Comments on: Kazakhstan, Beacon of Anticorruption Activity?

By: Ahad_Abdurahmon

Ahad_Abdurahmon — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:47:59 +0000

if you let corparations to extract ans sell your natural resources you are good (Kazakhstan)
if you don’t you are a shithole (Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan)
if you don’t have any resources and really poor and trying to be friends with Russia, we don’t give a damn whether you had a color revolution or not. You are bad, bad, bad!!! Try to guess who that was!
if you don’t have any resources, but really mad at those who have and at Russia at the same time, you are less corrupt no matter what (Tajikistan)!!!

By: oldschool boy

oldschool boy — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:12:52 +0000

I noticed in your article you try to make a connection between the corruption ranking and political events, like the Zhovtis incident. Although, these may somehow be connected, I do not think there is much of a correlation.
And of course it is all PR, as any ranking. All the rankings are politically motivated, and serve purposes of those who make them. It is somehow new corruption: you do what we want you to do, and we will make your ranks OK. You can’t seriously believe that in India there are more democracy and security, than, for instance in Russia, but the Indian government is more deferential to the West and, therefore, it has higher ranks.

By: Alex Visotzky

Alex Visotzky — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:07:45 +0000

I think their methodology is for the most part sound given what it’s try to accomplish there’s no error in the calculations. I’m just talking about the divorce between reality and perception and whether or not it matters. At the heart of it, I think the CPI is an important tool for comparing countries, I’m just wondering what would push those surveyed to have a much more favorable impression of Kazakhstan than in past surveys. Furthermore I’m wondering if this tool will have a positive or negative effect on reform and hoping for some feedback.

The methodology, by the way, can be found here:
http://transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2009/methodology

By: oldschool boy

oldschool boy — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:18:40 +0000

Alex,
If you think there is a flaw in the Transparency International methodology, just state it. It should be in there website, take it, read, and analyze. And if you think that there is an error in their calculations, let us know. Otherwise, the discussion is pointless. Corruption in Kazakhstan is bad, and we know it, but how do we know how bad it is in comparison to other places if we can’t compare and do not have the right methodology?

By: Alex Visotzky

Alex Visotzky — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:36:06 +0000

Yeah my visits to Kazakh border posts, interactions with the police, and various other outlets show how ingrained corruption is. When you’re hesitant about paying a bribe, people are totally befuddled and often say “Relax. This is just how we do things.” I’m still struggling to figure out what’s changed people’s perceptions so much that Kazakhstan leapt all these spots; partly I think it’s simply optimism that the OSCE chairmanship would force Kazakhstan to make more substantive changes.

By: Ekspeditsya

Ekspeditsya — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:26:30 +0000

I’ll tell you what I think, but you’ll need to pay me first.
But actually, I am with Dafydd on this. Obviously, no one person can empirically know whether corruption is improving or worsening by a matter of degrees, but Kazakhstan has been full of news over the past year about high- and low-level officials getting busted for graft. That could account in part for the shift in perception.
My experience on the Almaty-Bishkek highway, however, makes me suspicious about any premature optimism.
Having said that, I needed to undergo a minor bit of surgery at a public hospital in Almaty late last year and was told that I could be treated in a more professional ward if I paid a higher fee. It only dawned on me months later what exactly it was I had done.
Which is another problem about perceiving corruption; sometimes, it is so ingrained you fail to recognise it as corruption anymore. It just becomes an everyday, hum-drum practice necessary to “grease the wheels.”

By: Maria shannon

Maria shannon — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:32:25 +0000

I don’t know how u pegged me but i am glad u did. I have a son also in afghanistan. He is a sargent eor the 82nd airborne. His name is brenden shannon. U should connect with him. I feel ur aggravation.. I belidve u ard riit about the accompolirhments nf 2009. Gotta rtn. Beem on this thhng alk day

By: Dafydd

Dafydd — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:10:06 +0000

In as much as there have been arrests of corrupt officials, that must improve the perception of people on the ground. If you see your local police officer getting busted for taking a bribe, that, more than any political speech, will make you think that the government is taking on corruption. It would also limit the corruption of remaining police officers (assuming it is genuinely the most corrupt that have been arrested.

Those that have been arrested will by now have been replaced. To maintain (or improve) its place, the Kazakhs have to ensure the replacements are an improvement.

On that, only time will tell.