In the comments to the article “We owe it to Gorbachev that Russia almost lost its sovereignty” from 26 July 2011, a blitz discussion of the topic of modern Kazakhstan and its leader Nursultan Nazarbayev spontaneously arose. Then the participants of the discussion (mainly my fellow Kazakhstani people) completed an exchange of views on an optimistic note in terms of the development of integration processes between Russia and Kazakhstan. But some sense of understatement (at least with me) remains ...
In addition, I did not leave a sense of duty to the esteemed community of the Military Review - at one time I promised to prepare material on this topic. The publication offered to your attention is a kind of “digest” - a selection of materials on a given topic from various Internet sources, including Kazakhstan. It is clear that the selection is subjective and, in many respects, coincides with the “own opinion” of the author.
For the most scrupulous readers at the end of the material are links to sources of information.
Nazarbayev has no replacement
Unexpectedly sounded news of the German newspaper Bild about the hospitalization of the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev took by surprise absolutely everyone in the country. Some bitter bewilderment of high-ranking officials, emphatically cautious words of anxious opposition ... Yes, there, even the usually harsh and uncompromising Rakhat Aliyev, the disgraced politician who served as the senior son-in-law of the head of state, showed miracles of humanity, wishing the first head a speedy recovery.
Meanwhile, the suddenly discovered human face of Kazakhstan’s politics is not evidence of a sharp breakthrough to a different level of civilization. And, rather, about the confusion of the elite, who at once lost the main support that allowed them to justify their own helplessness. And in fact, what will happen to the state, where all aspects of life: from the concept of foreign policy to the arrangement of regional administrations - is personified by Nursultan Nazarbayev? Take this rod out of the state machine - and how will it lead itself after this? It is clear that in recent years - these rhetorical questions have also become commonplace. But it is important that behind the rhetoric there is a really serious systemic problem: no one - neither the opposition, nor, especially, the government, has yet proposed that strategy — at least the vision of Kazakhstan without Nazarbayev.
Russian political consultants who are familiar with the situation in Kazakhstan once formulated a conclusion that was offensive for the entire class of bureaucrats: the elite in the republic live by waiting for the first person to leave the political field of the state. Yes, there is no way to exclude the preparation of all, without exception, the forces for the situation when the supreme arbiter, for various reasons, leaves his post. But, in fact, the very fact of preparation, paradoxically sounds, is completely excluded. No one, no one at all, even the most sophisticated players of Kazakhstan’s politics, are not able to reveal their vision of the future of Kazakhstan’s statehood. It is clear that the logic of the built system itself does not allow people to speak openly about the care of a person whose political potential has been at its zenith for many years.
In this context, the wish for a “speedy recovery” from the main opponent of the head of state looks not only the stated political demand of the majority of citizens of the country, but also the confirmation of Mikhalkov’s words that the personality cult is formed only where there is a personality. And in fact, who will be worshiped by hordes of Kazakhstani officials, and to fight with whom will the democratic public of Kazakhstan continue to beat out grants?
Director of the Central Asian Foundation for the Development of Democracy Tolganai Umbetalieva is convinced that Kazakhstan can no longer avoid negative scenarios:
“I think that it’s already impossible to avoid negative consequences. If last year we analyzed the situation in Kyrgyzstan and talked about whether such a scenario is possible in Kazakhstan, we were sure that in Kazakhstan this is unrealistic. Now I have a completely different point of view. Because the situation has changed very much over the year: social tensions in the country are very high. I recently returned from the regions with research, and if in the west people are more belligerent, in the south of Kazakhstan people are more disappointed. Therefore, I think Nazarbayev’s successor will find it very difficult to keep power in his hands, the presidency will be very difficult for him, and it will be difficult for him to maintain stability in the country. I think that the moment has already been lost, and even if the president now introduces a successor, this can turn into a big chaos that there are a lot of political forces that will declare their ambitions for this post both domestically and abroad. They will not sit on their hands. "
Disappointing processes in the political field of the country states the head of the foreign opposition bureau Serik Medetbekov. In his opinion, Nursultan Nazarbayev never managed to build up system mechanisms for the transfer of power. "... We all understand - all political scientists are talking about this, and they clearly understand this inside the government, - that there is no political mechanism for the peaceful transfer of power. Unfortunately, Nazarbayev today has built a system in which it is almost impossible. And Considering what is happening in Kazakhstan now, I think it will be so difficult if Nazarbayev suddenly leaves, that it will probably lead to more radical things, that is, by non-peaceful means, all of this will happen. what is in power to our much regret, they have not only money, influence and power, but also armed formations. And this is not a secret. Therefore, as I have already said, no one will just give up power. "
Corruption in Kazakhstan
(According to the materials of the article by the leader of the Alga party, Vladimir Kozlov)
Almost a decade ago, at a meeting with business representatives, President Nazarbayev said the phrase, which became sadly winged: "I can take any of you by the hand and take to court." The president of the country, at that time already with a ten-year term of government, knew what he was saying. In one phrase he expressed the quintessence of what we call the state system of Kazakhstan: steal, but remember who allows you to do this. Since then, the “formula of corruption in Kazakhstan” appeared: corruption is what the president pays for with dishonest but personally loyal officials for supporting him.
President Nazarbayev was right. Almost 100% of citizens doing business do it in violation of the law. The word "almost" is here to refer to those very few who are offended by this statement, sincerely believing that they do not violate anything, because "everybody does this."
Before logically substantiating my opinion that in Kazakhstan corruption is the basis of statehood, I will say that I see this as the direct guilt of President Nazarbayev, and I will explain why. Everything is simple and short: Kazakhstan is a country with a presidential form of government. For twenty years, we haven’t yet had another president besides Nazarbayev. Hence, Mr. Nazarbayev should be responsible not only for the successful sale of oil and other resources of the country, but also for everything that happens in the country, for everything that is created and built. In particular - for the very corrupt statehood.
The corruption basis of statehood created by President Nazarbayev leaves no room for those who want to do business honestly. The system of relations between the state (in the person of officials loyal to him personally) and business that he created determines the dependence of business on the regulatory functions of officials at all levels. The number and, most importantly, the personification of approvals and permits make the formation and development of any business (and not only business) completely dependent on what each particular official decides who occupies an appropriate place in this system. There will be no permission - there will be no business. Or he will not be allowed to develop. Or - will destroy already developed. Or ... There are a lot of obstacles, as well as services that are engaged on behalf of the state.
But - there is a solution. It is only necessary to “improve relations” with specific individuals, in other words, to find “moves” for paying bribes for solving the issues necessary for business. But - in the accounting program "1С - Accounting," for which taxes are paid, there is no item of expenditure, which would be called "giving a bribe to an official." So - need a secret "2С - Accounting". And that means you need to hide part of the income - to give a bribe - from taxation. That's all. There was a businessman - became a criminal. You can "take the hand and take to court." And you can not take and not take away. But then forget about citizenship, about your rights, forget about honor, about morality, about morality, justice and conscience ... Remember only about income, about those who provided them, and about who created it, about the “Creator , So to speak ... Remember and not against the wind .... And then they will immediately remind you of who you are and where your place is.
Several years ago, at one of the meetings of the Politon discussion club, presidential adviser Mr. Yertysbayev once said such an interesting phrase: “The state system has already been created, it is functioning properly, and there is no need to change anything in it. Just find your place in this system and live, have fun. ” But, as our everyday reality shows, the system is not direct and transparent. It consists of fancy puzzles in its curvature. If you are a citizen with moral principles and a civil position, if you are not inclined to change it and lose it - you cannot find a place in this system. There are no right angles; in order to get there, you must first bend under the “allocated space” ... Having agreed to exist in such a system, you should not be surprised and indignant if, as a result, before the eyes, instead of a clear sky, there will first be someone “upbeat” ass, and then - the lattice ... The system — not by me — is created and functioning ...
At the beginning of the two thousandth, a survey was conducted on the role of corruption in business. Almost all businessmen have recognized corruption as a “positive factor” that promotes business development. At first glance - unexpectedly and absurdly. But - it is logical. Existing laws, incl. The tax code, customs legislation, the size and calculation of duties and taxes do not provide an opportunity for business development. And in this situation, the “activities” of corrupt officials who, for bribes, give a “green street”, are positive for business.
In Kazakhstan, the fight against corruption is led by those who create and protect it. The winged question of our time - “how much is the place of the leader of the fight against corruption” - says everything. Citizens' fight against corruption leads not citizens of corruption, but citizens themselves, because corruption is systematic and strictly guards itself at all levels: from bribe takers-policemen to bribe takers-judges. This is my comment to the newly-summoned call of Mrs. Dzharbusynova, ambassador-at-large for ambassadors, to “come to a zero level of tolerance to corruption.”
At the same time, I agree with the thesis of Ms. Dzharbusynova that you should start with yourself. For example, I will not consider President Nazarbayev to have the right to demand that all officials submit the declaration until he “starts with himself”, informs the public about his income and the incomes of members of his presidential family, whom he has endowed with himself immunity. Why, one wonders, is the criminal immunity of the leader of the nation and his family? Shouldn't they give society examples and standards of honesty, morality and ethics? What are they doing today - why they don’t want to answer tomorrow?
After 20 years of independence, we have come to a situation where we can’t name a single area of government activity where there is no corruption, where it won the so-called “fight against it”. This is a state cancer. It is very dangerous for the statehood of the country and its future.
The threat of terrorism and separatism
The topic of terrorism in Kazakhstan has become a priority for most media and public analysts of the country. With a slight delay, the sluggish earlier discussion develops into controversy, where the main question is formulated - how should the state respond to the threats that have arisen? But the main thing is that the expert community of the country was involved in the discussion, which even at a level close to the authorities articulated: terrorism in Kazakhstan is not fiction of the media.
Vremya tells the facts about the facts ignored by the security services of Kazakhstan in an interview with the former head of various security agencies, Lieutenant-General Bulat Baekenov. The most important thing that the guest guest states is that the distribution area of extremist organizations is expanding with catastrophic speed:
"... At the beginning of 2000-s, when I retired, for me an unpleasant surprise was the arrest of a group of members of the Hizb-ut-Tahrir movement in the East Kazakhstan region, where, as is known, the Slavic population predominates. Initially, the security forces practically did not pay attention to this area, considering the most confirmed manifestations of extremism to be regions with a population preaching Islam.
The President of the Habitat Information Fund on Religious Issues Aiman Rustembekova sees the equally disturbing picture, stating in an interview with Megapolis: Kazakhstani youth on the periphery are very attentive to religious issues. "Even 15-year-olds are now involved in religious movements. But if in Astana, the capital city, young people can find work and entertainment, make plans and see goals, then for youth in villages where socio-economic issues are not resolved, religion becomes ideology protest. "We were once united by the idea of building communism, and even lived in a time when all sorts of social guarantees were provided to everyone," says the president of the foundation. "Now the young people, who cannot be guaranteed anything, are carried away by the idea of the construction of the caliphate, and perhaps in this way it protests against corruption, immorality and the separation of society into rich and poor.
The former head of the Center for Antiterrorist Programs, Secretary for the Strategic Development of the Nur Otan Party, Yerlan Karin, on the pages of Italics, reflects on the causes of the terrorist threat in Kazakhstan:
“Today in expert circles there is no consensus on the causes of terrorism. Some believe that the exacerbation of socio-economic problems (poverty, poverty, marginalization of society) serves as a catalyst. Others see the fundamental principle in the specifics of the political regime (degree of openness / closeness of society, level of enlightenment, the level of rights and freedoms.) Still others believe that the basis of terrorism is sociocultural deformation (the depreciation of certain values and moral norms). However, terrorism, like any other set, has a complex causes and difficult intertwining motifs. In conditions of Kazakhstan can be identified at least three major factors contributing to the growing threat of terrorism.
First, the factor of social depression, lack of channels and elevators of social mobility. Social stratification and a certain caste of social groups. Impossibility of self-realization and achievement of social success. Social insecurity and lack of life prospects, especially among young people. And all these problems are exacerbated by corruption in society. In addition, when a critical threshold is reached in the separation of the rich and the poor, social protests arise, one of the forms of which is likely to be attacks.
Secondly, the low efficiency of the state policy in the ideological sphere, in particular, some formalism in the regulation of the religious and inter-ethnic sphere, in the conduct of language and religious policy.
Thirdly, the presence of "hotbeds of tension" in neighboring states always affects the situation with terrorism. In our case - the preservation of the current instability in Central Asia - the likelihood of the exacerbation of the political crisis in Kyrgyzstan and possible next attempts to destabilize the situation in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
Social, religious or ideological discontent, not having legitimate political ways of solving it, inevitably leads to attempts to influence the government and society through threats, violence, and death. This is the road to terror. And Kazakhstan is going this way. Today in Kazakhstan everything has been done so that people lose faith in the honesty of power, the justice of laws, and the humanity of society. Hundreds of thousands of people thrown to the periphery of life are beginning to realize that they are not needed by anyone, that they have been deceived. A protest is ripening, which, not finding its manifestation in political life, will begin to manifest itself in terrorist acts, the death of innocent people. And, most likely, this will manifest itself through the activities of various Islamist groups.
Portal Asia Center, in turn, states the problems that have arisen earlier - the emergence of separatist sentiments in the west of the country. The publication emphasizes:
“The clan structure is capable of destroying the foundations of statehood, in particular in the western regions, especially in Mangistau (formerly Guryev), populated mainly by Kazakhs, most of them belonging to the Adai clan. This genus is one of the key ones in the structure of the Junior Zhuz, the same one that has already become stories Kazakhs initiated a split state. Now, on the territory of the Younger Zhuz, the ideas of creating an independent state from Kazakhstan, typical for the 1990-s, roam with new force. Of particular popularity is the assertion that the Adai are fed all of Kazakhstan, while they themselves sit starvingly - this is repeatedly stated in the articles protecting the Younger zhuz. They gradually give judgments that, if the West of Kazakhstan dispose of "its" oil independently, without the dictates of Astana, everyone would already live there as in the Emirates.
For example, the well-known leader of the Union of Muslims of Kazakhstan, M. Telibekov, runs around this idea: "Western Kazakhstan has its own distinctly expressed specifics. The population of the region is represented by Adayans. Since ancient times, this Kazakh genus has been militant. For Aday people, impulsivity and pronounced temperament are characteristic. The population today is in a very difficult economic situation. People are well aware that they are sitting on "gold", but they eke out a miserable existence. The oil of the region essentially feeds the whole country. Such a monstrous failure Livability (in their opinion) pushes people to extremes. This is a fully justified rebellion. If the situation of the population does not improve in the future, then Western Kazakhstan can become not only a center of major social upheavals, but also an initiator of separatist aspirations. Once the collapse of the Soviet Union also seemed inconceivable fantasy. Western Kazakhstan will become an independent state if the policies of the Center do not undergo significant changes. "
Foreign policy - balancing act on several chairs
Over the past decade, Kazakhstan has become the most developed country in Central Asia due to rapid economic growth at the expense of oil and a pragmatic foreign policy. President Nazarbayev has managed to skillfully balance a wide range of the country's interests and maintain a reasonable balance between the two most important international partners of Kazakhstan - Russia and the United States, whose interests in the region collide. While Russia has a historical and geographical comparative advantage, Kazakhstan’s relations with the United States are significant and growing and strengthening. Nazarbayev achieved a balance in relations with Russia and the United States by sending cheap oil to Russia, and becoming an integral part of Washington’s war on terrorism for the United States.
One of the priorities of Russian foreign policy under President Medvedev was a rapprochement with these former satellite countries with a conscious strategic and geopolitical goal - to make them part of a broader framework designed to regain the country's influence in the region. Kazakhstan attempted to achieve real autonomy from Russia and confirm its national identity, while not fearing to turn its face to Moscow in search of a solution to its security and defense problems. Military cooperation between Astana and Moscow today is strong and deep-rooted, and is conducted in mutual interests. Both countries are members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) of the Central Asian countries, as well as members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Since 1994, Kazakhstan and Russia have steadily increased the level of their military cooperation. In 2010, joint military exercises were held three times, a similar number is planned for this year, and approximately 15 of thousands of Kazakh soldiers are being trained under the guidance of Russian military specialists.
Russia is the leading trade partner of Kazakhstan due to the fact that it is a member of the Russian Customs Union - another driving force through which Moscow is trying to restore its influence in the region. The customs union between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan formally began its existence in January 2010, and is expected to evolve into the creation of a single economic space by January 2012. Russia maintains a dominant position in bilateral trade between the two countries, as it is a transit country for Kazakh oil and gas exports.
Astana also has good, strong relations with Washington, which have developed since 1991, without any particular obstacles. The United States was the first country to recognize the independence of Kazakhstan. Washington has considered Astana as a reliable partner ever since, actively supporting the country's candidacy as a rotating president in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2010. Energy cooperation is one of the pillars of US-Kazakh relations, given Washington’s support for the idea of energy independence among countries in the region. Washington views the diversification of the Caspian pipelines as a counterbalance to Russian dominance in terms of energy resources. Washington approved an agreement between Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, which allowed Astana to export oil partially through the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which helped reduce Astana’s dependence on Moscow in this regard. Non-proliferation issues are also the basis of the bilateral relations of Astana and Washington. Agreement on joint risk reduction, through which Washington has already paid more than two hundred million dollars to Astana as part of helping Kazakhstan get rid of its arsenal weapons mass destruction, is considered one of the best examples of non-proliferation policy, a card that Astana played well.
Although Astana considered it less difficult to manage the competing economic interests of Moscow and Washington, the settlement of interests in the military and security spheres proved more problematic. Kazakhstan decided to use its CSTO membership as a counterbalance to NATO, although it is a member of the NATO Partnership for Peace program from 1995 of the year and cooperates with NATO in the framework of the Action Plan for Partners. The organization (meaning CSTO) actively supports the country in a number of areas, from measures to combat terrorism and customs security to emergency response and migration issues. It is obvious that the volatility and instability in relations between NATO and the OSCE in the military sphere influenced relations between Astana and Washington. NATO’s stubbornness, which categorically refuses to accept signals aimed at cooperation from the CSTO, may lead Astana to rely more on Moscow for its security and defense needs, but this is unlikely to entail any serious consequences. for her long-standing and solid relationship with Washington. Astana’s multilateral foreign policy is based on a carefully balanced strategy in which concessions alternate with demonstrations of power. For example, Moscow has to tolerate Astana’s openness towards foreign investment in its oil sector, in return it benefits from continued military cooperation at the expense of NATO. Kazakhstan was able to diversify its interlocutors and to develop a partially independent political line in the region, in which the interests of several large global players collide and compete with each other. This seems to be consistent with the satisfaction of the desires and goals of the Obama administration in the country, despite the fact that the White House by all means contributes to the development of a stable, secure and democratic state that accepts the rules of the game in terms of a free market economy, while being a respected regional leader.
Nazarbayev undoubtedly views Central Asia as a territory that is increasingly becoming the battleground for influence and superiority, not only for Russia and the United States, but also, inevitably, for China. As Russia continues to rise, both economically and politically, its ability to influence events in the region is very likely to continue to grow. The same can be said about China, which does not make a special secret from its own ambitions to improve its status and increase access to energy resources in the region. At the same time, the United States finds itself in a situation where their ability to influence events in the region begins to be limited to relatively static foreign policy and limited financial resources.
Russia is very likely to become the final winner in its battle for a dominant role for itself in the military and security fields. It is possible that over time, the United States may cede its economic influence of the post-Soviet period in the Kazakh hydrocarbon sector to Chinese oil and gas companies, as is increasingly happening in other regions of the world. At the same time, it can be expected that Nazarbayev will continue to carefully manipulate the foreign policy of Kazakhstan for the maximum benefit of Astana.
Russians in Kazakhstan
In Kazakhstan, Russians are mainly descendants of 16th – 19th century immigrants and descendants of labor migrants of the USSR period.
The oldest settlement founded by Russians on the territory of modern Kazakhstan - Yaitsky town (later - the city of Uralsk) was founded back in 1520 year. Later were based Guryev (1645), Pavlodar (city status with 1861), True (1854), Semipalatinsk (1712), Ust-Kamenogorsk (1720), Petropavlovsk (1752), Akmola (1824), Aktyubinsk (1868), Kostanay ( 1879), Kokchetav, Irgiz (1845), Turgai (1845), Kazalinsk (1848) and other smaller urban settlements.
Many of the Russians currently living in Kazakhstan are labor migrants who arrived in Kazakhstan in the course of internal migration during the Soviet period. This was carried out by the decision of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Government of the USSR in the order of organized recruitment and organized resettlement for the construction of factories, mines, virgin lands, etc.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, 6 million Russians remained in Kazakhstan. By this time, almost the entire population spoke Russian; it was not only the language of social advancement, but also the spoken language of urban Kazakhs.
After gaining independence in 1991, the outflow of Russians to Russia began, and their numbers declined significantly and continue to decline, but at a slow pace. Every year, hundreds of thousands of people began to leave. At present, the average age of Russians in Kazakhstan is 49 years, against 27 years among Kazakhs. This is due not only to the exit structure, but also to the low birth rate of the Russian population of Kazakhstan. Thus, at present, the Russians have become the second largest national group and at the beginning of 2010, make up 23,3% of the country's population.
The main factors of departure are: the collapse of the single space of the USSR, returning to the ethnic homeland (Russians to Russia, Germans to Germany, Jews to Israel, Ukrainians to Ukraine, Belorussians to Belarus, etc.), rapid growth of the Kazakh population, migration of excessive rural population cities, increased inter-ethnic competition in labor markets, as well as an increase in the number of Kazakhs in the state apparatus and leading sectors of the economy. As the reason for the departure of Russians from Kazakhstan, the fear of discrimination was cited by the international human rights organization Human Rights Watch. But many assess this data as superficial, since the Kazakhs are considered the most tolerant of the Russian ethnos in the post-Soviet space and are traditionally loyal to Russia. According to data from the statistical institutions of Kazakhstan and Russia, up to 20% of Russians who have moved from Kazakhstan to Russia are returning back, failing to adapt due to the already established mentality (different from the purely Russian) and the absence of more affordable financial conditions in Russia than in Kazakhstan.
Recently, however, there is a “dismantling” of the Russian space in Kazakhstan through attempts to deprive the Russian language of the constitutional status of the official language of communication, on a par with the Kazakh. In particular, according to the statement of the Republican Slavic movement “Lada” of 16 in August 2011:
“... the topic of the accelerated introduction of the state Kazakh language is actively being discussed in Kazakhstani society. In the electronic and print media of the republic, regular informational stuffings appear, calling for toughening of the language policy and the speedy expulsion of the Russian language. Moreover, this campaign in Kazakhstan day by day acquires a hard-offensive character.
The ideological center of this campaign is the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Kazakhstan, headed by the notorious Kul-Mohammed, the main “Kazakhizer” Ak Orda. It is from there that gush initiatives on legislative restrictions on the functioning of the Russian language, on strict administration in relation to those citizens of the republic who do not speak Kazakh.
It seems to us that today in the upper echelons of the Kazakh authorities there is a stable anti-Russian and anti-Russian lobby, which has a growing influence on the domestic and foreign policy of the country and impede the integration processes between Russia and Kazakhstan. And one of the main disintegration tools used by Kazakh national isolationists is the systemic radicalization of the “language issue” in the republic, aimed at assimilating the Russian population and breaking the Russian-Kazakh historical and cultural-communicative ties.
The visible result of the actions of this nationalist lobby was the draft law “On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on State Language Policy”, which was rendered in the depths of the above-mentioned Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The essence of this chauvinistic document is that the “official” Russian language (used “on a par” with the state Kazakh language) in the republic will be excluded from public use and will become the language of Russian kitchen gatherings.
Meanwhile, as is well known, this bill has already gone to various state bodies for approval. It seems that none of the Russian Kazakhstani people will have any doubts that after a light cosmetic treatment, this document will most likely be agreed and adopted.
It should be recalled that the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Kazakhstan is not a private shop, but the main ideological and propaganda body of the government of Kazakhstan, whose ministers are approved by the president. Thus, we should talk here about the state policy towards the Russian and Russian-speaking population of the republic, numbering about 6 million, and being law-abiding and full-fledged citizens of Kazakhstan.
Lada Movement believes that, conceptually, this bill actually cancels the effect of paragraph 2, Art. 7 Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, roughly violates p. 2, Art. 14 Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as the norms of the current Law on Languages. With the adoption of this bill, which presupposes linguistic “personnel cleansing”, in all structures of power of the Republic of Kazakhstan - with its current absolute Kazakh dominant, the role of the Russian state-forming ethnic group in governing the country will be reduced to almost zero.
We would like to emphasize that the discriminatory bill is a logical continuation of the notorious doctrine of national unity, which clearly traces the desire of its creators to build civil (state) identity on an exclusive basis only of Kazakh culture and Kazakh language. In this regard, the “language revolution” proposed by the Kazakh Ministry of Culture follows from the logic of the doctrine and strengthens us in the opinion that the constitutional status of the “official” Russian language can be “dismantled” in the near future in Kazakhstan.
We believe that such actions taken on the eve of the celebration of the 20 anniversary of the republic are clearly provocative in nature and are aimed at destabilizing inter-ethnic harmony. Since it is clear that the Russian population will not disregard and respond to all those steps that are aimed at infringing upon their legitimate rights in the sphere of language policy. Another goal of the linguistic zeal of the Ministry of Culture, we believe, is the desire of this department to hide the obvious failures in its own ideological activity, which allowed (and encouraged !?) radical "Islamization", which resulted in "criminal" acts of terror in Aktyubinsk.
The authorities of Kazakhstan should clearly understand all the political and humanitarian consequences of adopting this chauvinistic bill that violates the basic rights and freedoms of the Russian and Russian-speaking people in Kazakhstan. And one of such consequences could be the renewal of the “exodus” of the Russian population from the republic. In addition, such steps by the government of Kazakhstan cause serious doubts about the reliability of the Kazakhstan partnership in the framework of existing integration processes, which are based not on the length of pipelines and not on the number of tenge, rubles and petrodollars, but century-old historical Russian-Kazakhstan cultural ties, the foundation of which is civilizational space of the Russian language. "
1. Nazarbayev’s Disease, Threat of Terrorism and Separatism
2. Nursing Nazarbayev should occur within six months
3. Oracle Ertysbayev
4. President's early funeral
5. Corruption as the basis of statehood
6. Kazakh customs are paid by prostitutes from Kyrgyzstan
7. Islamization of the Caucasus and Central Asia goes on the cannibal neoliberal background
8. Kazakhstan: seeking equilibrium
9. "Dismantling" of the Russian space in Kazakhstan ... Statement by the Republican Slavic movement "Lad"
10. Creeping coup ... Kazakh nationalists, personnel cleansing and ... the collapse of the country?