EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Kazakhstan’s Leading Opposition Party Faces Split

EURASIA INSIGHT

KAZAKHSTAN’S LEADING OPPOSITION PARTY FACES SPLIT
Ibragim Alibekov 2/16/05

Ak Zhol, the leading opposition force in Kazakhstan, is on the verge of a break-up precipitated by a feud among the party’s leaders over its political direction. Some regional analysts believe that President Nursultan Nazarbayev’s administration may have had a hand in stirring up the party’s internal troubles. Whatever the cause, Ak Zhol’s pending split deals a severe blow to the opposition’s effort to mount a viable challenge to Nazarbayev in the next presidential election.

A special meeting February 13 of the Ak Zhol leadership, led by party co-chairman Alikhan Baimenov, voted to express no confidence in another party leader, Altynbek Sarsenbayev, for supposedly violating party rules barring collaboration with other political parties and movements. Sarsenbayev has been a prominent figure in promoting an opposition alliance known as the Coordinating Council of Democratic Forces, which also includes members of the Communist Party and the Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan movement.

Sarsenbayev, speaking at a news conference, characterized the February 13 vote as illegitimate, saying that the meeting was held by a rump group of party members who lacked the authority to make leadership decisions. Sarsenbayev has received the backing of other prominent Ak Zhol figures, including Oraz Jandosov, Bulat Abilov and Tolegen Zhukeyev. They issued a joint statement February 14, in the name of Ak Zhol, defending their action to forge a broad opposition front against Nazarbayev.

"We are absolutely convinced that the idea of a union of all opposition forces of Kazakhstan on the eve of the presidential elections is a demand of society, and is something that is supported by a majority of the membership of our party, and by all supporters of democratic change," the statement said.

Sarsenbayev and his loyalists also suggested that those participating in the February 13 meeting specifically aimed to bring about the party’s collapse. Abilov expressed concern that an Ak Zhol split would derail the effort to establish an opposition coalition, leaving Nazarbayev without a serious challenger in the presidential election, scheduled to occur no later than January 2006. Ak Zhol is the only opposition party represented in Parliament. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

For now, Sarsenbayev, Jandosov and Abilov are downplaying the notion of the inevitability of a party split. However, political observers say there is little hope of keeping Ak Zhol intact. They say the main question now is; how many activists will follow Baimenov and shun participation in an opposition front? Some believe a majority of party members will go with Baimenov.

Ak Zhol’s power struggle comes at a difficult time for the opposition in general. Parliamentary elections last September virtually shut opposition politicians out of the Kazakhstani legislature. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. In recent months, opposition political organizations and media outlets have figured in several prominent court cases -- the most prominent of which involves Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan (DCK). On February 9, an Almaty city court upheld an earlier ruling to close down DCK. Prosecutors have justified their action by portraying DCK as an extremist organization. In a statement, the prosecutor’s office alleged that DCK’s activities could cause "mass disturbances," endanger "people’s health and lives" and disrupt "the work of state agencies and economic entities." Party leaders have vigorously denied the charges and have vowed to appeal the latest ruling.

Meanwhile, two opposition newspapers – the Assandi Times and Soz -- have received stiff financial penalties in recent libel cases brought by government agencies. In the Soz case, a court ruled January 31 that the newspaper damaged the National Security Committee’s reputation when it published a report in September 2004 alleging that the committee’s agents conducted surveillance of Ak Zhol leaders. In addition to imposing a 5 million tenge (roughly $40,000) fine, the court ordered that the newspaper print an apology.

Some political analysts say the Nazarbayev administration is using the Kazakhstani judicial system to keep the opposition from gaining traction as the presidential election nears. "Kazakhstani authorities’ new method of combating the opposition – via judicial bodies – is so far working without a hitch," commentator Saken Salimov wrote in the Russian daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta on February 11.

Salimov indicated that the government’s use of the courts to harass the opposition would likely intensify in the coming months, citing parliament’s recent passage of a new law, titled "On Countering Extremist Activity." The law, which awaits Nazarbayev’s signature, appears to broaden the definition of extremist activity, potentially making it easier for prosecutors to target critics of incumbent authorities.

Some observers see Ak Zhol’s impending split as part of the perceived government effort to undermine the opposition’s cohesion. Salimov, writing two days before Ak Zhol’s internal divisions became public, wrote that "there are persistent rumors in Astana that a plan has been drawn up to split the Ak Zhol party from within."

Editor’s Note: Ibragim Alibekov is the pseudonym for a Kazakhstan-based reporter and analyst.

The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues.

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.