| PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN KAZAKHSTAN 
ANDREY GROZIN,
Head of the of Central Asia and Kazakhstan Studies Department, Institute of the CIS Countries, Moscow Though the election returns in Kazakhstan are preliminary, only one political party will be likely represented in the Majilis (the lower chamber of the Kazakh Parliament). “Nur Otan”, a pro-presidential party, took about 88 percent of the votes.
During the election campaign the so called “administrative resource” (the built-in-advantage) was vastly employed in Kazakhstan, especially in the regions. If to compare the election returns in Kazakh cities Almaty and Astana with the results in the regions, one can see that in Almaty and Astana the opposition took up to 19 percent. It seems that the local authorities in the regions tried to make the pro-presidential party sweep the elections too hard.
When the election campaign started in Kazakhstan some experts predicted that the governors’ seeking to gain favor with the central authorities may play a mean trick. And this happened.
Not only the local authorities are guilty of that. After the presidential election in 2005 four governors, in whose regions President Nazarbayev had taken the least number of votes, were fired.
Of course, the governors remember that. Now they’ve done their utmost to make Nazarbayev’s party in power a winner. In the central cities the presidential administration controls the situation better than in the regions. That’s why “Nur Otan” party took 65-70 percent there. As a matter of fact, this is rather a general outcome in the country. As a result of vote rigging, “Nur Otan” party took extra 10-15% in the regions.
The central authorities would like one or, better, two opposition parties to win seats in the Parliament, because the elections should have shown that Kazakhstan, which wished to chair the OSCE, had become a democratic state.
I believe that the Kazakh authorities reckoned on the most loyal “Ak Zhol” opposition party’s getting 5-6 mandates. But the results were not answerable to their hopes. If the Central Election Committee says that one of the opposition parties took 7 percent, the authorities will welcome that. But I repeat that it is hardly probable.
Now those who are against Kazakhstan’s holding the OSCE chair will have extra powerful arguments, so Astana’s application for the OSCE chairmanship may be considered only in several years.
As regards domestic policy, the election results indicate that President Nazarbayev is a guarantor of stability. “Nur Otan” party’s success means people’s desire to maintain the existing regime. In fact, the elections turned out the referendum on the President’s policy.
Of course, the opposition will seek to appeal against the outcome of the elections. But it will be a losing battle. I doubt that the opposition has good potential. Kazakh people support the existing regime. While President Nazarbayev is active and is able to meet the needs of different social strata, there is no chance that the opposition will be lucky.
While Nazarbayev is President of Kazakhstan, however hard the opposition forces may try to be united, they will have prospects only if the President wants to delegate them authority.
August 21, 2007
|
