The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPepe Escobar Archive
Kazakhstan Holds the Secret for Greater Eurasia
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information

People walk on a bridge over the Ishim river in Nur-Sultan on June 8, 2019 on the eve of Kazakhstan's presidential elections. (Photo by Vyacheslav OSELEDKO / AFP)

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The no holds barred US-China strategic competition may be leading us to the complete fragmentation of the current “world-system” – as Wallerstein defined it.

Yet compared to the South China Sea, the Korean peninsula, the Taiwan Straits, India-China’s Himalayan border, and selected latitudes of the Greater Middle East, Central Asia shines as a portrait of stability.

That’s quite intriguing, when we consider that the chessboard reveals the interests of top global players intersecting right in the heart of Eurasia.

And that brings us to a key question: How could Kazakhstan, the 9th largest country in the world, manage to remain neutral in the current, incandescent geopolitical juncture? What are the lineaments of what could be described as the Kazakh paradox?

These questions were somewhat answered by the office of First President Nursultan Nazarbayev. I had discussed some of them with analysts when I was in Kazakhstan late last year. Nazarbayev could not answer them directly because he has just recently recovered from Covid-19 and is currently in self-isolation.

It all harks back to what was Kazakhstan really like when the USSR dissolved in 1991. The Kazakhs inherited a quite complex ethno-demographic structure, with the Russian-speaking population concentrated in the north; unresolved territorial issues with China; and geographical proximity to extremely unstable Afghanistan, then in a lull before the all-out warlord conflagration of the early 1990s which created the conditions for the emergence of the Taliban.

To make it even harder, Kazakhstan was landlocked.

All of the above might have led to Kazakhstan either dispatched to political limbo or mired in a perpetual Balkan scenario.

Have soft power, will travel

Enter Nazarbayev as a fine political strategist. From the beginning, he saw Kazakhstan as a key player, not a pawn, in the Grand Chessboard in Eurasia.

A good example was setting up the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building measures in Asia (CICA) in 1992, based on the principle of “indivisibility of Asian security”, later proposed to the whole of Eurasia.

Nazarbayev also made the crucial decision to abandon what was at the time the fourth nuclear missile potential on the planet – and a major trump card in international relations. Every major player in the arc from the Middle East to Central Asia knew that selected Islamic nations were extremely interested in Kazakhstan’s nuclear arsenal.

Nazarbayev bet on soft power instead of nuclear power. Unlike the DPRK, for instance, he privileged Kazakhstan’s integration in the global economy in favorable terms instead of relying on nuclear power to establish national security. He was certainly paving the way for Kazakhstan to be regarded as a trustworthy, get down to business neutral player and a mediator in international relations.

The trust and goodwill towards Kazakhstan is something I have seen for myself in my pan-Eurasia travels and in conversations with analysts from Turkey and Lebanon to Russia and India.

The best current example is Astana, currently Nur-sultan, becoming the HQ of that complex work in progress: the Syrian peace process, coordinated by Iran, Turkey and Russia – following the crucial, successful Kazakh mediation to solve the Moscow-Ankara standoff after the downing of a Sukhoi Su-24M near the Syria-Turkish border in November 2015.

And on the turbulent matter of Ukraine post-Maidan in 2014, Kazakhstan simultaneously kept good relations with Kiev and the West and its strategic partnership with Russia.

As I discussed late last year, Nur-sultan is now actively taking the role of the new Geneva: the capital of diplomacy for the 21st century.

The secret of this Kazakh paradox is the capacity of delicately balancing relations with the three main players – Russia, China and the US – as well as leading regional powers. Nazarbayev’s office boldly argues that can be even translated to Nur-sultan placed as the ideal venue for US-China negotiations: “We are tightly embedded in the US-China-Russia triangle and have built trusting relationships with each of them.”

In the heart of Eurasia

And that brings us to why Kazakhstan – and Nazarbayev personally – are so much involved in promoting their special concept of Greater Eurasia – which overlaps with the Russian vision, discussed in extensive detail at the Valdai Club.

Nazarbayev managed to set a paradigm in which none of the big players feel compelled to exercize a monopoly on Kazak maneuvering. That inevitably led Kazakhstan to expand its foreign policy reach.

Strategically, Kazakhstan is smack in the geographical heart of Eurasia, with huge borders with Russia and China, as well as Iran in the Caspian Sea. Its territory is no less than a top strategic bridge uniting the whole of Eurasia.

The Kazakh approach goes way beyond connectivity (trade and transport), two key planks of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), to get closer to the converging vision of BRI and the Russian-led Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU): a single, integrated Eurasian space.

Nazarbayev sees the integration of the Central Asian “stans” with Russia and with Turkic-speaking countries, including of course Turkey, as the foundation for his concept of Greater Eurasia.

The inevitable corollary is that the Atlanticist order – as well as the Anglo-American predominance in international relations – is waning, and certainly does not suit Asia and Eurasia. A consensus is forming across many key latitudes that the driving force for the reboot of the global economy post-Covid-19 – and even a new paradigm – will come from Asia.

In parallel, Nazarbayev’s office make a crucial point: “A purely Asian or Eastern answer is unlikely to suit the collective West, which is also in search of optimal models of the world’s structure. The Chinese Belt and Road Initiative clearly showed that Western countries are not psychologically ready to see China as a leader.”

Nur-sultan nonetheless remains convinced that the only possible solution would be exactly a new paradigm in international relations. Nazarbayev argues that the keys to solve the current turmoil are not located in Moscow, Beijing or Washington, but in a strategic transit node, like Kazakhstan, where the interests of all global players intersect.

Thus the push for Kazakhstan – one of the key crossroads between Europe and Asia, alongside Turkey and Iran – to become the optimal mediator allowing Greater Eurasia to flourish in practice. That is the uplifting option: otherwise, we seem condemned to live through another Cold War.

(Republished from Asia Times by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Central Asia, China, Eurasia, Kazakhstan 
Hide 10 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Stan says:

    A puff piece for Nazarbayev.

  2. bob sykes says:

    Generally I find Pepe opaque, incoherent, or just wrong headed—a typical communist. But this time he seems to be onto something. I used to think Kazakhstan was just a curiosity, but now I think it is important. Thanks Pepe.

  3. Aaaa, the people on here don’t know what you’re talking about. And don’t care. And if they did care, all they would want to know is what race Khazakhs are so they can babble about their low IQ. Unless they are Yamanas, or whatever the mythical tribe they set such store by is or wasn’t, in which case they are the salvation of Causianosity.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  4. Pepe is giving us a glimpse of a possible future. The optimistic view is Eurasian integration — a world in which Europe & Asia are voluntarily coordinated based on mutual understanding, interest & baseline equality.
    Its a view which the US will not agree with: it will not tolerate first amongst equals, let alone “equality”.
    Its a view which necessarily involves the US diminished by the degree that western Europe integrates with Asia. However, perhaps the long shot bet will come off & the US will change its ways…. Integration of Europe with Asia is a huge enough bet as it is ….

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  5. Historically, balancing “the interests of all global players” is a gargantuan challenge, that in the last hundreds years has failed twice, resulting in two world wars. Failure a third time will mean nuclear war, not another Cold War.

  6. Given the many references to the Grand Chessboard and the Great Game, the Atlantacists vs the idea of Greater Eurasia, it goes without saying that Nazarbayev and Escobar are using the language that has grown up around Sir Halford Mackinder’s geopolitical theory of the World Island. While Mackinder feared the rise of a single ruler over the Eurasian Heartland, the reality appears to be the formation of a Greater Eurasia comprising many nations, an economic union cemented through the BRI that will be every bit as formidable. It appears that we are looking at ground zero for the coming multipolar world.

  7. @obwandiyag

    Sad but true… They have no clue of the history of Central Asia and how important it was in transferring things from East Asia to Europe…. Central Asia (via Persia) was also the conduit for which Christianity reached China and East Asia – not European missionaries. It also took Islam into the same regions.

  8. @animalogic

    “Pepe is giving us a glimpse of a possible future”… In many ways it is “back to the future”. With much less technology – the Silk Roads effectively did that many centuries ago. So it’s the 21st century version rebirth.

  9. Derer says:

    This article is about nothing. Kazakhstan is closely tie with Russia because 60% of population are Russians. Do not rely on the CIA lies. The borders of Kazakhstan were drew by Stalin by falling asleep over the map with pencil running uncontrollably. Nobody bothered to change it.

  10. Pepe forgot to mention Israel…There is a large map collection in Israel, and one map in particular stands out from the rest. This map is of a clover leaf design with three oval shaped leaves, and a circle in the middle. The leaves attached to the circle represent three continents, Asia, Europe and Africa and the circle represents Jerusalem. All clearly marked on the map. America is seen in a corner not part of the map. The map was made in 1581 depicting Jerusalem at the center of the great Pan-Eurasian trading routes. And that is exactly what the current day Belt and Road Initiative seeks to establish. Making Jerusalem into the long ago bible prophesied Greater Israel, the center of trade, politics and culture, replacing the United States as the world’s leading power.

    America is depicted in part, off to the side labeled the New World, a seeming unrelated side show, to the main game of dominating the Eurasian land mass. The US was stripped of their manufacturing industry, they were moved to Asian countries, to provide the driving force of the Belt and Road Initiative (products). Without the products to sell the plan wouldn’t work.

    We keep seeing countless of US high technology and weapons contractors are transferring their operations to Israel. This high technology transfer will occur in the same manner that the US steel industry and manufacturing sector moved to China and Asia, beginning under the Nixon administration. Interestingly…the same people are involved, now. Henry Kissinger and the Council on Foreign Relations including Roger Stone and Dr. Steve Pieczenik who had a hand in bringing Donald Trump to the White House. Roger Stone worked for Nixon and said Donald Trump and Richard Nixon had a lot of things in common. Trump, like Nixon couldn’t wait to hand over billions in technology and trade to other countries, especially Israel who’s totally in bed with China.

    • Agree: SolontoCroesus
Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pepe Escobar Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV