Kazakhstan Votes

by Nathan Hamm on 12/5/2005 · 5 comments

No surprises here. Kazakhstan voted and Nazarbaev cleaned house, receiving about 91% of votes in the preliminary count. But of course the real winner isn’t Nursultan Nazarbaev…

Nazarbaev’s victory was more decisive than most observers had predicted. Shortly after the announcement of his victory, Nazarbaev told a rally in the capital Astana that his reelection to another seven-year term is “a victory for the country, for all Kazakhs.”

“The people voted for our country’s stability, for our nation’s unity, for our state’s modernization, for the improvement of people’s lives, for the future of our children and grandchildren. I consider it a victory for the Kazakh people. I thank all those who voted for me yesterday,” Nazarbaev said.

The CIS has wonderful things to say about the vote.

Rushailo announced that his team determined that the Kazakh election was fair. “The state electoral bodies that organized elections in the Republic of Kazakhstan ensured the realization and protection of the electoral rights of citizens in the presidential elections of Kazakhstan,” he said. “International observers from the CIS concluded that Kazakhstan’s presidential elections of 4 December 2005 were held in accordance with the country’s legislation. We assess them as free, open, and legitimate.”

The OSCE commented, saying the election lacked meaningful competition and calling on Nazarbaev to open political life in Kazakhstan. Their most recent report on the election, covering October 17 through December 5, can be found here.

Though not directly related to this election, the US defended OSCE election monitoring from Russian attacks.

For more election news, visit KZ Blog for a news roundup and report on the election atmosphere and neweurasia for a number of posts, including the Caspian Information Centre’s take on the election.

UPDATE: The OSCE report is here (PDF). Thanks, David!

UPDATE II:


Subscribe to receive updates from Registan

This post was written by...

– author of 2991 posts on 17_PersonNotFound.

Nathan is the founder and Principal Analyst for Registan, which he launched in 2003. He was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Uzbekistan 2000-2001 and received his MA in Central Asian Studies from the University of Washington in 2007. Since 2007, he has worked full-time as an analyst, consulting with private and government clients on Central Asian affairs, specializing in how socio-cultural and political factors shape risks and opportunities and how organizations can adjust their strategic and operational plans to account for these variables. More information on Registan's services can be found here, and Nathan can be contacted via Twitter or email.

For information on reproducing this article, see our Terms of Use

{ 1 comment }

David L December 5, 2005 at 12:40 pm

The actual OSCE report (rather hidden away) is much more critical than Rupel’s statement. See
http://www.osce.org/documents/odihr/2005/12/17232_en.pdf

The CIC report is pretty embarrassing, even if you’re a Nazarbaev fan, but what can you expect from Cecil Parkinson?

Previous post:

Next post: