Kazakhstan: Experts Cautious On OSCE Announcement

The news that Kazakhstan will serve as the 2010 chair of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is generating a mixed reaction among international experts and human rights activists. Some believe the decision undermines the OSCE's ability to act as a vehicle for democratization, but others hope Kazakhstan can serve as a bridge that helps close existing gaps in the organization.

The announcement that Kazakhstan would realize its long-sought goal of serving as OSCE chair came in late November during the organization's Ministerial Council meeting in Madrid. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

At the time, Kazakhstani Foreign Minister Marat Tazhin insisted the decision would stimulate "the comprehensive modernization of our country, and the region in its entirety." Tazhin also vowed that Kazakhstan would introduce domestic reforms and continue to support election monitoring activities carried out by the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR).

Representatives of a leading human rights organization, Human Rights Watch (HRW), expressed skepticism that the OSCE's action would promote liberalization in Central Asia. The decision does "damage to the organization's credibility," said Rachel Denber, the deputy director of HRW's Europe and Central Asia Division.

Denber and other rights activists are especially leery of Kazakhstan's pledge to stand by the ODIHR, which has come under attack from Russia and other member states. "The Kazakh government in the past has supported Russian efforts to weaken the monitoring mandate of the ODHIR, so the pledge doesn't have a high degree of credibility," Denber said.

"The OSCE's geographic breadth and inclusive mandate make it unique," Denber continued. "It can remain relevant [only] if it retains all aspects of its security, economic, and human dimensions in equal measure."

Alain Délétroz, a vice president of the Brussels-based International Crisis Group (ICG), believes that the responsibility of the OSCE chairmanship will force Kazakhstan to have "better compliance [with] the OSCE charter," but he questioned whether Astana's selection will have much of an impact on regional developments. "The Russian crackdown on the ODIHR is damaging the OSCE image more than the Kazakh presidency," Délétroz said. "If the relationship between the European Union and Russia worsens ... the OSCE will become again, like the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe before, a forum for security discussions between diplomats of two blocs that deeply distrust each other."

"If the situation remains like today, I don't see any real relevant role for a weakened OSCE in Europe," Délétroz added. [Note: Prior to joining ICG, Délétroz served as executive director of the Soros Foundation in Uzbekistan, which was affiliated with the New York-based Open Society Institute. EurasiaNet operates under OSI's auspices].

For over a year, the OSCE wrestled with the question of Kazakhstan's qualifications to chair the organization. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. In the end, OSCE members decided affirmatively, despite the fact that none of the Central Asian nation's elections have been deemed to meet OSCE democratic standards. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. In addition, HRW's Denber pointed out that constitutional amendments adopted in Kazakhstan this year, including one that enables President Nursultan Nazarbayev to serve for life, run "counter to OSCE principles and makes the government less subject to public accountability."

David Gullette, an ICG analyst based in Bishkek, described Kazakhstan's selection as a "matter of delicate diplomacy" based on geopolitical factors, especially the country's energy abundance. At the same time, he called it an opportunity for the OSCE to enhance its influence among post-Soviet states.

"Allowing Kazakhstan to chair the organization may be seen as a way to try to effect change within the country, while not distancing it at the same time," Gullette said. "If Kazakhstan had not been awarded the chair, the government may have seen very little reason to follow through with any reforms."

Freedom House, the US-based group that promotes democratic values, offered a cautious endorsement of Kazakhstan's pending 2010 chairmanship. In a statement issued in late November, Jennifer Windsor, Freedom House's executive director, stressed that Kazakhstan should be evaluated on deeds, not words. "Fulfilling [reform] pledges is both more important and more difficult than making them," Windsor said. "The proof will be in whether Kazakhstan can demonstrate through actions that it is ready to address those major deficiencies in its democratic performance that have been, and continue to be the cause of major concern."

Editor's Note: Gelya Leshchinskiy is an editorial associate at EurasiaNet.