Kazakhstan applied to join the World Trade Organization (WTO) in January of 1996. Twenty long years later (July 27, 2015), President Nazarbayev signed the official ascension documents in Geneva, making it the 162nd WTO member state.
While assessing the impact of Kazakhstan’s entrance into the WTO is difficult at this early stage, speculation is rampant given current geopolitical tension in Central Asia and the global price of oil. This article will attempt to contextualize this decision by adding insight to three questions – why, why now, and what’s next?
The WTO is an important stepping stone for legitimacy and integration on the world stage. To some, most notably Kazakh economist Aidarkhan Khusainov, WTO membership is more comparable to United Nations membership, simply providing an image boost, rather than a substantive change in Kazakh political economy. This diminished outlook is not the only position in Kazakhstan and around the world, however, as many believe that this move will open up Kazakh markets, allow for increased foreign investment, and diversify the largely energy-dependent and landlocked nation.
Regardless of economic prognostications, Nazarbayev’s signature ultimately formalized an already informal economic reality. As Nazarbayev himself said, “In the mid-1990s, Kazakhstan had ties only with post-Soviet states, while now we are trading with 185 countries of the world.” Kazakhstan’s elevated status into the WTO, therefore, is a bit more pomp and circumstance, and less substantive change, as much of the Kazakh economy has already been developed in the global arena for some time. Thus, WTO membership is more about affirmation of deeds already accomplished, than hope for potential development somewhere far off in the future.
Kazakhstan’s membership status in some ways could always be seen as a foregone conclusion. For example, more than 50% of the nation’s trade is with the European Union. WTO membership, therefore, is a continuation of a two-decade long process of real economic integration and reform, rather than a radical departure from it. The significance of ‘now’ is less about Kazakhstan’s economic reality and more about the potential geopolitical and economic challenges in the region.
First, the global drop in the price of oil has had a significant impact on the Kazakh economy. WTO membership will not only provide new opportunities for investment and economic diversification, but greater flexibility in global markets.
Second, U.S.-led sanctions on Russia have indirectly constrained Kazakhstan’s economy. Russia and Kazakhstan are more than trade partners, but members of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), which features Kazakhstan, Russia, and Belarus. Russia’s economic woes have negatively affected the strength of this union. Evidence of this from a political perspective is the renewed stress on WTO negotiations from both Kazakhstan and Belarus starting in 2013. Moreover, Russia has gradually shown a willingness to support these negotiations (Russia joined the WTO in 2012) rather than oppose them.
Third, the why now of this moment is representative of a broader desire for engagement in Central Asia, particularly between those global players with higher stakes in the region. We are far from a proliferation of cooperation, but recent events have shown an environment in cautious conversation and optimistic consideration. WTO membership does not magically transform enemies into friends, but it does pave the way for a more solid process of enhanced cooperation between Kazakhstan and many other nations.
What remains to be seen is whether this shift is more representative of the dynamism of the landscape or the individual states? In this case, will we see motivated regional cooperation or cooperation in lieu of state capacity for direct or unilateral action?
Economic projections range from the optimistic (new investment and development) to the pessimistic (job loss, wage decrease, and simply being out competed) to the apathetic (WTO is more about banal prestige and less about workable policy). Any basic economic theory will show that increased free trade comes with benefits and drawbacks, where the effect on the state is ultimately determined by good governance. What is most clearly next is Kazakhstan’s opportunity to diversify economically and have that diversification feed into a new positive political evolution. If the country is able to broaden its economic capacity, then its membership in the WTO, at least in the short term, is a win, offering Kazakhstan an outlet from energy export dependence. If it is able to broaden that into real political (read: democratic) consolidation, then membership in the WTO will have proven far more invaluable than anyone could have surmised. These potential geopolitical ramifications and speculative regional suggestions are what should be seen as the truly fascinating, and still unknown mystery, of pending WTO ascension.
What Kazakhstan’s WTO entrance hopefully suggests is less contestation and more cooperation across Central Asian economies. The EEU can be seen as strong evidence of this. Until very recently, the EEU was a barrier for Kazakhstan’s entrance in the WTO. With Russia and Kazakhstan now WTO members, and Belarus poised to follow, the EEU (which is Russian-led), has shown a clear willingness to conform to global economic standards. The EEU is thus now operating within the parameters of the WTO. What remains to be seen is if there is a bigger or more politically-motivated strategy behind Russia’s cooperation. Put another way – how does this affect the regional economic strategy of Russia’s so-called privileged area of influence? Is Kazakhstan moving away from the regional fold and into independence (or interdependence) in the global market? I find it difficult to believe that Russia would passively allow the countries of what it considers to be its personal sphere of influence to integrate one by one into the global economy (a US and EU-led order) without also trying to achieve serious advantages or privileges for itself. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Indeed, it is quite a normal thing when considering international political economy. But there are both acceptable ways of achieving those advantages or privileges and non-constructive ways. In this case, a win for WTO liberal institutionalism is a sign that both sanctions and the regional economic landscape have limited Russia’s influence and ability to project power arbitrarily. Russia can either adapt to that reality and incorporate itself better into that changing landscape or problematically try to fight such change. Time will tell exactly how that plays out.
To turn to Kazakhstan’s strategic outlook, however, WTO membership represents not only a win for Nazarbayev’s ambitions, but for Kazakhstan’s potential as a serious player on the international stage. Being the strongest economy of the former Soviet states but also quite literally surrounded by great and regional powers, Kazakhstan has been unable so far to cast a long geopolitical shadow in any direction. I expect Kazakhstan to gradually fill this opportunity of potential by trying to expand its own capacity and in so doing drafting more of an independent, rather than subservient, strategy to its large imposing neighbor to the North. Hopefully, Kazakhstan will carve out that new role without incurring a heavy price militarily or in terms of new economic regional conflict. So congratulations, Kazakhstan, on the end of your 20-year odyssey. Here is to hoping a WTO with Kazakhstan turns into a win-win-win for all sides: Kazakhstan, Central Asia, and the global community.
Shifting Sands: Chinese encroachment in Central Asia and challenges to US supremacy in the Gulf
China and Russia are as much allies as they are rivals.
A joint Tajik-Chinese military exercise in a Tajik region bordering on China’s troubled north-western region of Xinjiang suggests that increased Chinese-Russian military cooperation has not eroded gradually mounting rivalry in Central Asia, long viewed by Moscow as its backyard.
The exercise, the second in three years, coupled with the building by China of border guard posts and a training centre as well as the creation of a Chinese security facility along the 1,300 kilometre long Tajik Afghan Border, Chinese dominance of the Tajik economy, and the hand over of Tajik territory almost two decades ago, challenges Russian-Chinese arrangements in the region.
The informal arrangement involved a division of labour under which China would expand economically in Central Asia while Russia would guarantee the region’s security.
The exercise comes days after China and Russia operated their first joint air patrol and months after Tajik and Russian forces exercised jointly.
The “exercise represents a next step in China’s overall encroachment upon Russia’s self-proclaimed ‘sphere of influence’ in Central Asia,” said Russia expert Stephen Blank.
“Moscow has given remarkably little consideration to the possibility that China will build on its soft power in Central Asia to establish security relationships or even bases and thus accelerate the decline of Russian influence there,” added Eurasia scholar Paul Goble.
The perceived encroachment is but the latest sign that Russia is seeking to balance its determination to ally itself with China in trying to limit US power with the fact the Chinese and Russian interests may be diverging.
The limitations of Russian Chinese cooperation have long been evident.
China, for example, has refrained from recognizing Russian-inspired declarations of independence in 2008 of two regions of Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia that recently sparked anti-government protests in Tbilisi.
China similarly abstained in a 2014 United Nations Security Council vote on a resolution that condemned Russia’s annexation of Crimea.
Meanwhile, Chinese dependence on Russian military technology is diminishing, potentially threatening a key Russian export market. China in 2017 rolled out its fifth generation Chengdu J-20 fighter that is believed to be technologically superior to Russia SU-57E.
Perhaps most fundamentally, Chinese president Xi Jinping opted in 2013 to unveil his Belt and Road initiative in the Kazakh capital of Astana rather than Moscow.
By doing so and by so far refusing to invest in railroads and roads that would turn Russia into a transportation hub, Mr. Xi effectively relegated Russia to the status of second fiddle, at least as far as the Belt and Road’s core transportation infrastructure pillar is concerned.
China’s recently published latest defense white paper nonetheless praised the continued development of a “high level” military relationship with Russia that is “enriching the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination for a new era and playing a significant role in maintaining global strategic stability.”
In a bid to ensure Russia remains a key player on the international stage and exploit mounting tension in the Gulf, Russian deputy foreign minister and special representative to the Middle East and Africa Mikhail Bogdanov this week proposed a collective security concept that would replace the Gulf’s US defense umbrella and position Russia as a power broker alongside the United States.
The concept would entail creation of a “counter-terrorism coalition (of) all stakeholders” that would be the motor for resolution of conflicts across the region and promote mutual security guarantees. It would involve the removal of the “permanent deployment of troops of extra-regional states in the territories of states of the Gulf,” a reference to US, British and French forces and bases.
Mr. Bogdanov’s proposal called for a “universal and comprehensive” security system that would take into account “the interests of all regional and other parties involved, in all spheres of security, including its military, economic and energy dimensions” and ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance.
The coalition to include the Gulf states, Russia, China, the US, the European Union and India as well as other stakeholders, a likely reference to Iran, would be launched at an international conference on security and cooperation in the Gulf.
It was not clear how feuding Gulf states like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arb Emirates and Iran would be persuaded to sit at one table. The proposal suggested that Russia’s advantage was that it maintained good relations with all parties.
“Russia’s contributions to the fight against Islamic terrorist networks and the liberation of parts of Syria and Iraq can be regarded as a kind of test for the role of sheriff in a Greater Eurasia” that would include the Middle East, said political scientist Dmitry Yefremenko.
Mr. Putin this week asserted himself as sheriff by signalling his support for embattled former Kyrgyz president Almazbek Atambayev, a Putin crony who has been charged with corruption. Following a meeting in Moscow, Mr. Putin urged Mr Atembayev’s nemesis. president Sooronbai Jeenbekov, not to press charges.
At the same time, Mr. Putin, building on his visit to Kyrgyzstan in March, offered Mr. Jeenbekov a carrot.
Kyrgyzstan “needs political stability. Everybody needs to unite around the current president and to help him develop the state. We have many plans for cooperation with Kyrgyzstan and we are absolutely determined to work together with the current leadership to fulfill these plans,” Mr. Putin said.
Russia and Kyrgyzstan signed an agreement during the visit to expand by 60 hectares the Kant Air Base 20 kilometres east of the capital Bishkek that is used by the Russian Air Force and increase the rent Russia pays.
Mr. Putin further lavished his Kyrgyz hosts with US$6 billion in deals ranging from power, mineral resources and hydrocarbons to industry and agriculture.
Mr. Putin also allocated US$200 million for the upgrading of customs infrastructure and border equipment to put an end to the back-up of dozens of trucks on the Kazakh-Kyrgyz border because Kyrgyzstan has so far been unable to comply with the technical requirements of the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union (EEU).
Uzbek president Shavkat Mirziyaev last month gave the EEU, that groups Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan Belarus, and Armenia, a boost by declaring that Uzbekistan would need to join the trade bloc to ensure access to its export markets.
EEU members account for 70 percent of Uzbek exports.
Said Russia and Eurasia scholar Paul Stronski: “China’s deft diplomacy towards Russia — along with both states’ desires to keep the West out of their common backyard — has kept tensions behind closed doors. But with China now recognising it may need to strengthen its security posture in the region, it is unclear how long this stability will last.”
Chimes from Tashkent
Located at the new center of global attraction for economic activity, Pakistan and Uzbekistan share a long string of relations. After the independence from the soviets, Pakistan was among the first countries to recognize it. In 1992, Pakistan established their first diplomatic sanctuary in Tashkent. Since then delegations from both the countries paid visits to each other.
The bond shared between the two countries, that lie in close proximity, is strengthened by similar eastern culture and fortified by the religious ties. This sharing of cultural and religious values is clearly visible in the national language of Pakistan which borrows thousands of words from Uzbekistani language. This nexus is now getting even stronger with the increase in co-operations in social and economic sectors.
Relations between both the states saw an unprecedented growth in recent times and this social integration is ever growing. During the last year only,
63events such as seminars, presentations and business forums were arranged for general public. Whereas, the Uzbek Embassy had a significant number of bilateral meetings with the top tier of business community including several associations and unions. The same sentiment was reciprocated by Pakistani side when more than 50 companies paid visit to Uzbekistan with the purpose of investment. There were a number of exhibitions, events and investment forums in Tashkent, Jizzakh and Bukhara. Eight different Pakistani companies participated in such events.
Uzbekistan and Pakistan have also been working on 38different joint ventures for launching import/export operations.
In economic sphere, Islamabad and Tashkent hold great trade potential. In just 2018, the mutual trade between both countries crossed USD 98.4 million’s mark, which means a raise of around 170%.Prior to 2018 in 2017 numbers of economic activity between two states were low and accounted for just USD 36.6 million.
In 2018 Pakistani export to Uzbekistan increased for 150% and amounted 66 million USD (in 2017 – 26 million USD).
Last year Ambassador of Uzbekistan to Pakistan Mr. Furqat A. Sidikov while addressing business community at Islamabad Chamber of Commerce and Industry expressed that trade volume between Pakistan and Uzbekistan has the potential to rise up to USD 1billion in next 5-6 years. It clearly signifies that both countries can provide enormous benefit to each other’s socio-economic segment. Pakistan has been exporting edibles like mango, citruses, raw and refined sugar. Furthermore, chemical products, pharmaceutical products, and leather and textile goods are major exports of Pakistan to Uzbekistan.
Uzbekistan is also a hub for petrochemical goods, cotton and silk goods. Its exports to Pakistan includes: leather raw materials, petrochemical products and mineral fertilizers, cotton yarn, cotton fiber, raw silk, plastic products, agricultural machinery, clothing, etc. Not only this, dry fruits and vegetables are also exported from Uzbekistan to Pakistan.
In 2018 Uzbekistan-Pakistan Business Council was established in Islamabad in order to facilitate and support the business community in two countries. Apart for this, several forums are also established in main cities of Pakistan to boost up the economic potential.
Accessibility remains a key subject in establishing people to people relations thus recognizing this flight route from Tashkent-Lahore-Tashkent was resumed in April of 2017. Both states also look forward to initiate new routes from Islamabad and Karachi as well. Earlier in May Uzbekistan’s Ambassador to Pakistan had a meeting with Chairman Senate of Pakistan to discuss the inter-parliamentarian cooperation between Pakistan and Uzbekistan. Sideways to expanding parliamentarian relations it was also discussed to further strengthen the cooperation on transport sector to provide uninterrupted route to trade of goods.
Both countries share many economical and regional platform and are member of Organization of Islamic countries (OIC), Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and Economic Cooperation organization (ECO)and others. Multiple times these platforms were used to freshen up the relations between two countries. Based on mutual trust both countries can have free trade agreements to amplify the relations between them.
Enormous potential lies in social, economic and political sectors on which both countries can work. Both countries can play a key role in bringing peaceful non-military solution to misery in Afghanistan as well as in the region. Pakistan needs to explore new avenues for cooperation with countries like Uzbekistan and extract the maximum benefit for itself.
Uzbekistan understands importance of Pakistan in keeping stability and prosperity of the whole South Asian region. Both countries are interested in continuing bilateral partnership on all key issues of the regional security and stability agenda, including the conflict resolution in Afghanistan and expansion of infrastructure, trade and economic ties between Central Asia and Pakistan.
Uzbekistan initiated logistic project that project will include the construction of the massive railroad transport corridor “Uzbekistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan”. In details, this corridor will compose the rail line “Uzbekistan-Mazarisharif” which has been already realized between Uzbekistan and Afghanistan as well as construction of new rail road “Mazari-Sharif-Kabul-Peshawar”.
In perspective, full realization of this unique transport corridor, will make Pakistan as a Central regional trade hub between South Asian and Central Asian regions.
No More Business as Usual: Improving Water Usage in Central Asia
Central Asia’s future economic development, including its energy and water security, depends to a great extent on how effectively countries manage their natural water supplies, especially under increased pressures from climate variability, economic growth, and population expansion.
The population of Central Asia is expected to grow by around 30% by 2050. As such, demand for water services will also increase significantly.
Central Asia is heavily dependent on agriculture, which provides livelihoods for about 50% of the population in some countries. But its level of water productivity is one of the lowest in the Europe and Central Asia region. More efficient use of water in the economy could significantly contribute to increased agricultural productivity, green energy production and the health of the region’s environmental assets.
According to estimates, the adoption of modern agricultural techniques and methods could increase the region’s crop yields by over 20% by 2030, and by 50% by 2050. On the other hand, if countries continue a “business as usual” approach, Central Asia is among the regions that could experience a significantly negative impact on GDP under climate change. Each year, inadequate water supply and sanitation leads to overall economic costs equivalent to around $2.1 billion, although these costs differ from country to country – ranging from almost 0.5% of GDP in Kazakhstan to around 4.25% in Tajikistan (2017 data).
“The water agenda in Central Asia is always viewed through the lens of the Aral Sea disaster,” said Ato Brown, World Bank Country Manager for Kazakhstan. “Today, it is high time for us to start changing the narrative so that Central Asia is known for being an oasis of production and productivity.”
According to a World Bank report, Central Asia is among the regions that have most to gain from properly managing water resources under climate change.
Most of the major rivers in Central Asia cross borders, therefore countries need to coordinate water management to advance sustainable development and climate resilience.
Water resources in the region are sensitive to climate variability, which poses significant challenges to the agriculture and energy sectors.
Since the 1950s, average annual temperatures have increased by 0.5°C in the mountainous areas of southern Central Asia, and glaciers that feed the region’s main rivers – Amu Darya and Syr Darya – have shrunk by a third. With the melting of glaciers, the expected fall in river flows will have a major impact on agricultural production.
By 2025, hydropower is expected to overtake gas as the main fuel source for energy production in Central Asia. Where hydroelectricity production is based on reservoir storage, there can be flow management benefits for climate change adaptation, including flood and drought prevention and mitigation, as well as timely delivery of irrigation and drinking water.
“Central Asian countries need to start with a joint project, and there are opportunities for working together,” said Ato Brown at the Astana Economic Forum. If the countries of Central Asia invest sufficiently and effectively in better water management, they have the potential to become not just economically prosperous and resilient to climate change – but also to provide new opportunities and hope for all their citizens.
The Likely Outcome of Narendra Modi’s Unconstitutional Seizure of Kashmir
An independent fact-finding mission into the now military-ruled constitutionally autonomous Indian state of Jammu-Kashmir (commonly referred to simply as “Kashmir”)...
Expert tips for a better night’s sleep
When was the last time you had a good night’s sleep? For many, sleep doesn’t come easy. Up to 70...
Top 4 Drives around Beverly Hills and L.A. to Experience in a 2019 Maserati Levante SUV
With a deep history of more than 100 years of Italian craftsmanship, Maserati’s DNA is a balance of luxurious, sophisticated...
Indian Subcontinent Independence and Economies Lagging Counterparts
Mid-August is when the subcontinent celebrates independence from Britain. Born in a cauldron of hate 72 years ago, India today...
UN Security Council discusses Kashmir- China urges India and Pakistan to ease tensions
The Security Council considered the volatile situation surrounding Kashmir on Friday, addressing the issue in a meeting focused solely on the dispute,...
Business and boxing: two sides of the same coin
What do a planned US$15 billion Saudi investment in petroleum-related Indian businesses and a controversial boxing championship have in common?...
Kashmir: A Nuclear Flash Point
India has challenged the whole world with nuclear war, the Defense Minister announced to review its policy of no first...
Terrorism2 days ago
Does Kenya Really Want To End Terrorism?
Intelligence3 days ago
9-11 Terrorist Attack: Defensive countermeasures of deter and detect
Southeast Asia2 days ago
Being Wealthy Helps Singapore’s Naval Ambition
Africa3 days ago
Africa yet to unleash full potential of its nature-based tourism
Newsdesk2 days ago
World Bank Issues Second Tranche of Blockchain Bond Via Bond-i
Russia2 days ago
Battle for the Arctic: Friends and foes
Southeast Asia1 day ago
South-East Asia youth survey: Skills prized over salary
Health & Wellness3 days ago
Expert tips to reduce workplace stress for better health