Fuad Asimov writes a straight-forward, if harsh, piece on exactly why Kazakhstan is the wrong country to head the OSCE, especially with Nazarbaev at the head. I have to say that, while I agree Kazakhstan’s heading of the OSCE probably won’t be good for the organization, I disagree with Asimov’s reasoning, especially the parts that come off as ethnic/racial profiling. Asimov’s post was published by “adai,” which would imply that Asimov [or his proxy publisher] is himself Kazakh, a member of the adai clan. Of course, racist comments are even easier to make about your own race.
I order to fully understand the distinctions in the ways of thinking between the European and the Kazakh, it is necessary to note, that the national tale hero in Kazakhstan is not Borat as is seen by British comedians, but Aldar Kosa – the poor liar existing due to cheating others. Nobody will give guarantees, that similar distinctions will not be put on a paper in the form of destructive decisions of OSCE under presidency of Kazakhstan.
Aldar Kose is not unlike other cultures’ legendary “trickster” heroes, like Br’er Rabbit and Anansi. In other words, Asimov is suggesting that Kazakhstan, like Aldar Kose, owes its continued success to cheating its wealthy neighbors. However, Kazakhstan’s mineral and petroleum wealth and limited political and social reforms are not the work of its neighbors. I would also mention that Aldar Kose is not specifically Kazakh, and that this kind of profiling is often extended to the other cultures with Aldar Kose tales – Uzbeks, Tatars, Turks, Kyrgyz, Karakalpaks, etc. Granted, perhaps only Kazakhstan has created a CGI cartoon series with the character, but I don’t think that’s the point Asimov is trying to make.
This post was written by...
Michael Hancock-Parmer – author of 153 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.
{ 7 comments }
I have read articles by Asimov including this one. It seems to me to he has anti-Kazakh bias in general. Anyway, he is not famous and not taken seriously since people can see that most of the articles he writes are far from reality.
This latest article by Asimov is really a pile of sh… Naming himself an expert on cetral asia he provides such arguments as Kazakhstan should not even have been granted membership in OSCE due to geographical location. What kind of argument is that? The reference to Aldar Kose and establishing a relationship between Kose’s behavior and national mentality is extremely offensive, he is not a hero and the tales about him are intended to laugh about his tricks with rich people.
I believe that Kazakh chairmanship would be good for OSCE, not because of democracy or freedom or something fundamental, but because it is a fresh thing for OSCE. Not any other European country know what to do with the organization. OSCE is now in its decadent phase, and not because of Kazakhstan. Did Finland do any good to strengthen OSCE? The goals and intentionas of OSCE should be reoriented to something different. Who needs OSCE with 1985 mentality?
I agree that bringing in geography in this case is bollocks. If chairman- and membership of the OSCE ought to be ‘European’, as in fact the last part of its name makes one often think it does, then the US and Canada are automatically excluded as well.
For the rest, the OSCE has indeed been screwed and will be changed, that is, hollowed out, more from the iside by Kazakhstan’s chairmanship that the chairmanship will change Kazakhstan. The ‘Eurasian bloc’ within OSCE (Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus) is out to get the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, that’s most clear.
But then again, it means that OSCE diplos *wanted* to be screwed. The price of naïve ‘pragmatism and wrongly assessed self-interest, I guess…
does the geographical argument even hold up? i mean, a portion of kazakhstan is east of the ural river. it is at least partially in europe, as that continent is usually defined. maybe “partially europe” isn’t good enough for asimov, but that means that russia and turkey should also be excluded.
There are a number of anti-American authors and bloggers who predict that USA will soon fall apart, that Americans are stupid and lazy etc. One of them is Russian historian Igor Panarin. However, nobody takes him seriously, he is just insane. I am pretty sure there are plenty of anti-Americanists in other parts of the world, including Russia. Fuad Asimov is just like those but for Kazakhstan and Kazakhs, except he is not famous and his articles are very self-degrading. Judged by his essays he devoted himself to disparaging Kazakhstan and Kazakhs (and I really doubt he is Kazakh). In some of his articles he even sinks to racial slurs, and saying that there is distinction between thinking of Europeans and Kazakhs is very mild one (this was definitely attempt at offense). I am surprised that you take this kind of authors seriously here.
What do you mean by taking them seriously? I reviewed an article. Should I have ignored it completely? I thought it was interesting, and we have talked about Igor Panarin in the past here, and on my own blog. Just because they are weirdos, kooks, racists, biggots, or what-have-yous, should we ignore them? It’s not like anyone here agreed with his premises. And while Asimov might not be Kazakh, I find it interesting that he would publish under “adai,” one of the more famous clans.
You are right, you can post anyone you want. It is just, he would be interesting if he had to say something new or original, or backed his essay with some analysis; but it is just annoying yap. Nothing is original and isn’t going to change anything anyway.