Page 54 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 54 of 265 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
48
national identity of Kazakhs is linked to an idealized image of President Nazarbayev, the current head of the state, rather than to the idea of the Kazakh nation as a greater community. More specifically, she determines that Nazarbayev successfully instilled in the Kazakhstani population the thought he is the guarantor of political stability of the republic; this belief has been faithfully maintained and replicated ever since. (Kazakhstan: a Republic of Minorities, 1993) The common weakness of such portrayals of national identity construction in the region is the lack of depth and relative simplicity due to timing because they came out almost immediately after Kazakhstan became independent. However, closer examination of nation-building processes in the region, illuminated in later studies, provide a more nuanced understanding of these processes.
One such detail, glossed over in early studies of Central Asia, is various types of bifurcation of societies of Central Asia to a lesser or larger degree. Kazakhstan stands out in this regard, first due to the significant proportion of population made up of non-Kazakhs, mostly Russians, and second because of the long history of the titular nationality being a minority in its own republic.61 Kolsto in his edited volume examines this most obvious fault-line between ethnic Kazakhs and large Russian-speaking community to determine how Kazakhstan manages so far to avoid Horowitz’s dilemma of “centrally focused ethnic systems” which predicts an inevitable clash over the control of the state populated by two rather well defined major ethnic groups. (Horowitz, 1985) Kolsto’s analysis comes to a conclusion that in divided societies, such as Kazakhstan and
61 In 1989, just 2 years before independence, Kazakhs made up 39.7% of population of Kazakhstan, while Russians made up 37.8%, which, if combined with Ukraninans and Belorussians and Russified Germans, raised the proportion of Russian speakers to 50% (Cummings 2005, 2).
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 54 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 48 national identity of Kazakhs is linked to an idealized image of President Nazarbayev, the current head of the state, rather than to the idea of the Kazakh nation as a greater community. More specifically, she determines that Nazarbayev successfully instilled in the Kazakhstani population the thought he is the guarantor of political stability of the republic; this belief has been faithfully maintained and replicated ever since. (Kazakhstan: a Republic of Minorities, 1993) The common weakness of such portrayals of national identity construction in the region is the lack of depth and relative simplicity due to timing because they came out almost immediately after Kazakhstan became independent. However, closer examination of nation-building processes in the region, illuminated in later studies, provide a more nuanced understanding of these processes. One such detail, glossed over in early studies of Central Asia, is various types of bifurcation of societies of Central Asia to a lesser or larger degree. Kazakhstan stands out in this regard, first due to the significant proportion of population made up of non-Kazakhs, mostly Russians, and second because of the long history of the titular nationality being a minority in its own republic.61 Kolsto in his edited volume examines this most obvious fault-line between ethnic Kazakhs and large Russian-speaking community to determine how Kazakhstan manages so far to avoid Horowitz’s dilemma of “centrally focused ethnic systems” which predicts an inevitable clash over the control of the state populated by two rather well defined major ethnic groups. (Horowitz, 1985) Kolsto’s analysis comes to a conclusion that in divided societies, such as Kazakhstan and 61 In 1989, just 2 years before independence, Kazakhs made up 39.7% of population of Kazakhstan, while Russians made up 37.8%, which, if combined with Ukraninans and Belorussians and Russified Germans, raised the proportion of Russian speakers to 50% (Cummings 2005, 2). |
