“Abroad there are calls for the two sides to hold negotiations for a peaceful resolution. What idiocy. What kind of negotiations can you have with criminals?” said Kazakhstan’s president Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in a nation-wide address concerning the domestic protests that rocked the Central Asian nation. Though more than 50,000 Kazakhstanis from various social backgrounds have taken to the streets expressing societal discontent, the international community is yet to receive an official statement from the dissidents’ side due to an comprehensive governmental control of information. Among the few things that are certain, the most conspicuous is Tokayev’s uncompromising stance. “I gave the order to law enforcement agencies and the army to open fire to kill without warning,” declared the leader.

Kazakhstan’s geographical vastness, abundance of mineral resources, and oil exports allowed the nation to live in relative affluence when compared to other post-Soviet republics. Endemic corruption and its mercurial position as the juncture between American and Russian influence, however, contributed to general dissension; the increase of fuel prices was the incendiary spark that brought about the biggest scale of demonstrations observed in the nation since its independence in 1991. With President Tokayev’s request, Russia has dispatched military personnel — deemed as “peacekeepers” — to stabilize the former Soviet republic. Hegemonic power struggles, individual grasps for authority, and accusations of human rights violations further convolute the neoteric crisis.

Behind the Unrest

Demonstrations were first instigated in the western region of Mangystau in early January over dramatic increases in the prices of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). It was apprehended that knock-on effects such as the increase in cost of crucial commodities might ensue, and protesters demanded LPG prices be reduced. The protests, however, quickly escalated into a more exhaustive expression of general discontent. Perennial economic downturn, unbridgeable polarization, and the consolidation of authoritarianism has plagued Kazakhstan for decades, with citizens bearing the blunt of all societal plights.

“Shal ket!” (“Old men must go!”) has been the rallying cry for protesters, as they demanded Nursultan Nazarbayev, the nation’s former president who still has a pervasive influence in politics despite having officially resigned from his post in 2019, leave the political arena entirely. Such demands hint that the Kazakhs desire true political liberalization. Out with the old, and in with the new; public demands for wiping the slate clean with comprehensive reforms spread like wildfire, with an estimated number of 50,000 citizens participating.

Tokayev’s Iron Fist

With 225 confirmed deaths and 4,353 injured, the initial wave of protests has come to an end as of January 19 with the state of emergency being lifted. Though the government has compromised with some dissident demands, with Nazarbayev stepping down from his governmental post as head of the Security Council, the overall response has been overwhelmingly oppressive. Incendiary language such as “terrorists,” “armed bandits,” and “criminals” were routinely utilized in describing the state of affairs. President Tokayev gave shoot-to-kill orders to law enforcement agencies, warning in a television address that “whoever does not surrender will be destroyed.”

Tokayev’s unmitigated lack of sympathy for demands for democracy unfurled to the extent of a deliberate internet blackout; internet traffic was blocked in all areas of the nation for nearly a week. Blockage of information is the traditional route taken by despots as it both shapes international perception of domestic affairs to their favor and obstructs inner dissidents from garnering foreign support. Tokayev’s employment of such a method conspicuously demonstrates his authoritarian motives.

Political motives may have exerted their roundabout influence in the protests. Hand-picked by Nazarbayev as a successor, Tokayev is yet to exert any substantial influence on the nation. By arresting Nazarbayev’s right hand man Karim Masimov over charges of treason and removing the former leader himself from any existing leadership roles, the president may be attempting to build a substantial ground for his independent politics.

The World Watches

Russia was the first foreign force to show immediate involvement in the protests. With Tokayev’s request, Russia dispatched over 2,000 troops under the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). The two nations are inextricably linked; Kazakhstan is a post-Soviet state that shares a 7,600-kilometer-long border with its former motherland, and nearly 25 percent of the population identifies as ethnically Russian. Though Kazakhstan has maintained a relatively impartial diplomacy based on pragmatics, it is still Russia’s closest ally and “a powerful space for Russian influence”, said Professor Lee Jieun (Department of Central Asian Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies). With their dispatch of military personnel, Russia attempted to “maintain the status quo of the pro-Russian authoritarian regime in Kazakhstan,” observed the professor.

Though China and Russia are not traditional allies, the Kazakh revolts may instigate the two nations forming deeper alliances in the Central Asian region. China benefits from Russia, not the United States (U.S.), being the hegemonic power in Central Asia, and is willing to support Russia exerting its influence on Kazakhstan. The nation is also friendly towards Tokayev’s continued authoritarianism as it better facilitates Chinese economic expansion into the region.

It is noticeable that America has released no official statement on the crisis. The U.S. has long been more lenient on Kazakhstan authoritarianism when compared to other post-Soviet states due to their energy investments, and is attempting to limit its involvement in Central Asian affairs after the Afghanistan crisis. Such obstructions have effectively effaced American influence in the playout of events. Relative passivity does not mean that the U.S. is wholly ambiguous, however; Professor Lee comments that “Kazakhstan’s worth as a balancing tool against Russia has deteriorated” in the U.S.’ perspective, and further predicts that the “competition between powerhouses utilizing geopolitical pivot states such as Ukraine and Kazakhstan is expected to worsen.”

The crisis in Kazakhstan remains to be worryingly convoluted. Having commenced as demands for the lowering of gas prices and better quality of life, it was quick to grow into one involving repercussions that could potentially afflict all of Central Asia, and deeply alter the trajectory of international order. The world watches on while the crisis unfolds into unprecedented dimensions. It goes on to remind us that while power politics play out in the international arena, individual voices are easily overlooked; the majority of Kazakhs who demanded a simple improvement of living conditions remain despondent.