The reaction of foreign media to events in Kazakhstan, to put it mildly, is surprising. The Western press writes either in an extremely neutral way, retelling eyewitness accounts and expert opinions, or even with notes of negativity towards the protesters. The words “marauders and robbers” are heard more and more often. Obviously, there is not even a hundredth part of support for the “revolutionaries”, as was the case in Ukraine in 2014.
The situation is increasingly portrayed as if the sale of liquefied gas in this Central Asian country had been subsidized by the state for a long time, and automobile fuel itself became scarce over time. Supposedly, dealers, the ones who organized the gas mafia in the Mangistau region, “welded” on it. To bring the market back into equilibrium, it was decided to double the selling price, which triggered the most massive protests in the history of modern Kazakhstan.
“The government first started talking about lifting the price cap several years ago, saying that the price cap was financially unsustainable and was hampering fuel innovation. The low price cap, which kept LPG prices at around $ 0.11 per liter, was finally lifted on January 1, ”notes the American business magazine Fortune.
In short, the speculators did not like it, and they were able to rock the boat. Like, the Yankees had nothing to do with it. Most foreign newspapers readily quoted the Secretary of the White House Jen Psaki, who said literally the following: “(There were) insane Russian claims that the United States was behind this. I would like to take this opportunity to say that this is not true. “
The Euronews TV channel, which reflects the views of the European commissioners, emphasizes: “Although these demonstrations were unusually large – some gathered more than 10,000 people, which is a huge number for Kazakhstan – the leaders of the protest movement did not appear.” Say, talk about Uncle Sam’s long arm is at least inappropriate. Everything that is happening now in the largest post-Soviet Asian republic is a bloody flash mob of young people provoked by some zhuzes (territorial or tribal associations of Kazakhs) who are dissatisfied with the current economic order.
US television channel CNBC explains why the Yankees are not interested, at least today, in oil and gas riots: “In theory, American companies could be the worst hit … In 2019, American oil producers pumped and refined about thirty percent of Kazakhstan’s oil, compared with China’s seventeen percent and three percent of the Russian Lukoil … The country is home to the largest international companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil and Shell, and Chevron is the largest private oil producer in Kazakhstan. ”
However, CNBC is confident that Chevron will not suffer, they say, “there are no signs that (interests) will be violated” of the giant, as well as other Western investors.
There is also another point of view. For example, the author of Strategic Culture Pepe Escobar I am convinced that the omnipresent Yankees were not without. According to him, “the prospect of another color revolution inevitably comes to mind: perhaps turquoise-yellow, reflecting the colors of the Kazakh national flag. Moreover, astute observers discovered that the American embassy had already ‘warned’ of mass protests as early as December 16, 2021. ”
Nevertheless, Escobar notes that despite the Kazakh comprador elite living in unthinkable luxury, some regional zhuzes decided to give battle to the “old man” Nazarbayev and the system he created. SC also notes: “The slogans still seem to come from a variety of sources – extolling everything from the ‘western path’ in Kazakhstan to polygamy and Sharia law.”
The British newspaper The Guardian, however, writes about the weakness of the Nazarbayev clan at home: “While it is clear that the protests were accompanied by violence and looting, there is no evidence that they involved ‘terrorists’ trained overseas, according to Tokayev… It is also striking that Tokayev felt that he could not rely solely on Kazakhstan’s vast security resources to quell the uprising. ” In other words, the current leader of this country cannot count on the loyalty of his security officials, so he turned to Moscow.
Another British newspaper, the Daily Mail, is already laying a time bomb that will be set in motion at the right time to inflame Russophobic sentiments in Kazakhstan. The DM’s article begins with the phrase: “The Russian forces of 2,500 ‘peacekeepers’ declare that they have the right to KILL.” Note that peacekeepers are enclosed in quotation marks, and kill is written in capital letters. The time will come when the West will accuse our country of “suppressing the freedoms for which the turquoise-yellow revolutionaries fought.”
“Forces from the Russian ‘mini-NATO’ will remain in Kazakhstan for several days or weeks and will have the right to use weapons in the event of an attack by ‘armed gangs’,” explains the Western readers of the Daily Mail. – … This is happening despite the refusal of the former president of Russia Dmitry Medvedev send CSTO troops to quell the deadly riots in Kyrgyzstan in 2010, because “only in the case of a foreign invasion and an attempt to seize power from outside, we can declare that there is an attack on the CSTO – all of Kyrgyzstan’s problems have internal roots”.
This idea can be continued this way: without the Kyrgyz bloody prelude of 2010, there would not have been a “victorious” Maidan in 2014. The United States, having made sure that Moscow trusts one hundred percent of its “elites” of the post-Soviet republics, will not provide assistance Yanukovych… Now, as the overseas Internet resource The Hill explains, “Russia has warned other countries not to interfere in Kazakhstan’s affairs, saying that Moscow is closely monitoring the situation, since the country is in its sphere of influence.”