Announced in March, the early presidential election in Kazakhstan has become a debate about the results reached during the past years, the actual problems and the future challenges. The advanced poll was proposed by institutional officials in order to permit President Nazarbayev to lead the country again in the next future.
Kazakhstan is dealing with challenges in political and economic sphere existing in former Soviet space. The country, in addition, is facing some strategic bids directed to promote economic integration in the international markets and its worldwide image. For instance, Kazakh diplomacy is actively working for admission in the World Trade Organization and it has presented its candidacy for a seat as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council for the years 2017-2018.Moreover, among many relevant events scheduled in the country in the next years, Astana in 2017 will host the International Exposition while Almaty is one of the two candidate cities to host the 2022 Olympic Winter Games.
In this way, in the political establishment gained momentum the idea to ensure stability in phase of great transformations and challenges for the country.
Motivations for the early poll were linked to “technical” as also political and social reasons. One motivation is linked to the willingness to divide presidential and legislative elections, both scheduled for 2016, in order to prevent any sort of threat that could have led to political and institutional paralysis.
The second motivation is related with the increasing tensions in the world scenario and especially in the Eurasian context. The Ukrainian crisis and the current problems between Russia and the Western countries have put under pressure the Central Asian country, always devoted to pursue its “multi-vectorial” foreign policy of good relations with all the most important global players. Moreover, changes in the economic outlook, due to rising prices in the international market and devaluations of national and Russian currencies, have been valuated as possible sources of uncertainty for the next future.
Kazakhstan’s challenges in the next years will be aimed not only at consolidating the stability of the country, but also at establishing a new path of reforms that the presidential bloc is, with all the probabilities, called to implement. On April 11, at Nur Otan (Kazakh ruling party) Congress in Astana, Nursultan Nazarbayev accepted the proposal for candidacy advanced by the professor Kenzhegali Sagadiyev. With this move, there is no doubt about another landslide vicotry of the incumbent. Despite his long staying at power, the Head of the State still enjoys a widespread support throughout the country, thanks to economic and political successes and the objective weakness of the opposition side.
In his acceptance speech, Nazarbayev explained the necessity for the country not to stop its process of modernization, claiming that: “We cannot stand idle. We have to move forward availing on our success to strengthen our statehood”. He underlined the next years are going to assume a great relevance not only for the stability of the country, but also for the realization of a wider spectrum of reforms.The President, in fact, seemed more interested to illustrate the long term path than campaign promises, by identifying five fundamental points for the modernization: state apparatus and meritocracy; rule of law; industrialization and economic growth; strengthening Kazakhstani identity; transparent and accountable state
Among them, there are two key points of Nazarbayev’s presidency. The first, the continuation of the process of economic reforms started with new amendments on law on investments and the main economic development program “Nurly Jol”, within the strategic plan “Strategy 2050”, aimed to put the country among the top 30 world economies. The second, no less important, achievement of a multinational, tolerant and secular society where all the 130 ethnic and 17 religious communities can live in concord.
In addition, Kazakh President stressed the importance of combating corruption, the consolidation of rule of law, the professionalization and training of bureaucratic officials. There is a commitment for the introduction of scrutiny for state apparatus, meritocratic selection criteria and transparency. Moreover, these proposals for “openness” should extend also to political system.
In Nazarbayev’s view, new constitutional reforms should promote a progressive ceding of responsibilities and resources from state structures to regional ones and a transfer of power form the Presidency to the Government and the Parliament. The aim is the creation of a more balanced system of government with a clear division among state institutions, as only in part realized with the constitutional changes in 2007, when were introduced changes to electoral law and the relations between the Prime Minister and the Parliament.
If the calling of new presidential election can be analyzed recurring to motivations of economic stability and the maintenance of socio-political internal concord, the intervention of the President added new significances to the upcoming vote. The five structural areas of reforms listed by Nazarbayev mean the necessity, no longer possible to postpone, to implement a comprehensive package of institutional, administrative, judiciary and economic reforms in order to sustain the modernization of the country.
On one side, these proposals represent a fundamental step for the economic development of the country: after years of impressive growth due to high hydrocarbon prices, it is not possible to conceive a qualitative leap without a more efficient normative and bureaucratic framework.
From the other side, the provision for new constitutional changes could contribute to the improvement of political system. Of course, Nazarbayev’s speech must be analyzed considering the particular Eurasian context. The demand for an immediate introduction of the so called “Western democratic standards” could have a logic in theory but not necessarily in political reality. The choice made by Nazarbayev is the adoption of a gradual, progressive and “Kazakhstani” path of democratization to be completed in four or five decades: considering the work done from 1991 till today, it is possible to reduce this lapse of time to 15-20 years.
This may be not easy to understand for the West, but recent events have demonstrated the failure of an immediate imposition of external cultural and political values not only in former USSR, but also in other parts of the world. Where the process of democratization ignored the establishment of strong institutions, the aspiration to democracy gave the way to chaos or, in the worst scenarios, new forms of authoritarianism. This kind of situation is what a country with such precious, but delicate, social and ethnic equilibrium needs to avoid. Abrupt, not programmed changes within this framework, in order to adhere to a precise political ideology, could lead to risks for the survival of the country.
If, as said before, Kazakhstan is in the middle of the path of modernization and the next election can be defined as another turning point in its history. Kazakhstan’s development from 1991 till today was characterized by the transition from socialist economy, the definition of a new “Eurasian” identity and the achievement of a notable position in the international community.
After the celebration of this election – and the extension of Nazarbayev’s presidency for another, and maybe the last, mandate – the “leader of the nation” will have to face one of the most delicate challenge: granting to his nation a “legacy” not only in terms of political succession, but also for durable, efficient and stable mechanisms of government. Only in this way, Kazakhstan can maintain and consolidate in the future the positive objectives achieved since independence, improving its position in the international arena and the world economy.
