Reassessing classification of Kazakhstan’s ethnic management model: A comparative approach

Abstract

Kazakhstan’s model of ethnic management is often classified as a typical example of national identity-building. Kazakhstani politicians and media, however, prefer to refer to it as their unique third way. The article attempts to disprove both these claims. It argues that Kazakhstan merely uses two different ethnic management approaches—national identity-building and hegemonic exchange. The article tests this hypothesis by conducting a comparative analysis of various theoretical approaches to ethnic management and applying them to Kazakhstan. Furthermore, it explains what this dual approach means in terms of operationality by outlining the key challenges the model faces. The final section of the article summarizes its findings and provides recommendations.