Tashkent, Uzbekistan (UzDaily.uz) — Alisher Kadyrov, chairman of the Milliy Tiklanish party, has criticized the approaches of Uzbekistan’s Cultural Heritage Agency to the preservation of historic sites.
In particular, he questioned the need to preserve one of the buildings in central Tashkent, calling it the “house of a Russian artist,” and said a differentiated approach was needed in allocating state resources among cultural heritage sites.
Kadyrov noted that historical and cultural significance should be taken into account when setting priorities. As an example, he compared the building in question with the Shahi-Zinda complex and said the Agency should give priority to national cultural heritage.
The Cultural Heritage Agency responded that the building in question is House No. 7 on Babur Street in Tashkent, which is under state protection. The Agency stressed that the historical value of sites should be determined based on legislation, scientific expertise, and their historical and cultural significance.
House No. 7 was built in 1935–1936 based on a design by architect Alexey Shchusev. According to the Agency, scientists who contributed to the development of Uzbekistan’s science and culture lived and worked there at different times, including academicians Tashmukhammed Kary-Niyazov and Vasily Shishkin, as well as Professors Rahim Atazhanov and Natan Mallaev.
Elmurad Najimov, First Deputy Director of the Agency, said it was wrong to associate the value of a historic building with the nationality of a person connected with it.
According to him, Tashkent’s history was shaped by representatives of different peoples, and dividing historic sites into “ours” and “theirs” based on nationality could shift the professional discussion about heritage preservation toward national confrontation.
The conflict over House No. 7 dates back to 2018. At that time, the Tashkent city administration decided to allocate a land plot to Universal Packing Masters for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a multi-storey residential complex. The Agency explained that the decision had been made before the building was officially granted cultural heritage status.
In 2020, the Agency’s Scientific and Expert Council included the house in the National List of Tangible Cultural Heritage Sites. In 2021, a proposal to remove the building from the register was rejected.
In August 2026, the issue of removing the house from the National List was raised again. The Agency said it considered such a step inappropriate. On 8 September, the Agency appealed to the Prosecutor General’s Office, asking it to provide a legal assessment of the circumstances surrounding the Tashkent city administration’s 2018 decision and, if violations were identified, take measures provided for by law.
Following the Agency’s statement, Kadyrov published a response on his Telegram channel. He said the party intended to use its parliamentary powers to obtain answers to questions related to the Agency’s activities and the use of budget funds.
The politician also pointed to issues that, in his view, exist around other cultural heritage sites, including Sarmsysoy, Shahi-Zinda and Mizdakhan. He raised questions about the condition of these sites, spending on their preservation and the Agency’s actions regarding government authorities.
Kadyrov also said that questions concerning the Agency had been raised since last year and stressed the need to hear the Agency’s report in parliament.
The dispute over House No. 7 on Babur Street has thus gone beyond the issue of a specific building and touched on approaches to setting priorities in cultural heritage preservation, as well as the use of public funds.
