Change and Transformation in Kazakhstan: A New “Success” of Nationalization?

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 17, 1993 - 2026, 31.03.2019

Levent Duman

https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.511891

Öz

Nationalization
processes which take different forms across regions and historical periods are
among widely studied topics in Political Science. When 15 new states achieved
their independence as a result of the Soviet Union’s disintegration, those
states proceeded to implement measures in order to consolidate their new
independent status. After gaining its independence at the end of 1991,
Kazakhstan put into effect a series of polices for the purpose of
nationalization. Those policies whose effects can be observed on lives of
people living in Kazakhstan in various areas including culture, art, education,
politics and economics are essentially have the objective of creating a new
society. It is still too early to come up with a definite conclusion about
whether those polices are “successful” or not. The main purpose of this study
is to analyze on-going nationalization policies in Kazakhstan, to evaluate
those policies’ effects on different ethnic groups which form a significant portion
of the country’s population and to scrutinize Kazakhstan’s pros and cons in
achieving the goals which are being put forward in post-1991 period.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kazakhstan, Nation-State, Nationalization, Kazakhization

Kazakistan’da Değişim ve Dönüşüm: Yeni Bir Uluslaştırma “Başarısı” mı?

Öz

Dünyanın farklı
coğrafi bölgelerinde farklı biçimler alabilen, gerçekleştiği zamanın
koşullarına göre şekillenen uluslaşma süreçleri Siyaset Biliminde oldukça sık
çalışılan konular arasında yer almaktadır. Sovyetler Birliği’nin dağılmasıyla
birlikte 15 devlet bağımsızlığına kavuşurken bu devletler bağımsızlıklarını
pekiştirme yönünde adımlar atmaya başladılar. 1991’in sonlarında bağımsızlığına
kavuşan Kazakistan uluslaştırma hedefiyle bir dizi politikayı hayata
geçirmiştir. Kültür, sanat, eğitim, siyaset ve ekonomi dâhil olmak üzere
Kazakistan’da yaşayan insanların hayatının her alanında etkileri görülen bu
politikalar esas olarak yeni bir toplum oluşturulması hedefini taşımaktadır.
Geniş kapsamlı ve uzun erimli olması tasarlanan bu politikaların “başarılı”
olup olmadığı konusunda kesin bir kanıya varmak için henüz erkendir. Bu
çalışmanın amacı, halen devam etmekte olan Kazakistan’daki uluslaştırma
faaliyetlerinin analiz edilmesi, bunların ülke nüfusunun önemli bir kısmını
oluşturan farklı etnik gruplar üzerindeki etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi ve tüm
bu süreçlerde ortaya konulan hedeflerin sağlanabilmesi konusunda Kazakistan’ın
sahip olduğu avantaj ve dezavantajların irdelenmesidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kazakistan, Ulus-Devlet, Uluslaştırma, Kazaklaştırma

Kaynakça

• Aitymbetov, N., Toktarov, E. ve Ormakhanova, Y. (2015). Nation-building in Kazakhstan: Kazakh and Kazakhstani identities controversy. Bilig, 74, 01-20.
• Aksholakova, A. ve Ismailova, N. (2013). The language policy of Kazakhstan and the state language in government service. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1580–1586.
• Aydın, S. (1993). Modernleşme ve milliyetçilik. Ankara: Gündoğan Yayınları.
• Beachain, D. O. ve Kevlihan, R. (2011). State-building, identity and nationalism in Kazakhstan: Some preliminary thoughts. Working Papers in International Studies, Centre for International Studies, Dublin City University, No.1.
• Bingöl, Y. (2004). Nationalism and democracy in post-communist central Asia. Asian Ethnicity 5(1), 43-60.
• Boranbayeva, G. S. (2004). SSCB dönemi ve bağımsızlık sonrası Kazakistan Cumhuriyeti’nde Kazak dilinin genel durumu. Modern Türklük Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 20-41.
• Bowyer, A. C. (2008). Parliament and political parties in Kazakhstan. Silk Road Paper. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program.
• Buck, K. (2015). Limitations to the nationalising state: The case of Kazakhstan. K. Cordell ve K. Jajecznik (Ed.). The Transformation of Nationalism in Central and Eastern Europe: Ideas and Structures in (s.189-209). Warsaw: The Faculty of Journalism and Political Science University of Warsaw.
• Burkhanov, A. (2017). Kazakhstan 's national identity - building policy: Soviet legacy, state efforts, and societal reactions. Cornell International Law Journal, 50(1), 1-14.
• Carlson, C. F. (2015). Nation-building in central Asia through language legislation. MANAS Journal of Social Studies, 4(4), 22-30.
• Cohen, A. (2008). Kazakhstan:The road to independence /energy policy and the birth of a Nation. Washington, D.C.: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program.
• Çetin, S. (2014). Kazakistan ulus inşa sürecinde Türk dilli toplulukların karşılaştırmalı olarak diaspora ilişkileri. Yayınlanmamış Uzmanlık Tezi, T.C. Başbakanlık Yurtdışı Türkler ve Akraba Topluluklar Başkanlığı, Ankara, Türkiye.
• Dave, B. (2004). Entitlement through numbers: Nationality and language categories in the first post-Soviet census of Kazakhstan. Nations and Nationalism, 10(4), 439-459.
• Dinç, D. (2010). Nationality policies in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ortadoğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.
• Diener, A. C. (2005). Kazakhstan’s kin state diaspora: Settlement planning and teh oralman dilemma. Europe-Asia Studies, 57(2), 327-348.
• Dukeyev, B. (2017). Ethnic return migration in Kazakhstan: Shifting state dynamics, changing media discourses. Central Asia Program Papers, 183, 1-11.
• Fedorenko, V. (2012). Central asia: From ethnic to civic nationalism. Rethink Paper, Washington DC: Rethink Institute.
• Fierman, W. (2005). Kazakh language and prospects for its role in Kazakh “Groupness”. Ab Imperio, 2, 393-423.
• Foreign Affairs (2018). Kazakhstan and the world. 97 (5), 4.
• Gellner, E. (2008). Uluslar ve ulusçuluk. 2.Basım. (B. Ersanlı ve G. G. Özdoğan, Çev.). İstanbul: Hil Yayınları.
• Gürbüz, M. ve Karabulut, M. (2009). SSCB’nin dağılmasıyla bağımsızlığına kavuşan ülkelerde sosyo-ekonomik benzerlik analizi. Bilig, 50, 31-50.
• Hakim, M. (2009). Kazakistan’daki tarih anlayışı ve uluslararası boyutları. Bilig, 50, 51-64.
• Hale, H. E. (2009). Cause without a Rebel: Kazakhstan's Unionist Nationalism in the USSR and CIS. Nationalities Papers 37(1), 1-32.
• Hippler, J. (2005). Violent conflicts, conflict prevention and nation-building – terminology and political concepts. J. Hippler (Der.) Nation-building: A Key Concept for Peaceful Conflict Transformation? in (3-14) (B. Stone, Çev.). London: Pluto Press..
• Hobsbawm, E. J. (2006). 1780’den Günümüze milletler ve milliyetçilik: “Program, Mit, Gerçeklik”. 3.Basım. (O. Akınhay, Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• IHS Markit (20.09.2018). Country Reports –Kazakhstan. http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=ef2a21de-788a-4f55-885c-94412a8fd23b%40pdc-v-sessmgr05 (Erişim Tarihi: 21.11.2018).
• Jarosiewicz, A. (2016). Perestroika – The Nazarbayev Way: Crisis and Reforms in Kazakhstan. Point of View, 58, 1-53.
• Kaya, A. (2012). SSCB sonrası coğrafyada ulus inşa süreci: Kazakistan örneği. Alternatif Politika, 4(3), 354-378.
• Kesici, Ö. (2011). The dilemma in the nation-building process: The Kazakh or Kazakhstani nation? Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 10(1), 31-58.
• Kissane, C. (2005). History education in transit: Where to for Kazakhstan? Comparative Education, 41(1), 45-69.
• Koch, N. (2013). Sport and soft authoritarian nation-building. Political Geography, 32, 42-51
• Kuşçu, I. (2014). Ethnic return migration and public debate: The case of Kazakhstan. International Migration, 52(2), 178–197.
• Kuzio, T. (2002). History, memory and nation building in the post-Soviet colonial space. Nationalities Papers, 30(2), 241-264.
• Laruelle, M. (2016). Introduction. M. Laruelle (Der.), Kazakhstan in the Making: Legitimacy, Symbols, and Social Changes içinde (s.ix-xvi). Lanham: Lexıngton Books.
• Manassova, M. M. Zholdubayeva, A. K., Mukhanbet, A. A., Bolyssova, K. M. ve Altybassarova, M. A. (2016). The architectural ımages of capital city in the context of the national ındependence of Kazakhstan. Global Media Journal, 10(3), 1-9.
• Marat, E. (2009). Nation branding in central Asia: A new campaign to present ideas about the state and the nation. Europe-Asia Studies, 61(7), 1123-1136.
• Massansalvador, F. S. (2010). The process of nation building in central Asia and its relationship to Russia's regional influence. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, 10(5), 1-13.
• Matuszkiewicz, R. (2010). The language issue in Kazakhstan – instituti-onalizing new ethnic relations after independence. Economic and Environmental Studies, 10(2), 211-227.
• Melich, J. ve Adibayeva, A. (2013). Nation-building and cultural policy in Kazakhstan. European Scientific Journal, 2, 265-279.
• Mkrtchyan, Narek (2013). Astana: A new post-Soviet Text. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(21), 229-236.
• Mkrtchyan, N. (2014). The notion of 'Kazakhness' behind the symbolic nation-building of Kazakhstan. CEU Political Science Journal, 9(1-2), 16-38.
• Mun, O. (2015). (Re)constructing citizens through citizenship education in Kazakhstan. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Central European University, Budapest, Hungary.
• Narottum, S. K. (2006). Politics of nation-building and state-formation in Kazakhstan. Pakistan Horizon, 59(2), 49-71.
• Norman, W. (2006). Negotiating nationalism: Nation-building, federalism, and secession in the multinational state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• O’Callaghan, L. (2004-2005). War of words: Language policy in post independence Kazakhstan. Nebula, 1(3), 197-216.
• Oka, N. (2013). A note on ethnic return migration policy in Kazakhstan: changing priorities and a growing dilemma. IDE Discussion Paper, 394, 1-13.
• Oktay, E. Y. (2009). SSCB sonrası kazakistan’ın sosyal ve ekonomik boyutlarıyla göç durumu, II. Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimciler Kongresi (22-24 Ekim 2008 Bişkek / Kırgızistan) Kongre Kitabı. Kocaeli. 409-428.
• Özkırımlı, U. (2000). Theories of nationalism: A critical ıntroduction. New York: Palgrave.
• Peyrouse, S. (2007). Nationhood and the minority question in central Asia: The Russians in Kazakhstan. Europe-Asia Studies, 59(3), 481-501.
• Pianciola, N. (2001). The collectivization famine in Kazakhstan, 1931-1933. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 25 (3/4), 237-251.
• Schatz, E. (2003). When capital cities move: The political geography of nation and state building. Kellogg Institute Working Paper, 303, 1-26.
• Scriven, A. M. (2013). Top-down nationalism in post-Soviet Kazakhstan. Geography Masters Research Papers. Portland State University.
• Sholk, D. (2012). Kazakhstan’s new capital: Its importance and implications. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 13(2), 203-210.
• Sinnott, P. (2003). Population politics in Kazakhstan. Journal of International Affairs, 56(2), 103-105.
• Smith, A. D. (1991). National identity. London: Penguin Books.
• Sputnik (27.10.2017). Kazakistan cumhurbaşkanı Nursultan Nazarbayev, latin harflerinin kullanıldığı yeni Kazak alfabesini onayladı. https://tr.sputniknews.com/asya/201710271030775280-kazakistan-latin-alfabesi/ (Erişim Tarihi: 19.04.2018).
• Sultangaliyeva, A. (2016). Kazakhstan and its neighbors: opportunities and limitations. The Institute of World Economics and Politics (IWEP) under the Foundation of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan – The Leader of the Nation. Working Paper.
• The World Factbook (2018). Kazakhstan. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/kz.html (Erişim Tarihi: 17.04.2018).
• Türk Cumhuriyetleri Anayasaları (2014). Kazakistan cumhuriyeti anayasası. Ankara: TÜRKPA Yayınları: 4. 59-97.
• Vikipedi (2018). Kazakistan. https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakistan (Erişim Tarihi: 9.04. 2018).
• Wakizaka, K. (2014). Orta Asya’da devlet inşası ve devlet- diaspora ilişkileri: Kazaklar ve Özbekler örneği. III. Türkiye Lisansüstü Çalışmaları Kongresi - Bildiriler Kitabı III. İstanbul: İlem. 109-122.
• Wimmer, A. (2004). Nationalist exclusion and ethnic conflict: Shadows of modernity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Zardykhan, Z. (2016). Ethnic Kazakh repatriation and Kazakh nation-building: The awaited savior or the prodigal son? REGION: Regional Studies of Russia, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, 5(1), 17-34.