Kazak Authorities Promote Regime-Friendly NGOs
Independent groups say they are shut out of government funding.
Kazak Authorities Promote Regime-Friendly NGOs
Independent groups say they are shut out of government funding.
While the authorities in Kazakstan speak fondly of their relations with non-government organisations, many NGO activists say official support is restricted to those seen as loyal to the government, while truly independent groups are sidelined.
At the Civic Forum, a gathering of NGOs held in the Kazak capital Astana, in late November, Foreign Minister Kanat Saudabaev said the government would set aside 16 million US dollars annually for civil society projects over the next three budget years.
However, many NGOs believe this funding is not distributed equally, and instead goes almost entirely to groups that the government regards as friendly or at least inoffensive; and in some cases to “non-government” groups that it has actually set up.
This effectively divides the NGO sector into the haves and the have-nots. Well-connected but not always effective organisations attract the bulk of the government money, while those working on difficult subjects such as human rights and democracy-building get nothing.
According to official statistics, Kazakstan has about 5,000 NGOs. The biggest concentration of activity is on environmental issues, accounting for 15 per cent of these groups. Youth and women’s NGO’s make up 13 per cent each and human rights organisations about eight per cent.
Sociologist Gaziz Nasyrov says that as a rule only a narrow group of NGOs gets public funding.
“These are non-governmental organisations that are loyal to the authorities, do not criticise them and don’t ask uncomfortable questions,” he said.
Nasyrov suspects that connections play a role in distribution of funding, “Often you can see that an NGO has failed with one project, but the following year it again wins a tender organised by the authorities.”
The chairman of the Astana-based Union of Disabled Soldiers and Veterans of the War in Afghanistan, Kayrat Yelubaev, shared these concerns, saying tenders had been won by NGOs with little obvious connection to the work involved.
In one case, he said, a programme on combating terrorism and extremism was won by the Women’s League.
The chairman of a society that represents disabled people, Kayrat Imanaliev, said many NGOs do not have access to tenders or information about government programmes that are open to civil society groups.
“The information provided by government bodies is either incomplete or distorted,” Imanaliev said.
Anton Morozov, head of the sociopolitical studies department at Kazakstan’s Institute for Strategic Studies, denies allegations of government favouritism towards some NGOs.
“It is not a question of personal connections or agreements,” he said.
Morozov acknowledged that the state creates and sponsors NGOs, and said this was justified because in the past, there were too many groups funded by foreign donors.
“A lot of NGOs were set up... with foreign involvement, foreign money,” he said. “It is understandable that the interests of other countries differ from those of Kazakstan.”
Other analysts are critical of this policy, saying that this has led to a proliferation of the kind of group known as a “government-organised non-government organisation” or “GONGO”.
Nasyrov says the authorities divide civil society organisations into two categories – those they will fund and those they will not. The latter group work mostly in the areas of democracy, human rights and media freedom, and are often funded by international donors.
“Their representatives communicate freely with the media without covering up what is really happening ,and of course this annoys the country’s leadership,” he said.
Anna Alexandrova, who chairs the board of Soros Foundation Kazakstan, agreed that independent NGOs are often seen by the authorities as “potentially dangerous”, rather than as potential allies that can help the state solve problems.
“This leads to an attitude towards non-governmental entities that manifests itself in imposing restrictions on them, strengthening control over them and monitoring them,” she said.
Alexandrova also pointed to positive developments, arguing that some NGOs have become serious players. She said that in the 18 years since the Kazakstan became independent, civil society groups have come a long way.
“Some NGOs working practically in the areas of transparency and accountability of government finances, protection of human rights, and the development of independent media, have become experts in their fields, and both the government and international organisations listen to them,” she said.
The senior secretary at the ministry for culture and information, Janna Kurmangalieva, said cooperation between state and NGOs has strengthened in recent years, and many groups are now actively involved in the legislative debate.
First Deputy Prime Minister Umirzak Shukeev argues that NGOs have helped mitigate the effects of the ongoing economic crisis facing the region, and thus averted possible social unrest in Kazakstan.
“Some analysts predicted that during the crisis in Kazakstan, social tensions would increase, and people would become more prepared to protest,” he said, adding that this was avoided thanks to the work of NGOs funded by government.
Analysts say foreign funding has been drying up recently.
Almaty-based political analyst Oleg Sidorov believes that international organisations vary the level of funding according to how democratic – or undemocratic – they perceive a particular process to be.
“The more developed and informed a society, is the less attractive it is in the eyes of foreign donors,” said Sidorov.
Natalya Napolskaya and Aygerim Beysenbaeva are IWPR-trained journalists in Kazakstan.
