interdepartmental rivalry will inevitably flare up again. The new Constitution is but a tactical solution.

Question: And what do you think of the arrangement of political forces in the country?

Alexander Knyazev: Kyrgyzstan lacks a professional political elite. There are only some sprouts of it in evidence, and I'm not talking of those who claim for their own the privilege of being the political elite. We also lack political culture and political conscience. As a matter of fact, only centralized and thoroughly personified regimes are possible in Asia. What business communities, legitimate and otherwise, exist in Kyrgyzstan nowadays cannot rise to the level of national needs.

Nur Omarov: I'd like to mention the necessity to take the underworld into account. It has gained a great deal of weight in Kyrgyzstan. Aware of it, the authorities are anxious to seek compromises with the underworld.

Question: Both the authorities and the opposition claim victory - along with laurels for resolution of the conflict - for their own...

Nur Omarov: I keep saying it: the conflict has reverted to its latent state. Everything is back to square one. Count on a continuation, perhaps, next spring or summer. Any situation, even artificially created, will spark the conflict.

Alexander Knyazev: I agree. Another crisis is bound to break out in the foreseeable future. Perhaps, as soon as in a couple of months. Its foundation was laid in Akayev's time and the events of March 24, 2005, became the catalyst. What everything boils down to is fairly simple: we dethroned Akayev and installed Bakiyev. Somebody else can do it too.

Nur Omarov: Kyrgyz political arena is swarming with Napoleons...

Question: President Kurmanbek Bakiyev claimed establishment of the Constituent Assembly was illegitimate and branded it as an usurpation attempt on certain lawmakers' part. Do you agree with this estimate?

Alexander Knyazev: Establishment of the Constituent Assembly was illegitimate indeed. I accept it. It was nothing short of a coup d'etat... particularly without the parliamentary quorum.

Question: Do you think some heads will roll? That's a reference to the men the parliament is after, like General Suvanaliyev and Minister Sutalinov.

Alexander Knyazev: The way I see it, Sutalinov and Suvanaliyev will be left alone - at least for the time being. Setting them up for a kill at this point will be a height of stupidity on the part of the president and prime minister. In fact, the regime has only one option left it and that is preservation of the tandem. Kurmanbek Bakiyev and Felix Kulov must finally find a common language.

Nur Omarov: Crisis in the camp of the opposition leaders is undeniable nowadays. It should have been expected. Whenever a group is acting against something or someone, its members inevitably end up at each other's throats sooner or later. I'd like to add as well that all of that is happening as though in some other life, leaving society and the population absolutely unaffected. Social protest is what is absent. Neither side in the square included any socially active people. Some turned up because they had been paid to do it, others because they had been forced to (like budget sphere employees) but nobody was a genuine social protester.

Alexander Knyazev: Society is worn down. The population of Bishkek will only rise in response to something like that what happened last March - pogroms and all that. City dwellers will be better organized if it comes to that than residents of rural areas. After all, the former do have something to lose. It's like nomads and farmers. Whenever the former will leave to avoid trouble, the latter will remain and put up a fight to defend what is his.

Question: What turn will the events take now?

Alexander Knyazev: Bakiyev and Kulov need interaction and cooperation. Reinforcement of the executive branch of the government and security structures is what they need.

Nur Omarov: That's right. It is the executive branch of the government that handles the problems the population is facing. Properly or inadequately, regardless of whether it wants it or not. As I see it, an attempt to split the tandem is the worst mistake Bakiyev may make now. Left to their own devices, they are not even nearly as strong as when they operate together. Bakiyev won the November round. It's time Kulov solidified his position. The regime has emerged from the confrontation with the least damage to itself.

Ferghana.Ru news agency