Page 20 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 20 of 265 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
14
was located further away from Russia, it was not incorporated for another hundred years, except for one tribe which accepted the protectorate in 1742.
It took Russia that long to actually be able to exert full control over the Small and Middle Horde Kazakhs who, despite swearing fealty to the Russian crown, did not submit to its authority. The Kazakh Khans in this time period frequently sought patronage from other principalities as well, like Dzhunghars, China, Kokand or Persia. In particular, Ablai Khan of the Middle Horde is indeed celebrated today in Kazakhstan as a shrewd politician who skillfully played off China and Russia by offering allegiance to both in the mid to late 18th century and kept his people independent of the external control. As such, he commanded a great deal of respect and was able to rule the Kazakhs with very little interference from outside, unlike Khans of the Great and Small Horde. (Olcott M. , 1995, pp. 40-41)
Formally, both Small and Middle Hordes joined the Russian protectorate as early as 1731 and 1732, respectively, but it took Russia much longer to realize the terms of the agreements. In many cases Khans, who swore fealty, did not represent all of the tribes in their respective Hordes, and this fact frequently produced tensions between the Khans submitting to Russia and others resisting that, leading a string of rebellions which followed one another. (Olcott M. , 1995, p. 44) These rebellions, uncooperative Khans, as well expanding Russian economic interests in Central Asia were the factors which necessitated a more direct involvement of Russia in administering the Kazakhs to insure security of its trade routes and to reinforce its position against the growing influence of
Object Description
| Title | Market reforms, foreign direct investment and national identity: Non-national identity of Kazakhstan |
| Author | Zhanalin, Azamat |
| Author email | janalin_a@yahoo.com; zhanalin@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | International Relations |
| School | College of Letters, Arts and Sciences |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-22 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-29 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | English, Robert |
| Advisor (committee member) |
James, Patrick Rorlich, Azade-Ayse |
| Abstract | The present study offers an analysis of the concept of non-national identity in application to the Republic of Kazakhstan as the most likely case. The primary hypothesis is that newly independent states, which are undergoing a rapid transition to market economy and actively pursue integration in the world economy and foreign direct investment, will experience fragmentation of their national identity, defined as non-national identity.; Three sites in Kazakhstan, Almaty, Astana and Aktau, were chosen for the study as representative of the market reforms in the republic as well as the best examples of the country’s pursuit of foreign direct investment and integration into the global economy. The data collected indicates that while Kazakhstan does demonstrate fragmentation of its national identity, it is not necessarily caused by the market reforms and the participation in the global trade. Alternative causal variables such as the Soviet and Russian colonial legacy, intra-ethnic cleavages among the Kazakhs and the prevalence of multi-vector foreign policy were found to contribute to the development of non-national identity of Kazakhstan. The study’s results also suggest that in the last few years, Kazakh identity is experiencing a rather strong revival as well, which may yet counteract the existing factors leading to the emergence of the non-national identity of Kazakhstan. |
| Keyword | identity; nationalism; Kazakhstan; market reforms; globalization; foreign direct investment; national identity; countries in transition; foreign policy; culture; former Soviet Union; Central Asia; patronage networks; energy; oil; post-colonial legacy; nation-state |
| Geographic subject (city or populated place) | Almaty; Astana; Aktau |
| Geographic subject (country) | Kazakhstan |
| Coverage date | 1970/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3812 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Zhanalin, Azamat |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Zhanalin-4506 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume51/etd-Zhanalin-4506.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 20 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 14 was located further away from Russia, it was not incorporated for another hundred years, except for one tribe which accepted the protectorate in 1742. It took Russia that long to actually be able to exert full control over the Small and Middle Horde Kazakhs who, despite swearing fealty to the Russian crown, did not submit to its authority. The Kazakh Khans in this time period frequently sought patronage from other principalities as well, like Dzhunghars, China, Kokand or Persia. In particular, Ablai Khan of the Middle Horde is indeed celebrated today in Kazakhstan as a shrewd politician who skillfully played off China and Russia by offering allegiance to both in the mid to late 18th century and kept his people independent of the external control. As such, he commanded a great deal of respect and was able to rule the Kazakhs with very little interference from outside, unlike Khans of the Great and Small Horde. (Olcott M. , 1995, pp. 40-41) Formally, both Small and Middle Hordes joined the Russian protectorate as early as 1731 and 1732, respectively, but it took Russia much longer to realize the terms of the agreements. In many cases Khans, who swore fealty, did not represent all of the tribes in their respective Hordes, and this fact frequently produced tensions between the Khans submitting to Russia and others resisting that, leading a string of rebellions which followed one another. (Olcott M. , 1995, p. 44) These rebellions, uncooperative Khans, as well expanding Russian economic interests in Central Asia were the factors which necessitated a more direct involvement of Russia in administering the Kazakhs to insure security of its trade routes and to reinforce its position against the growing influence of |
