In Kazakhstan, one of the critical political events this year is the adoption of amendments to the Constitution of the Republic. In the recent article for CentralAsia.news, a political scientist Igor Dubovsky said the innovations in the presidency can be regarded as a negative impact on the sovereignty of the Republic.
The expert also commented negatively on the renaming of Nur-Sultan back to Astana. Dubovsky expressed his opinion about the rumours that are constantly circulating in Kazakhstan on the confrontation between the team of President Kassym-Zhomart Tokayev and the political elite loyal to the first leader of the Republic Nursultan Nazarbayev.
The name says a lot
In 2019, Tokayev ardently advocated for the renaming of the capital city to Nur-Sultan as part of the “transit of power” procedure. Three years have passed, and the President announced the return of the original name of the capital city.
This was presented to the public as the opinion of citizens, voiced by a number of parliamentarians. Meanwhile, Igor Dubovsky saw it not as the people’s will, but a blow to the sovereignty.
“The return of its original name to Astana arises out of the same circumstance – the lack of sovereignty. It would be more correct to say, a greater loss of sovereignty,” the interlocutor says.
Dubovsky explains his position by the fact that the first president, Nazarbayev, was not just an experienced politician. He has become a kind of centre of gravity in the Republic. Elbasy tried to pursue a friendly foreign policy towards Russia. Now the West is “casting out” its line in Kazakhstan, the expert believes. Its purpose is purely destructive.
“No matter what we think of him, Nazarbayev came out of the strong Soviet personnel management system. For many years, the governance, foreign and domestic policy and Russia-friendly policy of Kazakhstan have stood on his personal authority. Actually, I will cautiously assume that he lost power because of this. Now the “legacy” is being swept away. Russians don’t do that. This tactic is exclusive to Anglo-American politics. They destroyed both nations and their historical memory,” the political scientist commented.
Britain is the “odd man out” in relations
The events in Kazakhstan, even the January riots and the renaming of the capital city, do not at all indicate a tough confrontation between the teams of Tokayev and Nazarbayev. A political scientist Dubovsky believes that the situation should be looked at more broadly, because Britain is wedged actively into relations between the elites. There is no reason to look for Western spies and agents of influence.
“As for the personal relations between Tokayev and Nazarbayev, it would not be entirely correct to consider them and the ongoing events from the point of view of interpersonal and inter-clan relations. Indeed, it is the clan governance that works in Kazakhstan. However, the clans can always agree, if “a British gentleman did not come to visit one of them last night…” The “British gentleman” feels there at home. Therefore, inter-clan wars in the elites of Kazakhstan, bogged down with their interests, bank accounts and real estate in Britain and Europe, are just a matter of sleight of hand and the interest of the “British gentleman”,” the expert explained.
A political scientist Dubovsky added that the authorities of the Republic should start building human resources. New leaders should be “nurtured” on the traditional values, history and culture with an eye to employment, first of all, for its people. Otherwise, foreign forces will control governance processes in Kazakhstan.