In this issue:

1. Joining Customs Union beneficial for Kyrgyzstan

2. POINT OF VIEW: Kyrgyzstan for regional water and energy cooperation

3. Investing in Central Asia crops: how income can spurt out of the ground

4. LETTER FROM THE STEPPE: Kazakhstan’s political future: how to break through the mimetic triangle

1. Joining Customs Union beneficial for Kyrgyzstan (Kyrgyzstan, April 7, 2011-issue 663) BY MARIA LEVINA

BISHKEK (TCA) – At the Kyrgyz-Russian business forum held late in March in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Prime Minister Almazbek Atambayev stated that the future of Kyrgyzstan is in joining the Customs Union of Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, and the Single Economic Space. Kyrgyzstan is a full member of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) aimed at creating a single economic space. The accession of Kyrgyzstan to the Customs Union as a full member seems predetermined since the country is a EurAsEC member. This means that Kyrgyzstan’s entering the Customs Union is just a matter of time, Deputy Secretary-General of EurAsEC Sergey Glazyev said at the forum. Kyrgyzstan needs to enter the Customs Union in order to avoid problems with the export duty on petroleum products. In the CU framework Kyrgyzstan will get development and transit potential as part of a single customs territory. According to Glazyev, the benefits of Kyrgyzstan’s participation in the CU are obvious because the export potential of Kyrgyzstan in the case of joining the CU may increase by 25 percent. Whether Kyrgyzstan remains a base for re-export of Chinese goods or not depends on whether the country is part of the Customs Union or not, said Glazyev. Currently a huge flow of Chinese goods illegally passes through Kyrgyz territory. Only 10 percent of goods are subject to formal procedures for customs administration. Increased revenues from customs duties could grow the budget of Kyrgyzstan significantly. The Customs Union changes the geography of the flow of goods. If Kyrgyzstan remains outside the CU Kazakhstan will strengthen the customs border with Kyrgyzstan. This will impede re-exports and their volume will decrease. If Kyrgyzstan gains entry into the Customs Union access to the Kyrgyz market for third party countries will worsen, said Glazyev. Third countries can claim compensation for the deterioration of trade conditions. It will not be so much a problem for Kyrgyzstan as for other CU participants who are trying to join the WTO. Glazyev noted that within a single economic space a single system of gas pricing will be developed. A single space also guarantees the freedom of labor migration and equal social rights for workers. It is especially important for Kyrgyzstan because thousands of Kyrgyz labor migrants work in the CU countries. The Kyrgyz economy can not function independently and joining a strong partner such as the Customs Union is beneficial for the Kyrgyz Republic, believes Russian expert Yuri Solozobov. Kyrgyzstan like Tajikistan is an important strategic ally as the most promising member of the Customs Union. These Central Asian countries are located at the upper reaches of major water sources. Who controls the water in the future will control Central Asia. The expert believes that if the Customs Union countries do not assume this role then it will be China or some other big country. Meanwhile it is a question of long-range outlook with a way out for Kyrgyzstan in successive participation in the CU integration processes. First the country could have an observer status, and then it can step by step join the integration projects functioning within the CU framework. WTO membership is one of the main obstacles for Kyrgyzstan to entry the CU. According to experts, the Kyrgyz Republic surprised the whole world when it met every possible assignment and became a WTO member. Now the country has two options. The first and rather improbable one is that Kyrgyzstan would come out of the WTO and enter into the Customs Union and then join the WTO again. And the second and more real way is to wait until Russia joins the WTO and then join the CU. The reality is that on July 1, 2011 customs posts between Russia and Kazakhstan will be removed while customs border between Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan will be securely locked. So, Kyrgyz politicians have less than three months to finally decide whether the country wants to be a Customs Union member or not. Representatives of the Customs Union expressed their willingness to provide advice to Kyrgyzstan for its entry into this organization. EurAsEC is an international economic organization tasked with implementing the formation of common customs borders of EurAsEC members and developing a unified external economic policy, tariffs, prices, and other components of the common market. EurAsEC was created in 2000 and unites Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan. Uzbekistan suspended its membership in 2008. Armenia, Moldova and Ukraine have an observer status. The Customs Union was established within the EurAsEC.

2. POINT OF VIEW: Kyrgyzstan for regional water and energy cooperation (Central Asia, April 7, 2011-issue 663)

BISHKEK (TCA) – Editor’s note: This article is a contribution of former Ambassador of Germany in Kyrgyzstan Prof. Dr. Klaus W. Grewlich* on one of the most important issues for Central Asia — water. The views expressed in this article are those of the author. By Klaus W. Grewlich

BONN (TCA) – For Afghanistan’s sustainable economic development, one of the absolutely necessary conditions for successful governance after a responsible exit of coalition troops to a large extent is water. Economic revival in Afghanistan particularly means: water for agriculture, hydropower for electricity and water for health & hygiene. However, the desired rejuvenation of agricultural production in Northern Afghanistan and the resulting increase in water use is bound to add to the scarcity of water in the Amu Darya river basin. This is likely to worsen the already critical fragility of the regional water and energy infrastructure, to further exasperate the Aral Sea drama and possibly to sharpen reiterating tensions between upstream and downstream countries along the Syr Darya and Amu Darya. At the same time China’s intensified use of the waters of the Irtysh and Ili rivers is likely to complicate downstream water availability in Kazakhstan. The whole Central Asian “water problem” obviously contains the ingredients for becoming a major socioeconomic and political catastrophe, unless vigorous action leads to expedient and organized change.

Grand designs

To avert disaster, piecemeal engineering will not suffice. A sustained and balanced endeavour is necessary. Along the natural river basins of Syr Darya and Amu Darya it needs a comprehensive and ideally rules-based regional approach covering the whole Afghanistan & Central Asia (AFCA) region. The upstream countries Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, which are particularly rich in water and hydropower potentials, must together with the downstream countries Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan anticipate in a comprehensive cooperation scheme to rapidly improve water management. In terms of hydropower distribution a regional effort should also include Pakistan (AFPAC-dimension) as proposed in the “CASA-1000” energy bridge from Central to South Asia. CASA-1000 is a pilot project designed to transport hydro energy from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Grim realities

Such grand designs unfortunately contrast with grim realities. Barring a turn around, experts in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan forecast a systemic breakdown in the energy sector. In view of the 527 billion kilowatt hours of untapped hydro energy reserves in Tajikistan and 160 billion kilowatt hours in Kyrgyzstan, however, a large scale energy catastrophe would be completely unacceptable for the Kyrgyz and Tajik population and therefore is likely to increase already existing unrest. People request an end of electricity rationing and they want to see their hydropower rich countries less exposed to pressures from neighbours in terms of oil & gas deliveries and power sharing. To improve energy availability at home and to realize projects such as CASA-1000, however, Kyrgyzstan would need to build a number of stations and transmission lines to deliver electricity supply. The investment required for such projects is estimated at between $900 and $950 million. The Kyrgyz government also wants to build huge hydropower plants on the Naryn river which are estimated at $3.8 billion. Kyrgyzstan should – even if that may sound paradox – under given circumstances follow a policy of “functional duplication”, i.e. help itself by promoting regional cooperation. Someone must vigorously start a successful regional scheme converting the existing zero-sum game pertaining to water & electricity into a positive sum game, where all win instead of the advantage of some necessarily corresponding to the loss by others. Experience shows that to undertake circumspect and forceful steps, it needs someone having an understanding of the desired common good as well as an enlightened self-interest in taking action. Kyrgyzstan does have such objective interests in the field of water, environment and hydropower.

Integrating hydropower & agriculture

Water is a non-substitutable resource. The production of energy based on water is ten times less costly than production of energy based on oil, gas or coal. After the production of electricity the water is still drinkable, while oil, gas, and coal are transformed into CO2 with negative environmental impact. While Kyrgyzstan’s mountain environment is exposed to environmental dangers, it is estimated that Kyrgyzstan’s 7821 glaciers still contain 700 billion cubic meters of water. Kyrgyzstan remains water rich for the foreseeable future. Kyrgyzstan’s water and energy policies are confronted with a so-called “magic quadrangle” implying potential conflict of objectives that are to be solved by optimization:

 Water for human consumption (and possibly some day for export via pipeline systems),

 Water as a basis for environmental policies in a fragile mountain ecosystems (reforestation, ecological tourism),

 Water as a basis for elite-agriculture (elaborate irrigation),

 Water as a basis for electricity production.

A strategic question is whether Kyrgyzstan instead of building additional giant dams and power stations now better opts for networks of small, inter-linked environmentally-friendly hydroelectric stations and dams as a basis for exploiting a substantial amount of the 90% of untapped electric-generation potential? I believe that this would be the right way to go. And this for a number of reasons: Kyrgyzstan has a vocation for high quality tourism. If in Kyrgyzstan’s beautiful valleys small and medium (around 30 to 40 MW) state-of-the-art hydro-electric power stations are constructed, this may at the same time entail the infrastructure needed for new hotels and sanatoria, for agriculture and reforestation. Hydro-electric power may be combined with high-quality agriculture. If roads are built that lead to the dam, then these may also serve as roads leading to new holiday resorts. Electricity needed for hotels, sanatoria and water pumps for irrigation & reforestation can be reasonably produced on the spot. As soon as possible, some pilot projects of “small dams plus agriculture and tourism” should be developed and their success will determine the reason for further expansion. The idea would be to reach an optimum cash flow on the basis of hydro-electricity export (Kyrgyzstan’s main cash driver), high-quality tourism and agriculture. Therefore, in the future, tenders for water-related projects should not be limited to single sectors, but should contain integrated multi-element offers comprising "water-energy-agriculture-tourism/recreation".

Finance

How would such integrated projects be financed? To achieve sound financing of big network projects, my recommendation is a “syndication" of commercial banks, public-private partnership funds and development banks, if possible together with participation of operators and suppliers. Would banks and other partners be ready to take such risk? My opinion is positive. Why? The field of hydropower is known as an opportunity area where in principle it is possible to establish sound business plans. To put it simply, it is a matter of converting the hydropower of tomorrow into finance of today. I have done this in the telecommunications business, converting the phone calls of tomorrow into “money of today”. Such monies were used for building and financing networks, equipment and services. Thus, on all levels — construction, operation and financing — there must be mutually leveraging and reinforcing business activities: Agriculture must be combined with dams, turbines, high voltage long distance transmission technology, transport, hotels/medical recreation centres and environmental design and operation. Financiers will understand that the money to be paid back will not just come from one product, but - possibly at graduated times - from a combination of products and services with early brake-evens and interesting average pay back periods. Kyrgyzstan could become a pilot in conceptualizing "multi-product and multi-finance water & energy schemes".

Strong participation of downstream countries a basis for regional cooperation

In terms of downstream irrigation needs, small dams would be much less threatening than giant dams like Toktogul. There is less danger of floods and droughts could be prevented: For instance, water released in an energy and not irrigation mode could, at moments of excess electricity in the grid, be pumped as appropriate from reservoirs near the turbine back into the dams. Thus small dams may produce sustainable hydropower, while being mainly run in an irrigation mode for the benefit of downstream entities. And on a much wider scale: The downstream countries Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan who will soon deliver impressive quantities of their natural but non-renewable energy, i.e. oil and notably gas, via established and newly built pipelines to Russia, China (up to 60 billion cubic meters of gas), the EU (Nabucco) and Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAPI pipeline project), should have an objective interest in reinvesting cash in intelligent and sustainable energy projects providing for guaranteed access to renewable energy (i.e. hydropower) in the future. Thus at the present moment of perceived diplomatic rapprochement, Kyrgyzstan should stimulate the idea that Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan invest part of their oil & gas generated cash in innovative and sustainable Kyrgyz and Tajik “hydropower-agriculture-environment” projects. Such confidence building measures could eventually be turned into a lasting basis for regional cooperation! Vice versa trust and cooperation is a precondition for common regional projects.

AFCA-Water & Energy Academy

To conceive, build, make profitable & sustainable, and properly regulate in terms of transparent “rule of law governance” the proposed innovative 30 to 40 MW dam projects need a trans-disciplinary engineering and educational approach. An “AFCA-Water & Energy Academy” could become a centre of excellence for top-experts in the field of water management, environment and hydroelectric power. The academy would bring together what you may call “T-shaped” experts (i.e. combining in depth (vertical) knowledge and broad (horizontal) outlook. The Water Academy should generate knowledge and skills pertaining to water management, biodiversity, agriculture and irrigation, innovative financing of water-related projects, modelling in the field of desertification, hygiene & sanitation, hydroelectric production and transmission (high-voltage grids). Training in rule of law “regulatory governance” would be another major discipline. In addition international lawyers addressing issues such as trans-boundary river basin management should find their place in the Academy. An “AFCA-Water & Energy Academy” should be firstly an enlightened development project which means a respectful attitude towards people and the environment, sustainable funding and creation of jobs. Second, it should not tolerate any form of corruption, educate in respect of the rule of law and teach the art of well targeted and light handed regulation (protecting and advancing the mountain valley water & energy & environment projects). Third, the Academy should have a confidence- and peace-building effect for the whole region. In a nutshell the Academy would have three components:

 Research and education.

 Analytical work and scientific support as a basis for the generation of projects such as the 30-40 MW dams & hydro electric power stations combined with agriculture and reforestation, hotels, sanatoria.

 Conceptual preparation and follow up of a series of energy and water related AFCA-conferences (both scientific and diplomatic).

Intelligent regulatory governance

Any country’s political leadership has the responsibility to use the nation’s natural resources in a responsible way – having in mind also the interests of future generations. Notably it must be avoided that non-transparent “privatization” paves the way towards an irresponsible national “sell out”. This being fully acknowledged, the Kyrgyz are invited to better understand that the issue is not simply "privatization - yes or no?" The question rather is "How can Kyrgyzstan responsibly use direct investment for national purposes?" This is a matter of intelligent “regulatory governance” - regulation under the rule of law in the interest of the country. Intelligent regulatory governance is the art of creating legal frameworks that gear the effects of foreign capital towards the national common good. If such frameworks are too light, the scheme will not work; if they are too heavy foreign direct investment will not flow into the country. Unfortunately it is much easier to become some sort of failing state and attract dirty money and criminals. But if valid foreign investors are to be attracted and secured for the long term, there must be foreign investment protection and a reasonable amount of profit to reward the investment. “Rule of law” regulatory governance comprises both "monopoly regulation" (to avoid that public monopolies are succeeded by much worse “private monopolies”) and ex-ante (or prior) targeted "sector specific regulation". Kyrgyzstan and the other AFCA-countries may have a look into the “regulatory tool box” of the European Union, where possibly some useful concepts and practice could be found. In addition expertise international regulatory governance (comprising rules of public international law) is needed to avoid "water-conflicts" and maintain peace and stability in the AFCA-region. The public international water law is still in its infancy. There are some basic elements such as the principle of limited sovereignty, the principle of "equitable use", an obligation to warn neighbours in case of clear and present danger, the principle of compensation for damage, and the principle of cooperation and exchange of information. Since the emerging international water law is not only based on conventions and treaties, but also on general international law and state practice, the Kyrgyz and other AFCA-countries are able to influence and shape the content of the future international water law. Doing this successfully requires a credible attitude in terms of "functional duplication", i.e. safeguarding one’s own interest and at the same time the common international public good in the AFCA-region.

Action

Some of the above ideas are new and others had been already advanced in past years; in the meantime they have matured. The President of Kyrgyzstan, Parliament and the new Government ideally could examine these ideas and transform those considered as valid and feasible into political, legal and administrative action as well as regional arrangements and agreements for the benefit of the Kyrgyz Republic and the whole AFCA-region.

* Ambassador Prof. Dr. Klaus W. Grewlich, LL.M. (Berkeley), is Member of the Faculty of Law & Economics at Bonn University. He also teaches “International & European Regulatory Governance” in the College of Europe Bruges & Warzaw and the Hertie School of Governance/Berlin. Klaus Grewlich’s career spans diplomacy, business and academia. He served from 2006 to 2008 as German Ambassador in Kyrgyzstan (kwgr@gmx.de).

3. Investing in Central Asia crops: how income can spurt out of the ground (Central Asia, April 7, 2011-issue 663) By Charles van der Leeuw special to TCA

ALMATY — With credits hard to come by and cost-ineffective, sound and stable returns on capital are on top of many an investor’s agenda these days. Despite volatile weather conditions which affect global market prices, state protection in the name of national interests and a stable spread of income on investments over time (in contrast to the long-haul investment-return time tables in non-sustainable commodity sectors) are among the advantages funders and operators should not overlook. The former Soviet Union, some parts of which are already world grain suppliers while others come close to becoming ones, is a location which deserves special attention in this regard. For national and regional decision-makers in the wider region of Central Asia, some words must sound just like music. Thus, in a recent statement Director-General of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Jacques Diouf called for a boost in investments in agriculture and agro-industries in the world. “As in 2008, international agricultural markets again face higher food commodity prices that could undermine food security in a world where population, and thus the demand for food, are sharply on the rise,” an FAO press release dated March 15 this year reads. “The expected growth in population — from 6.9 billion people today to 9.1 billion in 2050 — will require a 70 percent increase in global food production and a 100 percent increase in the developing countries,” he said, adding that investment was not keeping pace. The press release quotes Diouf as stating: "The share of agriculture in official development assistance fell from 19 percent in 1980 to 3 percent in 2006. Currently, it stands at 5 percent. Developing countries only allocate 5 percent of their national budgets to the sector, instead of 10 percent, despite its contribution to gross domestic product, exports and the balance of payments.” According to the FAO, “…more than 100 million tonnes of cereals are diverted from food to biofuels on account of subsidies valued at 13 billion US dollars and tariff protection of the developed countries.” As Diouf concludes: "If we add the impact of droughts, floods, hurricanes and other events exacerbated by climate change and the speculation on agricultural commodity futures markets, it becomes clear that the current situation is the chronicle of a disaster foretold.” The Commonwealth of Independent States, which unites all former USSR member states except the three Baltic republics and Georgia, produced 134 million tonnes of cereals in 2010, a decrease of 28.8% from the previous year, the Kiev-based specialised news agency Agrimarket reported in the middle of February this year. The main reason consisted of unfavourable weather conditions, added to deteriorating equipment and logistics. The region’s three exporting states, the Russian Federation, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, saw their outputs decrease by 37.3%, 14.8% and 41.5% to 60.9, 39.2 and 12.2 million tonnes respectively. As for Kazakhstan, state policy of keeping surplus production in store for a rainy (or rather rainless in this case) day, which it did in its historic record-harvest year 2010, has enabled the country to keep up and even increase its world market position without invoking the extremely sensitive spectre of domestic shortages. This, the government believes, is about the strongest incentive any investor in the country’s agro-sector can wish for himself. Kazakhstan maintained reserves of 6.5 million tonnes into the new year, which enables it to export the same amount through the current market year that runs from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011. With sales prices oscillating around 350 US dollars per tonne, this represents $2.275 billion. Benchmark future prices on world markets for wheat on Europe’s LIFFE have all but doubled through last year and into the new year. On March 18 this year, the one-month contract closed the day at 19435 pence per tonne, as compared to 10650p on the last trading day of 2009 - a year which witnessed market stability as the market closed 2008 at 10575p per tonne. This year’s market trend includes a slight correction from a seasonal winter peak. On the whole, prices have remained high though little volatile so far this year. For winter and spring harvests together in the current year, the Kazakh Ministry of Agriculture has set the target for farmland for crop cultivation at 21.3 million hectares, including 16.5 million for grain, 1.7 million for oilseed crops, 94,000 for fodder and 95,000 for beans. For vegetables and sugar beets, only 2,500 million and 1,700 million hectares respectively have been reserved. In the south, Kazakhstan’s traditional grain-growing region, up to 8.1 million hectares of spring crop farmland is to be irrigated, for the first time ever in Kazakhstan, using sprinking devices, thereby saving up to two-thirds of the precious irrigation water in the country. This is expected to increase yield per hectare which for Kazakhstan in comparison to e.g. Kyrgyzstan, as the tables below amply demonstrate, remains painfully poor. Irrigation water, supplied through the rivers from the Pamir and the Tien-Shan mountains in neighbouring Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, is abundant in winter and early spring, but becomes scant in summer, even though after two years of political deadlock a supply treaty between the two suppliers, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan has been put back in place. In Kazakhstan, with its scant population and its immensely vast territory, further expansion of farmland is low on the agenda since it would demand more water and make agriculture even more labour-intensive than it already is. The agro-sector on the whole contributes less than 10 per cent of the country’s GDP while 40 per cent of the active population is self-employed in rural areas. For Kyrgyzstan, which remains a net importer of food even though technically speaking self-sufficiency is within reach with the possibility, if the agro-sector obtains proper management and equipment, to become a net exporter of grain and other products. According to the country’s minister of agriculture Torogul Bekov, as quoted by Agrimarket, an output of 1.06 million tonnes of wheat for human consumption and another quarter million for sowing grains each year will make the country self-sufficient. Wheat output in 2010 totaled close to 0.9 million tonnes in all. Thereby, investments in Kyrgyzstan’s agro-sector with the help of which the country can join the ranks of grain-exporting countries in Central Asia, represent a unique opportunity for boosts in returns on relatively low capital levels — which in turn limits the need for (nowadays expensive and severe) credits. Something other operators such as those in the oil and mining sector might look upon with envy — but for those who look for opportunities to invest more modest sums available into objects yielding gains spread over a long period but starting almost overnight, it represents a chance to get fair returns on fair business.

4. LETTER FROM THE STEPPE: Kazakhstan’s political future: how to break through the mimetic triangle (Kazakhstan, April 7, 2011-issue 663) By Charles van der Leeuw special to TCA

ALMATY — Kazakhstan can breathe for a while: criticism on its latest electoral exercise has been relatively mild. It may be true that the results of last Sunday’s presidential polls cannot possibly have come as a surprise for either friend or foe either inside or outside the country. The fact that competition was by and large absent, as outspoken opposition parties refrained from participating and other candidates in the polls indulged in resignation, was taken for granted from the beginning. The only wild card in the game consisted of reactions from the outside world. They have been mixed, and though not as cheerful as the victorious powers that be, stressing the importance of stability and continuity for Kazakhstan amidst a turbulent global sociopolitical environment, might have hoped for, comments were not altogether negative and by and large came down to the overall view that the polls give Kazakhstan an opportunity to get out of the post-Soviet deadlock and thereby overcome the risk of getting stuck in it. “Compared to the last presidential election, the media provided more equality in covering candidates in the news programmes, but outside the news there was virtually no analytical election-related coverage, diminishing the ability of voters to make a fully informed choice,” the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which monitors polls around the globe, wrote in a press release early in the week. “Election day was generally calm, but observers noted serious irregularities, including numerous instances of seemingly identical signatures on voter lists and several cases of ballot box stuffing. The vote count and tabulation lacked transparency, and procedures were often not followed. International observers were sometimes restricted in their observation. The election administration did not publish results broken down by polling station on election night. Many local authorities intervened in the election process in order to increase turnout. Despite efforts by the authorities to improve the election legislation, there remain shortcomings inconsistent with OSCE commitments. The candidate registration process was marked by lack of transparency and clear rules for verifying supporting signatures and evaluating the mandatory Kazakh language test.” The most painful thing is perhaps that last year Kazakhstan held the rotating chairmanship of the OSCE, and was widely praised for its management over the period. Both hopes and challenges for Kazakhstan seem to lie less in the latest elections but in what is supposed to happen next. “After the latest events in the Middle East, Nazarbayev is probably more aware than ever of the need for an orderly succession when he leaves office,” a US highbrow periodical called World Politics Review in which academics mount the soapbox wrote in its editorial on the eve of the elections. “The best way to achieve this is to develop Kazakhstan’s political institutions and lay the basis for a new leader to achieve legitimacy through the ballot box. […] This ballot might be the last such vote before another generation of leaders emerges to move the country further toward a multiparty democratic system, in which power is genuinely shared between the president and parliament, and in which all elections are free and fair. Kazakhstan’s future stability and security depend on it.” State officials tend to be inclined to such views – though not always consistently. Thus, in December last year, Kazakhstan’s branch of Novosti quoted a presidential advisor by the name of Yermukhamet Yertysbayev as observing: “I hope that in five years, or maybe earlier, a system will be built that does not depend on who heads the country. It is important for us to have real political powers in parliament to establish national dialogue there.” All very true indeed. But Kazakhstan may still have to build up the necessary consistency to get there eventually. On Monday this week, the Financial Times in its report on the event quoted the same Yertysbayev as saying that “…the west overlooks Mr Nazarbayev’s extraordinary abilities when carping at the lack of political competition”, adding: “What can we do if we have a personality like Nazarbayev? Mike Tyson had no competitors. Muhammad Ali had no competitors. Nobody complained about them.” Or did they…? The ambiguity is not something only Kazakhstan has to cope with, but is rather universal. Man’s mimetic desires are part of his instinctive fears of isolation and his lack of self-responsibility. Getting out of mankind’s “mimetic triangle” as described by Rene Girard (and for all it matters by Aristotle long before him) is a laborious process which cannot possibly be imposed from the top — let alone from the outside — on a community in which mimetic desire overwhelms individual aspirations. The real danger of such a situation is that it can be reversed virtually overnight and turn into its very opposite, with all the negative consequences such a lapse tends to carry along with it. So far, Kazakhstan has been able to handle the situation. But as hopes remain in place, the clock keeps ticking as well. The overall chance for Kazakhstan to keep blood from running down the streets is therefore to enhance change, encouraged and steered by authorities – meaning that the latter in all its ranks has to show discipline based on their own will rather than under command from the top.

For further information: The Times of Central Asia