CC BY
20Dinara Urozbayeva MA Student, Kazakh-German University Urozbayeva.di@gmail.com
NATION-BUILDING IN KAZAKHSTAN: THE ROLE OF NATIONAL SYMBOLS
Abstract:
This article examines the relation of national symbols to national identity, with a specific focus on understanding the role of symbols in nation-building process, particularly in multiethnic states with complicated historical background like Kazakhstan. The article argues that currently there is no comprehensive understanding of implications of national symbols for both conflict escalation and conflict preventing in multi-ethnic societies. Considering that, there needs to be a deeper understanding of the role of symbols in nation-building process, especially in the context of multi-ethnic states in order for progress to be made in maintaining national stability and strengthening the legitimacy of the government. Furthermore, the article argues that any state's social policy should be unifying, inclusive, designed from the "bottom-up", and not just focused on government institutions' policy. It emphasizes the need of scientific research on national symbols for future legislative decisions and efforts to create identity-inclusive policy. The article is useful in research of nation-building in Central Asia as it aimed to develop a diversified theoretical framework for study of identity constructing in this region.
Key words: national symbols, nation-building, inclusive identity, Kazakhstan
Introduction
Identity is an important part of the state building process. How to build a democracy if people do not perceive themselves as one people and one political entity? Here it is important to mention that the feeling of belonging to a group and perception of oneself as part of a whole is used to make sense of the world. This argument is grounded in social psychology. Henri Tajfel, for instance, whose findings have come to be known as minimal group paradigm, argues that when someone associates himself with a particular group, those in the group focus on the similarities between the members1. However, for people not in the group, differences are often exaggerated. Social groups provide a source of self-esteem and pride. Furthermore, 'imagined communities' of Benedict Anderson form a similar concept as in this work he pays special attention to the dynamics of socially and culturally organized imagination as processes at the heart of nation's self-understanding and solidarity .
Thus, national symbols are important elements of constructing national image and identity, they could provide automatic orientation toward group unity. National unity is a core element of state legitimacy. Government represents people, so it should reflect the common will of all people
1 Tajfel H. Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology - Cambrodge University Press, 1981. -pp. 254-267.
2Anderson B. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism - London: Verso, 1991. -pp. 39-40.
what cannot be achieved if people are living in some kind of echo-chambers, where people are exposed only to opinions that agree with their owns. People should agree to be a part of certain political entity for the purpose of the government's action on behalf of all. But different groups can produce different understandings. Symbols play significant role in these processes. They represent core values of a nation, so sometimes they play important role in protests against actions perceived as countering people's beliefs. For example, in Poland the "Solidarity" movement against communism involved the appropriation of anthem and national colors to delegitimize the ruling government.
On the base of the aforementioned, it is evident that for nation-building it is necessary to find a certain kind of a social clue, something that unites all the different groups living in the country. So, an important issue in building identity is its inclusiveness. The more universal the values are, the greater the chances for the further attractiveness and development of the country. The later condition is particularly important for states with a multi-ethnic population, like Kazakhstan. To ensure a stable peaceful situation in a multinational state and to preserve and increase its population, it is necessary that its state government promotes both the identity and symbols that are comprehensive and fit the various separate groups living in the country. In this article I examinethe relation of national symbols to national identity in context of multi-ethnicity with specific focus on the construction of national identity in Kazakhstan.
Chapter 1: Kazakhstan as multination state
Kazakhstan has declared its independence on 16 December 1991, and was one of the last countries of the former Soviet Union to do so. After Soviet Union collapsed the country faced ideology and legitimation vacuum. The survival of the ruling political class could only be guaranteed if this vacuum was successfully filled. Under these conditions, the concept of a "national idea" was developed. Thus, the Central Asian titular ethnic groups, which received state power after the collapse of the USSR, set on developing policies for their nationalizing programs in order to confirm their legitimacy in the new states.
Importantly, due to some political uncertainty that surfaced during this transition period large minority groups relied on the support by their "external homelands" which provided them with financial and cultural assistance.4 External homelands are the states to which particular ethnic groups belong, or can be construed as belonging, by ethnocultural affinity though not by legal citizenship. So, in their turn, with this complex interaction of various ethnic groups and states in the background the Central Asian state governments set on developing the concept of a nationalizing state as the key nation-building policy, maintaining the significance of a category of ethnicity in the state-building process while the policy of external homelands influenced the strengthening of cultural autonomy of various ethnic minorities. Thus, the early new independent states were characterized by a complex structure of ethnic groups, which was reflected in ethnically motivated agents and their policies. As a result, the 1990s and early 2000s brought two trends to Kazakhstan - the Slav and German population started actively leaving the country (the peak came in the mid-1990s) and at the same time ethnic Kazakhs started coming back from the
3Jakubowska, L. Political drama in Poland: The use of national symbols - Anthropology Today 6, 1990. - pp.10-13.
4 Brubaker R. Accidental Diasporas and External "Homelands" in Central and Eastern Europe: Past and Present, in: Political Science Series, Vol. 71, 2000, pp. 13-17.
neighboring countries to their historic homeland, which became independent. On Table 1 and Table 2 you can see how the ratio of ethnic groups in the country has changed.
Table 1. Population of Kazakhstan according to ethnic group 1989 (the 10 most common ethnicities)
Ethnic group Number %
Kazakhs 6534616 39.7
Russians 6227549 37.8
Germans 957518 5.8
Ukrainians 896240 5.4
Uzbeks 332017 2.0
Tatars 327982 2.0
Uyghurs 185301 1.1
Belarusians 182601 1.1
Koreans 103315 0.6
Azerbaijanis 90083 0.5
Table 2. Population of Kazakhstan according to ethnic group 20095 (the 10 most common ethnicities)
Ethnic group Number %
Kazakhs 10096763 63,07
Russians 3793764 23,70
Uzbeks 456997 2,85 %
Ukrainians 333031 2,08 %
Uyghurs 224713 1,40 %
Tatars 204229 1,28 %
Germans 178409 1,11 %
Koreans 100385 0,63 %
Turks 97015 0,61 %
Azerbaijanis 85292 0,53 %
Chapter 2: Symbols and narratives in the nation-building in Kazakhstan
In this context, it is worth noting that the ideological basis of self-esteem of any nation includes certain historical narratives. But, unlike a number of Eastern European states, the leaders of the countries of Central Asia could not rely on the remnants of any pre-Soviet statehood. In this regard, there was a need to legitimize new regimes by inventing and interpreting a new story with known characters. Claiming that the actual birth of a nation was in the ancestral times, the creation of a new nation state becomes a historically logical consequence of the past. Here we can
5 Atygayev N. O vremeni obrazovaniya Kazakhskogo khanstva (k 550-letiyu obrazovaniya khanstva) [About the time of the formation of the Kazakh Khanate (to the 550th anniversary of the formation of the Khanate)] — C. Valikhanov Institute of History and Ethnology, 2015, available at: http://iie.kz/?p=4051 (date accessed 01.12.2019).
recall the celebration of the 550th anniversary of the Kazakh Khanate in 2015, despite the fact that the date of the Khanate foundation was the subject of controversy.6
Thus, the need arose to create an academic basis for new state ideologies. To underpin the need for creation of new state ideology almost all state presidents of Central Asia started publishing books on national history. Also the Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev has authored several books, such as "In the Stream of History", "In the Heart of Eurasia", just to mention few of them, as well as various articles. In Turkmenistan, the former president Rahmon Niyazov published "Ruhnama" that was widely known throughout the country and was mandatory in schools. The book gave recommendations on all aspects of life, history and morality. In Tajikistan, the historical works of its president Emomali Rakhmon are venerated as textbooks in schools. The deceased Uzbek president Islam Karimov published about 30 books, including his magnus opus "High spirituality - an invincible power".
Furthermore, ideologies based on the superiority of the titular nations were proclaimed in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. For instance, in the book "Tajikistan in the Mirror of History" written by Rakhmon the history of Tajiks was presented in a romantic view, depicting Tajiks as the heirs of the Aryan civilization. The official ideology insists that the ancient Samanid dynasty put forward the idea of Tajik statehood. So, a monument of King Somon was built on one of the Dushanbe squares.
In the case of Kazakhstan, the process of creating national identity was particularly complex due to its complicated ethno-demographic composition. In the early years of independence, the country was considered one of the most ethnically heterogeneous successor states of the former Soviet Union. Less than 50% of the total population was ethnic Kazakhs during the last Soviet census in 1989, with Russians and Germans representing the largest minority groups (Table 1). So, after several attempts of building statehood on the basis of ancient Kazakh mythology, the leadership started using ethnic diversity as the basis for state identity. In this new myth, the regime acted as a guarantor of the preservation of multi-ethnic diversity, and the idea of "Kazakhstan is our common home" had emerged and was actively promoted in the public discourse ever since. The idea of inter-ethnic harmony found its manifestation in the inauguration of the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan in 1992, and evolved into other initiatives such as development of the patriotic act "Mangilik El" and the construction of "The Nation of a Unified Future" concept.
Important to note here, that this discourse of identity was not formulated with respect to the Soviet past, assessing it as good or bad, but rather accepted this past as a common historical experience, so that the new state identity would not undermine the past foundations. This can be explained by many factors: the hybrid nature of the transformation of the political elite, the widespread broadcasting of the Russian mass media, etc. Thus, the national ideology of Kazakhstan was implemented from the top down: inclusive narratives aimed at unification are transmitted through channels of influence. However, when translating narratives and discourses of ideology, their interpretation may differ. Individual perceptions of identity are mainly determined by individual ethnicity, age, place of residence, etc. It depends on effectiveness of these narratives, specific actions and their outcomes. Thereby, speaking about the formation of a
6 The Agency on Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Census 2009, available at: http://www.stat.kz/publishing/DocLib/2000/760179.rar (date accessed 01.12.2019).
7 Rahmonov E. The Tajiks in the Mirror of History.The first book. From Aryans to Samanids. London, 1999.
single identity in the context of a multinational state, one should not overlook the assessment of its inclusiveness.
Nowadays we can observe multiculturalism and the layering of identities. The results of a mass sociological survey conducted by the Kazakhstan Institute of Strategic Studies on "Identification models of Kazakhstan's main ethnic groups in context of societal security " in September 2014 (with a representative sample of 2,000 respondents) show that civil identity dominates for 41.2% of respondents while the ethnic identity is more prevalent for 47.6% of respondents. At the same time, the majority of people (74.1%) want Kazakhstan to be inclusive country, where all Kazakhstanis, regardless of ethnicity, can become important people. The idea
o
of "Kazakhstan for the Kazakhs" is supported only by 4.8% of respondents. At the same time it is important to note that other identification models are gradually becoming weightier (for example, such parallels as city-village, poor-rich, etc.).
So, Kazakhstan still needs more effective inclusive ideas that will unite Kazakhstan society, and not divide it along ethnic and other lines. To be comprehensive, the process of creating national identity must take place with the participation of various social groups, where there is no criterion for exclusion. For example, group size or geographical distribution should not be a problem. However, it is quite difficult to organize this process because the interested parties need a broad representation. In the context of building an inclusive national identity, the state and other interested parties and social groups should act as partners. Special attention should also be paid to the identity of women as a social group and youth. In any country, about half of the population are women, and young people play a special role in ensuring and maintaining the stability of national policies. Despite this, women or young people are not always part of the discourse of national identity as such, but these groups deserve a "place at the table".
The formation of an inclusive identity should be a complex process that allows all social groups to participate and contribute to its definition and fill Kazakhstan's "nationalism" with new cultural and ideological content. So, it is important to develop a systematic approach to the study of ideological, methodological, institutional aspects of identity. By doing so, we hope to extend the dialogue on identity formation and ways to make it more inclusive.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I would like to note that national identity as a social structure is constantly evolving and therefore state-building is a continuous, open-ended process, in which there will always be opportunities for change. The national question is always relevant. The absence of a holistic identity is reflected in intergroup relations. Today it is important to determine in which direction the national identity of ethnic groups in Kazakhstan will develop, otherwise the multinationality of Kazakhstan could become a factor of instability. The possibility of crisis determined by the recent Ukrainian events also cannot be ignored.
Identity shared by people from different ethnic, linguistic and religious groups is a kind of envelope that encompasses and unites these group sub-identities. However, this does not mean that national identity is simply the lowest common denominator that plays minor role in common
8Chernych I. A. Identification Processes in Kazakhstan and Mechanisms of National Construction// Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan//
http://www.kisi.kz/ru/categories/articles/posts/identifikacionnye-processy-v-kazahstane-i-mehanizmy-naciest (date accessed 01.12.2019).
social and political processes. Besides, the symbols of national identity are not only a flag, a coat of arms, or an anthem. These symbols are undoubtedly important and do play an important role in the national identity, but one cannot expect them to be strong enough to cause an equally deep emotional attachment and a sense of belonging to the state in all social groups, especially in a multi-ethnic country. The formation of inclusive identity requires a systematic study of ideological, methodological, institutional phenomena. The process of national construction in Kazakhstan is carried out from top to bottom, but for the successful implementation of common values it is necessary that representatives of different groups also have the opportunity to fill in the content of national identity. National identity is an ongoing process of change and adaptation. As a social construct, this is an expression of how and with what characteristics citizens identify themselves. This can be achieved by promoting the concept of new nationalism and new patriotism, shaping national identity, combining traditions and innovations, emphasizing the category of citizenship. After all, citizenship in a modern national state is the basis of sovereignty, and the category of citizenship should not depend on other types of self-identification. Thus, it is important to involve the entire national community in all its diversity in the process of the formation of national identity.
Last but not least, it is important to note that the progression of scientific research on national symbols should be in step with the work of government institutions, legislators and practitioners, as the answers to the important questions that remain will be useful for future decisions and efforts to promote and create inclusive national identity.
REFERENCES:
[1] Tajfel Henri. Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology. -Cambrodge University Press, 1981. - pp. 254-267.
[2] Anderson Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. - London: Verso, 1991. - pp. 39-40.
[3] Jakubowska Longina. Political drama in Poland: The use of national symbols. -Anthropology Today 6, 1990. - pp.10-13.
[4] Brubaker Roger. Accidental Diasporas and External "Homelands" in Central and Eastern Europe: Past and Present, - Political Science Series, Vol. 71, 2000, pp. 13-17.
[5] Kratkiye itogi Vsesoyuznoy perepisi naseleniya 1989 goda po Kazakhskoy SSR. Statisticheskiy sbornik [Brief results of the All-Union Population Census of 1989 in the Kazakh SSR. Statistical Digest]. - Alma-Ata, 1990. - pp.7, 9.
[6] Atygayev N. O vremeni obrazovaniya Kazakhskogo khanstva (k 550-letiyu obrazovaniya khanstva) [About the time of the formation of the Kazakh Khanate (to the 550th anniversary of the formation of the Khanate)] — C. Valikhanov Institute of History and Ethnology, 2015, available at: http://iie.kz/?p=4051 (date accessed 01.12.2019).
[7] The Agency on Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Census 2009, available at: http://www.stat.kz/publishing/DocLib/2000/760179.rar (date accessed 01.12.2019).
[8] Rahmonov Emomali. The Tajiks in the Mirror of History.The first book. From Aryans to Samanids. - London, 1999.
[9] Chernych Irina. A. Identification Processes in Kazakhstan and Mechanisms of National Construction// Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies under the President of the
Republic of Kazakhstan// http://www.kisi.kz/ru/categories/articles/posts/identifikacionnye-processy-v-kazahstane-i-mehanizmy-naciest (date accessed 01.12.2019).
[10] Official cite of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan// Speech of the State Secretary of the Republic of Kazakhstan at the conference "The identity and unity of the people of Kazakhstan in the context of 100 specific steps", 2015, available at: http://www.akorda.kz/ru/ secretary_of_state/ secretary_of_state_speeches/vystuplenie-gosudarstvennogo-sekretarya-respubliki-kazahstan-gabdykalikovoi-na-konferencii-identichnost-i-edinstvo-naroda-kazahstana-v-konte (date accessed 01.12.2019).
