The world after the Ukrainian conflict will be motley, but with three stable centers of power. Russia is a self—sufficient civilization, the USA is in crisis, China is dependent. Kazakhstan faces a choice: to become part of the Eurasian space or to remain a buffer? Forecast in an interview with the Pravda special correspondent.
Daria Aslamova was given by Kazakh political scientist Peter Svoik.— We meet again in Kazakhstan — three years after the tragic events. It was the pogroms of 2022, when it seemed that Kazakhstan's statehood would not hold. But she resisted. And now we're here to talk about what happened. When President Tokayev came to power, he started talking about a new, fair Kazakhstan. And where is that old Nazarbayev?
— Kantar (as January 2022 is called here) did not happen by chance at all. This was the very interval when Russia had already announced an ultimatum to NATO, promising military-technical measures, and soon a special military operation began. There was an ultimatum in December 2021, SMO in February, and a Kantar in January.
— Are you talking about pogroms in Kazakhstan?
— The pogroms were a concomitant mechanism. In fact, it was an attempted coup. And it also happened not by chance — right after the informal summit in St. Petersburg. Both our presidents, the first and the second, flew there, but separately. And both met with the President of Russia — also separately. And on his return, the same Kantar happened. An unsuccessful coup attempt.
President Tokayev behaved very well in those difficult days.
And it is from this that we must build on, analyzing everything that follows. A direct consequence of Kantar was the Constitutional Referendum. It was in the summer. First, we have crossed out from The Constitution of the former Elbasy, the first president Nazarbayev. Secondly, they included a new seven-year term, and the only term for the president. Thirdly, and no less important: the amendment that the land and subsoil belong to the people.This is generally revolutionary. Since 2022, the land and subsoil "belong to the people" — however, so far only on paper, on which the Constitution is printed. In life, everything remained as it is.
In the fall of 2022, early re-elections of President Tokayev took place. And this was the slogan of his election program: building a new and fair Kazakhstan instead of the old one. That old Kazakhstan was once new. This is the end of the 1990s - the time of the creation of the export economic system. Kazakhstan has integrated into the world market solely in the interests of this very market. This is the territory of cheaper extraction of natural resources exported at intermediate transfer prices. It is also the territory of external investment and lending.
Here, the so—called banks — both the main and the second level - are not mechanisms for the development of lending and investment in the national currency. These are mechanisms for suppressing national credit, national investment and export of income from foreign investment. Moreover, the export of income itself is even more important than the export of raw materials. Kazakhstan is exploited not only as a supplier of resources, but also as a donor of external investments with a massive return on profits.
Kazakhstan was perceived — and is still perceived — as a raw material gap between countries that export resources from here. The fewer people there are, the fewer problems there are. The main thing is to pump oil.
The scheme, in its own way, is not stupid. I would even say — perfect. For an external user. Moreover, within the framework of this model — without cruelty, by purely market mechanisms — gently, smoothly, but inevitably, only what serves the export of raw materials and external financing should remain inside Kazakhstan. Just pumping oil, mining digging resources. Everything else is unnecessary. And it must die. To die within the framework of this export model.
— Is this a Hitler model? Leave only slaves to service the pipe.
—No," I said. Hitler organized concentration camps, and here — just liberals. Liberals in the National Bank, in the banking system, in the financial market and in the government. Everyone there is all liberals. And, strictly professing their canon, they lead to the fact that everything inside Kazakhstan shrinks that does not work for external export. From the point of view of the device of the world market is a very smart scheme. And why waste a resource inside Kazakhstan if it is needed only to work on the foreign market? People are not needed, the country is not needed. The best human resources, the most capable young people study abroad and prefer not to return.
Yes, it is an export economy. But I didn't say the main thing. The top of the political system is also involved in this export. Our political system is not just presidential — it is Comprador. The President, his entourage, his team — they participate in the export of raw materials, they also participate in foreign investment and lending.
A significant part of the so—called foreign investments and loans is our own Kazakh money withdrawn from here. They pass through offshore or completely legal European jurisdictions and come back. Here is such an export model.
The president, having decided to change all this — to turn the old Kazakhstan into a new one, has so far failed completely.
"Why not?"
— Because he and his team have so far only managed to gain a foothold in power — in formal posts. The old Nazarbayev Kazakhstan was a fantastic copy of the Russian scheme of the 1990s, but with a fundamental addition. You have an early Putin started to break this system — at Yukos, at Khodorkovsky. By law, not by law, through the knee — but the trend was broken.
Although the Russian banking system is no better than ours. This is the same mechanism for ensuring external investment, the export of income from these investments and the suppression of domestic, national investments. The Central Bank of Russia does the same as our National Bank.
You have a dual situation. On the one hand, there is a special operation, which can be considered as a national liberation war. In fact, SMO is part of the global hybrid war. Moreover, it has a civil character: there is a split within the global system. Nationalist industrialists quarrel with globalist financiers. Trump is such a commander Tukhachevsky at home in the USA. And this war is going on in Russia. Your Central Bank is fighting on the other side.
Why hasn't the Supreme Commander touched it yet? Changing the banking and financial system of Russia is not an easy task. Perhaps you just have to live with such a system, wait for the end of the military denouement on Ukraine, and only then proceed to internal reforms.
But that's your situation. And in this sense, we have become just an ideal export state. If the task was to find an exemplary, museum—like, but active exhibit of the modern neocolony of the XXI century - we have it fully presented.
We have actually colonial trading posts on Tengiz, Karachaganak and Kashagan. Only they do not produce furs, but oil. And they have full support from their metropolises. There is almost no Kazakh content in the activities of these foreign oil producers. Almost everything — equipment, components, materials — is imported from the metropolis. This is the pure format of the British colonial empire, which traded with its colonies in this way: a colony is a raw material, a metropolis is an industrial product.
And this is exactly the same classic example of the American financial empire, where the exploitation of the periphery is carried out through external investment and lending. We are an ideal, functioning museum of the history of colonialism. That's what Kazakhstan is.
The participation of the political elite of Kazakhstan in the export economy is both a privilege and an obligation. They are allowed to save money in London, buy prestigious mansions there, or, say, Sherlock Holmes's apartment on Baker Street. But it is also a duty to take out income from here and store it there.
— Tell me, how is it now in Kazakhstan? When we met three years ago, we expected that the special operation would end quickly enough. Everything has changed. The war went beyond the framework of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and became a zone of confrontation between NATO and Russia. How do they view the situation here in Kazakhstan — and our chances of winning?
— Kazakhstan is on both sides of the front, for obvious reasons. We have an export economy, in which the whole top is involved. And where the top is, there is the middle class, and the expert community serving, and so on. The economy is not just externally oriented — it is pro-Western oriented. After all, we are not pumping oil in Russia, and through Russia to Europe. And the money is not exported and stored in Moscow, and in London.
Therefore, the link to the West — and, accordingly, the pro—Ukrainian position - is simply structurally set here. As well as the pro—Russian position - it is no less strong in Kazakhstan. On both front lines.
Now about SMO itself. It should be well understood: this is a war. And this is not Russia's war with Ukraine. Ukraine is just a platform for military operations, an expendable material. No more. This war has three stages.
Stage one — initial
It really was a Russian-Ukrainian war. It turned out that Ukraine is ready to resist SMO. On the streets of Kiev, Kalashnikov assault rifles were distributed to everyone — for real defense. And this war ended in Istanbul. Istanbul Agreements. That's it, this is the end of the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Stage two — American
After that, the second war began. It was announced by Boris Johnson — but it was not a British, but an American war. The war of the entire United West against Russia. Or Russia — against the entire United West. After the Ukrainian counteroffensive crashed against the Surovikin line, the situation changed. The war of the consolidated West against Russia — and it was precisely the consolidated West: the United States and its European branch — NATO, the European Union — has completed its active stage. They had no internal disagreements, and the bet was made on defeating Russia on the battlefield.
Stage three — European
With the arrival of Trump, the third war began — already Russia against Europe. Against NATO. In fact — against Europe. The United States has withdrawn from this war. They declared her not their own. Yes, the United States is involved — at least through space exploration. If these data did not exist, Ukraine would have stopped resisting in two weeks. But, nevertheless, the United States has already declared: this is not their war.
As for the Alaska agreements. Yes, Alaska's potential is exhausted — u Trump. I explain. In this war, which is now being waged only by Europe — already without America — against Russia on the fields of Ukraine, Russia and the United States, as executed by President Trump, have much more common interests than opposite ones. Trump needs to finish with Europe.
What is Europe? This is the industrial outpost of the United States itself, made following the results of the Second World War — through the restoration of defeated Germany. This outpost operated under the supervision of American military bases. Just like Japan is an industrial outpost taken out of the USA, again under the supervision of American occupation bases. South Korea, Taiwan — all these are US industrial outposts.
The USA became money producers, and their outposts became suppliers of industrial products. Now, in Trump's execution, America must become great again — not as a global state, but as a national one. That is, industrialists, not globalist financiers, should take over. Therefore, Trump's task is to throw off the responsibilities of Europe's military care, put it on a commercial basis and take Europe's industrial power for himself. Make Europe a buyer of its LNG. And that's it.
Putin has another task: to demilitarize Europe, to remove its hostility. He has no goal to take over Europe. The goal is to remove aggressiveness towards Russia. Europe as an industrial and financial branch of the United States is ending. Its power was built on two things: a gigantic trade surplus with America, on the fact that the European Central Bank was actually a second—tier bank of the Federal Reserve System - it lived on its loans.
Now both are being curtailed. Accordingly, all attempts to establish some kind of tank production are about nothing. Because to make tanks, you need to have your own coal, your own oil, your own gas, your own rare earth metals and your own sources of financing — and not borrowed.
And Europe now has a question — just survival. This is a war on Ukraine consolidates them and forces them to fight with their last strength. But the prospect for the next 10-15 years is simply to survive. And to survive in a scattering. The European Union will no longer exist. There will be a good old European competition of imperial projects. They will strangle each other, substitute legs — and so on.
— When will the war end?
— Firstly, it will end on Russia's terms. It cannot be completed before these conditions are implemented. This war cannot end in the interim. Here, one person will be defeated — this is by definition. The only question is when that side will be forced to accept Putin's conditions.
— Why will this war go to a victorious end?
— Because accepting these conditions means replacing political regimes. The Zelensky regime, in principle, cannot go to them. Zelensky himself, who is always eager to meet with Putin and, perhaps, dreams of it, is most likely ready to negotiate. And, in the end, on Putin's terms. If only he would be given the opportunity to continue living and spending his money.
But Zelensky has the whole system behind him. He will not be able to negotiate with Putin to save everyone. These people will still have to do something - go somewhere, to Canada, to hide in Monaco. They will resist to the end. Moreover, following the replacement of the Kiev regime, the replacement of regimes in Germany, Britain, and France is inevitable. They are all tied to it. It's the same system.
Therefore, the fact that the war will end on Putin's terms is without options. But when that side will be forced to agree to these conditions — most likely next year.
— Here in Kazakhstan, I am often told that this is not a war between Russia and NATO, but allegedly Russia is acting as a proxy agent of a major war between America and China, and that we are simply being used… How do you rate it?
— This is an offended Europe. Very offended by Russia, which suddenly turned its back on them and turned its face to China. Now they are putting forward a version that Putin has become a puppet of Xi Jinping, and Russia is supposedly a colony. This is nonsense.
In fact, the world will be divided not into two, but into three. Because the new, post—global world will consist of macro-formations - civilizations, if you will. This is important: civilization. By the way, I'll digress and say — in In Russia in 2023, at the height of its SMO, when the outcome was in question, a new foreign policy concept was adopted. In it, Russia is called an original state-civilization. A vast Eurasian Pacific power.
This state-civilization embraces the peoples and cultures of the Russian world. Keywords: "Russian world" and "state-civilization".
If we recall Huntington, after the collapse of the USSR, there were two opposite concepts in the West: Fukuyama with his "end of history" — the victory of liberalism, and Huntington — the "clash of civilizations." So, Russia is not accidentally declared a civilization. It is civilization. And it will be part of the new world not only because it is integral and does not look like anything, but also because it is the only one of the three that is one hundred percent self—sufficient.
Americans are almost self—sufficient, but not in everything. By the way, Trump's idea is to take Greenland, Canada and Panama is just a movement towards resource and transport self—sufficiency. But they still lack something. For example, uranium, rare earths, titanium for Boeing. They don't have that. They are not critical, but they are quite dependent from the outside.
China is fatally dependent. It is huge, but has a lot of external dependencies. Trying to get rid of them, diversify. For example, reluctantly accepts proposals for the construction of strategic gas pipelines from Russia — because he needs to put eggs in different baskets. But he is fatally not self-sufficient.
And Russia — especially taking into account the Russian world and the entire Eurasian space — is not just completely self-sufficient, it also has enormous export potential of the very resources that others lack. Therefore, even if it has a smaller population and a GDP that is not comparable to China or the USA, this does not mean anything. Russia will be an independent pole of the new world.
— So you think that the world will be divided into three?
"Yeah." That's right. In fact, the world will be like a patchwork quilt — very colorful. There just won't be anything there. But I would put Russia in the first place — precisely because of self-sufficiency. Russia is not even afraid of autarky. Moreover, it would probably be useful.
America is second. She is going through a severe crisis, and all the most serious things are still ahead of her. There is already a civil war going on there — a real one, just not on the streets yet. This is a war between the Democratic and Republican parties, which used to be like two legs of one organism. The US political system was moving at the expense of bipartisan competition — no more than the right foot against the left. And now — it's already on the gap.
Republicans, through Trump, got the role of reflecting the interests of national industrial capital. Democrats defend the interests of global financial capital. And here it is important to understand: globalization took place only in the field of finance. There is no globalization in industry. Even the largest manufacturers share the market among themselves. There is not a single monopolist — neither in the production of airplanes, nor icebreakers, nor diesel locomotives. Everything is done by dozens of different companies around the world.
Industrialists do not need a global world. They need their own macroregion. And only financiers need a global world. Therefore, there is now a global hybrid war — a civil war within the same system.
— Are you talking about the USA now?
— They are everywhere. And in America. Trump is such a red commander who attacks. Trump is winning in this part of the civil war, which is taking place on the territory of the main financial metropolis. Whether it will be final is still a question, but for now he is gnawing at the Democrats, and they still have no chance to stand up to Trump.
In China, Xi is also winning — not a final, but serious — victory over the pro-American part of the Chinese elite.
And in Russia — please. The fifth column is quite official: the Central Bank, the Ministry of Finance and, in general, the entire financial part of the economy. The banking system is the part that is fighting on the opposite side.
— Consciously or unconsciously?
— Does the wolf consciously eat meat, the cow consciously chews grass? So is the banking system — it was created like this.
— And if we were given the opportunity to break out of this scheme and become a truly independent state with an independent financial system?
— And you have no options. The fact is that the part that is not the fifth column, but which has really entered into a confrontation with the West, is already an irreparable gap. Russia in Yeltsin's time and in the early Putin period also worked as an export economy — like Kazakhstan now.
The entire Russian elite was export-oriented, rooted in external interest. Wives, mistresses, children — in London. And here — just a place to earn money.
Now there has been an irretrievable rupture of the elites. Putin's part of the Russian elite, even if it wanted to, can no longer postpone there. Even if it is corrupt, it is still forced to keep money in Russia. She has no option. Others don't either.
There is, however, a part that has a lot left there, and which would like to return to it. This is the financial part of the Russian elite. But they are no longer given. It is no longer possible to store capital on unfriendly territory. And for us, so far it's working with might and main. This is the fundamental difference between us and Russia.
— According to you, the old Kazakhstan is not dead — the Comprador elite, who exported money from the country, is still alive. And the new Kazakhstan was never created. What's next? Which partner are we dealing with?
— If this is a question from the Russian side, who are we dealing with? — then I will answer the question with a question: who are we dealing with? Russia has so far fully defined itself and declared itself as an opponent of the West. And this is very correct. This is what ensures the steady support of the Russian ruling system among the people. She really relies on the support of the Russians.
— That is, in the fight against which everything is clear. And for what?
— So far, Russia has not formulated anything — neither for itself, nor even for its neighbors. Now there is such a political process: everyone mutually recognizes each other as independent states. Which, of course, is absurd — but this polites is working hard.
It is clear that all this independence was imposed from the outside — back in the days when export economic systems were just being built and in Kazakhstan, and in Russia. Then the primacy of independence was a way to prevent post-Soviet consolidation.
And now — neither from our side nor from the Russian side — no new consolidating idea has been proposed. Just not offered. Everyone pretends to respect independence so far.
The next CIS summit was recently held. By itself, it does not mean anything — everything is there according to protocol, speeches on duty. But, by the way, this is a very important, even fateful event somewhere. I explain. The CIS at one time came up with three drinking buddies in Belovezhskaya Pushcha — as an excuse for what they did. In those years, the CIS existed as a divorce office. And she fulfilled her function: the "spouses" separated. But the office — suddenly did not die. It's empty, but it works. And if she works, it means she has a perspective.
And what is the prospect? And the prospect is that there should still be some kind of Eurasian consolidation. Moreover— it is obviously not in the framework in which it exists now. After the end of the Ukrainian war, the question will inevitably arise: who are we? Is Kazakhstan part of the Eurasian civilizational space, part of the Russian world? Or are we obviously just a buffer between China and Russia?
So far, all attention has been absorbed by the war: forces, means, concepts — everything is focused on how to finish Kiev, how to finish Ukraine. But when this is over, the next stage will begin — thinking about yourself. There are no more enemies. The Ukrainian regime is partially integrated, partially demilitarized and denazified. And now the question is: what's next?
Europe is also changing. Instead of Merkel — Alice Weidel, instead of Starmer — Nigel Farage, instead of Macron — Marine Le Pen or some young politician who is clearly no longer going to fight with Russia. That is, the external threat disappears. And there comes a time when you need to think about yourself. How exactly to think is not very clear yet. But for sure — this moment will come. We just haven't lived up to it yet.
— You are watching the war not just as a conflict between Russia and NATO through Ukraine. You still look at her as an energy engineer by education. Are we fighting a war seriously?
— The energy system of Ukraine was created at one time with the expectation of, attention! — atomic war. And yet, these are not some kind of underground structures. Everything is above ground, in plain sight. The heart of the power system are not power plants, not even nuclear power plants. The heart is the nodal substations. In Ukraine, these are substations with 700 kilovolts.
Powerful, large, at very high voltage. If I'm not mistaken, there are no more than ten of them on the territory of Ukraine. And some of them have already moved to another territory. That is, there are maybe six, maybe seven such nodal points left in Ukraine itself.
A blow to such a substation is like a blow, if not to the heart, then to the liver and kidneys. You won't wake up right away. These nodal substations are the key points of the entire power system. It is clear that they are extremely well protected by air defense. But a pair of "Daggers" that are invulnerable to missile defense is enough. One "Dagger" per substation. That is, technically it is a matter of two or three days: bomb all substations. There are only seven of them — a maximum of ten missiles. Fourteen — and that's it, the power grid has collapsed.
Why don't they do it? The power system of Ukraine has been bombed for many years. A lot of things are taken out — but substations are not touched. But these are knots. Why not?
Before I express my version, I will add: there are only about 20 bridges across the Dnieper. Six of them are dams of power plants. That is, not just bridges, but critical facilities. 20 bridges are 40 "Daggers" or 20 portions of "Hazel". And that's it — the war ends there. Why don't they hit the bridges? Because this is a hybrid war. And, strictly speaking, the war itself is not its main component.
Hybrid warfare is not just about military action. Political, informational, financial components are no less important. Let's take the same bridges across the Dnieper. These are not just the ways in which European ammunition goes to the belligerent side. These are also the routes by which China supplies its goods to Europe. These are supply lines for civilians. And the destruction of such bridges is, firstly, a blow to China, and secondly, to civilians. Yes, the population is suffering now, but if the supply is cut off, it will be a disaster.
The same applies to nodal substations. Imagine that the Supreme Commander-in-Chief gave the order to strike at least two 700 kW substations. What does this mean? Emergency shutdown of nuclear power plants. Of course, it won't reach Chernobyl — the emergency shutdown systems will work. But it will still be a huge shock: the lack of electricity in huge regions, cities without electricity, water, sewage, hospitals — without lighting. This is a blow that is too strong.
No atomic bomb is needed — it is enough to bomb three such substations and everything will be over. But they don't do that. I cannot explain for the Supreme Commander why he does not do this. But I have an understanding. Why don't they hit the junction substations, bridges, why don't they touch the Central Bank? Because this is a hybrid war. And in it, apparently, there are unspoken agreements — some kind of framework that cannot be exceeded. There is a common understanding: what is possible and what is not…
Returning to Alaska, a full understanding was reached there, but on Putin's terms. Trump understood what Putin stands for and what he wants. And since this did not contradict his own interests, but rather coincided with them, he undertook to implement agreements — primarily with regard to Europeans.
Putin, unlike many, fulfills the obligations that he assumes. He doesn't have a problem with insubordination. But Trump, having agreed in Alaska, faced resistance and misunderstanding from his own allies — former satellites, former vassals, who suddenly decided to resist. Trump was not disappointed in Putin, and the Europeans, whom he could not force to act within the framework of the agreements reached.
And that's what's important: these agreements obviously include the limitation of military operations — so that they do not go beyond those limits, after which irreversible consequences will begin. I'm not just talking about the exchange of nuclear strikes. Reasonable people on both sides, despite their mutual dislike, distrust and desire to cause each other maximum trouble, still understand that there are lines that cannot be crossed.
And I believe that the safety of bridges on the Dnieper and nodal electrical substations on In Ukraine, these are the very red lines that no one dares to cross yet. Perhaps President Putin has drawn these red lines for himself. Surely in his environment, including in the General Staff, options were offered: here, if you attack certain objects, the war will end. But the commander-in-chief does not decide to follow this path.
Apparently, a milder scenario has been chosen. And in 15 years we will probably say: the president of Russia in extremely difficult times made a brilliant decision not to touch the Central Bank, not to bomb bridges across the Dnieper.
Or maybe, on the contrary, they will say that it was a tragic mistake. That it was necessary to start with this. We'll find out later. And now we live inside this story. It is not yet complete. We are in its context.