Asian monitor Publications of experts

Features of Russian propaganda in Kazakhstan

CIACR is continuing a project to study the goals, objectives, narratives, tools and effectiveness of Russian propaganda and information influence in Central Asia. After the materials about Uzbekistan и Kyrgyzstan it is suggested to read the article Aidar Amrebaev (Head of the Center for Applied Political Science and International Studies) on the peculiarities of Russia's information influence in Kazakhstan.

Goals and objectives of Russian propaganda in Kazakhstan

Consideration of the spread of Russian propaganda in Kazakhstan should, in my view, be considered in the broader context of Russian influence, as the desire of the current leadership of the Russian Federation to prevent full sovereignty of the republics of the former USSR, including Kazakhstan, from the former metropolis of Russia.

The main ideology of the Putin regime in Russia today is restoring the Kremlin's influence in the international arena, in a broader context, the recapture of influence in the post-Soviet space, in the countries of the former socialist camp and in the countries of the "third world" of the so-called "socialist orientation" around the world.

In the Kremlin's ideological and analytical cohort of political experts, the positions of the "revanchists" are still strong, who think in terms of the period of the USSR's highest power as an equal rival of the United States in the late 70s and 80s.

The traditions of the Soviet political and ideological group of experts, based on the ideologies of the Cold War and forming the next generations of experts exclusively in this confrontational or "colonial" paradigm, still dominate in the expert-analytical schools of the Russian Federation.

Institutional examples of such analytical traditions include the "developments" of such institutes as the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO), the US-Canada Institute, the Far East Institute, MGIMO and the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry, the Defense and Foreign Policy Council. , RISI, as well as numerous private and public "think tanks", such as the Valdai Club, the Institute for Modern Development (INSOR), the Foundation for Effective Policy, the Institute for National Strategy of Russia, the CIS Institute (Institute for Diaspora and Integration), the Moscow Carnegie Moscow Center and others.

It is noteworthy that despite the fact that since the collapse of the USSR there has been some "emancipation and deideologization" of the field of expertise, along with traditional academic, departmental institutions, there are new private and emerging "power-fed" "brain centers", and in them, even positioning themselves as liberals, the spirit of "imperial ideological support" of politics has been preserved, and even the modern political-technological tilt in their development is only a "cover for the Kremlin's political attitudes" in the new conditions.

The creation of new analytical institutes and structures, such as the Institute of Diaspora and Integration (CIS Institute), Rossotrudnichestvo and others, pursues a very specific goal of ideological and informational support for the strategy of the current Russian leadership to so-called "revive the greatness of the Russian state." lands ”and former influence in the world. I think that this is the main leitmotif of the Russian foreign policy strategy, where the narrative of restoring former power is the main one, and all the others are auxiliary, arguing its necessity. In this regard, Vladimir Putin "loses his head", contrary to his own saying that "he who does not regret the collapse of the Soviet Union, he has no heart, and he who dreams of its reconstruction, he has no head."

Kazakhstan is fully and constantly experiencing constant ideological pressure on this "decrepit ideology" of the reincarnation of the USSR. One of the first post-Soviet ideologues of Kazakhstan's rejection of its territories was the Russian dissident writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who in his famous opus "How to arrange Russia" in the highest-circulation newspapers of the USSR "Kosmomolskaya Pravda" with a circulation of 21 copies and "Literatur »With a circulation of 925 copies in September 000 wrote about the shortcomings of the nomadic Kazakhs and the need to seize their territories up to the current borders of southern Kazakhstan, where there are preserved artifacts of ancient urban culture, as "minimal evidence of the civilization of the Kazakhs." Quote from the article: "And today in all the inflated Kazakhstan Kazakhs - significantly less than half. Their raft, their stable domestic part, is a large southern arc of regions, covering from the far east to the west almost to the Caspian Sea, really inhabited mainly by Kazakhs. And if in this coverage they want to separate - then with God».

Another "famous writer", Bolshevik extremist, chairman of the "Other Russia" party Eduard Limonov on the portal "Russian Planet" shared "Plans of Russian imperialism." “… Russian cities abroad, in Kazakhstan, attract us. Starting from Uralsk, a whole continuous chain of Russian cities up to Ust-Kamenogorsk must become part of Russia through a referendum. ", - wrote Eduard Limonov in the article "Ideal Russia". "More than 4 million Russians live in Kazakhstan now, and these are intentionally underestimated figures in Kazakh statistics. There is someone to rely on inside the country. After the death of the respected father of the Kazakh people, Nursultan Nazarbayev, in Kazakhstan, the elites will attack each other. It will be time to insist on local referendums in Russian cities and on their transfer to Russia in general. ", - Limonov wrote in this connection. "Kazakhs will agree or not - this is their business, but they will have nowhere to go: Kazakhstan, rich in oil, gas and rare earth metals, is staring at the great China. With a population of 17 million, half of whom are not Kazakhs (there are still a million Germans left), the Kazakhs will not keep a huge country. Let's help them. Let's take their surpluses ", - concludes this author, arrested by the Kazakh secret services for inciting separatism in East Kazakhstan in the 90s. It should be noted, however, that this call came from the mouth of this ideologue in April 2016, when Russia already had "practical experience" of rejecting foreign territories in 2008 in Georgia and in 2014 in Ukraine…

If it were only empty arguments of "dreamers of their own greatness at someone else's expense", but in reality in September 1991 an attempt was made to prevent the rejection of the so-called "lands of the Ural Cossacks" from the then Kazakh SSR in Uralsk, when Cossacks from different parts of the disintegrating USSR, using the occasion of the 400th anniversary of the service of the Ural Cossacks to the Russian crown, tried to destabilize the situation. In Ust-Kamenogorsk / East Kazakhstan / in November 1999, Viktor Kazimirchuk's group nicknamed "Pugachev", consisting of 14 militants, was convicted of attempted coup d'etat and the creation of the state "Russian Land". The last major incident involving Russian encroachment on northern Kazakhstan occurred in 2001. At the time, the leader of the fascist National Bolshevik Party, Eduard Limonov, was trying to create an armed group and raise an uprising in the northern pro-Russian regions of Kazakhstan. To this end, members of the group purchased small arms, but the uprising never happened. The "Russian card" was regularly played by separatists of various stripes, but the leaders of both Russia and Kazakhstan, who were complementary to each other and supported each other in strengthening their own power in their countries, prevented negative power scenarios in a timely manner.

Moreover, after the "practical cases of separatism" in order to reject the territories, the country's leadership took active steps to delimit and demarcate the state border of the Republic of Kazakhstan around the perimeter of the internationally recognized territory, establishing favorable friendly relations with major neighbors and guarantors of Kazakhstan. based on the principles of multipolarity and balance of interests.

Against this international background, in 1994 the First President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev at the Lomonosov Moscow State University MV initiated Eurasian integration as a way to preserve production chains and economic ties between the enterprises of the disintegrated Soviet Union. The main reason for this step was the desire to evolutionarily move to a new quality of independent states, while maintaining economic ties and industrial potential of countries, while relying on the friendly divergence of the republics of the former Soviet Union. However, this idea was not fully realized by the then leadership of the Russian Federation or other post-Soviet leaders. The first president of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, then professed the doctrine of "unlimited sovereignty" not only of the post-Soviet republics, but even of the federal entities of Russia itself. His saying is well known: "let them take away as much sovereignty as they want."

Kazakhstan, unlike many new post-Soviet countries, has managed to delimit and demarcate its borders on time and in full, which is an unconditional legal basis for the country's independence and territorial integrity. Important steps in this direction were also the relocation of the capital from Almaty to Akmola (now Nur-Sultan), as well as the legal definition of the status of the Caspian Sea (Convention), the signed international agreement between Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan at the Fifth Caspian Summit. August 12 in Aktau / Kazakhstan /.

It should be noted that after Vladimir Putin came to power in Russia and the need to design a new foreign policy course, the ideology of Eurasian integration as a "new union of states" in the post-Soviet space was used by Russia's second president Vladimir Putin as a doctrine of "reviving Russia's greatness." space of Eurasia ", as stated in the newspaper" Izvestia "program article" A new integration project for Eurasia - the future that is born today "from October 3, 2011.

Integration as a way to solve its own economic problems was also supported by President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko in his article "On the Fate of Our Integration" for Izvestia of October 17, 2011, using the format of Eurasian integration as a tool of political and economic trade with Russia on oil and gas tariffs. gas, as well as the admission of Belarusian products to the Russian market. Then, Nursultan Nazarbayev expressed his renewed conceptual vision in the final article of a series of integration publications from leaders in Izvestia on October 25, 2011 entitled "Eurasian Union: from idea to history of the future." It proposed the creation of an open trade and economic space from Lisbon to Vladivostok.

In fairness, it is worth noting that the geopolitical interests of the countries have always been put in the project of Eurasian integration in the first place. Thus, from 2010 to 2015, it functioned as a Customs Union, which limited its influence on the continental post-Soviet economy, both from the West and from the East. In particular, the CU allowed to restrain China's trade and economic expansion, which was in the tactical interests of the countries signatories to the Customs Union Treaty. In the West, the "turn" of Ukraine towards the EU has become, in fact, a "trigger" for Russia's aggressive behavior towards Ukraine with further geopolitical projects to reject Crimea and destabilize the situation in the east of this country. The genuine intention of the Russian leadership was to preserve its exclusive influence in the post-Soviet space at any cost. Such is the true semantic background of this ideological doctrine in relation to any of the countries of the former USSR, including Kazakhstan. Another thing is that this strategy is achieved by different tactics, where "whip" and where "gingerbread", depending on the degree of involvement of Russian oligarchic business in economic projects of the former Soviet republics, as well as the complementarity of political elites. Although there is a gradual "rolling down" of Russia's policy towards the so-called "near abroad" from the "soft power" of information domination to tougher responses, up to provocations and violent actions.

The main narratives of Russian propaganda and their description

Narrative about the need for integration of the post-Soviet space

The initial "soft" information and ideological narrative of the Russian media was the desire to voluntarily unite the economic potentials of the post-Soviet countries. With regard to Kazakhstan, which was guided solely by the economic format of this project, unequivocal proposals were made in practice to create a single Eurasian parliament, a common currency, a security system (through the CSTO and CRRF mechanism), a single information space, etc. Kazakhstan at the time formulated, in contrast, the idea of ​​an exclusively "economic union", rejecting any attempts by the Kremlin to create a model of "USSR 2.0". In the information field, Russia's main semantic narratives are aimed at closer integration of Russia with Kazakhstan, the latter's loss of levers of independent control over the decision-making process in its own country, economic assets and security, and its orientation in foreign policy exclusively to the Kremlin. For example, the expansion of Kazakhstan's economic cooperation with China, participation in the C5 + 1 project and attempts at Central Asian cooperation are an obvious irritation. These topics are traditionally considered in Russian information resources and expert circles in a rather critical tone, from irony to aggressive, threatening rhetoric.

Narrative about the insolvency of the Kazakh state and the possibility of revising the existing borders

Also significant, in addition to various provocative information intrusions by Russian politicians of various levels, such as V. Zhirinovsky or other "provincial officials" fulfilling the order, as well as regular talk shows with "direct attacks" on our country, is that he The head of state, President Putin, "touches" the issue of Kazakhstan's insolvency on certain issues with enviable regularity. For example, there is an "ideological preparation" involving young people in a speech at Seliger in 2014, when the Russian president allowed himself an unequivocal statement about the lack of "Kazakh statehood", as well as in fact a direct threat of "gifts" rejected as a result of disintegration. The USSR has Russia, lands and the need for their return, which was voiced recently in Pavel Zarubin's film "Russia. Kremlin. Putin ", shown on Russia 1 TV channel on June 21, 2020.

«When the Soviet Union was established, the treaty provided for the right of exit, and since the procedure was not prescribed, the question arises: if a republic became part of the Soviet Union, but received in its baggage a huge amount of Russian lands, traditionally Russian historical territories, and then suddenly decided to leave this Union, but at least then came out with what she came with. And I would not carry gifts from the Russian people. After all, none of this was spelled out. I am absolutely convinced that we are doing the right thing, that we are adopting amendments to the current Constitution. ", - the Russian president told then. Thus, he justified the legitimacy of Russia's arbitrary revision of agreements recognized by the international community, which was one of the central points of the recently adopted amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In particular, at the initiative of Vladimir Putin, the Constitution of the Russian Federation has a provision that allows Russia not to comply with the decisions of international bodies. What is required only is that the Constitutional Court, which after the adopted amendments is even more dependent on the president, recognize them as contrary to the Basic Law of Russia. Thus, the head of the state neighboring Kazakhstan is in fact legitimized the possibility of ignoring any legal norms and bilateral agreements, if they do not agree with the Kremlin's current position, including the possibility of revising international agreements between countries previously concluded. This "legal conflict" can be used by the Kremlin as a possible justification for any political adventure against neighboring countries, which makes bilateral relations unstable and unstable. And for the expert-information field of Russia and its agents of influence in the neighboring countries, it is quite a "favorable climate" for various kinds of information intrusions and "hybrid attacks" on any occasion that is unpleasant for Russia. It must be said that there are many such reasons in the form of narratives, which, one way or another, create tension in bilateral relations.

Narrative about the possibility of obtaining Russian citizenship

One of the most dangerous aspects today is the so-called "distribution of Russian passports." On April 24, 2020, Vladimir Putin signed a law that significantly simplifies the acquisition of Russian citizenship. The law came into force 90 days after its publication. These simplifications do not apply to everyone in a row, but to immigrants from the USSR and their descendants, as well as foreigners married to Russian citizens provided they live in Russia and have common children, and foreigners, at least one of whose parents is a Russian citizen and lives in Russia. Citizens of Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus and Kazakhstan are especially distinguished if they have a valid residence permit in the Russian Federation. The peculiarity of the changes is that it contradicts the legal practice of Kazakhstan, where there is no dual citizenship. According to Russian law, those wishing to obtain Russian citizenship do not need to renounce the citizenship of another state. So Russian authorities deliberately provoke so-called "compatriots" in neighboring countries to violate their laws and create "enclaves of Russian citizenship" on the territory of other states, as happened in Ukraine or Georgia, which eventually led to known results in the form of "self-proclaimed republics and referendums" with further annexation of territories together with new "subjects"…

Also in this legislative act, the requirement for the duration of employment in Russia when accepting Russian citizenship in a simplified manner for foreigners and stateless persons residing in Russia and who received education after July 1, 2002 in the main programs in educational or scientific organizations of the Russian Federation with state accreditation. This practice has already been tested through the distribution of Russian passports in Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transnistria - and in Moldova. The effectiveness of this action in the Crimea was especially evident. The result of which is known to all… For all the humanitarian goals of this action declared by Russia, the real practice says the opposite. The new citizens of the Russian Federation do not actually receive the full civil rights of this country, due to the peculiarities of the legal culture of this country, as everyone knows, but become hostages of the Kremlin's adventurous policy of "splitting post-Soviet societies" and destabilizing the situation there. The experience of refugees from the thus destabilized territories of northern Georgia or eastern Ukraine, who overnight became in practice "stateless" and "second-class" people, is obvious and should serve as a lesson for lovers of the "Russian world" in violation of the law.

In practice, the Russian authorities secretly propagandized the "insolvency of the post-Soviet states," "infringements on the rights of the Russian and Russian-speaking populations in these countries," "intimidation by various phobias, such as the rise of nationalism or Chinese expansion, Muslim radicalism," etc. , "Pushes" Russian-speaking citizens of post-Soviet countries to double loyalty in the country of residence and, further, recruits from them a marginal community of "people without a flag, without a homeland", which is used as a living, human resource for the so-called protection of "Russian world" and reviving ”in such a shameful way,“ former greatness ”…

Narratives about the positive contribution and altruism of the USSR and Russia in relation to Kazakhstan

For Kazakhstan, a huge problem for the health of the population and the ecology of the land is Russia's use of vast territories of Kazakhstan, its military-technological potential as a "test site of friendship", "military brotherhood of the CSTO allies", etc. Ideological fakes that Russia single-handedly created Kazakhstan's "industrial and technological potential" (although in reality it was created mainly as a raw material resource of the colony) are a "nuclear shield against the aggressive West" and protect its territories from Islamic radicals and Chinese expansion ", etc. These "intrusions", in particular, justify the unenvironmental and low-tech use of the Baikonur Cosmodrome, shameless, predatory use of the potential of former military plants, arbitrary attitude to landfills, radar stations in their interests in the country, external control of defense-related industries. (for example, the uranium industry), etc. Thus, in practice, the diversification and development of the industrial and technological potential of sovereign Kazakhstan is hampered in every possible way. It makes a special contribution to this process controlled "brain drain" from Kazakhstan to Russia through various educational and scientific cooperation programs, which are presented in the information field as "exceptional benevolence" by the neighboring, friendly state. Whereas, in practice, talented young people, as a result of their education, work further replenishes the labor and human resources of the Russian Federation and its intellectual potential.

Narrative about the negative consequences of the transition to Latin

The decision of the Kazakh leadership to translate the Kazakh alphabet into Latin caused great information resonance in the Russian media and analysts. An information attack on Kazakhstan was carried out and is still "subsiding" about the alleged "betrayal of the ally", the refusal of a common cultural and information space. A number of television programs and talk shows have received massive criticism of the move. At the same time, the complementary actions of the Kazakh leadership to preserve the Russian language as a language of interethnic communication, support the unique institution of the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan and other initiatives supporting linguistic and cultural diversity in the country were ignored. The very fact of Kazakhstan's undivided "information coverage" by the Russian media and social networks suggests that our authorities and the population in no way perceive Russia as a state with hostile intentions. This is evidenced by the results of opinion polls, where Russia appears as the most friendly state in the eyes of most Kazakhstanis.

Narratives about the negative aspects of Kazakhstan's cooperation with other countries

Characteristic topics of Russia's information propaganda are direct criticism or deliberate dissemination in information-analytical bulletins and social networks of fakes and stereotypes about certain alternative to Russia foreign policy and foreign economic projects of Kazakhstan, and, on the contrary, active propaganda of Eurasian integration under the auspices of Russia. At the same time, any criticism of Eurasian integration is interpreted by Russian and pro-Russian experts and journalists as "intrigues of nationalists", despite the fact that the real figures of the influence of certain international economic projects do not always speak in favor of cooperation with Russia and Eurasian integration initiatives. The hypertrophied (exaggerated) idea of ​​the role of Western and Chinese projects, the importance of the Afghan factor and the exclusive role of the Russian military presence in preventing destabilization in Central Asia, NATO's aggressive plans, accentuating contradictions between countries and peoples of the region, and supporting inter-ethnic tensions are also significant. etc. Examples of this are the facts of purposeful "promotion" in the media and social networks of Chinese phobia, stimulation of public discontent on the eve of bilateral international forums of China and Kazakhstan, visits of delegations of the two countries, such as President Tokayev's visit to China last fall. A negative background is being created around Kazakhstan's relations with Russia's geopolitical rival, the United States. Kazakhstan's projects to provide the United States with a terminal in the form of a transit center for non-military cargo for coalition troops in Afghanistan on the Caspian Sea, Kazakhstan's participation in the C5 + 1 format, and US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo's visit to the United States were negatively criticized. A number of publications were issued with unverified information about the development of bacteriological weapons by the Americans in reference laboratories in Kazakhstan. The latest action received a wide public response and caused distrust of the Kazakh society in the actions of the state bodies of Kazakhstan in the conditions of the pandemic, thus reducing the effect of the measures taken by the state. It is noteworthy that representatives of the Russian establishment often allow themselves a "mentoring tone" towards the foreign policy of sovereign Kazakhstan. Thus, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expressed dissatisfaction with the issue of visa-free visits to the country by US and developed Western citizens, going beyond the principle of the priority of national sovereignty of the Republic of Kazakhstan to establish a visa regime in their country.

Today, the number of precedents in mutual relations between the two countries is causing mutual reproaches between the parties. For example, in Russian analytical circles and the establishment, President Tokayev's refusal to sign the document "On Strategic Directions of Eurasian Economic Integration until 2025" caused dissatisfaction, emphasizing that bilateral cooperation between the union countries is multifaceted and affects almost the entire spectrum of economic, social and humanitarian relations. "Consideration of these issues in a five-party format with the involvement of the Eurasian Economic Commission may complicate their practical implementation. The full inclusion of issues such as health care, education and science in the competence of the Eurasian Economic Commission may significantly change its economic orientation, in other words, will contradict the essence of the EAEU Treaty of 2015. " According to the President, integration work should take into account the specifics of the national legal system and proceed from the principle of "necessary sufficiency" when considering issues of harmonization and unification of national legislation… Proposed in the strategy "harmonization and unification" of legislation in terms of legal liability - administrative and criminal , we are talking about customs, technical regulation, consumer protection, in our opinion, do not yet meet the principle of reasonable sufficiency. And this will lead to the rejection of the strategy by national public opinion, as the strategy will limit the sovereign rights of governments and parliament, "said Kasym-Zhomart Tokayev. This argumentation of the leadership of Kazakhstan was considered in analytical circles of Russia as a kind of "demarche" by the new President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which the Kazakh side then tried to disavow with a passage complementary to the Kremlin stating that the Kazakh leadership prefers not to use the term "annexation" in relation to the "Crimean issue" in a subsequent interview with Deutsche Welle Kasym-Zhomart Tokayev.

In this way, Kazakhstan is always in a state of ideological "hybrid pressure" from Russia, forced to engage in self-censorship, even on obvious things, in order "not to incur the wrath of the former metropolis." Various "household narratives" become a common place in the media and mass consciousness regarding the "primordial separatism" of the northern and eastern territories of Kazakhstan, where residents have a "double loyalty", a general desire for Russian education by young people with subsequent migration to Russia, infringing on the interests of the Russian-speaking population, the need to learn the state language, dissatisfaction with the return of settlements opposition of the local Kazakh population to “identification codes and attributes” related to Russia and its history, such as the wearing of St. George ribbons and Cossack military uniforms by certain groups of citizens, as well as the recognition of the right of some individuals to participate in hostilities abroad in separatist groups; semi-legal PMCs, including in the former post-Soviet space.

Vulnerabilities of Kazakhstan in the conditions of intensification of the Russian propaganda

It must be acknowledged that the process of disintegration of the Soviet Union, although de facto, but mentally the process of de-Sovietization and decolonization of the consciousness of the population, including elites, has not yet been completed. There are a number of vulnerabilities that call into question Kazakhstan's independence in these matters. In fact, the actual control of the ideological field of the country by the elites of the "Soviet generation" and the Kremlin's counterparts. Moreover, this takes place not only in the informal mode of personal beliefs of politicians, but also recorded by legal precedents, when individual government officials used their official position in the interests of foreign states. An example is the conviction of former Deputy Head of the Administration of the President of Kazakhstan Baglan Mailybayev, responsible for ideology, on a number of "sensitive" articles, including parts 1 and 3 of Article 185 "Illegal collection, distribution, disclosure of state secrets", part 4 of Article 361 "Abuse of official authority within the group" of the Criminal Code. According to the leak of insider information, the special services of Kazakhstan caught him in cooperation with foreign special services (see Kazakhstan 2.0 "Secrets of Mailybayev" dated September 10.09.2018, XNUMX).

In the conditions of the transit of power in Kazakhstan, a rather vulnerable area is the change of personnel in the power structures, the verification of the loyalty of the new administration and functional viability, the ability to take responsibility in extreme situations. For example, the health care structures of Kazakhstan have experienced problems related to the dysfunction of the powers of the heads of departments in a pandemic.

The relations between the authorities of society are quite difficult, despite the strategy announced by the head of state to create a "hearing state" in the country and to convene a National Council of Public Trust.

One of the vulnerabilities weakening the functionality of the state in the process of information hybrid wars is the imperfection of the implemented informatization in the country, failures in the egov portal, as well as the monopolization of telephony services and Internet traffic.

It is quite painful for the formation of a modern identification model of Kazakhstan, including in terms of choosing the vector of further development, is the intensified struggle of external players for influence on the decision-making process in Kazakhstan. A number of experts fear that Kazakhstan could become the object of confrontation between major foreign powers, such as China and the United States in the new "cold war" between them, or trade and sanctions wars between the West and Russia, "zealous relations" between China and Russia, etc. .e.

In this regard, it is clear that the "hybrid technologies" used by different parties can be a "trigger" for destabilization in a country with unpredictable results. Therefore Experts recommend that the Republic of Kazakhstan pay close attention to the experience of other states, including in the post-Soviet space, in combating hybrid threats, as well as to conduct a kind of audit of "vulnerabilities" in the country to develop preventive measures to neutralize possible threats.

About the author:

Aidar Amrebaev, head of the Center for Applied Political Science and International Studies. Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Assoc. Institute of Philosophy, Political Science and Religious Studies of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Honorary Professor of the East China Pedagogical University, Shanghai, China.