Pessimism on Kazakhstan*

Here are a couple reasons to be pessimistic about a democratic revolution in Kazakhstan.

The country’s main opposition party has has split. Ak Zhol (Bright Path) now has an offshoot, Nagyzh Ak Zhol (True Bright Path). RFE/RL’s Bruce Jacobs asks “how different is it from its predecessors?” The question overlooks something that Westerners often forget when talking about politics in far off lands – parties don’t always center around policies and ideals.

Sarsenbayev indicated that the core of Ak Zhol’s platform would remain the same in Naghyz Ak Zhol.

“Since this will be a new party, changes are inevitable. But the program prepared by the Ak Zhol party, the platform outlined by the Ak Zhol party on the eve of the elections [last summer], the values the Ak Zhol party offered to the people, to the nation, will be the basis for our new party, [Naghyz Ak Zhol],” Sarsenbayev said.

It is unclear how many Ak Zhol members have switched loyalties to Naghyz Ak Zhol. And Sarsenbayev, when asked, found it difficult to describe how the new party will differ from its predecessor.

“The difference [from the old Ak Zhol party] will become clear through our further activities. To outline, set down and propagate the program, and to implement that program, are two different things. We shall be Naghyz Ak Zhol, implementing its program into real life,” said Sarsenbayev.

So why the split? Bickering leaders struggling for power should be the obvious answer. If they can’t stay unified under one roof, one has to question how they would muster the public to force Akayev to step down.

On top of a split opposition, President Nazarbayev is extremely confident.

Nazarbayev’s confidence in his regime stems from the economic data that he likes to reel out. In a recent address to his nation, he said the radical market reforms have increased the per capita gross domestic product from a little more than $700 a decade ago to $2,700 by the end of last year.

And, like Islam Karimov, he understands that the way to stay in power is to try to make people fat and happy.

On Thursday, Nazarbayev confidently stepped outside this norm and blamed the revolutions on the failure of the respective governments to fulfill the basic needs of the people.

Speaking at the inauguration at the fourth Eurasian Media Forum in Almaty, he said the main reason behind the political developments in Ukraine, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan were not driven by any external conspiracies but by internal development issues.

“Poverty and unemployment resulting from lack of development strategies and visible economic successes make people feel unhappy with the authorities,” the president said.

He’s no dummy. And while I remain unconvinced in either Uzbekistan’s or Kazakhstan’s case that their respective economic growth is evenly spread enough to make them as safe as they both assume themselves to be, it does make quite unlikely that we’ll see government buildings in Tashkent and Astana surrounded by seas of protesters anytime soon.

* …’s chances for a democratic revolution” is probably what that should read

Update: Praktike wants to know why I’m pessimistic. The pessimism is for the chances of a great democratizing leap forward (like Tim on Armenia).

And that pessimism has to do with Nazarbayev (who in the sense mentioned above – an observation on their similar analyses of popular revolts – resembles Islam Karimov) than it does with the opposition and the direction the country’s headed. Maybe I’m not finding the right news sources, but it seems opposition elites have more problems with the state of the nation than do Kazakh citizens.

I’m actually fairly optimistic about Kazakhstan itself. I expect that its political system will eventually become more transparent (the sooner the better in my book) but that it will come through a brokered agreement rather than a popular uprising. (Because wouldn’t it be easier to secede rather than march on Astana – or even take the bus! – from Almaty?)

This post was written by...

Nathan Hamm – author of 2974 posts on Registan.net.

Nathan is the Founding Editor and Publisher of Registan.net, 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. Nathan is currently seeking research, analysis, and consulting opportunities. He can be contacted via Twitter or email.

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