Legitimation and the Party of Power in Kazakhstan

Abstract

This chapter surveys the legitimation strategies enacted by the political leadership of the contemporary post-Soviet republic. While showing that Kazakhstan bases its legitimation primarily on international recognition and the country's economic performance, it also focuses on an institutional dimension of legitimation. The leadership of Kazakhstan has chiefly been relying on Nur Otan, the party of power, for this. The party has contributed to legitimation by enforcing rules in the 1990s; by channeling popular support for the regime's economic performance in the 2000s; and finally by becoming more responsive to citizens' requests, thus shifting the regime toward input-related legitimation in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis. IntroductionThe goal of the present volume is to shed light on the importance of legitimation for authoritarian-regime stability, focusing in particular on institutional legitimacy in post-Soviet Eurasia. i The case of Kazakhstan is extremely relevant for this purpose: Governed by a soft authoritarian regime, the country is endowed with significant natural resources and yet deploys advanced forms of institutional legitimation, especially through its party of power.Moreover, the analysis of this case shows that modes of legitimation can vary over time, with shifts largely depending on the historical, economic and political conditions of the moment.This chapter begins with a review of the main legitimating frames considered and in some cases adopted by Kazakhstan's leadership. A reliance on international recognition and strong economic performance, two of the most successful strategies, are examined in particular. In the same section, the need for an institutional dimension for legitimation is explored.Institutions, it is argued, are needed to buttress, channel and at times provide a substitute for 1 This chapter is going to be published in an edited volume published thanks to the efforts and the support of the KomPost research network. The reference is Del Sordi, A. (2016) "Legitimation and the Party of Power in Kazakhstan" in J. Ahrens, M. Brusis and M. Schulze Wessel (eds) Politics and Legitimacy in Post-Soviet Eurasia (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

Sponsoring student mobility for developmentandauthoritarian stability: Kazakhstan’s Bolashak programme

“…Legitimation is the most important of the three pillars for Kazakhstan, which is known to use proactive framing and persuasion to ensure the survival of its regime (Del Sordi, 2016;Schatz & Maltseva, 2012). Against the background of the social contract mentioned before, economic development, and output legitimacy in general, constitute one of the main regime's claims to legitimation (Del Sordi, 2016;Kudaibergenova, 2015;von Soest & Grauvogel, 2016).…”

“…Against the background of the social contract mentioned before, economic development, and output legitimacy in general, constitute one of the main regime's claims to legitimation (Del Sordi, 2016;Kudaibergenova, 2015;von Soest & Grauvogel, 2016). Not only does the regime engage in promoting growth, development and general wellbeing; through its rhetoric, it tries to appropriate economic successes and reinforce the impression that the regime is the generous maker of such wonders (Del Sordi, 2016, pp.…”

“…Even if now Kazakhstan is no longer in the difficult economic conditions of the 1990s (it is firmly in the group of upper-medium income countries, World Bank, 2015), Bolashak is still expected to contribute substantively to the country's economy. The 2008-2009 global financial crisis and the 2014-2015 monetary crisis demonstrated that the sheer richness in natural resources, which drove the 2000s' economic boom, cannot sustain high levels of growth alone (Del Sordi, 2016). In this respect, Bolashak alumni, with their high-quality education and global connections, are an obvious asset.…”

“…The authoritarian regime that emerged, and started consolidating in the mid-1990s in Kazakhstan, is also one which claims to privilege stability, security and economic development over democratization, postponing political liberalization to an indefinite future (Del Sordi, 2016). It has, moreover, a paternalistic attitude towards the citizenry, which is also common in Singapore (Rodan, 2006).…”

“…It has, moreover, a paternalistic attitude towards the citizenry, which is also common in Singapore (Rodan, 2006). Independent Kazakhstan established a social contract with its citizens, promoting the idea that individual freedom could be waved in favour of economic and social development (Davé, 2007;Del Sordi, 2016). This was of course also a renewal of the pre-existing social contract between the Soviet state and its citizens (Davé, 2007), and, it may be argued, perpetuated the Soviet vision of an allknowing and all-providing state.…”