30
the sake of political order, security and economic necessity. Political ideals associ-
ated with liberal democracy often give way to the considerations of welfare, eco-
nomic growth and social order.
While supporting democracy as an ideal, inhabitants of Central Asia often un-
derscore that it is a culturally specific model of democracy that is more appropri-
ate for their national circumstances. The economic
components, including some guarantees against un-
employment, income equality and other forms of wel-
fare support from the state, are featured prominently
in these context-specific imaginations of democracy.
It comes as no surprise, therefore, that the states which
are better off economically, such as Kazakhstan, are
also ranked as more democratic by their people. Eco-
nomic growth, well-being and the popularity of the
president correlate stronger with the public’s assess-
ment of the state of democracy in their state, than the
quality of elections. This mixture of individual atti-
tudes that combine belief in democracy with non-democratic orientations is rein-
forced by the discourse on democracy by Central Asian governments.
The popular acceptance of economic and security-related limitations to the lib-
eral democratic order serves the interests of the governing elite. It provides an im-
portant source of legitimacy and an additional tool for constructing a nation su-
perimposed on the state identified with the ruling elite. It offers, however, a shaky
foundation for erecting legitimacy and building a nation. Strategies that are based
on a government’s performance in the economic and security realms are intrinsi-
cally unstable because they carry concrete promises. Once these promises are not
fulfilled, the strategies may backfire. The current economic crisis triggered by the
fall in global oil prices and the sanctions on Russia has handicapped Central Asian
governments’ ability to deliver on socio-economic promises. The worsening of the
economic situation has already planted seeds of dissent and augmenting fears of
political destabilisation. This context weakens governments’ calls for national unity
and exacerbates the overt and latent divisions in Central Asian societies.Mariya Y. Omelicheva is an associate professor of political science at the University
of Kansas and author of Democracy in Central Asia: Competing Perspectives and
Alternative Strategies (2015) and Counterterrorism Policies in Central Asia (2011).Economic growth and
the popularity of the
president correlate
stronger with the
public’s assessment
of democracy in
their state, than the
quality of elections.Opinion & Analysis How Central Asia understands democracy, Mariya Y. Omelicheva