CC BY
19
exploits them, but it quits the networks easily if it turns out that the national state provides for it its own resource. The Islamists, too, either enter cross-border networks and are fighting for Islamic values or quit these networks and begin to protect their national specificity and autonomy. The challenge that Islam presents to the idea of nation is not absolute and unidirectional. The death of the national statehood and its replacement by the Islamic statehood as the result of the actions of Islamist opposition forces is not predetermined. It is more likely, says Sergei Abashin, that under the impact of cross-border networks and ideas a complex process of reconfiguration of the political and ideological fields is under way, and it, in its turn, causes the destabilization of many institutions and principles and generally increases the unpredictability of events.
The author of the abstract V.N. Schensnovich
2017.03.003. DMITRY POPOV. CENTRAL ASIA IN U.S. FOREIGN POLICY. CENTRAL ASIAN LOBBY IN WASHINGTON // "Tsentralnaya Aziya vo vneshney politike SShA. 1991-2016", Moscow, RISI, 2016, P. 189-195.
Keywords: lobbyists, lobbyist organizations, lobbying activity, Central Asian states, Kazakhstan, Astana, the "Aliyev case".
Dmitry Popov,
PhD (legal),
Head of the Ural Regional Information and Analytical Center of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, Yekaterinburg
The author notes that at present many countries, formerly part of the USSR, secretly promote their interests in the United States through a system of lobbyist organizations legalized there.
Foreign governments use the "gaps" in the U.S. law, preferring to hire lobbyists through intermediaries in the form of non-governmental organizations, chambers of commerce, lawyer groups and other similar structures registered in third countries, particularly in Europe. They manage to circumvent legally the requirements of the U.S. Foreign Registration Agent Act 1938 (FARA) with this combination. Mediation scheme is subject to a "soft" act on the regulation of lobbying activity (LDA) in 1995, providing the ability to mask the involvement in Washington policy.
The author notes that little is known about the lobbying efforts of the Central Asian states. Elites and businesses of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan possess the most real opportunities for this.
The task of restoring contacts with the U.S. leadership after the crisis in the U.S.-Uzbek relations 2005-2008 was assigned to Abdulaziz Kamilov, the Uzbek Ambassador to Washington. Significant assistance in working with the Senate and U.S. executive bodies was provided to him by the local community of Bukharian Jews. In 2010, A. Kamilov returned to his homeland in the status of the First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs already, and in January 2012 - headed the Foreign Ministry of Uzbekistan.
Opponents of the Uzbek leadership were also seen in the field of political lobbyism. During 2008-2010, the law firm Maynard, Cooper & Gale received almost $ 800 thousand from the opposition coalition "Sunshine Uzbekistan".
The author notes that Kazakhstan is the most active among the republics of Central Asia in lobbying national interests in American instances. And the lobby in the U.S. was largely created by Astana for fear that Washington would support one of the famous political opponents of President Nazarbaev - his former son-in-law Rakhat Aliyev.
According to the representatives of the government of Kazakhstan, the ultimate goal of R. Aliyev's actions was to create the image of a dissident in the United States, obtain political
asylum there and continue the struggle for power in the Republic of Kazakhstan with the help of Washington.
R. Aliyev sought to attract the potential of the American judicial and political system for the return of assets, requisitioned by the authorities of the republic after the aggravation of his relations with N. Nazarbayev.
The leadership of Kazakhstan was extremely worried about what was happening in the U.S., fearing that the US administration could make political cooperation with Rakhat Aliyev. The U.S. Embassy in Astana recommended to the State Department to exclude the involvement of the US administration in the "Aliyev case", perceived as "a matter of life and death by President N. Nazarbayev".
The author emphasizes that, according to American diplomats, it is incorrect to consider the disgraced politician as the "golden boy of democracy", taking into account his direct involvement in large-scale corruption schemes during his period of being in power.
Astana did not limit itself to the prevention of American partners through diplomatic channels. In 2008, Kazakhstan hired lobbyists in the US, allocating a share of $ 3.7 million to start for three local firms for three years to create a parliamentary group "Friends of Kazakhstan" in Congress. There was a proposal to nominate N. Nazarbayev for the Nobel Peace Prize for his contribution to nuclear security. A special fund was created to make cash payments to "Friends of Kazakhstan" on behalf of N. Nazarbayev allegedly.
Another conductor of the interests of the leadership of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the United States was a small Washington firm Policy Impact Communications, which in late 2009 helped to create in Congress another loyal Astana parliamentary group called "Central Asian Kokus" in cooperation with the Kazakh embassy.
The lobbyists provided a number of positive statements by members of Congress on the success of Kazakhstan, which was
important for President N. Nazarbayev, whose reputation has suffered in connection with the publication of the book of revelations "Godfather-in-law" by R. Aliyev in Russia and Germany in 2009. The planned chairmanship of Kazakhstan in the OSCE in 2010 required improving the image of the republic as well.
Positive reports on Kazakhstan were released by several authoritative American analytical institutions specializing in Central Asia, including the Johns Hopkins University and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which received $ 350 thousand from the Republic of Kazakhstan for three years. In addition, Kazakh diplomats carried out work on the creation of the U.S.-Kazakhstan Legal Association in February 2013. As a result, the Embassy of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Washington, together with hired consultants, largely neutralized the consequences of the lobbying initiatives of Rakhat Aliyev and the Khurani brothers, which, according to the author, forced the latter to adjust the strategy by applying to the court.
In May 2013, the Federal District Court of Columbia rejected the claims of the Khurani brothers to A. Mirtchev and denied them the right to file a similar suit in the U.S. in the future as a measure against the abuse of the U.S. legal system. Rakhat Aliyev was detained at the request of Kazakhstan in Vienna, where in February 2015 he was found hanged in a solitary cell of an Austrian prison.
One of the results of the confrontation between the authorities of Kazakhstan and R. Aliyev was that the republic, in comparison with other countries of Central Asia, lobbies its interests in the U.S. most intensively. If other Central Asian states, as well as affiliated commercial structures, resort to the services of overseas consultants and public relations managers, then on a smaller scale. The author points out the cooperation of the Kyrgyz Prosecutor General's Office and the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld on legal issues and the promotion of the idea (disputed by Tashkent) of the construction of the Rogun HPP in Tajikistan by the aluminum company TALCO, which
paid $ 600 thousand to the lobbyists of Washington-based Fabiani & Company in 2013.
In general, the consequences of the activities of American lobbying groups in the interests of the Central Asian countries are not comparable to the counter influence of the soft power institutions deployed in the region by the U.S. government. However, taking into account the properties of the American political system, the author claims that they sometimes make notable adjustments in bilateral relations, including those that could potentially cause an acute conflict between Washington and Astana around the "Aliyev case".
Author of the abstract - N. Ginesina
