Kazakh vs. Kazakhstani: Why Ethnic Kazakhs have - Kent State ...

4groups. The challenge of this young state is to balance an ethnic nation-building policy with theconstruction of a civic state.Social psychology states there are three basic approaches to how multiethnic societiesnegotiate issues of ethnic diversity: 1) the assimilationist approach, 2) the pluralist approach, and3) the group dominance approach (Stacey Sinclair 1998). According to the assimilationistapproach, members of all groups should give up their culture of origin and exchange it foridentification with a superordinate, societal identity. The pluralist perspective suggests thatethnic and national minorities can maintain their own culture of origin and also identify with thelarger, societal culture. Finally, the social dominance approach argues that most multiethnicsocieties are better described as “group-based hierarchies in which one or a small number ofdominant social groups enjoy a disproportionate amount of positive social value (e.g., politicaland economic power, status),” while other groups have negative social value (Sidanius, Pratto, etal. 2004).In the present paper, we examined how a multiethnic sample of Kazakhstani young adults(17-23 years of age) defined what it meant to be Kazakhstani and how they perceived their placein society given the different policies enacted by the government. On the one hand, thegovernment is nationalizing the state through policies designed to promote Kazakh language andculture. This Kazakhisation of the state adheres to the social dominance approach, promotingKazakhs as the dominant social group. Conversely, the government is also advancing the ideathat all people living in Kazakhstan, regardless of ethnic or national background, areKazakhstani. This policy reflects the pluralist perspective, respecting all national groups whileencouraging all citizens to participate in the life of the new state. These two approaches are atodds with one another.

5Governmental Policies since IndependenceWith the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Kazakhstan symbolically declared itselfa new nation on December 16, the fifth anniversary of the ethnically inspired December riots inAlmaty. The new government began to promote Kazakh language education, Kazakh culture,the rewriting of history and tacitly put in place policies that appeared to be meant to affect achange in the demographic makeup of the country. These were policies that essentiallypromoted ethnic Kazakh nationalism. These initiatives were framed in terms of ethnic redress–helping Kazakhs regain what they had lost as a result of the pernicious policies of ImperialRussia and the Soviet Union.Many western scholars believe that the cornerstone of Kazakh revitalization is rooted inthe policies aimed at altering Kazakhstan’s demographic makeup (Dave 2004; Diener 2005;Kolsto 1998; Zardykhan 2004). In 1992, the Kazakhstani government held a worldwide “Qazaqqurultay” inviting representatives of the Kazakh diaspora from all over the world to Almaty.Moreover, under President Nazarbaev's initiative, a standing committee was established toaccelerate the pace of Kazakh migration from abroad to Kazakhstan. The highly publicized“Resolution of the qurultay” appealed for “all Kazakhs to unite under a single flag on the soil ofKazakhstan (Janabel 1996).” The ‘Resolution’ declared that any ethnic Kazakh who had leftKazakhstan for any reason would be automatically recognised as a refugee and given preferentialstatus with regard to returning and finding a home and a job in the republic. The policy wascouched in the terminology of correcting past wrongs, namely that those Kazakhs who had fleddid so as a result of Russian and Soviet oppression. In order to make the nation ‘whole’ thesepast injustices needed to be remedied.

9led by the prominent Kazakh poet Mukhtar Shakhano. The Kazakh nationalists believed that thedoctrine could mean that Kazakh language and culture may be eroded if the state pursued amelting pot path. The political organization Azat put forth its own doctrine entitled Concept forNational Policy. The Concept stressed that the Kazakh people were special because they werethe basis of state formation. Azat considers Kazakhstan as a mono-ethnic state since Kazakhsmake up two-thirds of the population. The group believes there is no need for a Kazakhstaniidentity that the National Unity Doctrine advocated (Kanagatuly 2010). As a result of theopposition for Kazakh nationals, Nazarbaev asked the Assembly of Peoples to reconcile theDoctrine of National Unity with the other proposals submitted. The result is similar to theprevious policies of Harmonisation and Kazakh redress—reinforcing the Kazakh language andculture while openly proclaiming a civic identity.Through these policies the Kazakhstani government is simultaneously sending twosomewhat competing messages. One message is that Kazakhstan is a multiethnic society madeup of “Kazakhstanis”, and according to the constitution, all citizens have equal rights. On theother hand, the fact that the government actively supports and pursues policies to promoteKazakh culture and language sends a second message that ethnic Kazakhs have a special place inKazakhstan. Understanding how individuals and groups are interpreting these messages canoffer important insight into the state of ethnic relations in Kazakhstan. For example, areindividuals getting the message that Kazakh culture is the dominant culture in Kazakhstan, or themessage of a more multicultural nation that includes all groups being equally Kazakhstani? Dothese messages affect Kazakhs’ and non-Kazakhs’ feelings of inclusion in society?Research Questions

10The first research question examined young people’s perceptions of what it means to be“Kazakhstani.” Given the governmental policies, three main categories of responses wereexpected: 1) responses that discussed the importance of getting along with people of all culturaland ethnic backgrounds, 2) responses that discussed the idea that being Kazakhstani meant beingof Kazakh descent, and 3) civic-minded responses that referred to following the laws, upholdingthe constitution, and being a good citizen.The second research question examined the young adults’ perceptions regarding who isand who is not considered “Kazakhstani.” If individuals are receiving the message of oneunified culture, as is consistent with the harmonization/national unity policy (pluralistperspective), then they should consider all ethnic/national groups living in Kazakhstan equallyKazakhstani. If, however, the message they are receiving is that a single group is dominant, thenindividuals will be more likely to rate that group as more Kazakhstani than other ethnic/nationalgroups (social dominance perspective). Based on research on ethnic asymmetry (Settles et al.2010; Sidanius, Sinclair, and Pratto 2006; Sidanius, Van Laar, et al. 2004; Staerkle et al. 2005) itwas hypothesized that young people of both Kazakh and non-Kazakh descent would rate ethnicKazakhs higher in terms of being Kazakhstani than groups of other ethnic or nationalbackgrounds, including Russians, Koreans, Germans, Uzbeks.An individuals’ perception of these messages can also influence the degree to which theythemselves feel Kazakhstani. Specifically, if one feels that their ethnic group is equal and valuedin society, they are more likely to feel a sense of inclusion. In contrast, those who feel that oneneeds to be Kazakh in order to be Kazakhstani may feel a sense of alienation within society.Consequently, the third hypothesis examined that Kazakh young people will report feeling moreKazakhstani than individuals of non-Kazakh decent.

11The present study asked adolescents whom they consider to be Kazakhstani, to ratevarious groups in terms of how Kazakhstani they feel they are, and to identify what qualities andcharacteristics it takes to be considered Kazakhstani. These questions assess the attitudes ofindividuals toward diversity and what it means to be Kazakhstani. The study hypothesizes thatwhere Kazakh adolescents report being more accepting of diversity, non-Kazakh adolescents willreport feeling more accepted and a greater sense of belonging to Kazakhstani society.MethodsData for this study were collected in Spring, 2002. Students in Kazakhstan wererecruited from four different universities in Almaty including Kimep, the Kazakh PolytechnicalInstitute, the University of International Business, and the American-Kazakh University. Theseschools were chosen because their ethnic make-up helped ensure a diverse sample.Translation and Cross-National EquivalencyA bilingual Russian faculty member who worked for the National Survey Center inMoscow and has administered many national surveys in the region translated the survey used inthe present study into Russian. Several Kazakh scholars also examined the survey for itsappropriateness for the Kazakh population. The researcher met with the translator on severaloccasions and discussed each measure, whether the construct was valid and culturallyappropriate within this culture, and how the construct was conceptualized. Then, items wereexamined individually to determine whether they reflected the construct and were culturallyappropriate. Based on these discussions, minor modifications were made to the survey.SampleThe sample consisted of 194 Kazakh and 196 non-Kazakh young people. In the Kazakhsample, there were more females (61%) than males (39%), and most young people came from

12highly educated families (88% of fathers and 85% of mothers had a college degree or higher).Within the non-Kazakh sample, 61% of the participants were Russians, 9% Koreans, 6%Uyghurs, 5% Tatars, and 19% other ethnic/national backgrounds or mixed. More participantswere female than male (65% vs. 35%), and most came from highly educated families (73% ofparents had a college degree or higher).MeasuresParticipants filled out a self-report questionnaire included a variety of measures assessingopinions about what it means to be Kazakhstani, attitudes towards who is consideredKazakhstani.Demographic variables. To permit a basic understanding of the demographic backgroundof the participants, participants provided information about their age, gender, and ethnic/nationalbackground.Open-ended Responses. Individuals were asked two open-ended questions that solicitedresponses about what it meant to be Kazakhstani and whether they felt their ethnic group wasincluded. The specific questions that were asked include, “Please define what you think it meansto be Kazakhstani,” and, “Do you feel your national/ethnic group is included in Kazakhstanisociety? Please explain why you feel this way.”Characteristics Important to being Kazakhstani. Individuals were asked to rate theimportance of 6 different characteristics to being “Kazakhstani” on a scale from (1) not at allimportant to (4) very important. These characteristics include: speaking Kazakh, being born inKazakhstan, adopting the values and attitudes of Kazakh society, being a productive member ofsociety, honoring and celebrating Kazakh holidays and traditions, and living legally inKazakhstan.

13Defining who is Kazakhstani. Individuals rated groups such as Kazakhs, Russians,Koreans, Ukrainians, Uzbeks, Turks, Germans, and Uyghurs on how Kazakhstani they felt theywere on a 4-point scale ranging from “completely” to “not at all.” The reliability on this measureis .87 in the Kazakh sample and .83 in the non-Kazakh sample.Feeling Kazakhstani. Individuals were also asked to rate the degree to which they felt“Kazakhstani” on an 1-item measure ranging from “completely” (4) to “not at all” (1).ResultsQualitative DataWhen asked to define what it meant to be Kazakhstani, the majority of respondentsdefined Kazakhstani in civic terms. To be Kazakhstani was to be a citizen of the state.Respondents used terms like patriot, citizen, law-abiding, etc… One Kazakh wrote that beingKazakhstani is “to be a patriot, to keep the traditions of your ancestors, to respect the presidentand to be loyal to Kazakhstan.” Another ethnic Kazakh stated that to be Kazakhstani was toparticipate in the political and cultural life of the country. And to “basically to try to bring wellbeing to the whole community.” Another ethnic Kazakh added that to be Kazakhstani meant“you belong to that country with your entire soul and will always try to do the right thing for thewell-being of the country.” Ethnic Kazakhs tended to repeatedly state that a Kazakhstani was acitizen of Kazakhstan who was loyal to the independent Kazakhstani state.Russian respondents who stated that Kazakhstani meant a commitment to the civic nationdid not have this strong emphasis on loyalty to the nation. Instead most Russian respondentswrote about abiding by the law of the state. One ethnic Russian put it simply when he wrote,“To be Kazakhstani is to simply live in Kazakhstan, and follow the constitution of Kazakhstan.That’s all!” Other Russians added that citizenship includes respect for the laws, to participate in

14politics by voting, work to improve economic conditions, etc… Those ethnic RussianKazakhstanis who espoused civic nationalism in terms of laws and duties did not put emphasison loyalty, but rather on law. It seemed clear in the responses that ethnic Kazakhs emphasizedloyalty, while Russians in Kazakhstan emphasized the rule of law.Overall, 54% of those who answered this question defined Kazakhstani in terms of civicnationalism. This, to a large degree, follows the government initiatives to have fair and equaltreatment of all of its citizens. The breakdown by ethnic group was fairly even with 56 ethnicKazakhs defining Kazakhstani in civic terms, whereas 62 ethnic Russians used civic terms and 8members of other ethnic groups also defined the term in civic language. However, it is clear thatthe ethnic groups stressed different aspects of civic nationalism. The emphasis on loyalty to theindependent state of Kazakhstan was a recurring theme in ethnic Kazakh responses. Thespotlight that was first placed on ethnic nationalism in the late Imperial Russia and continuedthroughout the Soviet and now post-Soviet times clearly is having an effect. While ethnicKazakhs worry about loyalty, ethnic Russians are concerned about the equal treatment under thelaw. The constitution of Kazakhstan does repeatedly make it clear that the rights of all citizensare clearly established. Those Russians who responded to this question want to make sure thatthis is indeed the case, they are at least hoping that it will be.Of the students who responded to this question 32% of the respondents definedKazakhstani in ethnic and exclusionary terms. These young adults believed that Kazakhstanshould be a nation-state, in other words a state that represented a homogeneous ethnicpopulation. The group most likely to express this view were the ethnic Kazakhs. Of the 127Kazakhs who responded to the question, 53, or 42%, believed that Kazakhstani was synonymous

15with being ethnically Kazakh. Only 22 of the 106 non-Kazakh respondents, or 21% felt thatKazakhstani held an ethnic connotation.The major themes presented by this group of ethnic Kazakhs was that if one wanted to beKazakhstani they had to learn the Kazakh language, study and learn the true history of theKazakh fatherland, and celebrate Kazakh holidays such as Nauruz. Some respondents believedthat only Kazakh blood could make one Kazakhstani. “It is very important to be Kazakh. I wasborn here, my ancestors were born here and I grew up here. It is joyous and happy for me to be a(real) Kazakh.”Ethnic Russians who used ethnicity in defining Kazakhstani agreed with the Kazakhs. Ina much more disparaging tone they wrote “the most important thing is to be Kazakh.” Anotherwrote, “I do not know, but it is hard for me to belong to Kazakhstan’s community. Firstly, it isnecessary to know the Kazakh language, their customs and traditions, and then to follow localrules. I am not comfortable with that—I do not agree (that I need to assimilate into Kazakhsociety)”. Yet another ethnic Russian wrote “I am not a part of Kazakhstan’s community.Therefore, I do not have anything to say.” (191) Clearly there were some non-Kazakhs,particularly among the ethnic Russians who were not feeling like members of the new society.32 of the 233 students who answered this question believed that Kazakhstan was a truemulti-ethnic state where all citizens were valued. One 22-year old Kazakh woman defined it as:“to be interested in the destiny of your state, to relate to people with different nationalities thanyours positively, with respect, to know the traditions, customs, and histories of other nationalitieswho are living in territory of Kazakhstan.” Clearly this individual valued the contribution ofother ethnic groups living in Kazakhstan.

16Other ethnic Kazakhs agreed, adding such sentiments as: “To be Kazakhstani is to betolerant of other nationalities, to be friendly and hospitable.” Or that “To be ‘Kazakhstani”means to be involved in the sphere where multiculturalness exists, and also be accepting ofdifferent cultures and social ideas.” Another ethnic Kazakh defined Kazakhstani as “To respectand follow the laws of Kazakhstan-a multinational state. It is to live in peace and accordancewith all nationalities, to love your native land, to serve the well being of your community anddevelopment of Kazakhstan in general. It is to effectively use resources, to try to makeKazakhstan a developed country. Also a citizen should know and to respect the history, the statelanguage, as well as the customs of nations who are living in Kazakhstan.”Some of the ethnic Russians also expressed a similar sentiment. One stated that to beKazakhstani meant: “To accept and respect the values of the community and to support theprinciples of democracy.” Another believed that being Kazakhstani meant that one needed “tounderstand and respect the culture of Kazakhstan, to relate in equal degree to all the nationalitiesthat lived there and to respect the territory.” One Russian stated, “Being Kazakhstani does notmean that you must know the Kazakh language, or have Kazakh blood, but that you are part ofthe Kazakhstani community. It is most important that we all live here.” Another stated thatbeing Kazakhstani is “to be part of one multinational community. It is great!”This group of young adults that defined Kazakhstani using multi-ethnic, inclusive termsincluded 18 ethnic Kazakhs, 12 ethnic Russians and 2 of other ethnicity. It is important becausethis represented 14% of respondents. The message of harmony was certainly resonating withthis group of Kazakhstanis.Do you feel your ethnic group is a part of Kazakhstani Society?

17The second open-ended question we asked was “do you feel that your ethnic/nationalgroup is included as Kazakhstani?” The overwhelming majority of all ethnic groups askedreported that yes, they felt that their ethnic group was part of the larger, supranationalKazakhstani identity. All ethnic Kazakhs wrote that they were Kazakhstani (146 ethnic Kazakhsanswered this question). Most frequently the ethnic Kazakhs stated that their ethnicity madethem part of Kazakhstan. One young Kazakh wrote that, “Yes, (we are Kazakhstani) because weare Kazakhs and are close to the problems of the community. “ Another wrote the their groupwas part of Kazakhstani society because, “Many of us celebrate the national holidays, speak inour native language and many of us even know our tribal ancestry.” Similarly, one Kazakhconveyed the notion of nativity by stating, “Because we value and respect our native people andour native country.” Clearly, ethnic Kazakhs believe that their ethnicity makes them part of theKazakhstani nation. This was the dominant theme running through their responses.The ethnic Russians who wrote that they felt apart of the Kazakhstani community citedtheir ethnic group’s contributions to society and the longevity of their ancestors’ presence. Oneethnic Russian wrote, “Yes, (my ethnic group feels part of Kazakhstani society) becauseRussians have had a significant influence on this country for a long time. Many Kazakhs andRussians feel themselves as brothers.” And one Russian stated that their ethnic group was part ofKazakhstani society because, “Historically, Russians made a great contribution in thedevelopment of the country. Most Russians who reside here, have deep roots in the territory,enough to call it their native land. Most were born on this territory so it is a part of them.”Another theme that ran through the responses from ethnic Russians was the idea thatKazakhstan is and always has been a multi-ethnic state. As a multi-ethnic state, Russians are fullcitizens under the legal rights of the constitution. One Russian wrote: “Representatives of my

18nationality (Russian) are Kazakhstani citizens because they live under those rights which othernationalities possess.” Another wrote that, “multinationalism has been instilled in the populationover a long period of time.” Still another wrote that members of their ethnicity felt Kazakhstanisimply because “they were born in this country.” This is a similar argument made by ethnicRussians in defining what it means to be Kazakhstani. The ethnic Russians tend to use a legaland civic definition of citizenship, whereas the ethnic Kazakhs believe that ethnicity and ancestryplay a large role in citizenship.When we look at the minority of respondents who wrote that they do not believe theirgroup was included in the Kazakhstani definition, it is clear that some national/ethnic animosityexists in Kazakhstan. Quite interesting is a response that some ethnic Kazakhs gave to thequestion. While all ethnic Kazakhs believed that their ethnicity was Kazakhstani, 9 of the 146Kazakhs who responded did present some reservations about members of their ethnicity. Oneethnic Kazakh wrote that certain members of her ethnicity are not part of Kazakhstani societybecause, “some of them do not respect and do not even know their native language, which is alsothe state language.” Another Kazakh wrote “Some Kazakhs are not satisfied with their life inKazakhstan and wish to move away. These are not real Kazakhstanis.” Clearly the issue oflanguage is an important one to some of the ethnic Kazakhs. Also perceived loyalty to their‘fatherland’ is equally valued according to these responses.For ethnic Russians, there is also bitterness towards the state language and seeingthemselves as not part of the dominant culture. One ethnic Russian summed up the prevailingfeelings among those who wrote that they do not feel their ethnicity is part of Kazakhstanisociety: ‘Many Russians are not comfortable with the behavior of the native people towards ournationality. It is hard to advance in society (jobs, government positions, education, etc..) for

19Russians because there are many “uncles” placed high up everywhere and they are taking care oftheir relatives, placing them in well-paid jobs.’ Another Russian respondent echoed thissentiment when she wrote: ‘I do not feel there exists an equality of rights for Russians. Kazakhsin Kazakhstan are now getting better jobs and being promoted above the Russians.’ One Russianstated, ‘If you are not Kazakh you have fewer opportunities to make a comfortable future here.’Overall, only 13 of the 88 ethnic Russians who responded to this question said that theydo not feel part of Kazakhstani society. Most of those ethnic Russians who stated they did notfeel a part of Kazakhstani society tended to list the perceived lack of opportunities as the largestgrievance. A few complained that the state language was a direct reason why they could notadvance in society.There were also 56 members of other ethnicities who answered this question. Of those51 said that they felt their ethnic group was included. Most cited the multiethnic make up of thestate, with one Ukrainian stating, ‘There are more than 120 nations in Kazakhstan and each ofthem is a part of Kazakhstani society.’ One Uyghur young person wrote, “Yes. Because a largenumber of people of my nationality live in Kazakhstan and they are all Kazakhstani. And thecommunity accepts us as their own.”A Chechen wrote, ‘Yes, because Kazakhstan became a shelter for many refugees fromChechnya. I was born and I live in Kazakhstan.’ Simply living, working and participating insociety made most of these members of various ethnicities feel a part of Kazakhstani society.Although a few members of this group, 5 of the 56, also stated that the lack of opportunities andthe expectation to know the state language made them feel that they were not a part ofKazakhstani society.Quantitative Data

20When asked to rate how important various characteristics were to being Kazakhstani,Kazakh, Russian and other minority respondents did not differ in their opinions about whether anindividual had to be born in Kazakhstan or whether it was important to have citizenship (seetable 1). On a scale of 1 (not important) to 4 (very important) the average response concerningbeing born in Kazakhstan was 2.9 across all ethnic groups with no significant differences.Citizenship was rated as an important characteristic among all the groups with an average ratingof 3.25 and no significant differences between the groups. Living in Kazakhstan was deemedslightly more important among ethnic Kazakhs, who gave it an average rating of 3.5, whileethnic Russians and other nationalities rated this characteristic at 3.35 and 3.33 respectively.Ethnic Kazakhs rated knowing the Kazakh language as a more important characteristic ofKazakhstani identity than either the ethnic Russians or those from other ethnic groups. TheKazakh respondents rated language as 3.17, Russians as 2.68 and the other ethnic groups as 2.83.Ethnic Kazakhs also believed that accepting the values of society was more important than ethnicRussians and the other ethnic groups. Kazakhs rated accepting values as 3.40, Russians as 3.01and the other ethnic groups as 3.17. Finally, ethnic Kazakhs rated that celebrating holidays andtraditions as more important than either the Russian or other ethnic groups. Kazakhs ratedcelebrating holidays and traditions as 2.93, the Russians rated celebrating as 2.38 and the otherethnic groups as 2.56. See Figure 1Table 1Average Ratings of Important Characteristics of Kazakhstani IdentityMeans by Ethnic GroupKazakh Russian OtherSpeaking Kazakh 3.171 2.681 2.825Living in Kazakhstan 3.535 3.354 3.325Born in Kazakhstan 2.872 2.77 3.032Accept Values of Society 3.396 3.009 3.169Useful Member of society 3.417 3.177 3.312

21Citizenship 3.267 3.283 3.169Celebrate holidays and traditions 2.93 2.381 2.558Figure 1--Importance of Characteristics of being KazakhstaniWhen asked to rate how Kazakhstani various ethnic groups were, all respondentsindicated that ethnic Kazakhs were the most Kazakhstani. Using repeated measures ANOVA,results indicate that Kazakh youth rated their own ethnic group higher in terms of beingKazakhstani (M=3.97) than other groups, including Russians (M=3.55), Uzbeks (M=3.19),Uyghurs (M=3.13), Koreans (M=3.09), and Germans (M=2.91). Simple contrasts comparing themean rating for the Kazakh group with each of the tests was significant, with probability levelsless than p < .001 (see Table 2).Table 2Kazakh Young Peoples' Ratings Regarding Who is Kazakhstani

22National/Ethnic Group Mean StandardDeviationMeanDifferencet-valueP valueKazakh 3.97 .16Russian 3.55 .72 -.43 -8.23 .000Uzbeks 3.19 .88 -.79 -12.49 .000Uyghurs 3.13 .93 -.85 -12.59 .000Korean 3.09 1.03 -.87 -11.84 .000German 2.91 1.04 -1.05 -14.05 .000It was also hypothesized that non-Kazakh youth (e.g., Russians, Koreans, and Uyghurs)would rate Kazakhs, as more Kazakhstani. This hypothesis was supported; non-Kazakhs ratedethnic Kazakhs as more Kazakhstani than other groups: Kazakhs (M=3.91), Russians (M=3.52),Uyghurs (M=3.43), Koreans (M=3.25), Uzbeks (M=3.24), and Germans (M=2.88). Simplecontrasts revealed significant differences between the rating of the Kazakh group and each of theother groups, p < .001 (see Table 3).Table 3Non-Kazakh Young Peoples' Ratings Regarding Who is KazakhstaniNational/Ethnic Group Mean StandardDeviationMeanDifferencet-valueP valueKazakh 3.91 .37Russian 3.52 .76 -.39 -7.18 .000Uyghurs 3.43 .88 -.48 -9.07 .000Korean 3.25 .72 -.66 -10.59 .000Uzbeks 3.24 .85 -.66 -10.27 .000German 2.88 1.05 -1.03 -13.48 .000To test the hypothesis that Kazakh youth would feel more “Kazakhstani” than non-Kazakh youth, an independent sample t-test was run using the degree to which adolescents’ feltthemselves part of “Kazakhstani” society as the dependent variable and ethnic group (Kazakh vs.non-Kazakh) as the independent variable. Results revealed that non-Kazakh youth did feel

23significantly less “Kazakhstani” (M = 3.13) than Kazakh youth (M = 3.70), t = 7.77, p < .000.These measures indicate that all ethnic groups perceived ethnic Kazakhs as more Kazakhstani.DiscussionThe present study sought to examine how young Kazakhstani citizens studying inuniversities perceived governmental nationality policies. University students are usually thefuture leaders in a country, both within governmental agencies as well as business. In the newlyindependent Kazakhstan, where spending on education had initially shrunk because of the cut offof Soviet subsidies, these young people represented the elite. They had earned a place in theuniversity. Therefore, we were looking to see if the policies of Kazakh national redress and/orharmonization were leaving an impression on these young citizens. Interestingly, the results ofthis study suggest that depending on the format of the question, messages are somewhat mixed.In the open-ended question format, most respondents seemed to support a type of civicnationalism, which could be said to be consistent with the pluralist perspective. However, in thequantitative format, responses supported the social dominance perspective.When asked to define what it means to be Kazakhstani, the majority of responses fell intogeneral descriptions that focused on being a citizen, respecting and participating in the politicaland cultural life of the country. At the same time, some young people focused their discussionon respecting all people living in Kazakhstan and the idea of a multinational country, consistentwith the pluralist perspective. However, there was a clear trend of ethnic Kazakhs mentioningloyalty as a key trait in Kazakhstani citizenry. Ethnic Russians tended to state the importance offollowing the law and the constitution as traits most desirable for a Kazakhstani. Theseresponses may indicate an underlying distrust of the civic nation. This becomes clearer when therespondents rated the degree to which the various ethnicities residing in Kazakhstan were

24Kazakhstani. In this case both Kazakh and non-Kazakh adolescents rated ethnic Kazakhs as themost Kazakhstani, indicating that ethnicity was indeed a key ingredient of citizenship inKazakhstan. Although their ideal “Kazakhstani” was an equal citizen, their answers in thequantitative format revealed a society that may be more fragmented by ethnic hierarchies thanthe relative calm seems to indicate.There are several conclusions that can be drawn from the present study that are alignedwith the social dominance perspective. First, although the Kazakh government is attempting topromote a “Kazakhstani” citizenry that includes members of all national and ethnic backgrounds,non-Kazakh youth do not feel a part of this overall culture as their Kazakh counterparts. Onereason for this may be the attitudes of the majority group (Kazakhs). When asked to ratewhether different national/ethnic groups were considered “equally” Kazakhstani, Kazakhs ratedtheir own ethnic group as more Kazakhstani. Ethnic Kazakhs were also twice as likely to statethat ethnicity is a factor in Kazakhstani identity than non-Kazakh respondents to the open endedquestions. This, in turn, could contribute to non-Kazakhs feeling less a part of the overallculture. Another reason non-Kazakhs may feel less a part of the overall culture is because of theaggressive Kazakh nation building policies that are taking place, including the promotion ofKazakh language as the national language, along with the celebration of Kazakh traditions andholidays. Follow up interviews and focus groups are necessary to help understand these feelings.Secondly, the study indicates that Kazakhstan is indeed developing peacefully, but yetunder the stern tutelage of an authoritarian state where discontent is not well tolerated. Theveneer of national unity was expressed in the survey but more telling was the tying together ofcitizenship with the Kazakh ethnicity. This indicates that Kazakhstanis do indeed perceive thatone group is the favoured or dominant group in the state. President Nazarbaev often presents

25himself as a key reason for the stability and lack of violence in Kazakhstan, and the 2005election results do demonstrate that ethnic Russians do support the president, with 87% votingfor Nazarbaev (Kazakhstan presidential election exit poll, December 4, 2005). Indeed, in arecent address to the people of Kazakhstan he stated: “My fellow people of Kazakhstan, peaceand harmony in our multilingual and multi-faith society are our common achievement.” In thatsame address, Nazarbaev declared: “Our task is to make sure that by 2017 the number of peoplein Kazakhstan who have mastered the state language reaches at least 80 percent. And by 2020 –no less than 95 percent” (Nazarbaev 2011). This demonstrates that the Kazakhstani governmentcontinues to expand the use of the Kazakh language and promote Kazakh culture. 20 years afterindependence the Kazakhstani government continues to extol the state as a model of multiethnicharmony while at the same time instilling the markers of Kazakh ethnicity.

26ReferencesReferencesAsimov, Fuad. 2008. Russians Are Leaving Kazakhstan In Mass Departure. Huliq,4/02/2008.Bremmer, Ian. 1996. THE TROUBLE WITH DEMOCRACY IN KAZAKHSTAN. CentralAsian Survey 15 (2):179-199.Dave, Bhavna. 2004. Entitlement through Numbers: Nationality and Language Categories in theFirst Post-Soviet Census of Kazakhstan. 10 (4):439-459.Diener, Alexander C. 2005. Kazakhstan's Kin State Diaspora: Settlement Planning and theOralman Dilemma. Europe-Asia Studies 57 (2):327-348.Janabel, Jiger. 1996. When national ambition conflicts with reality: Studies onKazakhstan's ethnic relations. Central Asian Survey 15 (1).Kanagatuly, Daulet. 2010. Arguments Over Nationhood in Kazakstan. Almaty,Kazakhstan.Kazakhstan presidential election exit poll, December 4, 2005. 2005. InternationalRepublican Institute, Baltic Surveys/The Gallup Organization.Kazakhstan, Republic of. 2009. National Census.Kolsto, Pal. 1998. Anticipating demographic superiority: Kazakh thinking on integration andnation building. Europe-Asia Studies 50 (1):51.Nazarbaev, Nursultan. 2011. Address of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan,Nursultan Nazarbayev, to the People of Kazakhstan, January 28, 2011. Astana,Kazakhstan: President of the Republic of Kazakhstan.Peyrouse, SEBASTIEN. 2007. Nationhood and the Minority Question inCentral Asia. The Russians in Kazakhstan. EUROPE-ASIA STUDIES 59 (3):481-501.Peyrouse, Sebastien. 2008. The “Imperial Minority”: An Interpretative Framework of theRussians in Kazakhstan in the 1990s. Nationalities Papers 36 (1):105-123.Schatz, Edward A. D. 2000. Framing Strategies and Non-Conflict in Multi-Ethnic Kazakhstan. 6(2):71-94.Settles, Isis H., Carlos David Navarrete, Sabrina J. Pagano, Cleopatra M. Abdou, and JamesSidanius. 2010. Racial identity and depression among African American women.Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 16 (2):248-255.Sidanius, Jim, Felicia Pratto, Colette van Laar, and Shana Levin. 2004. Social DominanceTheory: Its Agenda and Method. Political Psychology 25 (6):845-880.Sidanius, Jim, Stacey Sinclair, and Felicia Pratto. 2006. Social Dominance Orientation, Gender,and Increasing Educational Exposure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36 (7):1640-1653.Sidanius, Jim, Colette Van Laar, Shana Levin, and Stacey Sinclair. 2004. Ethnic Enclaves andthe Dynamics of Social Identity on the College Campus: The Good, the Bad, and theUgly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87 (1):96-110.Sinnott, Peter. 2003. Population Politics in Kazakhstan. Journal of International Affairs 56(2):103.Stacey Sinclair, Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin. 1998. The Interface Between Ethnic and SocialSystem Attachment: The Differential Effects of

Hierarchy-Enhancing and Hierarchy-Attenuating Environments. Journal of Social Issues 54(4):741-757.Staerkle, C., J. Sidanius, E. G. T. Green, and L. Molina. 2005. Ethnic minority-majorityasymmetry and attitudes towards immigrants across 11 nations. Psicologia Politica 30:7-26.Zardykhan, Zharmukhamed. 2004. Russians in Kazakhstan and demographic change: imperiallegacy and the Kazakh way of nation building. Asian Ethnicity 5 (1):61-79.27