6 ms·

> But why is such a dysfunctional dictatorship so stable? (...) I believe the answer is: it is backed by the West because a stable dictator in Kazakhstan and Az

by fivea 5y ago

> But why is such a dysfunctional dictatorship so stable? (...) I believe the answer is: it is backed by the West because a stable dictator in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan guarantees the oil flow. And yet, it's Russia and it's strong-arm tactics that are desperately trying to keep Kazakhstan's regime in power. Think about it: Russia is even sending it's paratroopers to Kazakhstan to stomp out unrest. Not the US. Not the EU. Not Switzerland. No, Russia. How do you fit that into your mental model?

scotty79 5y ago
Do you assume Putin and western corporations are antagonistic? Putin is just closest strong arm and most appropriate politically.
- fivea 5y ago
  > Do you assume Putin and western corporations are antagonistic? Please don't try to change the subject. Putin sent Russia's paratroopers to Kazakhstan to use them against Kazakhstan's civilian population to quelsh unrest. It's not the US, Switzerland, Finland, the EU, nothing. This is Russia intervening in Kazakhstan to preserve Russia's interests, and no amount of whataboutism changes this.
  - scotty79 5y ago
    Russia's interests are aligned with western companies interests that buy Russian exports. Also I'm not changing the subject because we have a whole branching forum here, not a single coversation that can talk only about one thing at a time. If you are not interested in that branch of the discussion simply skip it.
    - ericmay 5y ago
      > Russia's interests are aligned with western companies interests that buy Russian exports. Just to be clear you are blaming “the west” (US, UK, Sweden, France, Canada, Switzerland, etc.) for Russian intervention in Kazakhstan because those countries buy Russian products? (Leaving aside all the other countries in the world which do the same but w/e).
      - mikem170 5y ago
        Not the OP, I think you misunderstand. The idea is that the West is fine with Russia dispatching troops to Kazakhstan. They share a common interest in wanting to keep the oil flowing, and are not so much interested in how Kazakhstan is governed. Contrast Kazakhstan with Ukraine. The U.S. would not sit silently by if Russia were to send troops into the Ukraine again.
      - scotty79 5y ago
        Just to be clear I'm saying that western companies will benefit from maintaining regime in Kazakhstan. And Putin helping with this, is getting him further on the good side of wealthy people in the west. I'm not blaming anybody for anything. It's just business.
  - inglor_cz 5y ago
    Not the OP, but way too many German politicians seem to be cooperative with Gazprom et al., regardless of what happens elsewhere (Ukraine etc.)
    - reducesuffering 5y ago
      Like Germany's ex chancellor being chairman of the board for Nord Stream AG and Russian energy company Rosneft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der
  - anticodon 5y ago
    > It's not the US, Switzerland, Finland, the EU, nothing. What these countries has to do in Kazakhstan? Russia and Kazakhstan has a treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Org... Also, significant percent of population of Kazakhstan is Russian.
    - kspacewalk2 5y ago
      >Also, significant percent of population of Kazakhstan is Russian. So what? They are citizens of Kazakhstan. Russia does not have some sort of "claim" over every person in the world who is of Russian descent.
_bohm 5y ago
I'm confused by this question. Russia is one of the world's largest oil exporters, is it not?
washadjeffmad 5y ago
What makes you feel that economic interests are always the same as political interests? Why doesn't Russia kill all its Sturgeon so American Royalty can't eat Russian caviar? Maybe things are not as simple as Fox News makes them.
- nradov 5y ago
  Russians also like caviar. I'm sure it's served in the Kremlin.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >What makes you feel that economic interests are always the same as political interests? HN is generally bad at understanding that people will willingly forgo some wealth in exchange for political/ideological/religious goals when the forgoing takes any form other than paying more taxes to fund something you approve of. They get it when your example is something they all support like the US fighting a civil war over slavery but when you try to generalize that behavior up a step and then use it to explain the actions of people supporting something they don't agree with you get something like this[1]. [1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/patrick-stars-wallet https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/patrick-stars-wallet
halpert 5y ago
Just to add on to this, Russia needs support in the region. Most democratically elected governments do not choose to align themselves with Russia. This is why Putin always props up nearby dictators. Without support, Putin’s regime and power would be in danger. You see many examples of trying to strong arm support from weaker regional neighbors: Ukraine, Belarus, Syria, Georgia, and now this situation.
- stevespang 5y ago
- anticodon 5y ago
major505 5y ago
Countries like Kazakhstan, serve russia as a buffer state from the Nato influence. If near countries start to align with the west, Russia will start to feel personally attacked.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  This is such a cold war mindset that I have trouble believing that it is actually still the case. It seems overly simplistic.
  - anticodon 5y ago
    It is not. If it wouldn't be true, why then US incessantly unleashes "revolutions" in all countries around Russia? Why US invests millions of dollars into rusophobic propaganda in all countries bordering Russia? Why US attempts to build military bases in all the countries that border Russia? If it's all just a "cold war mindset".
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - Jon_Lowtek 5y ago
      That foreign nations are inciting revolutions is Siloviki rhetoric, used by authoritarian regimes to justify surveillance and arrests of their opposition or at least undermine their support by the public. And this is exactly what we are seeing in Kazakhstan: people riot over increasing cost of living and the president blames it on foreign agitators. Because that is easier and more convenient than actually engaging with the issue.
      - helge9210 5y ago
        > That foreign nations are inciting revolutions is Siloviki rhetoric Not always. See for example "US Army Field Manual FM 31-20-3, Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces". This one is outdated and was based on US operations in Central/South America. I'm sure Russians have something similar.
anticodon 5y ago
> And yet, it's Russia and it's strong-arm tactics that are desperately trying to keep Kazakhstan's regime in power. If Russia is so influential over Kazakhstan, why all natural resources and power plants in Kazakhstan belong to Western companies? Why Nazarbaev had replaced Cyrillic alphabet with Latin? It was clearly a jab at Russia. Kazakhstan was/is clearly under heavy western influence. > Think about it: Russia is even sending it's paratroopers to Kazakhstan to stomp out unrest. Not the US. Not the EU. Not Switzerland. No, Russia. What will US do if in case of civil unrest in Mexico, Russia will send troops to Mexico?
- kspacewalk2 5y ago
  >If Russia is so influential over Kazakhstan, why all natural resources and power plants in Kazakhstan belong to Western companies? This is false. Kazakhstan retains most oil revenues and its joint ventures with foreign companies for oil exploration and drilling include not just Western, but also for example Chinese companies. >Why Nazarbaev had replaced Cyrillic alphabet with Latin? Because he saw clearly how Putin is weaponizing language and identity rhetoric to justify wars of aggression and Anschluss-style annexations against its neighbours. The script you use is rather symbolic, but those symbols do matter. Otherwise, Russia itself wouldn't have stamped out the Latin script and forced those minority languages, already few in number, to use Cyrillic in the 2000s.
  - mint2 5y ago
    This line the comment said also is not logical at all > “ What will US do if in case of civil unrest in Mexico, Russia will send troops to Mexico?” This makes no sense, no one is alleging Mexico is under Russia’s thumb so this makes no sense. Replace Mexico with Cuba circa 1970 and it would be relevant. And also yes, if Cuba in 1970, I would not be surprised if Russia sent in troops if Castro asked.
    - anticodon 5y ago
      > This makes no sense, no one is alleging Mexico is under Russia’s thumb so this makes no sense. This makes no sense, because no strong independent sovereign country (there're very few of them in the world, about 5-6) will allow foreign troops to land in the neighboring country. If Russia would send troops under any pretext in any situation to Mexico, USA would start a World War III.

by fivea 5y ago

scotty79 5y ago

Do you assume Putin and western corporations are antagonistic? Putin is just closest strong arm and most appropriate politically.

fivea 5y ago
> Do you assume Putin and western corporations are antagonistic? Please don't try to change the subject. Putin sent Russia's paratroopers to Kazakhstan to use them against Kazakhstan's civilian population to quelsh unrest. It's not the US, Switzerland, Finland, the EU, nothing. This is Russia intervening in Kazakhstan to preserve Russia's interests, and no amount of whataboutism changes this.
- scotty79 5y ago
  Russia's interests are aligned with western companies interests that buy Russian exports. Also I'm not changing the subject because we have a whole branching forum here, not a single coversation that can talk only about one thing at a time. If you are not interested in that branch of the discussion simply skip it.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    > Russia's interests are aligned with western companies interests that buy Russian exports. Just to be clear you are blaming “the west” (US, UK, Sweden, France, Canada, Switzerland, etc.) for Russian intervention in Kazakhstan because those countries buy Russian products? (Leaving aside all the other countries in the world which do the same but w/e).
    - mikem170 5y ago
      Not the OP, I think you misunderstand. The idea is that the West is fine with Russia dispatching troops to Kazakhstan. They share a common interest in wanting to keep the oil flowing, and are not so much interested in how Kazakhstan is governed. Contrast Kazakhstan with Ukraine. The U.S. would not sit silently by if Russia were to send troops into the Ukraine again.
    - scotty79 5y ago
      Just to be clear I'm saying that western companies will benefit from maintaining regime in Kazakhstan. And Putin helping with this, is getting him further on the good side of wealthy people in the west. I'm not blaming anybody for anything. It's just business.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  Not the OP, but way too many German politicians seem to be cooperative with Gazprom et al., regardless of what happens elsewhere (Ukraine etc.)
  - reducesuffering 5y ago
    Like Germany's ex chancellor being chairman of the board for Nord Stream AG and Russian energy company Rosneft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der
- anticodon 5y ago
  > It's not the US, Switzerland, Finland, the EU, nothing. What these countries has to do in Kazakhstan? Russia and Kazakhstan has a treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Org... Also, significant percent of population of Kazakhstan is Russian.
  - kspacewalk2 5y ago
    >Also, significant percent of population of Kazakhstan is Russian. So what? They are citizens of Kazakhstan. Russia does not have some sort of "claim" over every person in the world who is of Russian descent.

_bohm 5y ago

I'm confused by this question. Russia is one of the world's largest oil exporters, is it not?

washadjeffmad 5y ago

What makes you feel that economic interests are always the same as political interests? Why doesn't Russia kill all its Sturgeon so American Royalty can't eat Russian caviar? Maybe things are not as simple as Fox News makes them.

nradov 5y ago
Russians also like caviar. I'm sure it's served in the Kremlin.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>What makes you feel that economic interests are always the same as political interests? HN is generally bad at understanding that people will willingly forgo some wealth in exchange for political/ideological/religious goals when the forgoing takes any form other than paying more taxes to fund something you approve of. They get it when your example is something they all support like the US fighting a civil war over slavery but when you try to generalize that behavior up a step and then use it to explain the actions of people supporting something they don't agree with you get something like this[1]. [1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/patrick-stars-wallet https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/patrick-stars-wallet

halpert 5y ago

Just to add on to this, Russia needs support in the region. Most democratically elected governments do not choose to align themselves with Russia. This is why Putin always props up nearby dictators. Without support, Putin’s regime and power would be in danger. You see many examples of trying to strong arm support from weaker regional neighbors: Ukraine, Belarus, Syria, Georgia, and now this situation.

stevespang 5y ago
anticodon 5y ago

major505 5y ago

Countries like Kazakhstan, serve russia as a buffer state from the Nato influence. If near countries start to align with the west, Russia will start to feel personally attacked.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
This is such a cold war mindset that I have trouble believing that it is actually still the case. It seems overly simplistic.
- anticodon 5y ago
  It is not. If it wouldn't be true, why then US incessantly unleashes "revolutions" in all countries around Russia? Why US invests millions of dollars into rusophobic propaganda in all countries bordering Russia? Why US attempts to build military bases in all the countries that border Russia? If it's all just a "cold war mindset".
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - Jon_Lowtek 5y ago
    That foreign nations are inciting revolutions is Siloviki rhetoric, used by authoritarian regimes to justify surveillance and arrests of their opposition or at least undermine their support by the public. And this is exactly what we are seeing in Kazakhstan: people riot over increasing cost of living and the president blames it on foreign agitators. Because that is easier and more convenient than actually engaging with the issue.
    - helge9210 5y ago
      > That foreign nations are inciting revolutions is Siloviki rhetoric Not always. See for example "US Army Field Manual FM 31-20-3, Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces". This one is outdated and was based on US operations in Central/South America. I'm sure Russians have something similar.

anticodon 5y ago

> And yet, it's Russia and it's strong-arm tactics that are desperately trying to keep Kazakhstan's regime in power. If Russia is so influential over Kazakhstan, why all natural resources and power plants in Kazakhstan belong to Western companies? Why Nazarbaev had replaced Cyrillic alphabet with Latin? It was clearly a jab at Russia. Kazakhstan was/is clearly under heavy western influence. > Think about it: Russia is even sending it's paratroopers to Kazakhstan to stomp out unrest. Not the US. Not the EU. Not Switzerland. No, Russia. What will US do if in case of civil unrest in Mexico, Russia will send troops to Mexico?

kspacewalk2 5y ago
>If Russia is so influential over Kazakhstan, why all natural resources and power plants in Kazakhstan belong to Western companies? This is false. Kazakhstan retains most oil revenues and its joint ventures with foreign companies for oil exploration and drilling include not just Western, but also for example Chinese companies. >Why Nazarbaev had replaced Cyrillic alphabet with Latin? Because he saw clearly how Putin is weaponizing language and identity rhetoric to justify wars of aggression and Anschluss-style annexations against its neighbours. The script you use is rather symbolic, but those symbols do matter. Otherwise, Russia itself wouldn't have stamped out the Latin script and forced those minority languages, already few in number, to use Cyrillic in the 2000s.
- mint2 5y ago
  This line the comment said also is not logical at all > “ What will US do if in case of civil unrest in Mexico, Russia will send troops to Mexico?” This makes no sense, no one is alleging Mexico is under Russia’s thumb so this makes no sense. Replace Mexico with Cuba circa 1970 and it would be relevant. And also yes, if Cuba in 1970, I would not be surprised if Russia sent in troops if Castro asked.
  - anticodon 5y ago
    > This makes no sense, no one is alleging Mexico is under Russia’s thumb so this makes no sense. This makes no sense, because no strong independent sovereign country (there're very few of them in the world, about 5-6) will allow foreign troops to land in the neighboring country. If Russia would send troops under any pretext in any situation to Mexico, USA would start a World War III.