Russia and Kazakhstan have only one prospect

By Vestnik Kavkaza

Presentation on Russian-Kazakh relations and the Customs Union by Ermukhamet Ertusbayev, the advisor to the President of Kazakhstan on political questions, at the History Faculty of Moscow State University.

The guest was introduced by Alexei Vlasov, editor-in-chief of VK, Deputy Dean of the MSU History Faculty: “After graduating from Karaganda University, Mr Ertysbayev did his PhD at the History Faculty of MSU.  In a way, we can say that our common home, the History Faculty of MSU, played its role in your impressive career as minister of information and sport of Kazakhstan and, of course, as an adviser to Nursultan Nazarbayev.  Regardless of our political beliefs, we still speak the same language with you, both in a literal and in a metaphorical sense. It is impossible to overestimate the meaning of this communication, because our leaders are able to find a common point of view on the most difficult questions of today, and, similarly, experts in Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus should be able to exchange their opinions, explain their positions, so that their relations both bilateral and in the multilateral format of the Eurasian Union, are be free of any rumours spread by those who are against our cooperation.

There is no doubt that contacts between Russian and Kazakhstan have become stronger in all directions, but this means that the responsibility of experts, of the media community, also grows, as they have to provide the most honest coverage of the processes happening now in the political and economic spheres. I believe that all these rumors are an inevitable part of the growth. The dynamics of the integration processes have grown in the last few years, and we need to prepare for thisnot only instrumentally, but also psychologically, which is sometimes difficult. If we treat this process as a normal working process and put the right accents on our dialogue, I am sure that Russia and Kazakhstan not only will maintain their partnership, but will be able to become the nucleus and the center of attraction for their neighbors in Central Asia and Caspian region.”

Ertysbayev answered to several questions which are interesting for the Russian expert community.

-    How do you see the prospects of Russian-Kazakh relations? In which direction will the dialogue between Moscow and Astana develop?

-    In the last 20 years Kazakhstan has had the warmest and most reliable relations with Russia. For Russia, Kazakhstan is also an important partner in military, political and economic questions.  These are exemplary relations. Therefore, as for the prospects, I can only see further and deeper integration. Yesterday, before flying here, I talked to the head of the country about our aims to create an efficient Eurasian economic union. I stress – Eurasian economic union - because we often run too far ahead.

-    What is the reason for the sharp reaction of Kazakh politicians to the proposal by Sergey Naryshkin to discuss the question of a Eurasian Parliament? Is it because they do not accept the whole idea? Or it is a tactical question that concerns only the speed, deadlines and dynamics of supra-national bodies?

-    We have a pluralistic society, so some senators, MPs, national -democrats reacted very sharply to the proposal by the Duma speaker, Sergey Naryshkin, about the need for a  Eurasian parliament by 2015, although our president talked about a Eurasian Parliamentary Assembly a year ago in Russian Gazette.  I actually do not know why they were so much against it, because for many years there has been the CIS parliamentary assembly and nobody ever negatively reacted to its existence. I believe that, using the experience of the EU, we can avoid many mistakes in the future Eurasian Economic Union. I mean that the European parliament in the EU did not have the necessary functions that would allow it to avoid certain mistakes, particularly in the emissionary policy in the eurozone crisis. Therefore, I am positive about the future supra-national bodies. A different question is the mechanism of the elections to the Eurasian parliamentary assembly. Direct elections, or will the national parliaments delegate some of their members, or will Russia and Kazakhstan will certain amendments to the law to elect deputies that would coordinate the legal and normative field?  I should say that in the Customs Union there are numerous daily problems.  Administrative barriers are still there. If Russian and Belorussian products flood the Kazakh market, our products encounter numerous administrative barriers. All the customs are removed, the heads of the state signed an agreement, the united economic space exists from January 1, but every day we receive numerous complaints from Kazakh businessmen, and the people responsible send these complaints to the Eurasian economic committee, saying that the Customs Union is experiencing certain differences. Until we make the work of the Eurasian Union efficient, talk about the supra-national bodies is too early and it can only divert other countries from the Eurasian Union. Our head of state stated main principles of the Eurasian Union – its voluntary nature openness and market efficiency, because only then will the other members want to join the Eurasian Union. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan already want to join it. I saw one sociological survey in a Russian business-newspaper from October 28 with 15,000 respondents. I was really surprised. The survey was carried out in Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and some other post-Soviet countries. And the majority, more than 50%, even in Georgia it was 55 %, support joining the Customs Union. Because the trade turnover increased by almost 30% in one year. The 21st century is the century of large transnational corporations and unions such as the EU or NAFTA in North America – also a very interesting experience where Mexico, the US and Canada united into a  free trade zone without any supra-national bodies and work quite effectively. Of course it is the biggest economy in the world, but still.  No administrative superstructure. As you know, in our case we have a Eurasian economic committee working here in Moscow. Answering your question, I'd say that our head of state voiced the idea of the Eurasian parliamentary assembly. When the question develops, we can discuss it in detail.

 

-    Do we need to discuss the question of the common history of Russian and Kazakhstan in the 18th and 19th centuries? Or we should leave these questions to professional historians, limiting the public discussion  to  very moderate rhetoric that does not provoke any confronational comments by those who, as I said, are against our integration?

-    As for our common history, I believe that history is the field of professional historians. The experience of the Western European countries is very interesting here. I have recenly been in Strasbourg, I presented at the World Forum for Democracy, and was surprised to learn that Angela Merkel and the former French president Nikola Sarkozy agreed that students in France and Germany should study history from the same textbooks, so that young people in France and Germany have the same understanding at least of the history of the 20th century, because it not only brings peoples together and ensures the viability of the EU, but it also removes a lot of contradictions. This is a very important question. Europeans have reached this stage. And we lived in one country, but now if we take textbooks in the 15 post-Soviet countries we will see completely different interpretations.

-    Do you think that there is any need for a permanent Russian- Kazakh or Russian-Kazakh-Belorussian forum, where experts from two or three of the countries could be in permanent communication and exchange ideas and as a result find compromise. From my side, I will say that none of the expertal forums created in the last 5 years works, neither in Moscow, nor in Astana or Almaty.  I believe that misunderstanding is often caused by the lack of knowledge about the processes in Kazakhstan. If we had more information, I think, there would be no problems in bilateral relations.

-    As for the Russian-Kazakh-Belorussian expert committees, you know that some of them actually do work in business.  I know that Kazakh businessmen have initiated a business community. I stress this concept “business community.” Why? Because I think that businessmen should play a decisive role in the creation of the Eurasian economic union. We should not repeat the mistakes of the past, when politics was always ahead of economics.

When in 1991 the Union was about to collapse, I remember that our president was asked for the first time why he conducted such a desperate struggle for the preservation of the Union when it was clear that the Union was about to collapse. The conversation took place in the autumn. He replied that, when working as the secretary of the Central Committee on Industry and as Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic in 1980, he like no other studied the entire national economy of the Soviet Union, knew the industry and the structuring of the economy of Kazakhstan, which had thousands of threads connected to all regions of Russia. And he talked about the fact that if the economic links were cut off for at least one month, it would lead to disaster. Indeed, in 1994, Kazakhstan's GDP fell 40%. Only during the Great Patriotic War did we reach such a level. We had a catastrophic situation in Kazakhstan, when production almost stopped, and inflation and hyperinflation were horrifying. I do not want to recall it. And in March 1994, when we had a very bad situation in the country, speaking here, at Moscow University, Nursultan Nazarbayev proposed the idea of the Eurasian Union. Then, many reacted critically to this, they thought it was a question of the political situation, but 18 or 15 years later, now I just cannot say, in 2007, the heads of state of Belarus, Russia and Kazakhstan signed a declaration on the need to create a single economic space - the future Customs Union, which should inevitably become the Eurasian Economic Union. Of course, the global economic crisis has played a role in terms of escalation, in a good way, and intensification of this process. I think the two years of the Customs Union proved this to the whole world. Trade turnover sharply increased, including trade with the European Union. Removing numerous administrative barriers allowed Kazakh businessmen, Russian businessmen to work in a completely different mode. I think that the prospects of the Customs Union are very great. After all, there is a market with a population of 170 million people, although it is said that an independent, efficient market can only work with a population of 200-250 million people. Of course, Ukraine's accession to the Customs Union would dramatically change the situation. In the middle of the 21st century there will be three giant centers in the world - America, the European Union, which can be integrated with our Eurasian Union, and the Asian continent, of course.

-    In Russia the context in which the Republic of Kazakhstan acts in the conflicts that naturally arise in the former Soviet Union and around Central Asia is usually underestimated. I would like to ask, what in your opinion is important in the trends over the last year that can be recorded or noted in the relations of Kazakhstan with the region? I am primarily interested in, probably, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, to some extent, Turkey and China.

-    Back in 1995, our President invited the leaders of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan to establish the Central Asian Union of States. The population of the region is over 65 million people, if taken collectively; there is a very good infrastructure, hard-working people with long traditions, especially if you take the tradition of the "Silk Road" trade, crafts and so on. The market model of Kazakhstan, plus combined resources - it was a good idea, which met with a rather cool reception from the leaders. The issue of integration and constantly uniting efforts in terms of competitiveness, especially in the era of globalization, is quite urgent, and I honestly do not understand the position of some leaders on this issue. Therefore, we have a much larger trade turnover with Hungary or Poland than with Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, and that's what's sad. As for Turkey, it takes a leading position in terms of investment, hundreds of joint ventures with Turkish businessmen are working in Kazakhstan. By the way, our president recently attended the Turkish-Kazakh business forum. He was there with the sole purpose of promoting and advertising the Customs Union, to show the attractiveness of the Customs Union to Turkish business. I recently visited Hungary and Poland; I have noticed this trend among the elite and entrepreneurs who do not want further integration in the European Union in any case, the introduction of the euro in these countries, and vice versa; with great hope, optimism and greed they look to the east - to the Russian market, the Customs Union, to the prospects that are opening up for business. We have, of course, quite normal relations with our southern neighbours, but the main vector of integration has been chosen. This is Russia. Government policy, as Napoleon said, is defined by its geography. We have 2,000 km of common border with China, but we will never integrate, you know for what reason, I do not want to recall this. We have a 8,000 km border with Russia, including 2,000 km of sea in the Caspian Sea. This is an open border of friendship. And we have a long common historical experience with Russia. I will not go into details on historical estimates of the past, especially in the era of the Russian Empire, and even the Soviet Union, but the fact the Kazakhs made a giant leap thanks to Russia in the 20th century, urbanized their country, created industry, developed the economy and jumped from a semi-nomadic state. And in alliance with Russia, I am referring to the former Soviet Union, we created a state-territorial border of Kazakhstan, which allowed us to declare independence in 1991; it was certainly well worth it. We have preserved the language, culture and traditions, and from this point of view we have no alternative but close integration and further progress in our relations with the Russian Federation. When our neighbours, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, now want to enter the Customs Union, we can only support them. Therefore, it must be clear that this is not about creating a new empire, it is about creating an economic union of equal states, which in the 21st century will be competitive in the struggle for markets against China, the European Union, the United States and other economies of the world. This is the number one issue. It is vitally important for both Russia and Kazakhstan.

-    Can you share your views on the current situation in the Caspian region in a few words? First, the question of determining the status and position of Kazakhstan in this regard, although it is clear that with Russia all these issues are resolved, and the issue of the situation around the South Caspian Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan pipeline, the situation in Iran, which could also threaten stability in the region.

-    On the Caspian Sea, as far as I know, very intensive and good discussions with all parties, including Iran, have been carried out. You know the problems of the Caspian Sea: if at least one of the countries bordering the Caspian Sea has a negative stance on an issue, the issue actually comes to a standstill. As for Russian-Kazakh relations, there are absolutely no problems. Just yesterday I saw another document - our Oil and Gas Minister and his Russian counterpart signed it on Kashagan, the largest oil field work. Next year the work will begin. That is our goal - by 2015 to have 150 million tonnes of oil per year. Once again, I want to emphasize and focus on the excellent relations between Kazakhstan and Russia, which allow us to use Russian territory, Russian transit, to sell oil, petroleum products and natural gas through Russia to Europe. This allowed Kazakhstan to have $85 billion in the national fund now. Such friendly relations are, of course, mutually beneficial, because some of Kazakhstan's oil goes through Russian pipelines, I will not go into the specifics and details. I emphasize again, Russian-Kazakh relations are the most exemplary and ideal in terms of bilateral relations.

-    How does your President and the leadership see the activity around the situation in Afghanistan? The fact is that after Obama's re-election as president, he, in theory, should keep his promise to withdraw troops in 2014. And I remember that somewhere else 1.5 years ago Nursultan Nazarbayev said that we needed to negotiate with moderate Taliban groups; then this information disappeared. Does anything go in this direction?

-    I would remind you that in September 2002, Kazakhstan and the United States signed strategic partnership agreements, mostly relating to the fight against terrorism, drug trafficking and security issues in Central Asia, as well. America considers Kazakhstan to be its main partner on resolving the Afghan problem, I mean the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. This is a major technological and organizational challenge. Imagine, every 7 minutes transport aircraft will take off from Afghanistan through northern Kazakhstan air routes, railways will be used, as well as Kazakhstan's Caspian ports and of course, Russian territory: we are due to withdraw 175,000 trucks from Afghanistan. This is a vast amount of machinery, equipment, weapons, aircraft carriers, tanks and so on. That is a lot of work to do, and Kazakhstan, I repeat, is one of the main participants in the solution to this problem. As for Afghanistan, I have recently spoken on the topic. In fact, the problem is more complex. 42 countries are involved in the resolution of this problem. You know, 87-90% of the drugs in the world are still produced in Afghanistan. The country is crammed with numerous equipped laboratories which are deeply hidden. They still produce heroin, which poisons the Central Asian region, Russia, Europe and the whole world. For 10 years the Americans were there, and still the problem persists. Many Afghans, representatives of public and political elites, are against the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. By the way, 30,000 American trainers will remain in Afghanistan after the withdrawal in order to resolve this issue. In part, we are to blame for this. I'll just give you one example. Kazakhstan supplied 100 000 tonnes of high-grade flour to Afghanistan for one year only. And others were doing this, including Russia. As a result, last year, or the year before last year, the price of bread in Afghanistan was the lowest in the world, there are no Afghan farmers motivated to grow wheat. Why grow wheat, if cultivating poppies can yield 12-15 times more money than one hectare of wheat? Another thing is that about a thousand or fifteen hundred students from Afghanistan have graduated from Kazakh universities. These are future doctors, engineers, teachers, industrialists, agriculturists and so on. This is really effective aid. Therefore, we are constantly engaged in the Afghan problem, and we will get more and more involved in it.