Kazakhstan: Muslim, Ethnically Diverse, Prosperous, Calm

In his New York Times op-ed "Pray. Hope. Prepare." (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/13/opinion/13friedman.html?hp), Tom Friedman stated:

"That is to say, in Europe, when the iron fist of communism was removed, the big, largely homogenous states, with traditions of civil society, were able to move relatively quickly and stably to more self-government — except Yugoslavia, a multiethnic, multireligious country that exploded into pieces.

In the Arab world, almost all these countries are Yugoslavia-like assemblages of ethnic, religious and tribal groups put together by colonial powers — except Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco, which have big homogeneous majorities. So when you take the lid off these countries, you potentially unleash not civil society but civil war."

Is Friedman correct? If so, what about Kazakhstan? Why have there been no disturbances in this central Asian country, where 70% of the population is Muslim, and where 70-year old President Nursultan Nazarbayev has ruled for the past 20 years? If Friedman was on the mark, Kazakhstan, which is home to 131 nationalities (Kazakhs comprise only some 60% of the population), would now be awash with tumult.

As reported by Ms. Kathy Lally in a Washington Post article entitled "Kazakh president holds fast as Arab revolutions topple others
" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/kazakh-president-holds-fast-as-arab-revolutions-topple-others/2011/04/11/AFNvnCWD_story.html?hpid=z3):

"Nazarbayev has ruled since 1989, when Kazakhstan was part of the Soviet Union and he was its party secretary. He is the country’s only directly elected official. His domination has been so complete that no serious political competition has emerged and so adroit that much of the population reveres him.

'He’s more than the leader of our country,' said Erlan Karin, secretary of Nazarbayev’s Nur Otan party. 'People see him as a symbol of Kazakhstan’s development, independence and success.'

Local officials, all appointed by Nazarbayev, compete to get out the vote and get it right. 'Here, 99 percent voted for the president,' said a triumphant Turkbenuli Musabayev, mayor of the small, depressed southwestern town of Aralsk. 'He has visited us, and people know he cares.'

Kazakhstan’s 16 million people live on a landscape the size of Western Europe. Corruption is high, but oil and gas reserves have helped Nazarbayev bring the per-capita gross domestic product from $700 in 1994 to $9,000 now.

. . . .

Rather than envy the revolutions of the Arab world, people are grateful that they have avoided the turmoil besetting neighboring countries. Tajikistan endured a costly civil war, and Uzbekistan, where the president is as long-serving but far more ruthless, has suffered civil strife."

Although, according to Ms. Lally's article, Kazakhstan is not free of corruption, there has been no meaningful challenge to President Nazarbayev, and the reason for Kazakhstan's tranquility is plain for all to see: The steep rise in per-capita GDP, which starkly contrasts with the economic malaise that pervades much of the Muslim Middle East.

As I stressed in my prior blog entry, the turmoil in the Muslim Middle East has little to do with a desire for democracy and freedom, but rather is the consequence of crushing poverty, which has given rise to furor and despair.

[It has been years since I was last in Almaty, and I miss looking out my window at the snow-capped mountains . . .]