Tom Paine 1949
Diamond Member
- Mar 15, 2020
- 5,407
- 4,512
- 1,938
Little is known yet about the real forces that were behind the recent violence. The situation seems to have stabilized for now, and there are reports that the several thousand Russian and CSTO forces will soon be withdrawn. Let us hope so. If even only a few thousand Russian troops remain too long, or are too obvious in everyday life, serious problems down the road may emerge in relations between Kazakhs and the large Russian minority population.
That Russian population is today around 19% of the total, less than half what it was just before the USSR collapsed. We are talking of some 3.5 million Russians out of about 19 million total. Even after 30 years of independence, and despite resentment from some Kazakhs, the Russian language still plays a crucial role in higher education and society as a whole. There are other minorities as well, at least partly because this area was where many suspect populations and individuals were sent in Stalinist times.
The arrest of the old security director on high treason charges, and other reports too, strongly indicate that a power struggle at the top opened the door to different forces from below. The Russian role, the American role, the role of criminal and tribal elements, the degree of repressed Kazakh / Russian conflict, the role if any of religion, these are all still unclear.
Kazakhstan is the size of West Europe, has a small population density and tremendous oil & gas resources. Hence there are immense temptations for elite corruption, as in Saudi Arabia, Libya and similar oil-producing countries.
We need to understand that the tiny civic freedom groups there, mostly underground, were NOT leading the struggle, and were evidently as surprised as others by its sudden outbreak and ferociousness.
The standard Western psychological profile of “imperial” Russians — applied to the recent Kazakhstan events — is misleading and obscures much. Kazakhs were a nomadic people who were first partly Russified and then transformed by their Soviet experience — not entirely for the worse. The “new” Kazakhstan that arose after independence eventually brought more wealth and much more inequality than existed under the final decades of the USSR. There are real conflicting geopolitical interests here, tremendous economic and social differences, as well as deep corruption. Though there is much hatred for rich and corrupt ruling groups in society, it is still far from clear that the recent violence inaugurated the beginning of any future “revolution against authoritarianism.”
Russia, not wanting any more “color revolutions” on its periphery, naturally made itself available to prop up the recently established Kazakh governing administration, suddenly faced with this unexpected and violent uprising. This was no Soviet “invasion” or “occupation” however. There are not enough Russians left for the political situation to resemble China’s Xinjiang. The Kazakhs — like the Uighurs a Turkic-speaking people — are mostly Muslims, but have never been religious fanatics. Still, their nationalist pride is growing.
Splits among Kazakh’s own kleptocratic factions in the country’s domestic ruling class, and in its security forces, may have precipitated the violence. But what lies deeper is unclear. Was there any role of “foreign influencers” in bribing certain factions to take action? Was everything spontaneous? We may never know. We do not even know if there are any “domestic oligarchs” or political factions genuinely interested in bringing democracy to the country.
It will be interesting to see if the great Western oil and commercial interests, like Chevron, that have been allowed in recent decades to grow dramatically and now have huge sums invested there, will continue to be welcome. We shouldn’t assume that the West really has the best interests of the people of Kazakhstan in mind, anymore than our corporations and military have had the real interests of the people of the Middle East in mind. The best future for the people of landlocked Kazakhstan will almost certainly require careful balancing of trade and relations with Russia, China and the West.
That Russian population is today around 19% of the total, less than half what it was just before the USSR collapsed. We are talking of some 3.5 million Russians out of about 19 million total. Even after 30 years of independence, and despite resentment from some Kazakhs, the Russian language still plays a crucial role in higher education and society as a whole. There are other minorities as well, at least partly because this area was where many suspect populations and individuals were sent in Stalinist times.
The arrest of the old security director on high treason charges, and other reports too, strongly indicate that a power struggle at the top opened the door to different forces from below. The Russian role, the American role, the role of criminal and tribal elements, the degree of repressed Kazakh / Russian conflict, the role if any of religion, these are all still unclear.
Kazakhstan is the size of West Europe, has a small population density and tremendous oil & gas resources. Hence there are immense temptations for elite corruption, as in Saudi Arabia, Libya and similar oil-producing countries.
We need to understand that the tiny civic freedom groups there, mostly underground, were NOT leading the struggle, and were evidently as surprised as others by its sudden outbreak and ferociousness.
The standard Western psychological profile of “imperial” Russians — applied to the recent Kazakhstan events — is misleading and obscures much. Kazakhs were a nomadic people who were first partly Russified and then transformed by their Soviet experience — not entirely for the worse. The “new” Kazakhstan that arose after independence eventually brought more wealth and much more inequality than existed under the final decades of the USSR. There are real conflicting geopolitical interests here, tremendous economic and social differences, as well as deep corruption. Though there is much hatred for rich and corrupt ruling groups in society, it is still far from clear that the recent violence inaugurated the beginning of any future “revolution against authoritarianism.”
Russia, not wanting any more “color revolutions” on its periphery, naturally made itself available to prop up the recently established Kazakh governing administration, suddenly faced with this unexpected and violent uprising. This was no Soviet “invasion” or “occupation” however. There are not enough Russians left for the political situation to resemble China’s Xinjiang. The Kazakhs — like the Uighurs a Turkic-speaking people — are mostly Muslims, but have never been religious fanatics. Still, their nationalist pride is growing.
Splits among Kazakh’s own kleptocratic factions in the country’s domestic ruling class, and in its security forces, may have precipitated the violence. But what lies deeper is unclear. Was there any role of “foreign influencers” in bribing certain factions to take action? Was everything spontaneous? We may never know. We do not even know if there are any “domestic oligarchs” or political factions genuinely interested in bringing democracy to the country.
It will be interesting to see if the great Western oil and commercial interests, like Chevron, that have been allowed in recent decades to grow dramatically and now have huge sums invested there, will continue to be welcome. We shouldn’t assume that the West really has the best interests of the people of Kazakhstan in mind, anymore than our corporations and military have had the real interests of the people of the Middle East in mind. The best future for the people of landlocked Kazakhstan will almost certainly require careful balancing of trade and relations with Russia, China and the West.
Last edited:
