Happy New Year, Kazakhstan

It was a hell of a December for Kazakhstan. The country that until recently was known for its stability, for its pungent economy and openness for Western companies was suddenly taken by a turmoil that it was too myopic to see coming. Actually, the deadly clashes in the Western city of Zhanaozen were just the apex of a long process: oil workers had been protesting in the city since May, asking for higher wages, whereas the authorities insisted that they already had received a raise (If I were to leave in such a hellhole, in the middle of nowhere, probably I would ask for much more as well). Anyway, the clashes with the police took place exactly on the day in which Kazakhstan was celebrating its 20th Independence Anniversary. Strangely, the party was seen as an insult to those “hooligans” protesting for months. And what an unforgettable celebration it was indeed (Watch this short video), with at least 17 dead.

Regardless of the reasons for the protest itself and steering clear of the debate about the heavy-handedness of the authorities, there are many extremely concerning causes for concern in relation to what happened. First and foremost: the longtime Kazakh leader, Nursultan Nazarbayev, is 71: by now he was supposed to be a wise aksakal (old man) and know how to deal with a simple strike. But, instead, he let the situation escalate to a level in which it became unbearable. What does it say about the prospect of Kazakhstan harboring a progressive, Western-style democracy anytime soon? It says that it is not going to happen. It says that Nazarbayev and the Kazakh elites behind him are definitely not open for negotiations, for reforms, for the people to have a real voice. One needs to be more civilised to be able to leave in a more open country. It is not the case, and apparently it will not be the case for a while. When time was needed to be political, Nazarbayev showed its hammer. That’s a pity, especially because Kazakhstan is holding parliamentary elections this month with the promise of changing its domestic politics. A presidential political advisor said in December that the elections will prepare the terrain to move Kazakhstan away from the “super-presidential” system of almighty Nazarbayev to some sort of parliamentary-presidential system. After what happened in Zhanaozhen? Haha, tell me another joke.

The situation in the city is still tense – the end of the curfew was postponed until the end of the month. What will happen after the curfew expires? Probably a lot of government agents will keep their eyes wide open and calm will be reestablished once more. An artificial calm, though, one that will not last until real change comes to the steppes.

Do you want another reason to be very concerned? The rise of islamist activity. Since I last wrote about the explosions in the West and the South of the country last year, new facts came to light about the islamist group called Soldiers of the Caliphate that claimed responsibility for the explosions in Atyrau (read more about the group here). The organisation apparently was formed by Kazakh people fighting in Kazakhstan on the Taliban side and has the goal of ousting Nazarbayev and creating a caliphate in the Kazakh lands – a goal remarkably similar to the one adopted by the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (which, of course, as one can imagine because of its name, wants to remove Islam Karimov from power in Tashkent instead). If the islamists are able to tap the discontent generated by the recent violence in Zhanaozen, Kazakhstan certainly can expect a nightmare scenario. One more reason for Nazarbayev to abandon any silly ideas of political reform now. The well-known argument that, for historical reasons, Islam is weaker in Kazakhstan than in other countries in the region, that most people in the country are moderate Muslims and that this would keep the country away for any sort of militancy, it is now officially flawed (although in the heavily Russified north nothing has happened so far).

Add to the recipe the fact that Nazarbayev will soon have to relinquish power, and a transition period may always lead to political instability. There are those who believe that the Arab Spring will eventually reach Turkestan. Difficult to say for sure. If this happens, I believe it will not be soon (probably not even this year) and will be even more violent. One key moment to watch will be the death of Karimov and Nazarbayev. While in Kazakhstan there are already some rising names quoted as possible successors for the current leader, in Uzbekistan no one knows for sure who the heir might be. In a country were radical islamists are known to operate, anything can happen in this scenario.

A new wave of Islamist terror in Central Asia?

Is there a new wave of terrorism afoot in Central Asia? There are some indications that it might be a possibility.


First: we already know that Kazakhstan (as seen here some weeks ago) is facing an unseen wave of explosions. At least one of those attacks, the one that took place in October 31st in the Western city of Atyrau, has been reclaimed by a new Islamist puritan group called “Soldiers of the Caliphate”. This group apparently is formed by Kazakh citizens who fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan, but at this moment there are just not enough indications that it is the case. The Kazakh government announced a ban on the organisation in the end of last month, after another bombing in Taraz (south) left seven dead. Now, on the 4th of December, there was an obscure episode, with seven dead, near Almaty (the commercial capital of the country, in the South) that might have been terror related.


Second: Uzbekistan knows very well how troublesome an Islamist group can be with popular support in an authoritarian regime. The country has recently seen another, to say the least, obscure episode, but in its border with Afghanistan. In November 17th, an explosion destroyed part of the railway there, in the Surkhandarya Province. At first, the local media said that the attack was "terrorist". Then, absolute silence – it was as if nothing had happened. When it took place, some raised the possibility that the railway attacked was used by the US to transport military supplies to its troops in Talibanland. If that is true, it could mean the beginning of a nightmare for Uzbekistan – that has not seen an attack like this in a long time – and the US alike, as it would indicate that there are pro-Taliban operatives in Uzbekistan. But the most recent theory is that the Uzbeks themselves, and not any jihadist organization, is behind the explosion. It would be a way to punish Tajikistan, with whom Uzbekistan has, let’s say, a not so amicable relationship. Read more about this plausible conspiracy theory here. Interestingly, after the explosion, the Uzbek leader Islam Karimov changed the Governor of the province in which it took place.


Third: Uzbekistan already had a lot of trouble with Juma Namangani and his Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), regarded as one of the most violent and dangerous Islamist movements in the world. Between 1999 and 2001, the IMU conducted a series of incursions that affected Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. For a time, since them, the group was quiet (the death of its leader, Tahir Yuldashev, in 2009, sure played a part in this). Now, in the beginning of December, the authorities announced the arrest in the Moscow of four people supposedly linked to the movement. The four residents of Central Asia were accused of plotting terror attacks.


Fourth: The IMU has just released (interesting timing) a list commemorating 87 “martyrs” of the organisation that died since last year. Probably, the IMU leaders expect the list to have the effect of rallying its supporters to a bloody vendetta against the infidels. Most members of the IMU are supposed to operate now from the Afghan-Pakistan border or... from Northern Afghanistan, not far from Uzbek lands.


Fifth: On December 6th, Afghanistan had two unprecedented bomb attacks targeting specifically the local Shia minority, who was celebrating a religious holiday. One of the bombings was in the capital, Kabul; the other in Mazar-i-Sharif – a Northern city very close the border with Uzbekistan and that, over the last years, has remained relatively calm in spite of the chaos in other parts of the country. Nearly 60 people died. The Taliban denied any responsibility for these attacks, which echo the Sunni versus Shias bombings that have tormented Iraq for years now. The attacks in recent years in Afghanistan had a different and clear target – the foreign troops and government authorities. What does an unseen attack like this mean, at this moment, so near the Uzbek border?


It is necessary, of course, to take all of these facts and suppositions with a pinch of salt. There are many interests involved in an escalation of the Islamist threat in Central Asia. Russia is aggressively trying to reassert its dominance in the region and would love to have a stronger military presence there to counterbalance the US influence and also, of course, to avoid any further risks to its own borders after the Americans leave Afghanistan in 2014. Karimov and his Kazakh colleague Nursultan Nazarbayev could use the Islamic threat to show strength, announce new security measures and, of course, submit the local Muslims to even more repression. More terrorism would give a good excuse for Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to demand more financial help, and so on. One thing, though, is for sure: the Islamist threat is alive in Central Asia, and the best way to deal with it is establish proper dialogue and an alliance with the Muslim world, tackle poverty in the region, offer good schools and allow the people to have a say in their own countries. Authoritarianism and more weapons have not solved the problem in the past, and sure won’t solve it in the future when it flares up again.

Terrorists find virgin lands in Kazakhstan

The recent terrorist attacks in Kazakhstan are really troubling for many reasons. Unlike Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, it was never a direct target of Islamist puritans that are known to operate in the region. Actually, Islam is relatively new to this giant country, as big as Western Europe. Most of its population has its roots in nomad tribes that roamed the steppes for centuries and were only “islamicised” after the Russian Empire dominated its territory, on the 19th century. Even so, the Islam that eventually took hold of Kazakhstan was heavily influenced by the traditional customs of the nomads and its shamanistic beliefs. Sufism also plays an important role in Islam here, like it does in Kazakhstan’s neighbours. Puritan Islamism, especially the one that preaches violence and encourages suicide attacks, is utterly against all those “transformations” in Islam. And so it is also utterly alien to these lands.

But a recent decision by President Nursultan Nazarbayev to tighten displays of religious expression was a good reason for the puritans to step up their northern operations. The law, which took effect on October 25th, makes it mandatory for religious organizations to register with the Kazakh authorities. At the same time, the government banned blogs accused of fostering extremism. These “security measures” set the scenario for two big attacks: on October 31st , the eastern city of Atyrau was shaken by two explosions and a suspected suicide bomber was killed, and then on November 12th a new suicide attack took place in Taraz (South). But the tension between the authorities and militants was brewing even before the law became a reality. There were two explosions in May and in September suspects of plotting terrorist attacks were arrested in Atyrau.

What do those attacks mean? First: if there is puritan Islamism, there are people that were wooed by its promises. Those people certainly are not rich – quite the opposite. In a country that has being constantly praised by its stability and its good environment for business, for its vast natural resources and its progressive, westernized society, those militants are the outcasts. Left behind, ignored by the state and with no education, they fell victims to the same lunatics that found fertile ground elsewhere in neighbouring countries. Second, it is crystal clear, as seen many times in the past, that attacking Islam does not lower the risk posed by extremists, but exactly the opposite. Third, by adopting this law without pondering its consequences, and so encouraging new attacks, Nazarbayev is offering an excuse for other leaders to follow suit and crush (again) their Muslims. Of course I am talking about Islam Karimov. The Uzbek deity, who previously this year had allowed unprecedented celebrations during the Eid ul-Fitr, suddenly decided to warn artists against the use of religious themes in their works (read more here). The number of pilgrims allowed to travel to Mecca was also limited. Karimov loves to attack its own countrymen under the guise of being “defending the country from extremists”. Muslims in general can be regarded as extremists if, for example, they grow a beard or go to mosques too often. By spreading terror, in the most traditional Stalinist way, Karimov reasserts its power. Nazarbayev needs to withdraw this new law and show, in unequivocal terms, his respect to religious freedom. He also needs to do what all other leaders in the world are supposed to do: turn all its citizens into real citizens, not outcasts. Otherwise, God knows what consequences we might see in the near future in Kazakhstan and its neighbours.