CC BY
19
geo-economic pole for them. Everything depends on whether a country is capable to submit other actors to its external and internal interests. Russia demonstrates now that it is capable to do this. Perhaps, it will be able to complete the gathering together of lands, including all former Soviet republics of Central Asia in the European project.
"Odnako, " Moscow, 2014, June-July, No 174, pp. 138-149.
Ivan Kochedykov,
Political analyst, Moscow State Linguistic University SPECIFIC FEATURES OF POLITICAL LEADERSHIP IN CENTRAL ASIA ON EXAMPLES OF UZBEKISTAN AND KAZAKHSTAN
The role of political leaders becomes more decisive in the modern political process. Actually, politics has now become personified. The phenomenon of political leadership connected with the mechanisms of managerial functions used by concrete subjects of power should be studied more thoroughly. The functioning of different social structures and society as a whole depends on the effectiveness of managerial actions of political leaders.
The political leader today is a man who constantly talks about values and promotes them. These values cause emotions among people and create mental cards. That is, the point is not formal leadership, but actual one. If there is not such communication, then it is only a nominal leader, or simply political manager.
In the 21st century the political leader is a collectively created product. Image is created by political strategists, and a decision is worked out by experts. The leader has the decisive chance to take
responsibility upon himself and to commit an act in a certain border, existential situation.
The President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov represents the type of a leader-administrator. His specific features include:
Prolonged stay in power which is personified, and the preservation of conflicts and balance between different clans.
As a result, great corruption, closeness of policy, and absence of channels for expressing dissatisfaction.
This is why in the conditions of a crisis greater courage and resoluteness are needed to suppress it, and in "time of peace" stricter control over the population and the "disobedient," which takes the form of reprisals.
However this power has support of the population because it lives in a relative order and security, and has certain mentality and local ideology aimed at the creation of a civic nation. He is ambitious and regards power as a resource which can be used, spent and augmented. Besides, he is able to adjust situations in which he finds himself, he is distinguished by resoluteness, active behavior and certain aggressiveness. There is nothing surprising in that he succeeded in bolstering up his power by legal and administrative measures.
His main problem is the absence of a successor. The daughters are incapable to succeed him. Lola is in the sidelines, and Gulnara evokes displeasure, even hatred of too many people. She is involved in big corruption scandals, but pretends to fight corruption. She makes surprising, even stunning statements from time to time. But there is a number of candidates from among people close to Karimov. For example, Rustam Inoyatov, who initiated a campaign against Gulnara Karimova. In recent months certain presidential powers have been transferred to the parliament and prime minister.
The President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev is a charismatic leader. He is tolerant and cunning, but when the matter does not concern Kazakhstan he can make blunders. At the beginning of his career he effectively used the nationalist sentiments of people living in the south of the republic and succeeded in consolidating them. The country is ruled by one man - the President and his family.
Nazarbayev is a very strong leader, able politician and knowledgeable and experienced manager, although with certain drawbacks. However, the question of a successor remains open. All fears and expectations of the Kazakh people are connected with this problem. The political elite, businessmen and plain people worried that the new head of state will be inferior to Nazarbayev. Thus, he serves as a sample for determining a candidate for next presidency. Despite criticism and possible negative assessments, Nazarbayev will remain an example of a harsh ruler, who did not allow chaos and anarchy and strictly controlled all actions of the elite.
In conclusion it should be said that Nursultan Nazarbayev is a political and national leader who takes into account all specific features of Kazakh society, and national mentality of each ethnos living in Kazakhstan. This is confirmed by many years of his staying in power. He prevented interethnic clashes and succeeded in achieving steady development of his country. He made Kazakhstan attractive for foreign investors. At the same time concentration of too much power in the hands of one man and reliance on and privileges to a small group of men close to the ruler can have disastrous consequences.
What is it that unites both I. Karimov and N. Nazarbayev?
They are the product of one epoch and graduated from one Soviet political school, hence, their role as reformers and fathers of the nation.
A specific feature of both them is the big role of clans played in their countries, eastern mentality, popular support, personification, and absence of a successor. There are expectations connected with the complete idealization of the present leader, or with the diametrically opposed view (for example, expectations for the coming of Islamists existing in the Ferghana Valley). Since there are no mechanisms of ensuring succession, it is necessary to note the presence of conflicts, and in future, the possibility of a split on the basis of ethno-confessional features.
The common feature of both presidents is their political psychology and different political orientation. Nursultan Nazarbayev tries to promote Kazakhstan's status in the international arena. Hence, its presidency at the OSCE in 2010 and entry in the Customs Union, whereas Islam Karimov is mainly oriented to the domestic problems of Uzbekistan.
Written specially for Bulletin "Russia and the Moslem World".
Darya Kosmaenko,
Political analyst, Moscow State Linguistic University SPECIFIC FEATURES OF FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM OF MODERN UZBEKISTAN
After the disintegration of the U.S.S.R. the former Soviet republics, including those in Central Asia, particularly Uzbekistan, have been forced to find their own ways of socio-economic and political development. The specific features of their political systems can be explained by their history, civilizational specificities, as well as peculiar features of their political culture. Without studying the specificities of
