The current turbulence of world development, which is perhaps manifested in the changing balance of power between the main actors, and in their ignoring the previously established rules of functioning of the world economy and world economic relations, could possibly pose new challenges for Kazakhstan’s diplomacy.
These tasks, as it seems, could be more complicated than those that were in the first years of independence. In order to navigate these challenges and position itself in a changing global landscape, the Republic of Kazakhstan will need to consider its place in the emerging international system. In this context, the role of our diplomacy is to facilitate the establishment of a new international order and to contribute to the balance of power among the major global actors. This is not just a responsibility of one country, but an opportunity for collective responsibility within the international community. The question of survival in such a world community is becoming increasingly pertinent. The Republic of Kazakhstan has gradually begun to find itself living in a world that is entirely different from the one it was previously accustomed to. The ongoing events in the East of Europe, the Middle East and East Asia represent a hybrid form of modern civil war, in which the leading actors of world politics and their nearby neighbours have been drawn.
If we were to attempt to draw geometric, rather than geopolitical, lines connecting these conflict hotbeds, we might see a peculiar ‘triangle of instability’ created, whether intentionally or unintentionally, by some forces. At the same time, the edges of this triangle seem to ‘cut’ the large Eurasian space mercilessly. And in the centre of this space, as we know, is the Republic of Kazakhstan.
In the new emerging world it may be beneficial for us to consider redefining, including for ourselves, ‘who we are’. These could include a Eurasian state, a Central Asian leader, a part of the historical Turkic or Kypchak worlds, or a middle power. Such self-identification should logically ‘flow’ from the relevant internal political documents (the public part of the national security concept, etc.). In this regard, it would be prudent to consider not only the historical traditions of our multinational and multi-confessional state, but also the realities that have emerged over the past 30 years of independent development.
It is understood that in the early 1990s, for a variety of reasons, the Republic of Kazakhstan did not set such a task for itself. At that time, the country was just entering the world community, and the national composition of Kazakhstan was somewhat different. At that time, the diplomats of the Republic of Kazakhstan were faced with the task of addressing issues that had been left over from the former Soviet Union. This was in relation to the weapons of mass destruction that were present within the republic’s borders during the 1990s. In addition, the Republic of Kazakhstan was working towards an honourable entry into the international community, which partly explains the desire to periodically propose new foreign policy initiatives. These were initiatives of regional (Central Asian integration), sub-regional (the idea of creating an Eurasian Union), continental (the proposal to convene the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia) and global (the Organisation of Congresses of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions) scales. By taking such steps, and by pursuing a multi-vector policy, the Republic of Kazakhstan has strived to establish itself as a responsible and predictable foreign policy partner, not only for the leading actors of the system of international relations, but also for all members of the global community. At the same time, Kazakhstan created its own professional diplomatic service practically from scratch.
However, it is important to acknowledge that the world in which our country finds itself today is one that is entirely different from the one we previously knew. On the topic of new self-identification and subsequent ‘positioning’ of the Republic of Kazakhstan, it is important to acknowledge the significance of this process, particularly in the context of other countries already undertaking significant endeavors to enhance their international standing.
Another challenge for our state is the existing level of specialists working in various areas of public service of the Republic of Kazakhstan, primarily related to foreign economic issues. It has been observed that the unprofessional behavior of some specialists, possibly affiliated with certain structures, may lead to difficulties in ensuring our partners in the EAEU fully comprehend the Republic of Kazakhstan’s interests.
We are also, unfortunately, still not in a position to critically assess the unprofessionalism of the steps taken in due time to develop the country’s oil and gas complex. It is common knowledge, yet our ‘professionals’ tend to overlook the ‘historical’ decisions, potentially denying Kazakhstani citizens the full picture.
Another area where we could perhaps improve is the system we have in place for training our diplomats. It is encouraging to note that there are now more than two dozen universities in the country that train students in the speciality of ‘international relations’. It is interesting to note that the universities offering this specialization do not necessarily receive the largest number of grants. At present, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan and other structures working in the field of foreign economic policy, including international organizations operating in Kazakhstan, can accept 50 to 100 young specialists per year. The question of where the rest of the «international specialists» should go is, therefore, an important one. This is a question that remains unanswered. It is important to consider that the provision of a state grant for the speciality ‘international relations’ should ideally be accompanied by the state’s commitment to employing the graduate. In addition, it would be beneficial for state grants to be concentrated in state universities that have professional teaching staff and attract professional diplomats with research and teaching skills to give lectures.
It would be beneficial for private universities applying for state grants in the speciality of ‘international relations’ to demonstrate their ability to train professional diplomats effectively. From a professional perspective, it would be beneficial to consider reviewing their curricula and syllabuses, as well as the literature offered to students.
When discussing the training of diplomatic personnel, it would be worthwhile to consider the matter of the return of the Institute of Diplomacy of the Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the system of diplomatic service of Kazakhstan.
One of the challenges that may emerge in the coming period, as the expert community considers its future, could be the further implementation of the well-known Kazakhstani foreign policy initiatives. At one time, their appearance was conditioned by the logic of earlier events that took place in a particular time period. However, it should be noted that several decades have now passed. It is therefore vital that any foreign policy and foreign economic initiative is adapted to suit the evolving nature of the international system.
Undoubtedly, one of the challenges for Kazakhstan’s diplomacy is the arrival of a Republican administration in the United States, which is likely to result in the strengthening of protectionist measures. However, this could also present an opportunity for Kazakhstan. There is a possibility that decades-old American stereotypes about our country may be able to be changed. It is therefore vital for Kazakhstan’s expert community, working closely with the foreign ministry, to play its part in this process. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan could organize expert consultations that explore new possibilities for bilateral cooperation between Kazakhstan and the United States. At the same time, it would be beneficial to significantly intensify expert consultations of various formats between Kazakhstani scientists and their colleagues in all states neighboring Kazakhstan.
There are also challenges related to the attraction of foreign investments and, in general, the investment activity of the relevant state structures of the Republic of Kazakhstan. It has been suggested that the responsibility for this area should lie with the Investment Committee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan. It may be beneficial to consider evaluating the activities of all Kazakhstani ministries, including those of the current difficult period, by an important parameter such as ‘attraction of investments’, whether external or internal, as well as modern technologies.
The opening of a branch of a world-renowned university in Kazakhstan, with specialities that are in demand today in the international community and the global economy, could be considered a powerful investment in the sustainable development of Kazakhstan’s economy.
Rustem Kurmanguzhin, Associate Professor, Higher School of Artsand Social Sciences, NARXOZ University
Photo: https://kstnews.kz
