|
| OSDP AZAT / Activity / In the Media / 15.02.2007 - Priorities of Kazakhstan’s Foreign Policy Orientation |
 |
| 15.02.2007 - Priorities of Kazakhstan’s Foreign Policy Orientation |
|
The foreign policy of a country is determined by its interests and expresses the nation’s identity.
The main goals of Kazakhstan’s national security strategy must be the wellbeing and development of the country drawn from the energy and patriotism of its citizens. Only full compliance with the principles of human rights and rule of law can promote the establishment of a sustainable political community and competitive economy.
Unlike authoritarian models, liberal democracies are considerably more difficult to build for they are complex systems that require fine tuning, resolution of contradictions and conflicts without recourse to force, and most importantly – constant participation of society.
Despite all difficulties and challenges of time, there should be clear understanding that Kazakhstan’s security depends on internal intellectual and spiritual resources of the country, competitiveness of its economy, effectiveness of the state and its ability to become a respectable member of the international community.
The geopolitical situation analysis: defining threats and challenges
Central Asia and Afghanistan – arc of instability
Kazakhstan is a country with vulnerable statehood and an arbitrary political system, located in an unstable region. The political crisis in Kyrgyzstan, ambiguity of the situation in Turkmenistan, high conflict potential of Uzbekistan, unclear development prospects of Tajikistan and continuation of military actions in Afghanistan create a range of threats and risks for the security of Kazakhstan.
The neighboring Kyrgyzstan experienced the ‘tulip revolution’ and has not been able to get out of the crisis yet. On the one hand, mass protests in 2005 leading to the change of government and renewed protests in 2006 that expressed the dissatisfaction with the ruling tandem Bakiyev-Kulov could become a prelude to the political transformation in Central Asia considered an archaic region, not ready for democratization. On the other hand, the country has weakened and is on the edge of governance failure. If political clans are unable to develop a common vision and consolidate the country, Kyrgyzstan can turn into a ‘failing state’ provoking the interference from outside.
Uzbekistan is in the economic and political deadlock. The necessity of reforms is becoming more obvious, but the ‘window of opportunity’ has practically closed. Uzbekistan saw itself as the key country in the region with the natural right to dominate over its neighbors and underestimated its powers. Its foreign policy proved inadequate. The repressive domestic policies went into conflict with the pro-Western foreign policy course, as it was manifested most acutely in the aftermath of the Andijon events. ‘Rejected’ by the West Uzbekistan made a dramatic turn toward Russia, with regard to which it had previously conducted a tough and not always friendly policy. They signed a security pact, and Uzbekistan joined the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). Moscow considers this development of events as its diplomatic victory, however, the prospects of such an alliance are most likely pregnant with serious problems for Russia.
Life in Tajikistan has more or less stabilized. A certain political pluralism that emerged at the end of the civil war has been virtually eliminated and a typical for Central Asia authoritarian form of government was set in place. The problems of internal security are similar to those of its neighbors, but are more acute: very low living standards, corruption, drug trafficking and inefficient government. The population is still traumatized by the armed strives and is hardly able to turn to political activism in the near future. The situation is aggravated by the proximity of Afghanistan. Tajikistan is a weak state and therefore cannot conduct an independent policy. Russia continues to play the role of the main sponsor of its security.
The situation in Turkmenistan is the least predictable. The dictator’s sudden death left the political system without its centerpiece, around which it had been built. Lack of legitimate power institutes gives no ground for optimistic forecasts of long-term stability. The future causes anxiety that together with the interest in rich oil and gas reserves of Turkmenistan stimulate the activization of external players.
Afghanistan remains in a hard situation and, to all appearances, it will not be able to become a capable state for a while. International forces, first of all NATO, control part of the territory of the country. The Taleban were able to restore their forces and start a counter-attack. Active military actions take place in the south. The cultivation of opium has been growing, which led to the increase in drug trafficking via Central Asia.
Kazakhstan is located above the arc of instability and risks to become its part eventually.
Russia and China
Kazakhstan is squeezed between two regional powers – Russia and China. These countries are sources of both opportunities and serious challenges to Kazakhstan’s security in the medium- and long-term perspectives.
Kazakhstan has been able to build close good-neighborly relations with Russia. For the Russian Federation (RF) Kazakhstan is a key partner in the post-Soviet space. The following main interests of Russia in Kazakhstan can be enlisted:
• security of the southern borders – Kazakhstan serves as a buffer separating the problematic South from the Russian territory;
• mineral resources, oils and gas, control over transit routes;
• considerable Russian population;
• geopolitical rivalry – the Republic of Kazakhstan (RK) is included in the ‘zone of vital interests’ and is a participant of various Russia-sponsored integration projects.
Russia has reviewed its foreign policy: distanced from the West and assigned priority to its relations with a number of post-Soviet states. It started supporting the expansion of Russian businesses, which allows buying profitable assets and increasing political influence. Russians characterize their policy as pragmatic and filled with newly acquired self-confidence.
The relations between Russia and the US and EU worsened, and their improvement in the near future is not foreseen. The RF is disappointed in the ‘strategic partnership’ with the US and talks less often about its ‘European choice.’ Such a tendency is not favorable for Kazakhstan. Russia that is detached from the West cannot offer partnership rich in content, and even more so, leadership for post-Soviet states. Various constructs such as ‘Eurasianness’ (Evraziistvo) and ‘sovereign democracy’ are not filled with practical meaning.
Instead of unsuccessful ‘strategic partnership’ with the US, Russia staked, at least publicly, on ‘strategic partnership’ with China. The rapprochement is based on shared aspiration to resist Western influence and American dominancy in Asia and the world. Such relations at this stage are in the interests of both weakening Russia and growing China. They try to amicably solve present problems in their relations and find a balance of interest and influence in Central Asia, the region spreading between them. At the same time Russian-Chinese relations are characterized by a considerable level of mutual distrust. The parties do not perceive each other as reliable partners and see the potential for future divergence and conflicts of interest. The Russian political class is getting more anxious about the strengthening China. Among the main threats to Russia are emphasized:
• erosion of control and sovereignty in the scarcely populated eastern parts of the country because of Chinese demographic pressure;
• loss of leadership in Central Asia – China is slowly pushing Russia out of the region;
• marginalization in the Asia-Pacific Region and international relations.
The fact that for China, as well as for Russia, the relations with the United States take priority, and their policies toward each other are derivatives of these relations, is not conducive to the strategic partnership. Thus, their strategic partnership has a rather shaky basis.
China’s policy in Kazakhstan and the rest of Central Asia is defined by the following interests:
• prevention of creation of Uighur separatist movement bases in Central Asia;
• opposition to the growth of American influence in the region, the strategic rear of China;
• attachment of the region to the Chinese markets and turning it into a source of energy, creation of a regional trade-economic zone.
China initiated a form of regional security cooperation – Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). The main directions of the SCO activities are: combating terrorism, extremism and separatism (so-called ‘three evils’) and development of economic cooperation.
At present, China acts in Central Asia with great caution and declares the principle of ‘non-interference in internal affairs’ of other countries. However, it is possible to predict the increase in China’s influence on the internal affairs of Kazakhstan and other Central Asian states in the mid-term perspective, and in the future – on the internal affairs of Russia.
Since the PRC is a growing power with a global approach, the sphere of its national interests is also growing. Some experts view its ‘peaceful rise’ as a transition strategy, used by China temporarily. In case of such development of events, security structures in Asia will most likely polarize, and Central Asian states will find themselves in a precarious situation.
Kazakhstan should develop its policy proceeding from the following considerations:
• Chinese economic expansion in the region is growing;
• along with the economic penetration, Chinese labor migration increases, which taking into account the low density of population in the country presents a potential threat;
• economic dependence and attachment to China can undermine the state sovereignty;
• instability in Central Asia can provoke China’s interference in the internal affairs of republics;
• growth of Chinese involvement in the regional affairs is not conducive to the processes of political modernization in Central Asia.
USA and EU
The American policy in Kazakhstan and Central Asia is shaped by the following interests:
• geopolitical rivalry – to weaken as much as possible the dependence of Central Asian states on Russia, to prevent them from falling under the influence of China and, to the extent possible, tie them to the Euro-Atlantic security structures;
• security cooperation that has grown in connection with the ‘war on terror’;
• commercial and energy interests – the policy is aimed at preserving positions in the oil and gas sector and diversification of energy transportation routes;
• political and economic reforms without which Central Asia states can destabilize with time, lose sovereignty and turn into sources of security threats to their regional neighbors and the world in general;
• stabilization of Afghanistan with the help of Central Asia states through the creation of ‘Greater Central Asia’.
The importance of the region for the US is determined, first of all, by its location between Russia and China. The US is trying not to allow the emergence of any ‘Eurasian empire’ which could challenge it, and only Russia and China are possible candidates for the undertaking. In line with this interest, it conducts the policy of supporting the sovereignty of newly independent states, including Kazakhstan.
The US is worried about the anti-American tendency in the SCO, shaped by two leaders of this organization – China and Russia. American politicians are developing plans of checking the influence of the SCO on the development of the situation in the region. At present, Kazakhstan is assigned a certain role in these plans: thanks to new winds in the US-Kazakhstani relations Kazakhstan is to become the source of restraint and will not let the organization become anti-American. The US is also working on development of relations with the other states of Central Asia.
The American political community considers security in Central Asia both in the narrow (military) and broad (long term stability, political and economic development) senses, and it has formed a certain opinion about the region:
• Central Asian states are weak states with high potential for instability;
• Central Asian societies are predisposed to authoritarianism due to cultural norms and historical legacy;
• low probability of speedy democratization of the region in the foreseeable future and lack of effective levers of influence make the policy of engagement preferable to forceful democracy promotion.
As for the prospects of regional development, it is believed that the regime change will unlikely occur through normal political processes, such as elections. Other significant events should take place in order to stimulate reforms. Since leaders of Central Asian states are not young, the power transition is not distant, and therefore there can emerge possibilities for favorable transformations. The main goal of the US in the region is to stimulate long-term reforms without undermining relations with current leaders, for destabilization can lead to geopolitical and economic losses.
The EU does not have a clear strategy in Central Asia, in general, and Kazakhstan, in particular. The main reasons for this are remoteness of the region from the Union (Central Asia does not fall under the ‘neighborhood’ programs) and ambiguity of geopolitical ambitions of Europe resulting from the nature of the EU as a supra-national political project, most of whose energy is spent on the internal space self-organization.
However, European states share a number of common interests in Central Asia, the promotion of which defines the EU foreign policy in the region:
• counteracting non-traditional security threats and challenges in the region (drug trafficking, pandemics, Islamic radicalism, migration);
• energy security;
• promotion of European values.
Energy security has become a priority issue on the European agenda over the past several years. It became even more acute after the gas rows between the Ukraine and Russia, which demonstrated that Moscow is ready to use energy resources to exert political influence. European politicians are worried about Europe’s dependency on Russia. The desire to lessen it gave a new impulse to the plans to diversify oil and gas supply. Such a policy raises the importance of Central Asia as an alternative source of hydrocarbons and promotes the practical search for new transportation routes.
The American geopolitical project – Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline – started working already. It is expected that the building of the gas pipeline along the same route will be completed in the near future. After the Ukrainian-Russian gas battles the idea of the Transcaspian gas pipeline is back on the table.
If the EU makes a stake on Central Asian energy resources, there will emerge the need for greater involvement of Europe in regional affairs.
European values constitute the foundation of the European identity and the EU political project. Europeans believe that the principles of human rights, rule of law, democracy and market economy make the best basis for building stable and prosperous states. Thus, the creation of a zone of stability around Europe is directly connected to the maximum promotion of these principles.
Authoritarian regimes of Central Asia are not considered by Europeans as stable in the long term perspective. Therefore, Central Asian states will be viewed by Europeans as not very respectable and reliable partners until palpable democratization takes place in the region.
European participation in Kazakhstan’s affairs is aimed at the positive, not zero-sum balance of interests. Sometimes EU countries and their organizations view cooperation with Kazakhstan through the prism of their relations with Russia. In this sense, European approaches differ from the tougher and geopolitics-conditioned approach of the US.
As far as China is concerned, it seems that its growing presence in the region does not scare Europeans. It is most likely perceived as diversification of ties beneficial for the development of the region, and fits into the policy of participation and taking into account the interests of all parties. Overall, the EU has not developed yet a strategic position with regard to China.
Resources and Security
Rich natural resources of Kazakhstan, on the one hand, stimulate considerable investments in the economy of the country, but on the other, can impose the so called ‘resource curse’. Irrational use of mineral resources can undermine the national security from inside. From the point of view of external security, rich resources can play a fatal role, for we are living in the world where the rivalry for limited resources is growing. Kazakhstan must conduct a very shrewd and far-sighted policy not to become a hostage of its own wealth. First of all, it concerns energy resources. At present, there emerged a certain balance in the oil and gas sector of the country due to the presence of companies representing the West, as well as Russia, China and India. However, this balance can be disturbed with time. The dependence of some state on our hydrocarbons creates not only levers for our government to use in the relations with it, but can also provoke this state to consider Kazakhstan within its zone of interests.
It is necessary to thoroughly assess the oil and gas transportation routes and to determine the order of priority, for the choice of direction and volumes should complement the foreign policy course of the country and support not only short-term but also long-term national security interests. It is important to watch tendencies and developments in the global energy market and the relevant geopolitics and also follow changes in the energy security strategies of big countries. Kazakhstan’s security to a large extent depends on what forms the rivalry for resources among big powers will take.
Security in Asia
The gravity center of world politics is gradually shifting to the Asian continent. It is home to such global economic powers as Japan, China, South Korea, India, Russia and South-East Asian countries. It is expected that by 2025 close to half of world production will be concentrated in Asia.
It causes worry that the economic dynamism does not alleviate the high conflict potential of the region. The confrontation between China and Taiwan, separated Korean peninsula, territorial disputes between India and Pakistan, China and India, China and Japan, Russia and Japan, China and its south-eastern neighbors are the problems that can provoke serious military conflicts and destabilize not only Asia but the world.
These tensions are especially dangerous because the above mentioned countries – Russia, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea – are nuclear states. Japan, which is now under the US nuclear umbrella, can eventually acquire a nuclear weapon – it has all technical capacities to do this.
The militarization in the area of conventional arms is proceeding at high speed as well. According to SIPRI, in the period from 1990 to 2005 the total military expenditures in Eastern and South Asia grew by 77% (from 82 to 145 billion USD). The region became the fastest growing arms market, ahead of the Middle East.
Until now conflicts in Asia have been largely restrained by the US presence. Military alliances of Asian countries with the US were main pillars of the security architecture in the region. However, gathering geopolitical shifts, caused primarily by the rise of China, can challenge the American hegemony. There is a possibility of future polarization of Asia around the old hegemon – US, and the new aspirant for the position – China. The rivalries between China and Indian, China and Japan, and the positions of Russia and South-East Asian states will determine the distribution of powers in the region.
In Asia there is no reliable regional security system of the kind Europe was able to build, and in the medium-term perspective its creation is unlikely. Kazakhstan should attentively follow the developments in the region and carefully develop cooperation in the area of security.
It should be noted that unlike issues if military-political security, such non-traditional threats as drug trafficking, pandemics and climate change, have an obvious unifying potential. These are very serious problems facing the region able to undermine both the economic growth and the general security of the countries. These threats can be counteracted only by joint efforts. Coordinated actions aimed at the solution of non-traditional security problems can form the basis for the creation of a regional system of total security.
Main Directions of Kazakhstan’s Foreign Policy
Kazakhstan should determine its foreign policy priorities to pursue the following goals:
• creation of foreign policy conditions for the development and prosperity of Kazakhstan through orientation toward successful democratic countries both in the West and in the East;
• promotion of stabilization and development of Central Asia.
Kazakhstan-Central Asia
Kazakhstan should make major efforts aimed at the development of Central Asia. The main instruments are economic cooperation and intensification of trade relations. Political integration is premature, for the states of Central Asia are not ready for it. A more promising option is Kazakhstan’s accelerated development and its transformation into an economically successful and politically progressive state, whose example would inspire its neighbors in the region. The RK can become an educational, cultural, information and financial center of the region. Its neighbors should form a favorable opinion about Kazakhstan. It will be extremely harmful if the country acquires the reputation of an ‘expansionist’, who using temporary weaknesses of others tries to capture their assets. It is very important not to allow any vain ambitions and arrogant behavior toward less successful neighbors. Otherwise, this will cause alienation and will not be beneficial for the development of the region. It is necessary to stay balanced and realistic. Good-neighborly relations and positive example constitute the key to long-term security.
Kazakhstan-Russia
With Russia it is necessary to build relations on the basis of equality and respect for each other’s interests. Moscow politicians should understand that if Kazakhstan has additional transportation routes for its energy resources, in the end that will benefit the development of real partnership relations between Russia and Kazakhstan. Otherwise, Kazakhstan will always harbor fears about the renewal of imperial policy and along with them a desire to get rid of its influence. Kazakhstan will always be a state friendly to Russia.
It is necessary to try to convince Kremlin to review its list of external threats, especially the outdated perception of the West as an eternal enemy of Russia, and focus on the real and potential threats and challenges.
It would be in the interest of Kazakhstan if Russia quicker identified itself in terms of geopolitical and civilizational choice and began to behave as an organic part of the Euro-Atlantic community. It is important for the West to take into account the reasons behind Russia’s distancing from it. It is better if Europe and particularly the United States do not reject Russia more, rubbing its sore spots and do not put it on the list of ‘alien’ and incorrigible states.
If Kazakhstan openly declares its ‘European choice’, that could push Russia to return to this path as well. To some extent, this choice is easier for Kazakhstan for full autonomy is in no way attractive or conceivable option for us and we are not burdened by reminiscences of former glory and resulting from it feelings of disappointment and resentment. Kazakhstan could become an advancing partner, one more Eurasian country – along with Turkey and Russia - gravitating toward Europe.
Kazakhstan-EU
It is necessary to actively develop relations with European states, especially using the growing interest of the EU toward Central Asia.
We should use to the maximum the position of Kazakhstan as a ‘neighbor of neighbors’ of Europe. The South Caucasus is becoming another bridge, apart from Russia, connecting Central Asia with Europe, both geographically and geopolitically. In this regard, the attachment of our oil and gas system to the European one would be useful from all points of view.
Kazakhstan can position itself as a Eurasian state that consciously made the European choice. To do this it should join various European structures, first of all, the Council of Europe, or at least become an observer in them.
In the long-term perspective Kazakhstan should aspire to advance the relations with the EU to the level of Association.
Kazakhstan-USA
The United States is a super-power and leader of the Euro-Atlantic world, and the relationship with it is extremely important. However, US-Kazakhstan cooperation should not undermine our relations with Russia, China and others. Overall, it is better not to provoke an aggravation of geopolitical rivalry in the region. It is necessary to further develop cooperation with the US.
We should try to change Russia’s opinion about the enmity of NATO, all the more so, since Russia does not cut off ways of rapprochement with the alliance, despite the rhetoric.
Kazakhstan-China
China presents the biggest challenge to the security of Kazakhstan. In order to overcome it, it is necessary to:
• clearly define our interests and create such mechanisms that narrow and current interests will not prevail over national ones;
• regulate the issues of migration;
• intensify the relations with other powers, first of all, EU, and Asian powers – India and Japan;
• push Russia toward integration with Europe.
With regard to the SCO enlargement, it is necessary to promote the entrance of Japan and India into the organization, these countries would naturally become partners interested in the security of the RK.
The inclusion of technically advanced Japan in the SCO would raise the attractiveness of this organization as able to assist the economic growth of its member-states. The entrance of the largest democracy in the world India would positively affect the political modernization of the region.
Thus, the foreign policy component of Kazakhstan’s national security strategy should be oriented toward partnership with those countries and communities that would conduce strengthening of policies that are truly in the long-term interests of the country, well understood and accepted by everybody.
Tulegen Zhukeyev, Nargis Kassenova -- Vremya Newspaper
|
|
