 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
International Conference
«Conflicts in the Caucasus: History, the Present and Prospects for Resolution»
Baku (Azerbaijan) 22-23 October, 2012 and Tbilisi (Georgia) 25-26 October, 2012
GENERAL OVERVIEW
Timur SHAIMERGENOV
Timur Shaimergenov, Member of the Secretariat of the Kazakhstan Parliament Majilis (Astana, Kazakhstan)
The main event of the year was the presidential election, which had an effect on most of the other processes going on in the country in one way or another. The year was essentially a turning point in the republic’s transition to a qualitatively new stage in its socioeconomic and political development. In this respect, several characteristic features can be singled out. First, there was a further upswing in the economy and social stability, which formed a springboard from which other processes could take off. Second, thanks to some real democratic changes that have taken place in the country, the election of the head of state retained the status quo in the republic’s leadership. Third, Kazakhstan gained a stronger international foothold, which also enhanced its image as a pioneer of economic reform and democratization among the Central Asian countries.
It should also be mentioned that the world community focused special attention on the republic throughout the year. And this stands to reason. After the wave of so-called color revolutions in several post-Soviet countries, the world community was keenly interested in the outcome of the upcoming presidential election in Kazakhstan too. Kazakhstan was the first country to offset the destructive wave of these revolutions in a flexible and innovative way, that is, by means of the evolutionary path of its development, which came as a surprise both to the revolutionaries and to many of their political adversaries. Practice showed that the economic reforms carried out in the country were quite efficacious.
On the whole though, the logic of all the processes going on in the republic was based on the strategy “first the economy, then politics.” For example, thanks to the high economic growth rates in 2003-2005, the volume of the per capita GDP rose 1.7-fold, amounting to $3,620. In 2005, the republic reached a state budget spending level of approximately 28% of the GDP, while growth in GDP at the end of the year amounted to 9.4%. Experts maintain that this index could soon exceed (if it has not already exceeded) the total GDP volume of the seven Central Asian and Caucasian states.1
Nevertheless, a two-fold drop in production growth rates was observed, which was caused by the reduction in activity in all sectors of industry forming approximately 30% of the GDP. But in so doing, 84% of all direct investments went to the metallurgy and oil and gas industries, which inspires hope that the growth rates will pick up again.
Thanks to the achievements in the economy and the stable sociopolitical situation, Kazakhstan is the most investment-attractive country in the region with an annual volume of foreign investments of $30 billion. This is allowing the country’s leadership to continue its course toward diversification of the economy on the basis of the Strategy of Industrial-Innovative Development, which was drawn up and approved, and toward the attraction of science-intensive technology. This is extremely pertinent for the republic, since according to many experts, it might otherwise become “addicted to the oil habit.”
In 2005, Kazakhstan made itself known as a future space nation, at least as a country capable of independently launching spaceships in the near future. In order to reach this goal, a National Space Program was prepared, which is gradually turning into a systemic program of action by creating such specialized enterprises as Kazkosmos, Baiterek, and KazSat. In spite of the objective problems, there are plans to implement these programs in the very near future.
What is more, economic growth became the catalyst for deep-seated social transformations, which in turn had a positive effect on the population’s social well-being and participation in the country’s sociopolitical life. Nevertheless, worrying trends are being manifested in the social sphere. For example, the creation of jobs and job opportunities are mainly concentrated around large cities, while there is still disproportion between regions on the job market due to the low mobility and migration of the republic’s residents. What is more, illegal labor migration from Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan is taking its toll on the domestic labor market.
As for politics, the year can be divided into three periods. The first, which continued until the beginning of July, was full of debate about the possible date of the presidential election and whether the current head of state would run for office again. When it was officially announced that this election would definitely be held in 2005, all of the country’s political forces threw their time and energy into preparing for the election campaign, which ended in the nation going to the polls. The third period began after the election, which, due to the voting results and particularly Nursultan Nazarbaev’s re-election, was characterized by defused political tension and stable sociopolitical development.
Despite criticism from certain political forces, the country’s leadership did not deny the need for political reforms, but did not hurry to carry them out either. According to the republic’s president, Nursultan Nazarbaev, this issue should not be rushed, because democracy is an evolutionary process and the country must go through all of its stages. Abrupt changes are fraught with unpredictable consequences. In particular, the decree signed by the head of state on 4 May On Measures on Further Use of the Potential of the Kazakhstan Constitution demonstrated that the country’s leadership has armed itself with a strategy of gradual political modernization of society.
The next strong move initiated by the authorities within the framework of the National Commission on Democratization and Civil Society (NCDCS) was a discussion about the future political reforms, which all the political forces, regardless of their ideological views, were asked to participate in. In this way, through the activity of the NCDCS, the world community was sent a clear message that Kazakhstan seriously intends to build democracy by conducting political reforms, and the presidential election reinforced the republic’s democratic image once and for all. The election campaign itself became a catalyst for citizen-generated political activity. This was shown in particular by the numerous acts of support, as well as by the 77% of the electorate who came to the polls. Here it should be noted that based on Kazakhstan’s current achievements, Nursultan Nazarbaev’s victory was to be expected. And one of the main tasks was to ensure that the election was recognized as legitimate, which indeed happened. Most international observers noted its open, alternative, and democratic nature. However, no one expected Nursultan Nazarbaev to receive 91% of the votes. But given the current sociopolitical reality, it is as clear as day that the planned political reforms can only be carried out by a person who not only enjoys the unconditional trust of society, but is also well aware of all the costs of the power system he built. So, in this case, Nursultan Nazarbaev was the logical choice.
The year was also a turning point for the opposition. Unjustifiably ambitious and unable to overcome its internal bickering, it split into several groups, which were polar in their ideological approaches. It can be noted with certainty that as things stand at the moment, the opposition flank demonstrated utter political and technical incapacity while organizing the election campaign, but the main thing was that it lost in the game of public politics. In this way, due to the destructive internal trends, a systemic opposition did not develop either, and the country’s leadership managed to better organize and prepare for the election race, whereby it also clearly understood the path of the country’s further development. In so doing, while putting a damper on the provocative calls of the opposition to take radical action, the government worked very cautiously, thinking out its every step, and making correct use of the latest political techniques. The arguments that the opposition was placed at a disadvantage were only its unsuccessful attempt to justify its defeat. But one of the main questions regarding the upcoming political reforms was what the Kazakhstan opposition would look like in the near future and around which political figures it would form?
The year was also characterized by the high level of Kazakhstan’s foreign political activity. While retaining its main priorities in this sphere, Astana is carrying out a multi-vector foreign policy, which is justified in practice and places the emphasis on strengthening relations with the European Union on the whole and its countries in particular, as well as with China, Russia, and the U.S., without undermining the importance of cooperation with other states.
Kazakhstan’s Eurasian strategy initiated by President Nursultan Nazarbaev is being carried out on the basis of integration, by means of participation in various international organizations. In this respect, several major events can be singled out which took place in Kazakhstan in 2005. On 4 July, a SCO summit was held in Astana, which became an important stage in this organization’s development; on 1 October, the 15th session of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the ECO member states took place; at the beginning of November, the republic made voluntary contributions to the fund of several U.N. institutions; and on 16-18 November a meeting was held of a Special Working Group of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICBMA). According to the results of the presidential election, Kazakhstan recommended itself as a democratically developing country, and in so doing made a serious bid for chairmanship in the OSCE in 2009.
What is more, during the year, the republic was a site of diplomatic pilgrimage and focus of attention for the most prominent world and regional politicians. In 2005, Kazakhstan was visited by Vladimir Putin, Condoleezza Rice, Henry Kissinger, OSCE Representative for Central Asia Alojz Peterle, Director of the ODIHR/OSCE Christian Strohal, EU Special Representative for Central Asia and the Caucasus Jan Kubish, NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative for Central Asia and the Southern Caucasus Robert Simmons, color democrats Mikhail Saakashvili, Viktor Iushchenko, Kurmanbek Bakiev, and others. Such high interest in Kazakhstan indicates that the country’s role in international affairs today is undergoing qualitative changes. According to many politicians, the republic is staunchly assuming a key position in the region and becoming its political and economic center.
Military-political cooperation was actively developed in two main areas. On the one hand, with Russia, India, and such organizations as the CSTO and SCO, and on the other, with the U.S., Turkey, and NATO. In practice, this was expressed in talks and the signing of several documents, as well as in holding joint exercises. They included “Rubezh-2005” (within the framework of the CTSO), Kazakh-American “Balance-Zhardem-2005,” and Kazakh-British “Steppe Eagle 2005” with the participation of U.S. and Turkish observers. What is more, in the format of an international coalition, Kazakhstan’s armed forces continued to participate in the postwar regulation in Iraq. But in so doing, it should be noted that although multilateral cooperation in the military-political sphere is helping to raise the level of security, the country is in danger of finding itself in the epicenter of controversies among rivaling international structures.
In this way, according to the conception of the so-called Triple Transit, which includes economic reforms, political liberalization, and high-quality transformation of public consciousness, Kazakhstan is confidently continuing its modernization. Of course, the country has its problems, which is very natural for a young state. But thanks to the timely response of the republic’s leadership, extremely destructive and dangerous trends have been avoided, making it possible for official Astana to set itself new ambitious tasks which will come to fruition in the next few years.
1 According to the information of Vneshneekonomicheskie sviazi. Available at [www.eer-magazine.com/ru/1044.html]. Back to text
|
|
 |