The recent parliamentary elections in Kazakhstan has resulted in a landslide victory for the governing party, Nur Otan (Light of Fatherland), and has further supported President Nursultan Nazarbayev stronghold grip on the country. Nur Otan won 88 percent of the ballots, essentially winning all the seats contested because of political party threshold rules. In Kazakhstan, political parties must reach a seven percent barrier in voting in order to qualify for seats in the lower house of Parliament. Only Nur Otan managed to reach this threshold in the election.
For the ruling party and government of President Nazarbayev, the elections results are evidence of democracy, as the people came out and voted for the party they believed in. From this perspective, a lack of political party pluralism does not necessarily hinder democracy.
Opponents and critics of the current regime on the other believe this election is more indicative of Kazakhstan maintaining an autocratic system similar to the old Soviet days.
Specific Election Issues
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which observed the election, welcomed the progress Kazakhstan has made with these elections, but also noted that the elections failed to meet international standards in certain areas. The OSCE praised the atmosphere of the elections but questioned its fairness. More specifically, there were serious violations in the election code and conduct of the election, mostly procedural problems and a lack of transparency.
It is believed that at 40 percent of the polling stations, the vote count was incorrect. This percentage has actually worsened in comparison to the last elections where 20-25 percent of the last vote count was considered suspect.
The seven percent threshold for a political party to gain seats was also criticized as unreasonably high. Opposition parties are in their nascent phase and thus it is difficult for them to get their voice across to the voting population. In addition, critics also complained that the media openly favored Nur Otan.
Opposition Complaints and the Government in Power
Opposition leader Valikhan Kaisarov from the National Social Democratic Party described the election as “utterly profaned.” The opposition also complained that a number of advertisements were not allowed on television—especially those that accused the government of corruption, and those that pointed out that the gaps between rich and poor were expanding.
In addition, opposition criticisms of the government voiced during a television debate were also edited out. Another opposition party, Al Zhol, officially received 3.25 percent of the vote, but said they did not recognize the results and claim their percentage of the vote was closer to 12 percent. The party commented that the election “outcome did not reflect the alignment of political forces and social support.” There were also ominous promises to launch a formal protest to the election commission with proof of voting irregularities.
To the party in power, these complaints are the protests of sore losers. With a two-thirds turnout of voters, Nur Otan believes the people have truly chosen their designated representatives. It may also be the case that voters are reluctant to rock the boat now that Kazakhstan is relatively stable, and that jobs and the economy are booming thanks to the abundant natural energy resources Kazakhstan is developing.
No outside observers have directly accused the Kazakh government of “cheating” in the election, despite irregularities; it is certainly possible that opposition parties do not have their mandate out to the public yet. Opposition groups would claim that is because the government does not allow them to do this and citizens vote for the government party because that is the party people are used to running things much like the Communist Party in the old Soviet Union.
President Nazarbayev has also claimed that the country is moving towards more democratic freedoms with constitutional changes and granting more powers to Parliament. At the same time however, he managed to push through a constitutional amendment ending term limits for his Presidency, effectively allowing him to be President for life should he continue to be elected in subsequent elections.
President Nazarbayev shows no signs of relinquishing power after almost 17 years in power. Many fear he is an autocrat by any other name and has a cult of personality surrounding his rule. In addition, it is also clear that his administration, despite claims to the contrary, is really not interested in political competition. Real power is concentrated in the hands of an elite few. Last year, two opposition members were killed under mysterious circumstances, one of the killings being blamed on a rogue element within the government. Nazarbayev has even quarreled with his own son-in-law, Rakhat Aliyev when he announced he would run for office. Aliyev was later recalled as the Ambassador to Austria and accused of kidnapping two bankers.
Future Outlook and Competition
It is likely that the international community will not make any major protests over the ‘fairness” of these elections. Kazakhstan’s enormous oil wealth is attracting investors from around the world. The Nazarbayev government has very shrewdly allowed Russia, China and the West to help develop this resource. China has very recently become a major shareholder in PetroKazakhstan.
It is likely that the Kazakh government is playing these parties off each other for their own gain by allowing them to compete for influence. Economic influence in the region can also translate into strategic influence.
Kazakhstan also has aspirations beyond economic wealth, wanting to also gain international stature. Most recently, the Kazakh government has bid to be the Chair of the OSCE in 2009. Certainly fair elections are an integral component of the OSCE’s vision, so it may seem inconsistent with these principles to have Kazakhstan as the Chair.
However, outside states and also the people of Kazakhstan will have to balance economic interests with democratic interests and decide which is more important. It is likely therefore, that we will not see any true political pluralism for some time, as the Kazakh government conducts business as usual.
