The Most Violent Protests Kazakhstan Has Seen Since Its Independence

On January 2, 2022, protests in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic that borders Russia and Uzbekistan, began over a rise in fuel prices and quickly turned into something more – grievances over endemic political corruption and greed of the government at the expense of citizens revealed itself as the underlying cause of the chaos that was unfolding. Protests of this scale in Kazakhstan were unheard of and shocked the whole world, seeing as Kazakhstan has largely been a peaceful and prosperous country, especially in relation to other post-Soviet republics.

A country the size of Western Europe and with a population of approximately 19 million, Kazakhstan has been relatively stable over the past 30 years since its independence and has experienced great economic growth — it has even attracted billions of dollars in foreign investment. It is a unitary republic and presidential elections are not considered free or fair. Its autocratic president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, has been in power since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and resigned in 2019, with a handpicked successor, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, the former prime minister and foreign minister of Kazakhstan, taking his place as interim president. Though it may seem significant that Nazarbayev stepped down and made room for a different leader to govern, the reality is that Tokayev is nothing but a puppet, temporarily holding onto this position. Nazarbayev is the one who has truly held onto power behind the scenes; he has been head of the National Security Council and leader of his political party, the Nur Otan party, and could veto any decision Tokayev made. Nazarbayev’s views always took precedence over those of Tokayev, and Nazarbayev was still seen as head of state in the eyes of the public and those in parliament, many of whom were still from the ruling Nur Otan party — one that faces no substantial opposition. 

The protests that occurred from January 2 to January 11 were unprecedented not just because of the size and scope of them, but also because no one expected so many people in a country as big and vast as Kazakhstan to mobilize effectively and demand justice for their struggles. The movement didn’t have a discernible leader, which was actually an advantage for the protestors, as it made it more difficult for the government to crack down on them. Protests have occurred in years past, but they were shot down almost immediately by the repressive government and didn’t result in lasting changes to the political system. These protests, however, were different in nature and even grabbed the attention of Western media — which rarely reports on events in the region.

Initially, they started out entirely peacefully in the region of Mangystau, in Western Kazakhstan, and were carried out by regular citizens who were negatively impacted by the government lifting price caps on liquefied petroleum gas as a way of helping LPG producers, which nearly doubled fuel prices. Yet they quickly became destructive when outside actors, particularly those from gangs, got involved, which made it convenient for the regime to group them all together as one. In an address to the country, President Tokayev characterized the protestors as “thugs” and ordered his government to shoot-to-kill his own people “without warning”. Additionally, he alluded that the protesters were backed by the West and condemned foreign interference in the internal affairs of Kazakhstan. Without any evidence, Tokayev also claimed that these protests were carefully planned ahead of time by terrorists and proclaimed that “the government will not fall.” 

The region that experienced the most violence was Almaty, the largest city in Kazakhstan, in which dozens of protesters and police officers died and hundreds were injured. Protestors knocked down a statue of Nazarbayev in Taldykorgan, the capital of Almaty, and chanted “Old man, out!”, demonstrating the discontent of citizens in regards to the political elite that has been depriving them of opportunities for decades. Cars and buildings were burned, and an airport as well as government buildings were taken over. Thousands of protesters were detained across the nation and Tokayev declared a “state of emergency”–- afterwards, the government orchestrated an internet blackout which made it more difficult for the rest of the world to stay updated on events that were unfolding. The government did attempt to appease the protestors by restoring price caps on fuel and even removing Nazarbayev from the National Security Council, but this did not help de-escalate protests. 

Ultimately, Tokayev decided to call upon the CSTO, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, which is similar to NATO. Article 4 of the CSTO treaty states that an attack on one member state is considered an attack on all the member states. Its member states are Russia,  Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan. Calling upon the CSTO to interfere in Kazakhstan’s affairs was an incredibly flawed response on the part of the regime because the correct course of action would’ve been dealing with the root cause of the protests and engaging in discussions with peaceful protestors. This way, long-lasting solutions could have been brought about. By inviting foreign troops, Tokayev undermined the voices of his own people and created resentment among the public that may result in more protests of the same nature in the future. 

This instance was the first in which Article 4 of the CSTO Treaty was invoked, and it was undoubtedly not necessary – many, including US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, have rightfully noted that Kazakhstan was more than capable of handling this on its own. Thousands of Russian paratroopers were deployed to Kazakhstan as “peacekeepers,” which highlights the magnitude of the role Russia plays in the post-Soviet space as well as the way it exerts influence over countries that are independent from it in name but not in actuality. The international community disapproved of Russian troops interfering in these protests, and there were substantial concerns that Russia may try to take advantage of the situation to potentially gain a stronger foothold in the region. At a U.S. Department of State briefing, Antony Blinken was asked about the invitation of Russian troops into Kazakhstan. He hinted at the danger of Russia’s neo-imperialist tendencies, stating,“One lesson of recent history is that once Russians are in your house, it’s sometimes very difficult to get them to leave.” This is especially relevant at a time when Russia is building up forces near Ukraine’s border and speculations of whether it will invade Ukraine are growing each day. 

With the arrival of Russian troops, Kazakhstan’s sovereignty was deeply undermined and any trust that may have been present in the regime is no longer there.Considering that Russia is the leader of the CSTO alliance, it can ensure that it can achieve the results it wants to see in all these countries which are weaker than itself — whether it be political instability, potential annexation of a certain region of the country, support of a fellow autocratic regime, etc. Since then, the troops have been withdrawn from Kazakhstan but the damage has been done — trust in Tokayev was already low and inviting Russian troops didn’t help bolster his image or create faith among ordinary people that the regime is willing to carry out meaningful reforms. 

As a post-Soviet republic with strong ties to Russia, it is time for Kazakhstan to free itself from Russia’s grip and pave a new future for itself, on its own terms. The regime must democratize and revitalize Kazakhstan by listening to the grievances of its citizens and implementing structural changes to the political system. The severity of these protests showed that the people of Kazakhstan are in great need of a true democracy with legitimate representation in their government instead of the same corrupt politicians that aren’t responsive to their people’s needs. Now, the whole world will be watching Kazakhstan and seeing where it goes from here — whether it begins its transformative path to a truly independent democracy or whether it attaches itself even more closely to Russia and suppresses the voices of its people even more harshly than before. Either way, this won’t be the last we hear of significant changes occurring in Kazakhstan — changes that may hint at broader discontent in the post-Soviet space, one that is rife with potential and deserving of so much more.

MOST RECENT ARTICLE