The words of the President of Kazakhstan about the colonial past of the country caused a strong reaction in Russia and was regarded as anti-Russian. Of course being such, they reflect the extreme complexity of the situation faced and Nazarbayev, and his young country. How Russia should relate to such statements?
The words of the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev about the colonial past of the country has caused widespread and openly negative resonance in Russia. This is not surprising, given that he said:
“Russia just by the fact of its existence (and especially the fact of its existence in the status of a great power) is really the factor of destabilization of statehood for most of its post-Soviet neighbors”
“During tsarist Russia all the wealth of earth were taken out, and we just left the dug the ground and forced to swallow the dust. We even have roads in the country were not. And now I saw some railroad launched? And before such was not, because we were a colony. Oil, gas, gold, silver – thank God that we have it. It is our wealth that we have in the pocket, no one will take it. We don’t have to swallow the dust behind foreign countries, it is not our way.”
In particular, December 5 to five and a half years of imprisonment was sentenced for inciting ethnic hatred and promote separatism a resident of North Kazakhstan region, calling on social networks to reunite Kazakhstan with Russia. Also in Kazakhstan prosecuted citizens who participated in the conflict in the Donbass in the ranks of the militia.
At the same time, Kazakhstan is one of the most reliable partners, associates and allies of Russia. Belarus, where most tensions and contradictions, rather than with him.
He Nursultan Nazarbayev has long become the epitome of the wise ruler, who successfully carried his country through extremely dangerous waters the last two and a half decades. The President of Kazakhstan is the locomotive of Eurasian integration on a par with Vladimir Putin, and they constantly show each other the deepest mutual respect, support and friendship.
Nazarbayev has repeatedly provided Russia and its leadership are serious and sometimes highly non-trivial support. In particular, he became an important link which ensured the restoration of relations of Russia and Turkey after the recent serious crisis.
In the combination of these seemingly contradictory facts and circumstances is much more important and relevant than condemnation statements Nazarbayev, is to try to understand what caused the incident. And it is equally important to try to understand what to do and how to respond to Russia.
For a start it is worth remembering that the East is known as a delicate matter. Another week had passed after the scandal with the statement of erdoğan about plans to overthrow Assad. In the end it turned out that it was the same phrase for “internal use” and not intended for removal outside. When it happened, was explained that, speaking about the overthrow of Assad, in fact, the President of Turkey did not mean anything. In this case, only to shrug and take note of the specifics of Eastern rhetoric.
With Nazarbayev the situation in some ways similar. He has spoken at internal events and hardly expected that his words will be widely publicized in the Russian media and caused wide and angry outcry.
But it would be wrong to write off the incident as not having much importance to a trifle. This is not a small thing. Nazarbayev’s words (and some actions of the Kazakh government) are a reflection of the real (and increasing) problems and threats – that’s just the problems and threats for Russia and for Kazakhstan.
Kazakhstan, like most post-Soviet States after the collapse of the Soviet Union for the first time in history created their own state. He succeeded, to a great extent, thanks to Nazarbayev, to walk this path without extremes of Russophobia and anti-Russian hysteria. The result was a functioning state, an influential center of power in the region.
At the same time, no steps, which are regarded as anti-Russian, do not succeed. It makes some sarcastic Russian experts that the former Soviet Republic can exist only in an ideological format-Russia or anti-Russia, because it is able to generate its own positive paradigm and basically can not find a meaning of their own existence.
However, in reality the situation is much more complicated.
Russia to post-Soviet (and even more) space is a powerful center of attraction, not only political and economic but also cultural, informational, ideological, linguistic and all other. And in recent years the situation has worsened since the country’s return to great power status have accelerated these processes at times.
Even without any special effort, by the fact of its existence Russia has a tremendous impact on the lives of neighbors. We can only guess what part of the population of these countries is experiencing what can be called double loyalty.
Plus, history shows that when Russia is in a growth phase, it is usually accompanied by territorial expansion, or just a complete political and economic subjugation of its neighbors to its will. No reasonable arguments that now such plans and desires there is neither the leadership nor the population, don’t work here. Practice shows that sometimes everything was happening by itself, because of the logic of the historical process.
As a result, Russia just by the fact of its existence (and especially the fact of its existence in the status of a great power) is really the factor of destabilization of statehood for most of its post-Soviet neighbors. And even the most friendly of them perceive Russia as a source of certain threats.
As a result, these countries as a protection of their own state choose anti-Russian propaganda in different hardness and intensity. The Baltic States, where there is a hysterical Russophobia state, to Belarus and Kazakhstan, from which we can hear the individual attacks against Russia.
The problem is that this policy in recent years numerous examples have already proved their bankruptcy. The Baltic republics turn into ruined and deserted backwater, and the example of anti-Russian Ukraine, the whole world has the opportunity to live to witness the complete collapse of the 40-million country.
Apparently, the President believes that he will be able in this case to pass between Scylla and Charybdis. Given his wisdom and experience, there is no doubt that this is true.
However, the question arises, what will happen after its inevitable (and already relatively short – just because of their age) resignation of the President?
If the Kazakh elite to keep a balanced rate of Nazarbayev? How really important and influential social groups, pumped up anti-Russian sentiments, and which actions they are willing to promote their ideas? To be able to Kazakhstan with its multinational young state, geographically sandwiched between the two great powers and within the focus of attention of the Islamists, to cope with the challenges of his period of world turbulence?
Most of the predictions in this sense, do not inspire much optimism.
It is therefore unlikely to lead to any action on the part of the Russian leadership to the statements of President Nursultan Nazarbayev. His merits in the eyes of the Kremlin covering all the possible controversial and not popular with us the steps.
The main interest of Russia is finding Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan at the helm for as long as possible.
And then… everything is in the hands of Allah.