Connect with us

Central Asia

Kazakhstan’s Snap Election Affirm Nazarbayev’s Power in Uncertain Environments

Samantha Brletich

Published

on

The Kazakhstan snap Parliamentary elections were held on 20 March 2016. The snap elections were called amidst economic turmoil and fears that the Kazakhstan government would lose voter and public confidence because of the economic situation in Kazakhstan.

The elections will solidify autocratic President Nursultan Nazarbayev’s rule over the country and make it appear that he has the unwavering support of the people of Kazakhstan. Reports of crackdown of dissent suggest otherwise. The crackdowns, aimed at political dissidents and non-conformists to President Nazarbayev’s policies, is a way to control civil unrest and silence critics which is a longstanding criticism of the Nazarbayev Administration.

The elections did not generate significant differences in the country’s political landscape which has remained relatively unchanged since Nazarbayev gained power in 1989. Arguably, the elections are part of Nazarbayev’s attempts to make Kazakhstan appear as a democratic country and are part of “managed democracy.” The elections are being held against the backdrop of a failing economy, fluctuating tenge, low oil revenue prices and the oil market crash, political dissent, and Nazarbayev’s need to be reaffirmed by the people of Kazakhstan. The election will also show regional countries that Kazakhstan handle economic problems and is a reliable partner. Nazarbayev’s victory was predictable and negative implications stemming from a minor Parliamentary mix-up are non-existent.

A Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) mission monitored the elections. Kazakhstan’s past elections have fallen short of international standards citing lack of competitive candidates and corruption. As many as 234 candidates from the following six parties vied for 98 available parliament seats: the ruling Nur Otan party and the Party of President Nursultan Nazarbayev (127 candidates), Ak Zhol (35 candidates), Auyl (19 candidates), the Communist People’s Party of Kazakhstan (22 candidates), the Nationwide Social Democratic Party (23 candidates) and the Birlik party (eight candidates). Over 1,000 candidates are running for seats in the lower Parliament. Not much has changed as the other parties platforms do not vary that greatly. Political parties are prohibited from forming blocks.

According to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the results of the March 20, 2016, parliamentary elections show, “that three parties will have seats in the Majlis[:]Nur-Otan got 82.15 percent of the vote; Ak Zhol, 7.18 percent; and the Communist People’s Party of Kazakhstan took 7.14 percent.” These results are similar to the 2012 Parliamentary elections which highlights the lack of political variety and true democracy in the country. The elections were hailed a success by regional organizations, the SCO and the CIS. The ODIHR did not agree as Kazakhstan has a long way to go to fulfill its democratic agreement.

International observers were not surprised at the results. As early voting commenced on Sunday, the Kazakh Central Election Committee, stated that the elections were transparent. The OSCE have been heavily involved as “the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission opened in Astana on17 February, with an11 member core team and 28 long-term-observers deployed throughout the country.”

Whether or not the elections will expedite the reforms or guarantee implementation, the economy continues to slow. If Nur Otan retains its majority in Kazakhstan’s Parliament, the speed of implementation would not be effected. The snap elections directly are not being held to give the government a mandate on “100 steps.” The legitimacy of “100 steps” is derived from the President and support from Parliament and the overall willingness to reform Kazakhstan. Fifty-nine laws have already entered into force citing information from the Astana Times.

The snap elections center on economic recovery and political change. The snap elections are supported by the Majlis, and the miners and metallurgists to allow for “further implementation of reforms,” under Plan of the Nation (or “100 Steps”) and to “understand how we work in a new way, what laws should be adopted to meet the requirements of a market economy,” according to the Kazakh BNews news portal. The Head of the Assembly of Peoples of Kazakhstan (APK) stated elections will benefit the country politically and economically. Kazakhstan’s People’s Democratic Patriotic Party, known as “Aul” Party, also supports the snap elections. Support from Aul makes the elections and the decision not so one-sided appear pluralistic. The Astana Times, published astonishing, but not surprising, poll results about voting in a new Majlis and reforms: “92 percent of citizens believe the early elections make the public more confident the new reforms will be implemented.” Other poll results are similar.

Recently, on 12 January 2016, protests were held in Astana against the Kazakh Bank and the falling tenge. In response, the Kazakh government offered powdered mare’s milk on the global market which “can generate product worth $1 billion (a year)” to mitigate declining global oil prices. Another recent incident was the firing of the Sovereign Wealth Fund manager, Berik Otemurat, stated Kazakhstan’s National Oil Fund would run out in the next six or seven years. The National Oil Fund, often used as an emergency fund, has fallen 17% from $77 billion since August 2014 and the government is withdrawing about according to the Wall Street Journal. The tenge strengthened slightly in February after the currency declined after the government began to float the currency and the country is still experiencing weakened GDP growth. By mid-March the tenge has recovered by 10%.

Two activists in Kazakhstan, Serizkhan Mambetalin and Ermek Narymbaev, were convicted and sent to prison for two and three years respectively for Facebook posts “inciting national discord” (Article 174 of the Criminal Code) and the “authorities claimed the clips amounted to a ‘serious crime against peace and security of humankind’ ” according to Human Rights Watch. The two men were arrested in October 2015 and their trial began 9 December 2015. A third activist, Bolatbek Blyalov, has movement restricted for three years and cannot “[change] his place of residence or work, or [spend] time in public areas during his time off.” The punishment for the three activists violates many of Kazakhstan’s international commitments. On 22 February, the head of the Union of Journalists of Kazakhstan National Press Club, Seitkazy Matayev, was arrested on charges of corruption—accused of tax evasion and embezzlement of funds. According to TengrinNews, “the state anti-corruption agency said Matayev was detained along with his son Aset Matayev who heads the private KazTAG news agency.” Seitkazy Matayev was President Nazarbayev’s press secretary from 1991 to 1993. The Committee on Protecting Journalists reported that the Mateyevs sent statements to Adil Soz (a local press group) indicated harassment by city and state authorities began in January 2016.

There was also a recent protest in Almaty on 18 March 2016 about the incarceration of activist Yermek Narymbayev, one of the facebook activists, jailed for incitement ethnic strife (Kazakhstan Criminate Code Article 174).

Kazakhstan repeatedly has fallen short of commitments for democratic reforms (particularly press freedoms) and instead has strengthened Nazarbayev’s soft authoritarianism. Edward Schatz categorizes Kazakhstan as a soft authoritarian regime that engages in managed information and “[discourages] opposition and [encourages] pro-regime authorities.” Information management, according to Schatz, is not only through media, but by staging “many events to convey information dramatically.” Nazarbayev has a history of staging political events. Applying this notion to snap elections, Kazakhstan’s citizens know of the economic troubles. Snap elections are unnecessary to highlight the problem and snap elections give the impression the government is actively handling the problem and that political change is imminent.

Kazakhstan does consider itself a democracy and whether or not Kazakhstan’s democracy meets international standards will be revealed once institutions are strengthened. The Kazakhstan-based Astana Times calls the 20 March elections the first step towards returning “to the levels of growth and prosperity we experienced.” Constitutional reforms may give more power to the lower house, redistributing more power from the strong Presidential system the country now has (in theory).

Poor economic conditions are simple a pretext for squashing dissent and reducing political opposition. The poor economic conditions should be viewed as an opportunity to engage and strengthen civil society, establish dialogue between the government and non-governmental organizations, strengthen financial institutions, and explore alternatives in the energy sector. The crash of the commodities and oil markets presents Kazakhstan a unique opportunity to diversify its economy. The elections also present the opportunity to implement electoral reform as Nazarbayev has not picked a successor which greatly increases political instability and the possible formation of a power vacuum.

Kazakhstan during its time as the Chair for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe has failed to live up to its democratic obligations. The early Presidential elections of April 2015 showed that democratic reforms have yet to materialize. However, failure of democratization (all-encompassing to include media and political rights) and constant criticism has not stopped Kazakhstan from taking on the role of an international mediator on many high-profile conflicts—Iran and Syria—and from becoming a reliable and cooperative economic, trade, and security partners to its neighbors. Kazakhstan’s slow rise on the stage fuel autocratic behaviors.

Kazakhstan’s elections, while varied, reflect Kazakhstan’s wavering commitment to democracy and lack of party pluralism. Snap elections and early Presidential elections provide an opportunity for Kazakhstan to slowly implement electoral reforms and most importantly media reforms. Kazakhstan’s Election Law is weak as it does provide for equal party distribution and fails to provide a concrete and non-ambiguous criteria for campaign finance.

Samantha M. Brletich is a researcher and writer specializing in Central Asia and governance, security, terrorism, and development issues. She possesses a Master’s in Peace Operations Policy from George Mason University in Virginia, United States. She works with the virtual think tank Modern Diplomacy specializing in Central Asia and diplomatic trends. Her work has appeared in multiple publications focused on diplomacy and Central Asia respectively. She is currently an employee of the U.S. Federal Government.

Continue Reading
Comments

Central Asia

Transformation of Uzbekistan: How smooth transition in elite class is reshaping the country

Published

on

Within the nations of the former USSR, serious transformations are accompanied by distress – active power struggles, revolutions, and outbreaks of separatism. However, today, a country that has been squandering its potential for a quarter of a century is transforming in an uncommon way for the CIS – rapidly yet without political upheaval.

Reboot

The Communist party appointed Islam Karimov to run the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic back in 1990. After the Soviet Union collapsed, he retained power and strengthened his authority year after year, a common case for the post-Soviet republics in Central Asia. Karimov abandoned a state-planned economy, but he was otherwise cautious about making reforms and took an isolationist approach, which unquestionably had an adverse effect on the economy in the era of globalization.

After his death in 2016, a small ruling elite privately began to organize, resulting in the emergence of a new leader – former Prime Minister Shavkat Mirziyoyev. The subsequent presidential election, which Mirziyoyev won, only formalized his legitimacy. It seemed like a bad sign for those hoping for change, which was almost all of the 32 million citizens of Uzbekistan. And yet significant change is underway.

Awakening: but for how long?

The new leadership, despite emerging from the “Karimov elite,” seems to be doing everything the former president had opposed for years. A policy of relative openness and careful balance of exposure between the key centers of power, such as Russia, the USA, and China, has replaced isolationism. Mirziyoyev, who succeeded Karimov, did away with exit visas and he became one of the most well-travelled presidents himself. In the last couple of months alone, he has met with the leaders of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, China, Russia, and Pakistan, and attended the Arab-Islamic-American Summit as well as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit.

Until recently, Uzbekistan saw about zero foreign investment in its economy (0.1 percent of GDP, to be exact), but today it is seriously engaged in attracting foreign capital. A recent landmark example is the privatization of AO Urgench Exkavator, a large previously state-owned factory now owned by the Chinese. This was unthinkable in the previous era of economic isolation. The same goes for Uzbekistan’s agreement with Turkey on a $2 billion investment in agriculture.

Perhaps the biggest economic reform has been the deregulation of the foreign currency exchange market. Though Karimov’s Uzbekistan economy departed from Soviet policy, it maintained state control in one key area – the currency exchange rate. Under Mirziyoyev, the exchange rate of the national currency – the som – was left to be determined by the market. The reform immediately weakened its currency. However, it was still a crucial and beneficial long-term move for engaging in foreign trade and attracting investors.

There have also been reforms in taxation, the judicial system, and law enforcement agencies. Transformation is apparent almost everywhere. But we’ve seen good intentions remain intentions many times in many different countries. Could this end up being the case in Uzbekistan? Of course, it could. However, there are several important signs and trends that give Uzbekistan a chance for real, rather than declarative, transformation.

Tourism as an indicator

Tourism is a telling industry that shows the processes taking place across the country. Uzbekistan is fortunate in this area – it’s an exotic and cheap country with a fascinating culture, nature, and cuisine. Many well-preserved Muslim monuments serve as a great basis for “religious tourism.” Did the country live up to its potential as a tourist destination? Not fully. You could count on one hand the number of hotels that were able to comfortably accommodate foreigners. And paying with a card or exchanging money was a no-go.

The new leadership team has prioritized the development of tourism, and the country is actively filling the gaps in infrastructure (new hotels, bank branches, and means of transportation) and personnel (the new tourism university in Samarkand). Combined with economic reforms, first and foremost the deregulation of the foreign currency market, the first half of 2018 saw the flow of tourism increase by 91.6 percent compared to the same time last year, largely supported by the countries that were granted visa-free status.

Placing a bet on this industry, Uzbekistan is hoping for a multiplying effect and acting very sensibly. Tourism is a driver for other areas of business, such as restaurants, hospitality, and sightseeing, as well as internal logistics. Demand for construction materials, machinery, and utilities will grow to accommodate new construction. And the rise of these industries will create new jobs, stimulating consumption.

The new elite

Surprisingly, a new elite is taking form in parallel to the old one in a peaceful process. The old elite was very small and included only the former president’s family and associates. Today the elite is expanding, primarily as a result of business, the layer of society vitally invested in change.

Instead of struggling for the redistribution of resources, the new elite has taken the long route, searching out new opportunities and creating new niches to occupy without competing with the old elite – the Karimov era politicians and those closely connected to big state business.

The new business elite is gradually finding its way into the administration. In April this year, Dzhakhongir Artykhodzhaev, 42, the founder of the AKFA Group, was appointed as the hokim (mayor) of Tashkent – a business representative, rather than a government official. A German national, Karsten Heinz, was previously employed by the German Ministry of Education and Researchand assumed the role of Deputy Minister of Innovative Development in July. Such appointments, unthinkable in the past, speak volumes about the change in Uzbekistan.

So far the only area that hasn’t shifted significantly is democracy. For the first time ever Freedom House recorded a slight improvement in this area in 2017. But Uzbekistan is a country that needs to develop democratic procedures and independent media. Otherwise, the lack of these characteristics combined with inherited corruption and a lack of skilled professionals will delay its transformation process. Even so, for the first time in 25 years, Uzbekistan stands a good chance of changing. According to HSBC’s forecast (World in 2050 report) within the next 30 years, the country will rank among the 26 fastest growing economies in the world (meaning GDP growth will remain above 5% per year). If this scenario comes to pass, we will witness one of the most impressive transformations of a state and, perhaps, the most inspiring one among former Soviet Union countries.

Continue Reading

Central Asia

Uzbekistan and India Cooperation in the Sphere of Law and Justice

Published

on

“Cultivate the moral self, then regulate the family, rule the country rightly and make the world stay in harmony.” – Li Ji (The Book of Rites)

Strong relations between Uzbekistan and India is the result of mutual cooperation and cooperative diplomacy dating back to several decades.  From a historical perspective, there are frequent bibliographical references of Kamboja in Sanskrit and Pali literature, which is referenced to include parts of present-day Uzbekistan.  It is a cited fact that the Shakas participated in Mahabharata on the side of Kauravas. Ancient trade route uttar path, having its reference in Ramayana passed through Uzbekistan.  In later years, Fergana and Samarkand in Uzbekistan emerged as centres of trade on the trade routes linking India with Europe and China. India had close interaction with the Uzbek SSR during the USSR regime.  Indian diplomats and Heads of State often visited Tashkent to strengthen cultural and diplomatic bonds.  Bi-lateral relations between both the countries is also politically sensitive, because former Prime Minister, Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri passed away in Tashkent on 11 January 1966 after signing the Tashkent declaration with Pakistan and in August 1991, as the events leading to the disintegration of the USSR unfolded, President Islam Karimov, in his then capacity as Chairman of Supreme Soviet of Uzbekistan, was visiting India. Uzbekistan was declared independent on 1st September 1991.

A numerically small but vibrant and active Indian community resides in Uzbekistan. The bilateral relationship aims to maintain regular links with the community through its social media accounts, targeted emails, and invitations to Embassy events.  The Indian community actively participates in the celebration of the national days, International Yoga Day, Pravasi Bharatiya Diwas, Hindi Diwas, Holi, Diwali and cultural programmes on various occasions. These frequent interactions over thousands of years since 1947 contributed to close cultural linkages in architecture, dance, music and art. India’s soft power has travelled through borders to Uzbekistan, and it is evident from the fact that Indian movies and cuisine have traditionally been popular in Uzbekistan. Prime Minister Narendra Modi soon after his electoral victory visited Tashkent to discuss bilateral issues in 2015.  He visited Tashkent again in 2016 to attend Summit Meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) during which India inked the Memorandum of Obligations for obtaining a status of the Member State of the SCO, of which Uzbekistan is a founding member. On 09 June 2017, India became a full-time member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. The Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO-RATS) is headquartered in Tashkent and on 15 June 2017, the flag of India was raised at the SCO-RATS Headquarters in Tashkent.  India has been an active participant in SCO meetings and SCO-RATS events in Uzbekistan and other SCO countries.  Mr. P.P. Chaudhury, Minister of State for Law & Justice and Corporate Affairs, Government of India led a delegation to the SCO Justice Minister’s Meeting in Tashkent in October 2017.

Government to Government dialogues are managed through a robust mechanism including an Intergovernmental Commission, which oversees trade and economic relations and Foreign Office Consultations. Uzbekistan and India have previously signed Agreements/MOUs/ Protocols/Joint Statements in areas such as trade, investment, education, civil aviation, tourism, science & technology, telecommunications, agriculture and Information Technology.   By the end of 2018, the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi approved the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between India and Uzbekistan on Cooperation in the Sphere of Law & Justice. The MoU is an all-comprehensive diplomatic agreement covering the exchange of experience by legal professionals, Government functionaries and their training and effective legal aid mechanism for resolution. The MoU will accelerate greater cooperation between India and Uzbekistan in providing legal services in both countries in the field of exchange of experience through training and information sharing visits between both countries on enhancing legal capacities of Government functionaries.

The present Government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi is practising a modern form of proactive diplomatic dialogue wherein there is tremendous focus on knowledge sharing areas in the field of law and policy. Strengthening the International law jurisprudence should be main focus of global economies striving for economic and societal progress. The MoU is also important from a diplomatic point for India as the Union Cabinet has also approved an agreement between India and Morocco on Mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. It will also fulfil the desire of both countries to strengthen the bonds of friendship and fruitful cooperation in the Civil and Commercial matters, which is the spirit, essence and language of the agreement. These dual agreements will enhance co-operation in the service of summons, judicial documents, letters of request and the execution of judgments decrees and arbitral awards.

Continue Reading

Central Asia

Tajikistan: Towards the Next Level of Development

Published

on

Today, Tajikistan finds itself at a juncture, where—with the right decisions taken—it could step onto a path of rapid socio-economic development, dynamic rates of inclusive growth, and significantly improved economic perspectives for its citizens. Many “foundational” investments, some with World Bank support, have been realized, not least those linked to the modernization of the country’s infrastructure and legal-institutional superstructure, allowing for a more effective delivery of public and social services. However, given the substantial changes that have occurred over the last 25 years, and which have built Tajikistan’s economy, policies that used to be appropriate in the past may no longer be effective in the future. Economic policy challenges have moved from a state-led focus on public infrastructure to the encouragement of private-sector initiative, investment, and innovation.

Throughout its history, Tajikistan has had to respond to a myriad of existential threats, from the civil war to increased politico-economic isolation along borders closed for reasons of politics and/or conflict, the global financial and economic crisis after 2008, or the sharp fall in prices of primary commodities after 2014. It was bequeathed an economic model that had collapsed under the weight of inefficiencies, amplified by a history that—with the demarcation of the Russian-Afghan border in 1895—had placed Tajikistan at the periphery of a larger state entity bereft of its economic base and home markets.

Still, Tajikistan has proven resilient, as reflected in impressive average annual growth rates of 7.3 percent during the post-conflict years. As a result, per capita income during 1998–2017 increased, net of effects from inflation, by more than 160 percent. There has been impressive success in resolving the winter shortages in energy supply, while—in many parts of the country—citizens benefit from tangibly improved water and transport services.

For the last quarter century (that is, for most of Tajikistan’s post-independence history), the World Bank Group has been privileged to support efforts to place the country’s economy on a sound footing and develop the foundation for a socio-economic (professional) perspective for the citizens of Tajikistan. It has done so through all three periods of the country’s development, from the civil war period to reconstruction and the responses to the various economic shocks affecting the country after 2008.

The Silver Anniversary of the collaboration between Tajikistan and the World Bank Group falls on the eve of a new era, with an opportunity for real, sustainable socio-economic transformation, a different set of challenges, and the need to adjust economic and development policies to a new environment. Rather than focusing on a domestic market of 9 million—mostly low-income—clients, which has proven too small a market for competition and sustained private-sector development, Tajikistan-based companies have the opportunity to access hundreds of millions of potential clients in the immediate neighborhood in South, Eastern, and Central Asia. All commodities and services, for which Tajikistan has a comparative advantage, whether it is food products, energy, minerals, cotton, textiles, or IT-based services, have deep markets nearby.

Already, Tajikistan is investing considerable national wealth to improve regional (or, rather, continental) connectivity and establish a stable export base, starting in energy. To be able to reap the full benefits inherent in very ambitious investments in energy generation and transmission, the country needs to pay particular attention to (i) investing in people (and preparing its mostly young citizens for the opportunities ahead); (ii) increasing the efficiency of (public) institutions; and (iii) providing the private sector with an environment that translates the opportunities into entrepreneurs’ confidence that private investments will result in improved productivity, company growth, and increased profits.

The inherent result of Tajikistan’s current remittance-financed, import-reliant economic model is a narrow private sector, with binding constraints to production, logistics, and innovation. If well-understood, the current economic structure might prove a “blessing in disguise” during a period in which there is high “in principle” demand for products and services “made in Tajikistan”. If economic policies are adjusted, with a view to permitting entrepreneurs and investors to develop sufficient trust in institutions and confidence in the future, they would complement public investments with private investments of the scale, scope, and quality to foster innovation, increase productivity of key sectors of Tajikistan’s economy, and increase wages and employment opportunities. By encouraging the private sector to import up-to-date technology, install modern equipment, and implement the highest standards, Tajikistan’s economy would be competitive, export-oriented, and provide profit opportunities for enterprises, irrespective of ownership.

As argued in the World Bank’s (2008) Growth Report, “economic miracles” are a misnomer. Dynamic rates of sustained and inclusive growth can be generated, as other countries have done before, by committed, credible, and capable governments that maintain macro-fiscal stability and allow the private sector to exploit opportunities in the world economy, support high rates of saving and investment, and permit markets to allocate resources. May Tajikistan, by the time of the Golden Anniversary of World Bank Group partnership, have shown the vision, courage, and determination to be included among the élite group of countries that have managed to transform their economies, and invest, innovate, and guarantee growth and prosperity to their people.

World Bank

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy