Some thoughts on Google.kz

by Michael Hancock-Parmer on 6/14/2011 · 4 comments

I’ve been following this story more openly on Facebook than on Registan, largely because before today I had not heard enough to really form a solid opinion. Fortunately, others who seem to know a bit less of the situation have saw fit to jump in and opinionate at will… so at least I have someone to argue against.

Here are some Headlines Concerning the Event, so we can get a feel for how it is being spun presented to the world’s readers.

Those with less interest (and information regarding) Kazakhstan have decided to paint this story in the same broad strokes as the continuing narrative of Google Vs. The Evil Empire. These stories tend to mention past problems with China, future concerns with Iran’s upcoming private “intranet,” and the fact that Central Asia is full of dictators who have done nothing but curb the rights of its citizens. The opposing thread hasn’t really been defined yet, though I suspect it might be something that more or less switches the players, with Google as Evil Empire and China, Iran, and their neighbors as the oppressed figures.

I think there is room for a third option, but I’m not entirely certain how to articulate it. There are a couple things that I am thinking about, however.

  1. Google did not, in its press release, make any comparisons with China openly. It used a rather poetic rhetoric speaking of, “the genius of the Internet” and the global network not being bound “by national boundaries.”
  2. Those stories which have jumped off the deep end in painting Kazakhstan as a clueless backwater attempting to deny Google’s openness have not offered any logic or reasoning for this move by Kazakhstan. What would Kazakhstan gain by refusing a company like Google? Is it a dictatorship that survives only on the ignorance and fear of its populace? According to one of the stories above, “Kazakhstan’s is just the latest attempt by an iron-fisted government to interfere with Google.” Some of the uninformed might assume that is the case, but I think Registan’s readers know this is not the case.
  3. The Wall Street Journal (among others) have asked some other questions: what about Yandex (the ‘Russian’ Google)? This is a very good question, but I do not think the Google decision was the result of the highest powers in motion. Similarly, the WSJ still falls into other pit traps (or lazy journalism) continuing to define Nazabaev as a leader who “has shown increasingly authoritarian leanings,” and leads a “mainly Muslim country.” Yes, well, sure – but the country is neither Russia nor Yemen, so a little more information might be useful to the casual WSJ reader.
  4. Some Russian language sources offer (not surprisingly) a bit more information:
    • Google ушел из Казахстана (Google leaves Kazakhstan)
    • Казахстанская ассоциация IT- компаний разъяснила ситуацию с Интернет-поисковиком Google.kz (Kazakhstan Association of IT companies to clarify the Google.kz situation)
      In short, these stories make a point that it is the opinion of a private company that is going against the opinions of governments, elected governments of foreign (to Google) countries. I think this is a very fair point to reiterate. Google’s VP can speak of the internet not being bound by national boundaries, but what of Google? It is an American company whose profits come, increasingly, from overseas. They might want to climb down from their lofty ideals when dealing with those countries typically less optimistic about the egalitarian way Americans view the world.
      Even more important, the KazInform story above explains that it was an overzealous act of a regulating committee, failing to see that Google was grandfathered into the Internet Laws requiring users of .kz to use servers found within Kazakhstan. It would seem, then, that not only is Yandex safe, but that Google may yet be asked to return. I imagine that will be either unreported in the West, or spun as the iron-fisted dictator bowing before the might of the super-giant Google…
  5. Google might actually be the oppressor in this case, or at least acting inappropriately. Google provides a service that the World is happy (so far) to pay for, but Kazakhstan is merely the newest country to be straining against their hegemony and requesting them to use servers in Kazakhstan to provide this service. It might even go so far as ask them to pay those bills using bank accounts set up in the country. That is really not so much to ask and other foreign corporations already do the same in Kazakhstan without producing the kind of blow-back from American bloggers.
  6. Another point to consider is that only the United States military and its affiliates have use of the .mil extension, as only the United States government uses .gov. There’s no real need for a .us extension, considering .com fulfills that need quite well. Why not let Kazakhstan do what it wants with .kz, at least until they receive a .uki (or whatever they want for gov’t and official sites)? It seems only fair. Perhaps the internet should learn that by failing to recognize national boundaries, they are in reality enforcing an American hegemony. Or is that un-American of me to suggest?

Subscribe to receive updates from Registan

This post was written by...

– author of 159 posts on Registan.net.

Michael earned an MA in Central Eurasian Studies in 2011 and remains a student at Indiana University pursuing a dual PhD in Russian History and Central Eurasian Studies. He served 6 months in the Peace Corps in Uzbekistan in 2005. After the events in Andijan and the subsequent closure of the program, he served 2 years in southern Kazakhstan, returning to the Midwest in 2007. His general area of interest is on post-Timur Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, centered on the Syr Darya river valley.

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

{ 4 comments }

michaelhancock June 14, 2011 at 2:56 pm

One more point I wasn’t sure enough about to include in the post is the possibility of the monetary cost to companies (especially those with Russian-language sites) in Kazakhstan. Without a .kz version of Google, the searches will instead go global. Not such a big problem with Kazakh-language searches, but with Russian-language searches, there is little chance that a site in Kazakhstan will have a higher ranking than a similar site in Russia… And then there is the money spent by IT-conscious companies on Google Page Ranking, which is of course attached to the .kz server which is now (at least temporarily) gone.

KZBlog June 14, 2011 at 7:30 pm

I see your points here and I think this does have to be put into perspective. This isn’t the same as blocking access to google or opposition sites. They’re not censoring google.

On the other hand, insofar as Kazakhstan has blocked access to opposition sites and the Ministry of Communication and Information has taken great steps to limit communication and information (regulating as much as possible), there is reason to believe that Kazakhstan’s policy of having .kz domains located in Kazakhstan is aimed at trying to control the sites on .kz. Which is not evil, but damaging. .I think we have to look beyond Google on this. Google is one “victim”. Tomorrow it might be mercedes.kz or blackanddecker.kz (neither exist I believe).

As I pointed out in my post on this, it’s just sad that Kazakhstan Internet users might not get the same service. Right now, amazon.com is pushing the Kindle, which isn’t available in KZ and wouldn’t work (legally). So wouldn’t it be nice to have amazon.kz promote Nomads or iPads? It’s better for the consumer, and better for the company who might then see a boost in sales in KZ and devote more time to targeting products to them and developing the market.

You’re right, it’s not a fight between good and evil. But it is kind of a shame.

Kzblog June 17, 2011 at 7:14 am
Kzblog June 17, 2011 at 7:14 am

this statement by Nazarbayev seems to play right into the narrative. He does talk about China and Iran, identifies the Internet as a threat, and say we need borders.

Previous post:

Next post: