Search

Each of the post-Soviet Central Asian states inherited both inefficient collectivized agricultural systems and an understanding of the nation rooted in categories defined by Soviet nationality policy. Despite the importance placed on territorial homelands in many contemporary understandings of nationalism, the divergent formal responses to these dual Soviet legacies have generally been studied in isolation from one another. However, there are conceptual reasons to expect more overlap in these responses than generally assumed; in this paper, we engage in a focused comparison of three post-Soviet Central Asian states (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan) in order to investigate how nationalizing policies and discourse, land distribution, and ethnic tensions interact with each other over time. We reveal that the nationalizing discourses of the three states – despite promoting the titular groups vis-à-vis other groups – have had limited influence on the actual processes of land distribution. Furthermore, the Kyrgyzstani case challenges the assumption that the effect flows unidirectionally from nationalizing policies and discourse to land reform implementation; in this case, there is evidence that the disruption caused by farm reorganization generated grievances which were then articulated by some nationalistic political elites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is dedicated to developments related to integration processes between Kazakhstan, Russia, and Belarus, which have collective existence as the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space. If matters progress as projected, within two years they will form a Eurasian Union modeled on the EU. The integration in Eurasia is developing with remarkable speed and has several obstacles to overcome. The first of these difficulties centers on economic relations. The second is the fear that Kazakhstan and Belarus have concerns about a potential loss of sovereignty, including a reduction in their capability to manage their internal and external affairs independently. The third set of problems relates to the smaller countries' desire to avoid dependence on one state, Russia, a situation which would lead to a rise in Russia's geopolitical role in the world. Also the Eurasian Union relates to counterbalance the strengthening of China's involvement in Central Asia policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores foreign policy and relations of Kazakhstan and its geo-strategic role in Central Asia. The author reflects on petroleum reserves and the location of the country as factors in Kazakhstan's geopolitical importance. A policy of multi-vector politics is related to the security relationships of the Kazakhstani government. The multi-ethnic character of Kazakhstani society and tensions with the Russian Federation are also noted. Other topics include oil pipeline routes, foreign investment in Kazakhstan, and authoritarian regimes.