RSS

I recently read a book entitled "Apples Are from Kazakhstan: The Land that Disappeared". One of the questions raised by the author Christopher Robbins was how come so a large country, which is four times the size of Texas, still remains unknown to most of the people in Europe and America. The answer was surprising for me: Kazakhstan is the land that disappeared because it was closed to foreigners under Tsarist and Soviet rule and it remained largely hidden from the world. 

I was thinking about my country and then I realized that this could involve great opportunities for the people of Kazakhstan, especially when it comes to a relationship with Western countries. Actually, we can cooperate with each other without preconditions.

Few nations have had a chance to start their relations with others from the ground up. We have such a fair chance. Kazakhstan and the West do not share a bitter experience of wars and colonization. There were no crusades against ancient Kazakh nomads, and it is worthy of mention that Kazakh nation and Europeans have never had any religious or ethnic confrontation. It is easy to cooperate with NATO today because we don't face any conflict of interest in missile defense issue or some nuclear program. We owe nothing to each other and that is why we have a room for a true cooperation. It is actually true that this cooperation is already taking place: Kazakhstan joined NATO's Partnership for Peace Program in 1995; Kazakh troops participated in several joint peacekeeping exercises; and currently Kazakhstan is developing the third cycle of the Individual Partnership Action Plan.

This interaction in the political and military fields is very important but today we face another very significant challenge - the genesis of a new civil society in Kazakhstan.

Following twenty years of independence the generation of young people who had never lived under the Soviet rule has already grown up in Kazakhstan. We call them "the children of independence". These youths are just 20 years old. They are used to live in a free, independent country. They are extrovert and open-minded. They get their education in the best universities of Europe and America and they welcome the outside experience of economic development and good governance.

I think that today we are ready for more dynamic cooperation with the countries of Western Europe and North America. We need a more profound exchange of ideas and values. I believe that our commitment to certain values which is expressed in our customs and traditions is not hermetically closed. People from different societies can exchange their values and even take the elements from the other value systems and fit them into their original framework in creative ways.

In this respect we face some challenges in Kazakhstan. First of all, it is the lack of information. The information realm is dominated by Russian mass media. There is only one European TV-channel "Euronews" broadcasting in Russian. BBC and CNN are also available, but they broadcast in English and most people don't watch them. I think the first step for channeling transatlantic values would be the creation of mass media in Russian or Kazakh languages, probably TV and radio programs, providing true and fair information about transatlantic community.

Secondly, it will take some time for the people to understand the information they are given, then structure it and finally turn that information to knowledge. People need time to realize that they have a choice. And then, they need time to make that choice. Will it be in favour of transatlantic values or other ones? I believe transatlantic powers should pay attention to this issue, and NATO's approach to Kazakhstan should be flexible, tolerant and supportive.

Another important issue concerns NATO keeping balance in developing the transatlantic community. The idea of it as "a unique community of values and democracy" sounds very idealistic. In some aspects it even resembles to Soviet's attempts to build "an international socialist community". Trying to create an exclusive inner world within the frameworks of NATO makes the system of transatlantic powers locked up. They lose connection with the outside environment. It doesn't help to spread transatlantic values, and NATO is taking risks to lose its huge influence it has gained in almost every part of the world during last 20 years.

Aliya Mussabekova is a student (MA) at Moscow State University of International Relations. Aliya studied International Relations (BA) at Eurasian National University, Astana, Kazakhstan.

March 10, 2012

Tilman Pradt, FU Berlin, (8)

• 1
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Aliya,

I really enjoyed reading your article and the your ideas about strengthening the NATO-Kazakhstan partnership. As you mentioned, Kazakhstan already took part in various NATO programmes beginning with the participation in the Partnership for Peace Programme in 1995.

However, I am wondering if it is possible to deepen this partnership any further. What is your impression, do you think that Kazakhstan could even become a NATO member in the end? I am sceptical about this and especially because of one fact. Kazakhstan has long been Soviet-ruled and still is dependent to a high degree on its relations (security/ politics/ Economy) to Russia. And Russia is especially wary of too much NATO engagement on former Soviet territory. Plus, Kazakhstan is a member of the Shangai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), which itself is constituted as a security organisation for this region. I wonder if a strengthening of Kazakhstan-NATO bonds would not cause irritations among the other SCO members.

Kazakhstan, located between Russia and China and sharing long borders with both of them, first has to be interested in properous and peaceful relations with its two big neighbours. But I have learned about Kzakhstan's policy of "өпвекторлы сыртқы саясат" (mnogovektornaya vneshnyaya politika = multivector foreign policy), and thus seeking good relations with the West in general and the US particularly.

You have much more expertise on this subject, so I would be interested in your assessment of the compatibility or incompability of these strategic partnerships.

Tags: | Kazakhstan |

March 13, 2012

Aliya Beisenbekovna Mussabekova, Eurasian National University, Astana, Kazakhstan and Moscow State University of International Relations (MGIMO), Moscow, Russia, (3)

• 0
•  
•  
• 
• 

I like this comment! What's this?

Dear Tilman,

Thank you kindly for your feedback. I agree in general with your assessment of the priorities in Kazakh foreign policy. Indeed, my country is dependent to a high degree in many aspects to Russia. The most important of the issues is security. Russia and Kazakhstan form together a “joint strategic military area” (“общее военно-стратегическое пространство”) which means the joint and cooperative use of different military facilities, including the Baikonur launch site. As to economic cooperation, the key partners of Kazakhstan are the United States, the European Union and China.
Officially the foreign policy of Kazakhstan is proclaimed as a multivector one. It implies the power balancing in relations with major states, alternative strategies and alternative partners. I suppose the main objectives of the multivector policy are preserving stability of the political regime and gaining economic profits. I believe Kazakhstan is quite successful on this route. Our government has managed to establish good relationships with many countries in the world and, of course, the US and European nations were among priorities. I think our way of building of strategic partnerships with different countries and different political systems can be considered compatible and expedient. Moreover, I suppose the multivector foreign policy is the only appropriate political course for small and medium sized countries whose neighbours are larger and stronger than they are.
As to probable membership of Kazakhstan in NATO, I share your sceptical vision. Due to geographical and geopolitical conditions it would be hard to Kazakhstan to become a fully legitimate member of the North Atlantic Alliance which is, first of all, a mechanism of collective defence. However, I am sure it is possible to deepen the partnership between Kazakhstan and NATO further. It should be developed in three directions:
- security (fighting terrorism, extremism and drug trafficking);
- exchange of information (creation of data gathering centres);
- broadening of the communication between young leaders (joint educational programs, visits, conferences on political and military issues).

Best regards,
Aliya.

Commenting has been deactivated in the archive. We appreciate your comments on our more recent articles at atlantic-community.org