Blog Assignment

Friday, April 12, 2019

Week 12: Kazakhs React To Their Capital City's Name Change


(https://indy-guide.com/en/articles/walking-tour-of-astana)

Summary:
The police have arrested 20 people for protesting Kazakhstan's capital name change from Astana to Nursultan at the mayor's office. For some background, Nursultan Nazarbaev resigned after being president for almost 30 years. Tokayev steps up to the task for the remaining of the term, until elections in April 2020.

(https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/kazakhstan-nazarbayev-transition-plan-190331061032825.html)

At a meeting with Parliament, Tokayev proposes the change in the name of the capital to name it after Nazarbaev. Parliament agrees. Following this, an online petition has been made against this. Nearly 40,000 people have signed it because this city has changed its name 3 times already. The Kazakhs are adamant about not changing the capital a 4th time in less than 60 years. The city of Astana was known as Akmolinsk followed by Tselinograd. After the break of the Soviet Union and Kazakhstan became independent, Tselinograd became known as Aqmola, which means White Grave in Kazakh. This city wasn't the capital until it moved from Almaty. Finally, it became Astana, meaning Capital in Kazakh. Not only does Tokaev want to rename the capital but also some of the major streets after Nazarbaev.

Reaction: 
I think that it is unfair to the Kazakhs that their capital city is being renamed without asking them first. Parliament and Tokaev created this new name for the city so fast that the people barely had time to react. I think Tokaev is also jumping the gun a little bit. He shouldn't make major changes until the elections next year. I also think that it's terrible for a city to be renamed so often in such a short time, especially one that is the capital. Most countries are very proud of their capital, and I think that the renaming is changing its identity in a way. Changing the name loses the value and a sense of magnificence of the capital in my opinion.

Connection: 
This connects to the Cold War because the Soviet Union disbanded after the Cold War. A few parts broke off to create new countries. Kazakhstan is one of these new countries. This article shows a bit of the youth of this country as it is off to a rocky start and their fluctuating decisions about the capital.

Questions: 
1) What do you think about the actions of Tokaev and Parliament?
2) What do you think of the response of the Kazakhs, their petition and protest?
3) How would you feel/react if your capital's name was renamed 4 times in your lifetime?

15 comments:

  1. The act of changing the name of the capital multiple times implies the instability within the government since it makes the government and country seem like they are unable to stick to one ideal or decision. In this case, it is not only just the capital’s name being changed, but also the major streets in all towns and citizens across Kazakhstan as well. Even if Nazarbaev has such a large impact on the country, I feel that naming and replacing the names of multiple streets and the capital is excessive. At most, maybe one name could be changed but only if the people of Kazakhstan agree as well. I feel that the citizens have the right to protest since there was not a vote for the name change, like the author states in the blog post. The citizens should have a say in what their capital’s name should be since it is a representation of their country as a whole. Personally if my country’s capital was changed four times within my lifetime, I would begin to feel unsure about my government since these name changes reflects their unpredictability and insecurity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it is immature of the parliament to change the capitals name. It seems pretty random, but in another article by the same news source it claims "Many in Kazakhstan saw those changes as a sign that Nazarbaev was seeking to ensure that he would maintain his grip on power if he stepped down as president." This explains the name change, but it seems pretty selfish considering most Kazahks do not support the name change. I understand why the Kazahks are angry, changing the name only makes things way more confusing. After all, a name is just a name, they should just pick a good one and stick with it like every other city in the world. If I was a Kazahk I would be very irritated as well. All the controversy over a stupid name is equivalent to a group project where everyone is arguing over the theme to use for the google slides, instead of focusing on the actual project.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/kazakh-president-nursultan-nazarbaev-says-he-is-resigning-/29830123.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I was researching for a blog topic, I did come across similar articles like the one you mentioned, ones that show that Nazarbaev is trying to maintain power despite stepping down. I’m pretty sure I found somewhere that that he’s still working in the government, just not as president. I really like your analogy to comparing it to working on a google slide presentation. To add on to that analogy, I think that the government should work more towards building their country. As a newer country than most, they probably have other work that they have to do instead of fiddling with the name of the capital.

      Delete
  4. It is extremely irresponsible of the Kazakh government to change the name of their Capital yet another time, and without consulting the people first. if I were a citizen of Kazakhstan, I would not so much care about the name of my Capital city but more about the fact that it lasts, because the consistency makes it so much easier and helps most people quite a bit. I can infer from sources that maybe the Parliamentary system in Kazakhstan is not working, or at least is not working to its full potential. At least in this case, the Parliament, which is supposed to represent the general population, poorly represented the people. In fact, 36,000 Kazahks signed a petition against the name change in the first 24 hours! I suspect that maybe a reason for the discontent is that the name change would honor a longtime authoritarian leader. Whatever happens next, it will be interesting to see whether the government will include the peoples' opinion or if they will continue on their current path and disregard the people.
    Sources: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-47652680
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/23/kazakhstan-renames-capital-nur-sultan
    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/03/kazakhstan-renames-capital-honour-leader-190323182311714.html

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the actions of Tokaev and parliament are unjust, it is a huge mistrust with the communication between citizens and government when it comes to changes that will affect all people. I think parliament should have recognized that citizens would be affected and moved for a partition. I think the Kazakh's took the best course of action if they wanted the capitals name to stay the same. Any violent protest would have made more people arrested and make the situation worse. By creating a partition it allowed everyone to express their disagreement in a civilized way. To be honest if the city of San Mateo was changed I wouldn't be too sad. To be expressed with a new city title could create fresh starts and besides, the "San" is used in like every city in California. My opinion would change however if its name was changed four times. The name of a city is supposed to have meaning of where someone lives. Swapping out that name every so often gives a city no value.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If the capital of my state was renamed 4 times it wouldn't have a big impact on me. Although the situation would be a bit confusing, Its no harder than writing down the date when the year changes. Overtime, people will get used to it, plus they can't do much to protest in the first place. Sure, changing the name of a state like Kazakhstan would be a pain, but its not the actual state, but instead the capital that is changing name. The capital isn't looked upon as important as the actual state, so people wouldn't care as much anyways. Sacramento is the capital of California and I barely recognize the name to be honest. Throughout all fifteen years living in California, I've never had to mention the capital in documents or fill-out forms. Honestly, I don't think that 4 capital changes in my lifetime will make much of a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that the actions of Tokaev and the Parliament are quite unnecessary. Changing the capital’s name repeatedly will not solve anything. In my opinion, a name wouldn’t cause much change in my life, only make things certainly confusing. Rather than spending time on this, I believe the government should invest in sustainable environmental programs, as the country currently faces several environmental issues. Through this, I can understand why the Kazakhs will be angry at their government as they probably are all looking forward to stability rather than a quick cycle of names. I wouldn’t go as far as to protest but petitioning for it makes sense as the situation is currently borderline ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I believe the actions of Tokaev and Parliament are useless and unjustified. There's no point of changing the capital's name. Unless the name is offensive or promotes corruptness, changing the capital's name is unnecessary. It solves nothing and accomplishes nothing. It's also unfair that they just change the capital without asking the citizens. The citizens make up the population and therefore should have a say in what to do. The protest is definitely just as the citizens have a right to make a change. If my capital's name would renamed 4 times I feel it wouldn't affect me too much. The capital doesn't play a key part in my life. My life wouldn't really be impacted, it would only cause confusion.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The innability to make a decision on the name of the capital is an example of the country’s instability. If the country cannot agree on a name, what does that mean for decisions that have to do with national security? They Kazakhs frusration is understood and just like in the US, they should be able to protest and petition, expecially over a controversial decision like this, but I think the decision for the names should ultimately be decided by the public who live there. Then, they should focus on improving their country as a whole by discussing more politcially important topics that can result in possible grwoth. These actions are unneceasry and a waste of time for the people for Kzahakstan. The name of a city of supposed to be meaningful and represent the area or the pople living there, but chaning the name strips the value from the name. If I was a Kazakh living in capital city and name was changed four times in the last sixty years, I was be irritated, as it would be taking the connection or significance away from my home. But if was not living in the city whose name was being changed, then I would just be annoyed, as it would just be a minor pain, but I would feel empathy for those living there.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-kazakhstan-protests/kazakh-police-disperse-protest-against-renaming-of-capital-idUSKCN1R20K0
    https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2019-03-22/police-in-kazakhstan-detain-dozens-of-anti-government-protesters

    ReplyDelete
  10. The multiple number of times the capital of Kazakhstan's name has been changed is implying that the people running the government are not only disagreeing and conflicting amongst themselves, but with the citizens and civilians living in Kazakhstan as well. I find it very unusual that their Parliament has passed yet another deal for the fourth time for their capital city's name change as if they made the decision without thought. Like both Arnav, and Penny mentioned, I believe that because of the government's inability to settle on a single name implies their instability as a whole. If the government can't even make a decision that everybody, including the civilians and citizens, agree with such as something as simple as a name change for a city, what would happen if the government was given something to decide on that was at a higher magnitude or of importance? I believe that the protests and petitions of the Kazakhs is reasonable since I find it highly disagreeable to name a capital city after someone, especially after the name has been changed multiple times previously, AND change multiple street names within that city after the same person. Even I find this idea absurd and that the government should just settle with one name and stick with it. However, to be entirely honest, if the capital of the United States, Washington D.C.'s name was changed 4 times in my lifetime, I honestly wouldn't care. The name change would not affect me or anyone I know's life severely or even at all, I would just be thinking that the people in government are crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The actions of Tokaev and Parliament were extremely childish and ill-thought-out. By changing the country's capital without publicly addressing the citizens just further exemplifies the poor leadership skills and lack of integrity in the government. Obviously every different capital name given to Kazakhstan has historic significance to the citizens, so by constantly switching and abolishing the previous names, in a sense they are disregarding the history and importance of the past name. I don't know if I support the protesting as it has caused a lot of pain and chaos for those participating in the riots. I do think it is important, though, for the Kazakhs to voice their opinions, as they were "adamant about not changing the capital a 4th time in less than 60 years." I think the only thing to do in the future is make sure that there is stronger communication between the leaders and citizens. As the 4th capital name change serves as a wake up call to everyone that to succeed as a nation, relationships and communication are key.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think their actions show that the people within the government is incompetent and are disagreeing with each other. Instead of changing the capital's name multiple times within a century, the government should focus on helping further improve the country and the people. I think that it was valid for the people to protest against the name change as they have the right to have a say. Although the government may have had good intentions trying to help remember the previous president, they could have made a memorial to help remember Nazarbaev instead. Personally, I wouldn't care if the capital's name was changed four times as it does not affect me, but it would cause me to think that something is wrong with the government.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Tokaev and Parliament have been irresponsible by changing the name of the capital so many times. Tokaev and Parliament have failed the people by not letting them have a decision in naming the capital city of their country. Parliament needs to challenge Tokaev's decision and the people need to have a say. I think that an effective way to do so is by getting the public to vote on the name so that it's fair for everyone. I feel that the Kazakhs have a right to be angry because of how the government handled this. They did it without telling them. I hope that the Kazakh's petitions and protest, work so that they don't have to deal with another name change. If this were to happen to me in my country four times I would be very frustrated, angry, and tired. I would just want the capital's name to stay the way it was regardless.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Changing the name of a capital is already weird. But, changing it 3 times in less than 60 years is excessive and it reflects on the government. It reveals that the government is unstable and they have trouble making decisions as a whole. This will affect future decision making for other, more important matters. Tokayev is currently the temporary president until the 2020 elections. At its core, being a president means that you serve the people and you represent them. If over 40,000 people reject this name change, there has to be something done. As stated previously by Michael, changing the name is only a minor issue and it should be argued over because this wastes precious time the government can be using to develop this second world country. Although Kazakhstan has enjoyed relatively high economic growth over recent years, fuelled mainly by its oil and gas industries, diversification of the economy is needed to further reduce poverty in the largest Central Asian country, as stated by the United Nations Development Programme (http://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2004/05/13/poverty-persists-despite-impressive-economic-growth). Data shows that over 57 percent of poor people in Kazakhstan are people of working age. Instead of fussing over a name, Kazakhstan should instead focus more on their economy and finding ways to improve the lives of their citizens.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-47652680
    https://eurasianet.org/kazakhstan-mp-suggests-changing-countrys-name

    ReplyDelete