Nigmet Ibadildin
Expert profile
|
Dear colleagues,
As a moderator of a forum on the “Central Asian Gateway” portal I invite you to take part in e-discussion on “Trans boundary relations in Central Asia: private investments, migration, exchange of know-how and healthcare” that was opened within the framework of general topic on the forum devoted to the problems of integration in Central Asia. The discussion starts on June 20th and will last for a month after which the summary of the forum will be made.
Regional integration is being discussed for years, including the discussions on the highest official level, but the real process is not seen. Much has been said about the barriers to integration, the importance of integration for the countries of the region in the long term and a lack of political will on the part of the ruling elites. Nevertheless, the theme of regional integration remains important, actual, and one cannot escape it considering perspectives for the feature of each of the countries at question and the region as a whole.
Some examples of the integration are obvious but much more room for improvement remains. Water supply to the region is still an issue because rivers start in the mountains of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan however main consumption goes on in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Transit of goods and energy is another area for common business projects and interdependency. Migration from poor regions to the more affluent ones and expansion of the capital from one country to other ones are also require some consideration. Political refugees issue in the post Soviet area needs to be solved immediately.
The theme offered for discussion on the open forum will allow one to comment on a wide range of questions and identify potentially productive and prospective paths to activation of integration of Central Asian states in the following spheres:
- Business and joined projects;
- Private investments protection;
- Prospects of regional specialization;
- Migration, legal and illegal, refugees and gastarbaters;
- Demographic and healthcare problems and the ways to solve them;
- Cooperation in the sphere of education;
- any other questions that are relevant and seem appropriate for discussion to the participants of the forum.
I invite you to take an active participation in the forum discussions and express my gratitude to all participants of the forum.
Sincerely yours,
Nigmet Ibadildin
Moderator
Background reading:
1. Epaulard Anne and Aude Pommeret Financial Integration, Growth, and Volatility IMF Working Paper IMF Institute 2005 http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2005/wp0567.pdf
2. Jeremy R. Azrael, Emil A. Payin, Kevin F. McCarthy, and Georges Vernez, eds Cooperation and Conflict in the Former Soviet Union: Implications for Migration.
RAND, CF-130-CRES, Santa Monica, California, 1996 http://www.rand.org/publications/CF/CF130/CF130preface.pdf
3. Patrizia Tumbarello Regional Trade Integration and WTO Accession: Which Is the Right Sequencing? An Application to the CIS IMF Working Paper Policy Development and Review Department May 2005 http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2005/wp0594.pdf
4. Central Asia and Southern Caucasus, 2002, Edited by Boris Rumer
5. The Silk Road Regional Programme (SRRP) http://www.cagateway.org/downloads/SRRP%20-%20Draft%20Program%20Document%20of%2015%20Nov04.pdf
6. Regional Economic Cooperation in Central Asia Books, Periodicals, Studies, and Reports ISBN: 971-561-179-6 1998
7. Muzzapparova L. Economicheskay integratsia v Tsentralnoi Azii; problemy I perspectivy ( Economic integration in Central Asia: problems and prospects) http://www.cvi.kz/old/text/Economy/Integrac_CA.html
8. Syroezhkin K. Integratsia v Tsentralnoi Azii: est problem (Integration in Central Asia: some problems ahead ), Continent ¹3(65) 6 - 19 February 2002 ã. http://www.continent.kz/2002/03/08.html
9. Kurtov A. Integratsia v Tsentralnoi Azii ((Integration in Central Asia) http://www.nasledie.ru/oboz/07_04/7_03.htm
|
Nigmet Ibadildin
Expert profile
|
Dear participants
I would like to invite everyone to express thier ideas about possible integration areas especcially in investments, knowledge exchange and healthcare. Hope our discussion will be vivid, fruitful and enriching for everyone
Moderator |
Cherie Fontenot
|
This is a question I pose to all participants:
How can the countries of Central Asia encourage FDI when their own business community has little to no trasparency? What steps can (or will) these governments take to ensure greater transparency, reassuring foreign investors that their money is safe? |
Nigmet Ibadildin
Expert profile
|
As a moderator I want tocomment that these steps on transparency are necessary not only for foreign investors but also for local people as well.
Also mineral TNCs follow the minerals but not good investment climate. They work in many unstable regions in the world
|
Nader Rastegar
|
Will you not agree that accomplishing transparency in the Region will be tantamount to nails in the coffin of United States business interests and the Israeli manipulation of the Security Apparatus?
What heresy!
Be careful what you ask for. Americans and Israelis will never allow such democratic fundamentals to take root. A floundering Region is their UNSTATED Objective!
Shsh! Keep it a secret entre nous!
Nader Rastegar |
Cherie Fontenot
|
While there might be profit being made by those in power (both regionally and globally), democracy and transparency are not synonomous. Transparancy in business situations ensures that contracts are looked upon as binding, that financal reporting is accurate, and that the steps to start a business or buy property are minimized for everyone--not just the ones who can pay a bribe. transparency encorages growth because people are able to choose other finacial investment options instead of keeping their wad of cash under the bed.
Another issue I have is how is Chinese investment and trade affecting Central Asia? What chinese companies are there, and what are they doing? |
Aldiyar Autalipov
|
I find the views of Mr. Rastegar on the role of the USA in promoting, among other things, transparency in the region as quite inaccurate. The United States and European Union are very much interested in transparent, open for business and democratic Central Asia.
The western companies working in the region, including the US companies, are actually the ones that interested in transparency and predictability the most.
such a prospect.
|
Grant Annable
|
I would question the underlying premise of this forum-a focus on Central Asia regional needs relative to private investments, etc.
Central Asia can be viewed as a regional entity. That may be misleading in all but geography. From an economic or religious or governance standpoint, the five countries referred to as a region are like 5 animals occupying the same small space. An elephant, a giraffe, a dog, a cat and a tiger may be able to coexist. But common interests, current agendas and the like will be difficult to discern, let alone work with.
Therefore, I would suggest an alternative approach to that of a regional program. For any of the program priorities (take private investment as an example), I would focus an effort on that of the Central Asia countries which has that matter at the top of their agenda AND has in place the appropriate governance to support that effort. That focussed effort would be fully funded to ensure success working with local organizations. If success is achieved, then other countries in the area may then move the issue higher on their agendas and also work to ensure that the appropriate governance is in place.
In short, the concept is to make a successful project in a specific country and let that success sell the project in other countries. If some countries are uninterested in that project, then why force the issue?
|
Aldiyar Autalipov
|
I agree with the last message. It is indeed difficult to speak of Central Asia as a region.
The socio-economic standing of the regional states changes continually taking these countries further apart. Some, for instance, identify Kazakhstan to be regional leader. But for Kazakhstan to be a leader of some group of regional players, that group should be moving in the same direction. The actual picture is that some of those players do not move at all or even degenerate.
|
Assel Rustemova
|
I also agree with the fact that Central Asia is not a region. Although in the most recent Address of the President Nazarbayev to People in February, he noted that Central Asian integration remains the priority in our foreign policy. I see this policy as a national interest since Kazakhstan's investors needs additional markets and projects to invest their money in. They cannot do it internationally yet, that is why they aim at the regional markets.
I also see the need of transparency in the interests of all the actors involved. It will allow local companies to obtain stronger foreign partners and it will also allow government to oversee the development. It has nothing to do with democracy.
|
Nigmet Ibadildin
Expert profile
|
Dear participants,
As a moderator I would ike to call you to activate our discussion. Also I would like to invite those who speak both English and Russian languages participate in Russian side of the forum
Sincerely
Nigmet Ibadildin |
Dina Sharipova
|
Integration of Central Asian states is possible only if the issue of Central Asian identity is resolved. However, it is not possible to talk of the identity of Central Asian region unless every single country in Central Asia finds its own identity. So far, a few, if any, countries of Cnetral Asia (I am talking about the five states of the former USSR. For instance, American interpretation of Central Asia region includes Afghanistan) has tackled the problem of national identity for itself. Fifteen years of independence is not enough to solve the problem. Central Asian states are still in search of their national identity. The latter is very acute for Kazakstan.
In addition, integraion is possible among states with even economic development. As we see there is a huge gap in the level of income and growh of economy. The disparity between Tajikistan and Kazakhtan is a good example. Integraion is not easy to reach at this point.
However, we can observe quite intensive development of informal links such as private business, especially trade at transboundary areas (everyone knows "Dordoi" in Kyrkyzstan), and an increasing rate of migration among Central Asian states, mainly from Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan to Kazakhstan.
|
James McNabb
Expert profile
|
Dear All,
In a speech in Vienna during a meeting of the Permanent Council of the OSCE (on September 8, 2004), Kazakhstan's foreign minister, Kassymzhomart Tokaev, said: "Our aim is to form a common market in Central Asia." Tokaev went on to say that until and unless some very significant problems are addressed this will be unachievable. He listed those problems as: "... religious extremism, terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, illegal migration, corruption, insufficiency of water sources, pollution, poverty, and the weakness of the rule of law."
Others, I am sure, would have additional issues to add to that list. If the problems are so varied and wide-spread, why would a statesman like Tokaev believe that the objective of forming a common market, i.e., economic integration, is possible? Why not simply go back to the individual state and concern oneself with domestic issues and problems? The leadership in Kazakhstan, particularly mentioned in some depth in the speech by President Nazarbaev earlier this year, believes that until the Central Asian republics come together and form a unified market place the individual states will lack the leverage in dealing with global forces now moving into the area. As Nazarbaev mentioned, "Either we achieve this integration and additional leverage or we simply wait for the next imperial master."
Tokaev, in his OSCE speech, discusses the concept of "oikoumene," a unified cultural heritage for Central Asia, as one of the reasons for his optimism in regards to integration.
The question I would pose to the discussants with Central Asian backgrounds (or those who have studied the concept), is: Does oikoumene exist? And if it does, does it exist in sufficient measure to allow it to aid in creating a common Central Asian identity? And, finally, can steps be taken and policies adopted which might foster the historical remnants of this heritage in order to create the conditions in which economic integration might develop?
--JM
|
Nader Rastegar
|
Mr. McNabb knows very well that fancy statements by Mr. Tokaev do not imply he is a Statesman!
Yet, he has so dutifully quoted statements at great length by the Great Leaders - much as it is the vogue throughout the Region and in North Korea and Libya!
I used to think that it was a Soviet Syndrome. Now I notice that even Westerners fall for it too! What is the motive? A renewal of a lucrative contract? Private Consulting Contracts?!
This is so embarrassing!
Before even attempting to address the supposedly innocent questions posed by Mr. McNabb - after his subtle propaganda infomercial - I would like to ask Mr. McNabb why is he acting like a Kazakh Official? Ever since when Mr. Tokaev has been regarded as a "statesman" - and by whom? By other Kazakh "yes-men"?
I refer to Mr. McNabb's statement quoted below:
"If the problems are so varied and wide-spread, why would a statesman like Tokaev believe that the objective of forming a common market, i.e., economic integration, is possible?"
Et tu Brutus??!!
Mr. McNabb knows better that Mr. Tokaev is simply an object ONLY answerable to Mr. Nazarbaev. He has NO ability to think independently! And it is sad that he is referred to as a statesman!!
Mr. McNabb further knows very well, that in Central Asia - as in many other Nations - led by iron fist of one megalomaniac man, fancy statements MUST be uttered every where and always! In Libya, they have been talking of the Great Visions of their comical mad man's Pan-Arabism, of African Unity, and ...
Mr. Tokaev says these things, but his heart is to please his Master, the President-for-life Nazarbaev! The trouble is that NO Minister believes in what that Minister declares!
As long as Tokaevs do not feel themselves beholden to their own People, and as long as Nazarbaevs have based their continuation of their corrupt and bloody grips not because of their Peoples Will, but rather, Washington D.C.'s Will - with a detour through Tel-Aviv!! - all that McNabbs debate about are simply just hot air!
All will simply be blown away by the Winds of the Steppes of Central Asia. And the misery and disunity shall persist!
And it all suites Washington and tel-Aviv just fine. They can continue harassing the defiant Nations of the Region, plunder the National Wealth of ALL Nations, and sell their Military junk at punitively inflated prices.
Nazarbaev shall anoint Tokaev as his heir, and both continue receiving their "commissions" and perpetuate their megalomanic delusions of reign.
It is sad that even Mr. McNabb must sing the praises of these autocrats so that he may have his work contract renewed for one more term!
Nader Rastegar |
XYZ
|
Integration in Central Asia has potential only in long term, when leaders with new vision will come to all post-Soviet central Asian countries. I really doubt that Americans or Israel have some conspiracy interests here. I think they really don't care too much as long as these countries are not under Islamist influence. They don't care what kind of governments here, democratic or authoritarian. If they would care they would object much stronger to events in Andizhan.
Oil is interesting, nukes are taken away, so what are other staff interseting for USA?
Integration can be in the area of interest of some academicians or NGOs or international agencies but reality is different. Countries are too different now from each other. Even demographic and HDI are so different that they simply can not integrate in near future.
I am very pessemistic in fast or instituionalized integration. Only water issues would finally force to some integration.
Who would integrate with such odious political regimes?
Is personal rivalry an issue? It seems yes. In this case ideas of integartion is just a declaration. |
Tamara Nezhina
|
I sincerely support the idea suggested by Rushdi Isakov. I want to say few words about his idea on ideology of integration.
Èç èñòîðèè íàèáîëåå óñïåøíûìè "ïðîåêòàìè èíòåãðàöèè" ìîæíî íàçâàòü Ñîâåòñêèé Ñîþç è Ñîåäèíåííûå Øòàòû Àìåðèêè. Êëþ÷åâûì ôàêòîðîì óñïåõà ýòèõ ïðîåêòîâ ÿâèëàñü ïðàâèëüíî âûáðàííàÿ èäåîëîãè÷åñêàÿ áàçà: êàâêàçñêèé ãîðåö ÷óâñòâîâàë íåêîå ñîöèàëüíî-îáùåñòâåííîå ðîäñòâî ñ ïðåäñòàâèòåëåì ìàëûõ íàðîäíîñòåé Ñåâåðà ("ñîâåòñêèé ÷åëîâåê"), à èðëàíäåö - ñ ÷åðíîêîæèì âûõîäöåì èç Àôðèêè ("àìåðèêàíåö").
Every political, economic and social ideology is grounded in a system of values and beliefs that most people in this political system share. Often, people are very emotionally attached to specific values that constitute the core of the system. Soviet integration was successful because in the Soviet Union (early stage of development) people strongly believed that they were building a just and fair society, where all people were equal, and where exploitation of some groups by other groups was made impossible. American integration was successful because people believed in democratic values, such as liberty (there are many definitions of liberty, however), freedom, political equality and self-governance. Culture, history and traditions were the key players in the formulation of both systems of values.
These ideological foundations helped to unite people. But they also led to specific and different institutional arrangements because of different definitions of liberty, equality (political and economical), and freedom.
For the purpose of our discussion it is important that such ideological systems should be able to truly inspire and unite people. What is the basis of common ideology (system of values) among the nations of the Central Asian countries? What is the basis for common identity?
1. region
2. history
3. traditions and customs
4. language
5. problems
6. positive or negative external perception ( how others see us)
7. internal perception ( how we see ourselves)
This list may be continued…
Which are the divisive factors?
1. ethnicity
2. history
3. traditions
4. level of economic development
5. political rivalry
6. personal ambitions of political leaders
This list may be continued too…
What the region needs to get united is a person like Mahatma Gandhi, Vladimir Lenin or Thomas Jefferson, who will manage to raise common values above personal selfish interests. We are waiting for a person with great vision, which will be clear and unambiguous to all people in the region, and which will show clearly the advantages of unification to all. This leader shall speak in common and simple language, but shall be able to contemplate at the highest level of abstraction.
Building institutions without having a great vision is like making a patchwork. Many believe that as soon as parliaments are elected (creation of democratic institutions), they automatically become representatives of the electorate. It did not happen in most post-Soviet countries. Same could be said about many other institutions. Privatization did not create real responsible owners. The majority of people does not view privatization as fair. The “owners” know it, and do not feel safe with their new ownership rights. Hence, they develop short-term business strategy (to get quick profit without considering future business development). Laws are not enforced because most of them are imported. They are not the result of the combined judgment of the national (or supranational) majority. Discussions and compromise are aliens to our political culture. We, still, may try to build democratic and market institutions. And then we should not be surprised that they do not work as expected.
I think that we shall first be concerned with the ways to make certain values take root in the society. Unification of the region is a great and very advantageous development for all. People in Central Asian countries should know why. Saying that it helps economic development, national independence, democracy building is not sufficient. It is too abstract for the most. Better saying that our agricultural product is the best in the world (which I, personally, underwrite), and together we will develop a regional agricultural policy that will enable farmers and cooperatives to grow and prosper, that will protect them from unfair competition from abroad.
I apologize if my remarks are a bit out of the way the discussion developed. I expressed my belief that the problems must be treated at the root. Otherwise, we are just treating the symptoms, and the problems recur. I am not saying that other things such as pilot projects, or water projects, or integration strategy development should stop. I am saying that together with developing institutions of integration and cooperation, the ideology of integration should be developed.
|
Mirek Karasek
Expert profile
|
Dear Souls :
I have read the discussion so far and it occured to me that some of the participants are talking about another planet. Fortunately, the moderator, as usual, is up to par. I am sending a few pages (you can see materials at http://www.cagateway.org/downloads/Karasek2.pdf) that are supposed to trace down some of the roots of the societal problems in all Silk Route societies (my favourite expression) and my personal opinion. Thanks for the idea to conceive such a discussion. Maybe, at the day's end, something good for the peoples of the Region will happen. With highest regards and sincere "da svidania", I am
Yours sincerely ,
Mirek Karasek |
Nigmet Ibadildin
Expert profile
|
Dear participants
Recently I talked on subject of our discussion with well known professor of history and political science from Kazakhstan Nurbulat Massanov. May be you have heard about him. it was small interview on our topic. I want to provide you with his ideas
He is very pessemistic about some institionalized integration in Central Asia at all for this historical period. Major obstacle is a nature of political regimes and political forms. Integration happens only in case of strong Parlaiments because they represent regional interests/ Only regions which are located next to each other across the boundary may be interested in real integration. Centralized presidential forms of government do not integrate to much because integration will limit their authority and overall power. The presidents can be interested only in some coordination but establishment of integration bodies with strong power is not in thier interest at all, whatever they say. Strong parlaiments are dependent upon thier electorate and if there are some interest of the people integration will happen.
it is also evedent from the history that so many countries could not integrate. Examples will be 4 arabic states in the 50s of 20 centrury or some african states. Even EU is facing difficulties. Canada has problems with french speaking province, Spain has problems with Basqes, Belguim has problems with vallons and flamands,etc.
Everyone sober minded and long term oriented understands that integration may save this region in global competition however this integration right now is facing too many problems |
Aldiyar Autalipov
|
I partially agree with the previous statement. But integration can be achieved, I believe, even among presidential republics if there is a political will for it.
In my humble opinion the most basic obstacle to regional integration is the lack of political will for it on the part of the regional leaders. Any scheme for regional political integration, such as the one proposed by Kazakhstan’s president or the ones that were declared within the framework of CIS are bound to failure. The sad truth is that most of the regional leaders are simply content with the status quo, and seek not the benefits of the regional political or economic integration. Preservation of power and security seems to be the main concern. Plans for the political union in the region are unlikely to be successful; no one is willing to share power. Each country pursues its own foreign policy.
Perhaps economic integration should be strived for as a prerequisite for a political union. As there is not will for economic integration among the CA countries, Kazakhstan should integrate with Russia.
What Kazakhstan should do, as the leading proponent of economic integration is preceded with its economic integration with Russia, Ukraine and Belarus and work on building a common market with these states. The prospect of such common market is also questionable as the “Common Economic Space” might become another agreed upon but not implemented project. If it were to be achieved, however, other CA states would inevitably join in the long-term perspective. For now there is simply no understanding within the region of the common benefit of economic integration as the countries follow protectionist and mercantilist policies.
|
Taraqqiyot
|
My warmest greetings to everyone,
Reading through the posts I began to think, “How long people can think about the Central Asian integration, what is the benefit of integration for Central Asian Republics (CARs)?”
Really, I personally think that CARs integration is not the foremost development need Central Asian people. Establishment rational relations and development of people-centered regional policies are more than enough to ensure successful co-existence of CARs. Aggressive attempts to prompt regional integration are more likely benefit outside stakeholders such as Russia, China, and the US.
I have talked too much to prove that Central Asia is unique and one of the oldest regions of the world in all meaning is this word. Central Asia stood as major world power when America, Israel and many other countries did not exist, when China and Russia were merely regional establishments. So please, dear participants, DO NOT say that Central Asia is not a region. Perhaps you need to study, live, and experience more in order to understand it.
|
.gif){kind=logo}
