But Lukashenka did not manage to jump out of the rut (or he did not want to, relying on his own strength).

Why?

Briefly:

• Both regimes survived thanks to the support of Moscow, as a result of which they found themselves highly dependent on Russia.

• But the Belarusian leadership put all its eggs in one basket and bet on Russia.

  But under Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan took a course to diversify foreign policy and economic cooperation.

• From the very beginning, Kazakhstan saw the USA and the European Union as important partners, and tried to maintain good relations with them.

  And since 1996, Belarus has been in a sharp conflict with the West.

• Lukashenko and Takaev drew different conclusions from the popular protests.

  Lukashenka categorically refused to take any steps towards the people, he bet on violence.

  Takaev, on the other hand, announced a reform course.

Belarus and Kazakhstan are members of all integration associations in the post-Soviet space created by Russia (CIS, CSTO, EAEU).

In both countries, there are authoritarian regimes that rely not on public support, but on the state apparatus.

Their leaders were not elected in democratic elections.

Both in Belarus (in 2020) and in Kazakhstan (in 2022), there were mass protests of the population that threatened the existence of the regimes there.

Both Lukashenko and Tokaev blamed external forces for this.

Both Lukashenko and Tokaev turned to Putin for help.

In 2020, the Kremlin prepared armed formations that were ready to enter Belarus to suppress protests.

In January 2022, CSTO troops were introduced into Kazakhstan to neutralize the "riots".

Thus, both regimes survived thanks to the support of Moscow, as a result of which they became highly dependent on Russia.

However, with the beginning of Russia's war against Ukraine, the leaders of Belarus and Kazakhstan behaved completely differently.

Minsk fully supported Russian aggression, became its accomplice, Lukashenka allowed to use Belarusian territory to attack its southern neighbor.

His rhetoric against the West and Ukraine is even more aggressive than Putin's.

Kazakhstan distanced itself from Russia.

Its leadership declared that it will not violate the sanctions imposed by the West against Belarus and Russia.

Takaev stated that he does not recognize the independence of "DPR" and "LPR".

Kazakhstan provided humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

Why did Belarus and Kazakhstan take fundamentally different positions at the time of the most acute international crisis?

There is a complex of objective and subjective factors that can explain this difference.

1.

Different geographical, and therefore, geopolitical position of the countries.

Belarus is located between two centers of power — Russia and the West.

Kazakhstan has more points of support - Russia, China, Turkey, the West.

2. The

Belarusian leadership put all its eggs in one basket, bet on Russia, and became extremely dependent on Moscow: economic, political, military, informational, ideological.

Only in the short period of 2014–2020.

a feeble attempt was made to break free from such dependence.

Even under Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan took a course to diversify foreign policy and economic cooperation.

The country was friends with everyone, it did not conflict with any of the powerful states.

3.

Belarus actually became completely dependent on Russia for gas and oil.

Kazakhstan, on the other hand, exports energy resources, which largely guaranteed the country's independent economic and foreign policy.

4.

Belarus and Kazakhstan have different models of national identification.

From the very beginning, the leadership of Kazakhstan took a course to build the Kazakh nation on an ethno-cultural basis.

Which objectively led to distancing from Russia in the cultural, informational, ideological, and linguistic spheres.

In Belarus, the state policy of identity formation was based partly on the Soviet heritage, partly on the ideology of the "Russian world".

Lukashenka constantly claims that we are "one nation", that Belarusians are the same Russians, only with a quality mark, he talks about a common Motherland from Brest to Vladivostok.

It is no wonder that at a critical moment of the war, Belarus and Russia turned out to be allies, former paratroopers during the celebration of the professional holiday walk around Belarusian cities with Russian flags, and policemen willingly use the letter "Z" - a symbol of Russian aggression.

5.

Different relations with the West.

From the very beginning, Kazakhstan saw the USA and the European Union as important partners, and tried to maintain good relations with them.

Every year, the country's leadership sends its young citizens to study at Western universities.

Western investments are welcomed and encouraged in every way.

Therefore, Kazakhstan avoids supporting anti-Western calls and actions of Belarus and Russia within the framework of the CSTO.

Although Takaev spoke about external intervention during the popular unrest in January 2022, he did not mention the West in this regard.

There were not even hints in this direction.

Belarus is ideologically the most anti-Western country in the post-Soviet space.

Since 1996, official Minsk has been in a sharp political, diplomatic, value conflict with the West.

From the very beginning, Lukashenka declared the USA and the European Union enemies.

6.

Lukashenko and Tokaev drew different conclusions from the popular protests.

Lukashenka categorically refused to take any steps towards the people, to arrange at least some reforms.

Violence is the only way to respond to public dissatisfaction.

That is why the Belarusian regime is evolving from authoritarianism to totalitarianism.

Takaev, on the other hand, announced a reform course.

And let his political opponents claim that these reforms are cosmetic, nevertheless, the government at least formally admits that its mistakes (blamed everything on Nazarbayev) contributed to the popular protests, and it is ready to listen to the people.

Thus, the regime is able to expand its social base, and it cannot be ruled out that Tokaev is able to win real competitive elections.

And he, unlike Lukashenka, needs external support to a lesser extent.

7.

The scale of the leader's personality, his worldview plays a certain role.

Takaev is a professional diplomat, graduated from the elite university - Moscow State Institute of International Relations, speaks five languages, worked in the system of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, the United Nations (was the deputy secretary general of the United Nations).

The President of Kazakhstan knows the world well, understands the dominant trends, easily communicates with the leaders of both the East and the West.

Therefore, he avoids the situation of deadlock, isolation.

In this regard, it is difficult to compare Takaev with Lukashenka.

The latter does not even speak Belarusian.

He is simply uncomfortable communicating with Western politicians.

Therefore, even during the period of "detente" with the West, the Belarusian leader avoided visits to European countries, although he was persistently invited.

Lukashenka got used to the position of an outcast, his ideas about the world do not go beyond the boundaries of a commoner who watches TV.

And for many years he has been trying to prove that he and Putin are keeping pace, and the whole world is not.

Therefore, at a critical moment, Tokaev avoided a strong connection with the Russian aggressor.

And Lukashenka, like the frog from Kondrat Krapiva's fable, could not (or did not want to, relying excessively on his own strength) jump out of the rut, he became strongly attached to the Russian "Titanic", which is speeding towards the iceberg.

The opinions expressed in the blogs represent the views of the authors themselves and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position.

• Valer Karbalevich

  He was born in 1955.

  Graduated from the history faculty of BSU, candidate of historical sciences, associate professor.

  Radio Svaboda political commentator.

  
  
  

  karbalevich@gmail.com

  Subscribe