Twenty years ago when the Soviet Union was collapsing many experts thought that the world was entering a new phase, beyond the Cold War. The future seemed to be rational, stable, based on the clear and transparent principles of settled relations both for the geopolitical reality and internal processes which take place in so called transit countries. But most expert predications were not realized and now it is obvious that the outlines of the past and the future were not drawn as distinctly as they seemed to be at the moment of the collapse of the bipolar world. The reasons for conflict potential, increasing new risks and calls for the internal development of post-Soviet countries are a complex of factors based on the violation of the balance between power and society. The problems of so called "social security" are becoming more obvious. It can be suggested that in the terms of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization these problems can and must be solved with the highest efficiency. Recent events in Kyrgyzstan clearly demonstrated that a lack of responsibility on the part of the
national elite causes a deep crisis. The country is immersed in an environment of conflict, and the way out might require not only consolidated efforts by the politicians of Kyrgyzstan, but also systematic external support by those who are interested in the fast stabilization of the situation in this Central Asian republic. The example of Kyrgyzstan, where the second revolution in 5 years has taken place, is certainly significant, but we also need to understand that it is not a unique case, and the hidden mechanisms of the crisis can be launched in other regions of the former Soviet Union. What is a crisis based on the post-Soviet countries? The leader of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, gives his own answer to this question. In 1991 in his book "Without the right and the left" he noted: "Increasing economic and social chaos will cause a storm, which will sweep away everyone. Political superstructure with a "right", "left" and "centre" will collapse in no time. We must realize this. Only a policy of common sense can prevent it".
Here is the key to understanding the sources of a crisis and the pattern of its prevention. If we react only to external risks, there is a possibility of the destabilization of internal development. We have examples of effective and stable development - Russia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan. At the same time not all political elites of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States have managed to organize effective cooperation between the authorities and society. Economic and social problems do not arise all of a sudden; they are formed as a result of a gradual separation of power from society. The
authorities stops feeling public moods, and rely upon process methods of management, without inquiring into the heart of the matters. These egative trends are absolutely obvious and in some sense universal - epotism, corruption, lack of social ladders, and clan structures in politics.
Society can "forgive" the authorities increasing economic problems if it understands that a crisis is objective and affects everyone, if the elite is ready to share the difficulties with the citizens. Otherwise dissatisfaction turns into riots, meaningless and merciless. However it is also obvious that the political lessons of the Kyrgyz crisis must be taken into account by the representatives of integrative structures which did not manage to prevent a crisis in the country - a member of the SCO and the CSTO. It is necessary to change the principles of political decision making in the terms of integrative structures, to widen the social component of the notion of "security", and to define more clearly the border between the internal problems and external risks. China, Kazakhstan and Russia must make united efforts not to allow the SCO to become irrelevant, reacting sufficiently to new risks and challenges.
Alexei Vlasov
