The old saying that if you keep expectations low, you will never be disappointed may go a long way towards explaining what the 56 member states of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe were thinking when, three years ago, they agree to let the autocratic regime of Kazakhstan become the OSCE chair-in-office for 2010. As it approaches the mid-term mark for its chairmanship, it's worth looking at Kazakh performance so far -- both in action and example -- to see if the state has any possibility of avoiding a failing grade when its term ends in December.
For starters, if any states harbored hopes that Kazakhstan, ranked "Not Free" by Freedom House, would be capable of exercising the kind of leadership required of an OSCE chair, they have been dashed by its handling the continuing crisis in neighboring Kyrgyzstan. As Bishkek burned, Astana dithered. Troubling though it must be for Kazakhstan's dictator to watch the toppling of another dictator next door, having taken on the OSCE chairmanship for 2010, the Kazakhs had a special responsibility to engage multilateral institutions -- even in their own backyard. Instead, they sealed the border, and ferreted the toppled tyrant out of Kyrgyzstan, briefly to Kazakhstan, and then onto Belarus where he now keeps good company with Europe's last dictator. Meanwhile, instability in Kyrgyzstan persists as evidenced by continuing violence last week.
Ironically, the decision to facilitate the escape of former Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev from the nation he drove to the brink of civil war could actually be construed as a useful -- if self-serving -- move by the Kazakhs. But five months into their OSCE chairmanship, that is a pretty scant record of success. Despite their promise to open the Kazakh-Kyrgyz border by May 11th, the Kazakhs have not -- at the time of writing -- honored this commitment. The effect of the closed border on transitional Kyrgyzstan's very vulnerable economy is devastating. But the Kazakhs' fear that instability might filter into their own state seems to overpower any sense of duty towards facilitating a constructive solution, which is something OSCE leaders, in theory anyhow, ought to do.
At the OSCE ministerial conference in Madrid in 2007, at which the chairmanship was conferred on Kazakhstan, its then-foreign minister made a series of commitments about democratic reforms Kazakhstan would undertake at home before taking the leash of Eurasia's best-known democratic watchdog. In most substantial respects, Kazakhstan has failed to honor these obligations -- libel remains a criminal offense there and is used to muzzle the press, opposition political parties are kept out of parliament by various barriers, and the country's best-known human rights defender, Evgeniy Zhovtis, sits in prison as a result of a flawed judicial system. After a representative of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly visited Zhovtis in prison this week, the Kazakh government blocked his report of the visit from the OSCE website, reminding those who had wished for better of the reality of how autocratic states behave. Additionally, last week, Kazakhstan's parliament bestowed lifetime immunity and the title "Father of the Nation," on Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbaev -- not only an undemocratic move, but also one that suggests the OSCE chairmanship is seen there as just another tribute to the fabulously-rich dictator.
In the case of Zhovtis, the Kazakh government recently had an opportunity to review the case and find a way to set the human rights defender free. They declined to do so. In the case of Kyrgyzstan, the Kazakhs also faced a choice: they could do things the old-fashioned, Soviet way where one regional strongman makes a deal with another, or they could do things the way modern, multi-lateral organizations do, through engagement and consultation. Unfortunately, they chose the more familiar route. It is reasonable to ask how many more tests the Kazakhs have to fail before people turn crimson when speaking of the embarrassment their chairmanship has become.
It might be time for Kazakhstan's friends within the OSCE might consider tapping the chairman on the shoulder and offering a little, friendly advice: Engage the OSCE more fully in finding a lasting, peaceful solution for Kyrgyzstan, let the human rights defender go free, and start taking the Madrid commitments you made more seriously. With six months left in their term, the bar is not so high for the Kazakhs to do a little better. While they still have a chance to beat the low expectations of most observers, if it continues on its present course Kazakhstan will simply prove what little is to be gained by offering poor performers responsibility in the hopes they might do a little better and diminish the OSCE in that process.
In the meantime, the Kazakhs are preparing for a major OSCE summit -- the first the organization would hold in over a decade. States within the OSCE -- including the United States -- are now considering how they would participate in such an event. Unless the Kazakhs start showing a little more respect for the democratic institutions the OSCE was conceived to support, lending credibility to their ceremonial summit hardly seems to send the right message.
Kazakhstan Eyes Joining Foreign Projects In Country - Minister
Kyrgyz Protesters Want Kazakhstan, Russia, US To Help Extradite Bakiev
In terms of Kazakhstan preventing or not a possible civil war, it is hard to tell for sure, but it seems like Bakiev and his associates with their money could have mounted a resistance which would only lead to more bloodshed, if the interim govt' tried to storm his base. So, it is safe to say, his removal was a good thing for the country, not a bad one. Whether or not he should be now or later extradited and tried, is another matter altogether, and I personally think he clearly should.
In terms of "one dictator giving a hand to another dictator" and helping Bakiev out... I would amend your comment then and say it was three 'dictators' (Nazarbayev, Obama and Medvedev) who met in Washington and agreed that Bakiev needs to be removed for the better. Obama and Medvedev in fact asked Nazarbayev to intervene, mediate and negotiate the removal of Bakiev. So your charge is midplaced.
As for the "dictators", did you sit in on the meeting between them? I doubt they "asked" Nazarbaev to intervene. Whatever, I don't care about it.
Saying 'I don't care about it' runs contrary to your earlier comment that 'dictator' Nazarbayev basically saved another 'dictator'. Our president was not acting all alone in this, but with the full agreement and invitation of the US and Russia.
And your claims that this scenario is impossible in Kazakhstan due to higher living standard are absurd as 90 % of population don't enjoy the dividends of oil bonanza. All your oil wealth has been distributed among a very tight group of Nazarbaev's close allies and relatives and been exported out into offshore accounts and Swiss banks. Everything else (new skyscrapers, shiny cars, glamour lifestyle) is just a smokescreen and bubble created by influx of bank loans that were shuttered by the financial crisis.
Lastly, I want to say that Kyrgyz is a bird that wants to live in freedom, not in the golden cage!
After the toppling of Bakiev Kazakhstan allegedly prevented a civil war. It's NOT true because Kyrgyz people don't support him besides a group of close relatives and criminal allies. All the unrest that followed in the south and Bishkek actually was instigated by Bakiev's provocateurs. Taking into account the fact that the Interim Gov has showed its ability to control the situation, I assure that Bakiev's prosecution will only lead to more stability in the society. But Kazakhstan under the flag of OSCE has assisted him in fleeing and it looks more like one dictator giving hand to another. And don't forget that Bakiev actually could find asylum only in Belarus', hardly a democratic place. It's really telling of Bakiev's perception in the world.
He may be described and is described in the West as 'authoritarian' or 'dictator'. These labels are misguided. Nursultan Nazarbayev should rather be viewed as a strong armed president who has managed to keep his country together and ensure its development. In fact, the lack of such development and the lack a strong and visionary leader are, among other things, the causes for another bout of violence in Kyrgyzstan, only five years after the previous one.
Now, onto an OSCE summit. Such a thing is much needed by the OSCE itself which has seen its credibility and role diminished over the past decade since the 1999 Istanbul summit. The Kazakhs broached the idea of a summit as a way to re-inforce the organization, make it more relevant. These days the agenda of a possible summit is worked out, with active participation of ALL member states. This tells us people in Washington, Brussels and Moscow believe the OSCE is a valuable instrument and should be strengthened. This gives the organization, and the Kazakhs that lead it now, a chance. And this means that what the Kazakhs need now is not a patronizing "tapping on the shoulder" as Sam Patten suggests, but a friendly shoulder on which to lean, and interested partners with whom to work with, shoulder to shoulder.
Ardaq Adlet
The president in fact is a very popular, unifying figure and a person who can rightly be called the founding father of the nation. There is no denying his role in many momentous decisions Kazakhstan has made, including the one to renounce nuclear weapons or to pursue peace and harmony in a country of diverse ethnic composition, especially when compared to what happened in the neibourhood.
The president himself however does not believe he needs a special title bestowed upon him by a decree as he clearly said publicly a few days ago. The bill is now with him and its fate depends on the president's judgement. Many in Kazakhstan hope he will exercise his best qualities which have made him a skilled and truly respected leader and make the right call. Only a few days remain to find out.
Ardaq Adlet
Let's try an experiment. Make the Parliament equally powerful to the President. Take away the President's power to appoint Senators. Make him no longer head of NurOtan. In other words, take away all the reasons why Parliament might want to do good things for the President besides pure respect. See how many orders and titles they give him.
The people--who no longer directly vote for members of Parliament--are of no interest to Parliament any more. We see it every day in the actions they take.
By the way, I like your mastery of the English language and the colloquialisms you use, KZBlog, which I thought one can acquire only by being a native speaker. So when you say "then they would pass laws that help us" who do you mean? Kazakhs? British? Americans?
By the way, as it turns out, the OSCE parliamentary assembly did post the release on a visit by their representative to Mr Zhovtis on their website, which is where their releases go, so Sam Patten's charge against the chairmanship is misplaced..
Ardaq Adlet
Third, Kazakhstan did make some of the legal steps it said it would do in Madrid, including passing legislation that would make sure there are at least two parties in the parliament after a future election, and a few other steps. Libel is indeed not de-criminalized yet, as justified concerns over irresponsible use of words remain high. True, Kazakhstan did not do all of the things outlined three years ago, but it has a plan for doing them gradually..
Ardaq Adlet
For starters, he claims Kazakhstan has done nothing as OSCE chair to help diffuse the crisis in neighbouring Kyrgyzstan. This is utterly not true. As noted by a number of politicians, including last week in Almaty by Joao Soares, chairman of OSCE parliamentaty assembly, Kazakh chairmanship has been very effective all in all, and has played a key role in mediating in early days (leading such efforts of the UN, EU representatives) and removing Bakiev from its neighbouring country. This indeed helped prevent a potential civil war there. Kazakhstan did so in full coordination with and with full support of the US, Russia and the EU.
Secondly, on May 20, meaning today, Kazakhstan reopened its border with Kyrgyzstan for trade and travel. This despite ongoing trouble in Kyrgyzstan, especially in the south, where interethnic tensions are now being played up, and despite the availability in Kyrgyzstan of what some would say thousands of light weapons stolen by the looters during the April clashes..
Ardaq Adlet