KZBlog

Neweurasia posted recently on this International Herald Tribune article raising a timeless question–how sincere is the government about fair elections? The article says it is all show, citing issues with opposition newspapers being seized, and the overall autocratic politics of former Soviet leaders; my own earlier post was presented as evidence that the registration is being taken quite seriously. And I will say that I have seen no evidence of dirty pool in general, though a fair amount of self-censorship. As was pointed out in neweurasia here Nazarbayev would appear to be more at risk of the appearance of election fraud due to high election results, than actual election fraud. The appearance of free elections is key to both international image in general and OSCE leadership in 2009.

To give an idea of how serious the Kazakhstan government is about these elections appearing to be free, we can look at the International Media Center’s report for the 14th to the 20th Novemeber. Authorized by the Ministry of Culture, Information, and Sport to monitor media coverage, the report covers objective statistics about coverage of each candidate. A sampling:

1. The Nazarbayev quotation index as presidential candidate is notably lower than the number of commercials and references focusing on his activity as Head of State. Abylkasymov and Yeleusizov are reviewed only as candidates. Tuyakbai and Baimenov are mentioned in other connections also.

2. Most of the Nazarbayev credits are provided by non-governmental channels.Tuyakbai’s and Yeleusizov’s coverage is approximately equal in the state owned and non-governmental channels, while the activity of Abylkasymov and Baimenov is featured somewhat more by the state television than the non-governmental
channels.

This is followed by actual statistics of time, source, and attitude (positive, negative, neutral). Needless to say Nazarbayev wins hands down for coverage–though this includes coverage of him as President. The Ministry makes frequent, publically broadcasted, announcements of these sorts of results. One wonders if it includes the free newspapers stuffed in mailboxes–most of which are pro-opposition.

This is all very good, but it does point to the attention to the appearance as opposed to the substance, the root causes, the reasons why the opposition does not get attention from the media, why the opposition is not firmly grounded. Overall the reasons cited, in newspapers and by the population, are:

1. The opposition is weak and infighting makes them weaker. There is truth to this, of course.
2. The opposition is corrupt–they just want power and have nothing of significance to say. There is truth to this as well of course.
3. Self-censorship out of fear or out of belief that Nazarbayev will win anyway; why cover a loser? I think more attention needs to be paid to this. And the institutional arrangements made originally to weaken the opposition that still have lingering effects today.
4. State government sources excluding opposition candidates or portraying them only negatively/closing down opposition newspapers, seizing copies of papers, etc.

   Some of this may fit into self-censorship with citizen groups harassing opposition nes sources on their own. I believe that reports like the above demonstrate that the level of direct government intereference is lessening, though there are troubling reports nonetheless. There are also some silly reports such as police citing that a newspaper had improperly renewed its license-the report was made two months before the newspaper renewed its license, so how did the police know it would be done improperly. This kind of incompetence indicates a lack of interference by the central authorities who are far too smart for that.

   It is pleasant to hear that Tuyakbai had access to President Clinton and the OSCE observers, after earlier reports that this sort of access was being blocked.

5. Many official sources restrict themselves to facts–if you read gazeta.kz or kazinform you will note that most news reads something like, “Tuyakbai met with voters of South Kazakhstan oblast today. The turn-out was 1500. He talked about political reform.” This briefness, unwittingly, does a disadvantage to the opposition whose platform may not be as well known as the Head of State’s platform.