2018年-查塔姆研究所_Kazakhstan039s_Chairmanship_of_the_OSCE_and_Prospects_for_Democracy_and_Human_Rights_22页_208kb

Summary of REP Seminar on Kazakhstan's OSCE Chairmanship and Democracy

Core Content

The REP seminar examined Kazakhstan's chairmanship of the OSCE in 2010 and its implications for democracy and human rights in the country and the wider Central Asian region. The discussion highlighted both the achievements and the challenges of Kazakhstan's leadership, as well as the broader geopolitical and socio-economic context.

Main Views and Key Information

Kazakhstan's OSCE Chairmanship

• Success and Recognition: Kazakhstan's chairmanship was considered a success by many OSCE members, culminating in the first OSCE summit in Astana in 11 years. President Nazarbayev emphasized the OSCE's motto of trust, tradition, and transparency.
• Security Focus: The chairmanship focused on security issues, including the reconstruction of Afghanistan, counter-terrorism, and combating Eurasian drug trafficking. Kazakhstan aimed to expand the European security architecture and integrate Asian perspectives.
• Human Dimension: Concerns about the neglect of the human rights dimension were unfounded. Kazakhstan maintained traditional OSCE meetings and increased NGO participation. However, civil society remains critical of the lack of substantive reforms in key areas like freedom of speech and media independence.

Challenges in Democracy and Human Rights

• Lag in Reforms: Despite some positive steps, Kazakhstan's democratic development is still limited. The country has not improved significantly in areas such as freedom of the press, political party independence, and public gatherings.
• Legal Framework: The legal system remains under executive control. The regulation of demonstrations is overly broad, and the judiciary lacks independence. The national action plan for democracy and human rights is still in progress.
• Political Will: There is a lack of political will to implement meaningful reforms. The government has not fulfilled its commitments under the Copenhagen agreement, and NGOs report that the state has not taken concrete steps to improve legislation or institutional independence.

Regional Context and Comparisons

• Central Asia Comparison: Kazakhstan is seen as relatively better in terms of human rights than its Central Asian neighbours, but it still faces challenges. The region is characterized by a common political model of "sovereign democracy," which prioritizes economic development over political reforms.
• Economic Dependence: Kazakhstan's economy is heavily based on natural resources, with limited diversification. The government has not prioritized the development of stable institutions or a robust middle class, which are essential for democratic progress.
• Geopolitical Influence: Russia and China exert significant influence over Kazakhstan. Russia dominates the media landscape, while China provides military support. Kazakhstan's multi-vector foreign policy aims to balance these influences and engage with the West through initiatives like the OSCE chairmanship.

Recommendations and Criticisms

• Western Engagement: Western countries should adopt a more critical and constructive approach to human rights in Kazakhstan. They should engage with opposition groups and use concrete procedures rather than vague memoranda.
• Legal and Institutional Reforms: The government needs to reform its legal framework, particularly regarding freedom of expression, political participation, and judicial independence. There is a need for more transparency in the legislative process.
• Civic Engagement: The lack of civic consciousness and the suppression of civil society activities are seen as obstacles to democratic development. The government has not effectively supported the growth of independent media and political parties.

Conclusion

The seminar concluded that while Kazakhstan has made some progress in its OSCE chairmanship, it has not fulfilled its democratic and human rights commitments. The country's political framework remains centralized, and there is a need for more substantial reforms. The OSCE and the international community should continue to engage with Kazakhstan, pushing for transparency and accountability. Political modernization is essential, and the time for meaningful change has not yet arrived.