CENTRAL ASIA IS A REGION OF FIVE STANS Dispute with Kazakh Eurasianists
Abstract
A so-called Eurasian trend of foreign poli-tical thought born in Kazakhstan is gaining increasingly wider support in this country, the main argument of its proponents being “Kazakhstan bordiers on Central Asia, but it is not a Central Asian country. Ours is a Eurasian state strongly influenced by Europe and Western values. Contrary to what certain politicians and journalists assert, we are not another stan. Saudi Arabia is not our historical landmark:
We look to Norway, South Korea, and Singapore.”1 This is what these people think about their country’s place and role in the world after 15 years of independent development. They loathe the very name of their country, which ends in stan. The Eurasian trend of “anti-stan” rhetoric merits serious attention and profound analysis.
It is tempting to ask whether the concept of a Eurasian state can be applied to Kazakhstan. This invites the question of where the borders between Kazakhstan, which is “not a Central Asian coun-try,” and Central Asia proper lie, and another broader one about whether the Central Asian countries can cope without Kazakhstan.
The statement quoted above turned geopolitics and ideology upside down; it distorted the reg-ularities of geopolitical transformation and the process of national self-identification. I will discuss self-identification ideology in the next section, but for now I would like to analyze the geopolitical implications of the above quotation.
Indeed, if Kazakhstan does not belong to Central Asia, where is its place? To which part of Asia does it belong? None of the sources describe it as part of say, northern Asia. Why should it move away from Central Asia? The answers to these questions might clarify the reasons why the country wants to detach itself from Central Asia, but they will hardly identify the geographical boundary between “Eurasian” Kazakhstan and Central Asia proper. In fact, Kazakhstan’s Eurasian nature is nothing but a myth or, rather, a geopolitical provocation; the same applies to the idea of Eurasianism, which spells rejection of independence and withdrawal into Eurasian nonexistence.
Eurasianism is a conception and philosophy designed to formulate the principles of Russia’s statehood; it is a philosophy of uniting lands for Russia and around it, therefore Russia alone is a Eurasian state. Neither Kazakhstan, nor any other CIS republic, belongs to this category. The Eurasian concept can be applied to the post-Soviet states only in the geographical context, it has nothing to do with the self-identification of either countries or nations.
Downloads
References
D. Nazarbaeva, “Spetsifika i perspektivy po-liticheskogo razvitia Kazakhstana,” Biulleten No. 3, 2003,Mezhdunarodniy institut sovremennoy politiki at the Insti-tute’s site [http://iimp.kz/index.php?action=show&art_id=150&from=5], 17 February, 2006.
E.G. Moiseyev, Pravovoy status SNG, Iurist Publishers, Moscow, 1995, p. 111.
D. Zamiatin, “Russkie v Tsentral’noy Azii vo vtoroy polovine XIX veka: strategia representatsii i interpretatsii is-toriko-geograficheskikh obrazov granits,” Vostok, No. 1, 2002, p. 48.
Ibidem.
S. Kushkumbaev, Tsentral’naia Azia na putiakh integratsii: geopolitika, etnichnost, bezopasnost, Kazakhstan Pub-lishers, Almaty, 2002, p. 83.
Ibid., p. 90.
S. Kushkumbaev, Tsentral’naia Azia na putiakh integratsii: geopolitika, etnichnost, bezopasnost, Kazakhstan Pub-lishers, Almaty, 2002, p. 144.
A. Dugin, Osnovy geopolitiki. Geopoliticheskoe budushchee Rossii, Arktogeia-tsentr, Moscow, 1999, pp. 354-355.
S. Akimbekov, “Tupik liberalizma. Kakuiu strategiu izbrat Kazakhstanu?” [http://centrasia.org/newsA.php4?st=
04.11.2005].
[http://www.tribune-uz.info/news/], 18 February, 2005.
S. Kushkumbaev, op. cit., p. 146.
S. Kushkumbaev, op. cit., p. 138.
Ibid., p. 141.
M.Kh. Abuseitova, Zh.B. Abylhozhin, et al., Istoria Kazakhstana i Tsentral’noy Azii, Dayk Press, Almaty, 2001,p. 522.
M. Abuseitova, “Razvitie istoricheskoy nauki i izmenenie interpretatsii istoricheskikh sobytiy v stranakh Tsentral’noy Azii posle obretenia nezavisimosti,” Materialy mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii: “Novaia istoria Tsentral’noy Azii.
ereotsenka istorii, sovremennye problemy i podkhody,” Tashkent, 13-14 sentiabria 2004 g., Tashkent, 2004, p. 15.
See: G. Sultonova, Sviazi Bukharskogo khanstva s Kazakhskim i Iarkendskim khanstavami vo vtoroy polovine XVI veka, Author’s summary of a candidate thesis, Tashkent, 2005.
See: Zh.M. Tulibaeva, Kazakhstan i Bukharskoe khanstvo v XVIII-pervoy polovine XIX v., Dayk Press, Almaty,2001.
M. Abuseitova, op. cit., p. 16.
E.W. Merry, “The Politics of Central Asia: National in Form, Soviet in Content,” in: In the Tracks of Tamerlane.
entral Asia’s Path to the 21st Century, ed. by D. Burghart and T. Sabonis-Helf, National Defense University, Washing-ton, D.C., 2004, p. 39.
For more on so-called Uzbek hegemonism, see, for example, F. Tolipov, “Certain Theoretical Aspects of Central Asian Geopolitics,” Central Asia and the Caucasus, No. 6 (12), 2001.
It can be found at the Institute’s site [http://iimp.kz/index.php?action=show&art_id=150&from=5], 17 February,2006.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2006 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
