Dr Jade McGlynn has published an article for The Diplomat discussing the modernisation of Britain’s Central Asian Trade Strategy, based on her report for the Henry Jackson Society, entitled ‘A Steppe Change: Should Britain Be Bolder In Central Asia?’. In it, she states the UK “needs to think more ambitiously and coherently about its business aims with Central Asia”. In developing relations with the Central Asian states, the UK could balance trade with human rights and developmental assistance. So far, the UK has failed to develop such a strategy, and efforts remain focused on trading opportunities. McGlynn wants the UK to take head of the political realities of these states and ensure it champions and actively encourages democracy and greater human rights while simultaneously organising and developing trade agreements. Novastan spoke to Dr McGlynn to find out more about her strategy. An example of where the UK has failed to do as much is their increasing arms deals with Turkmenistan, considered by human rights groups as one of the world’s most repressive and authoritarian regimes. In comparison, the UK’s assistance to Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan has benefitted both nations and given the UK considerable soft power through showing commitment to the region beyond trade. The emerging signs of democratisation in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, Central Asia’s two largest economies and nations, show the region to be making a gradual change from what has long been considered an authoritarian area of the world. The landslide election of Sadyr Japarov in Kyrgyzstan should be cautiously championed for implementing democracy. By providing vocal support for Kyrgyzstan, the UK reminds the other nations that its trade, investment and support are connection to Kyrgyzstan’s continued democratic style of governance. This in turn could increase the likelihood for democratisation in the neighbouring states. The UK should take inspiration from the Obama administration’s C5+1 initiative and build on its positive reputation gained from development work in the region. This would then allow the UK to maintain channels with Turkmenistan and Tajikistan and shows they are open to trade should they ever move towards democratisation. The UK has not paid enough attention to Central Asia. When it has, only specific countries or aspects, for example trade with Kazakhstan, have been made the point of focus. A region-focused approach instead would benefit both Britain and countries where regional cooperation has not always been strong. Human rights must remain a priority As much as increased trade negotiations with these countries should be encouraged, she maintains that the UK cannot sign deals at the expense of human rights and jeopardization of a free and fair society. The UK’s current arms deals with Turkmenistan are a shocking example of sacrificing ethics in order to bolster trade. The lack of pressure on the UK to halter these deals is due to a lack of knowledge and media coverage of the area. Too often the mainstream, generalised media focuses on the bizarre rules put in place by President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, shining the country in a comedic, ridiculous light. The reality of the brutal human rights abuses and widespread poverty despite the wealth of natural resources in the country is forgotten. Larger organisations rather than just specialised areas should give the country more attention in order to increase knowledge of Turkmenistan, something which would elevate pressure to stop these morally and ethically entirely unacceptable arms deals. These deals undermine the UK’s pronounced championship of human rights and should be stopped. Elsewhere, little has been done to improve the state of human rights for the citizens of Central Asia: despite claims by the governments of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan as to the development of human rights, little evidence of this has yet been shown. Recent human rights abuses include censorship of journalists and oppression of the LGBTQ+ community. While democratic, the election of Sadyr Japarov in Kyrgyzstan and imprisonment of the most outspoken critic and presidential hopeful, Omurbek Tekebayev, puts the country as risk of returning to the populist authoritarianism overturned in 2010. It would be hypocritical of the UK to adopt a trade policy with such countries after public anti-authoritarian efforts in China and Russia and could demoralise activists in these countries who need the UK’s support. Implementing a human rights checklist backed up by independent NGOs from the region in order to assess milestones in terms of achieving greater democracy and freedom could encourage increased democratisation. This would enable the UK to measure economic engagement against human rights and democratisation milestones. Goals could be set for countries like Uzbekistan that claim to be installing more democratic milestones such as free access for election observers, the establishment of NGOs and funds to support independent media. Once reached, the country could continue to the next stage in economic relations. Putting a permanent representative in Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan, would symbolise the UK’s commitment to supporting the democratic potential of the region. Kyrgyzstan is currently the most democratic country and would demonstrate the UK’s hope that they should stay on this path. It would also reward and prioritise the most democratic country and encourage Sadyr Japarov, President of Kyrgyzstan, to continue this work. The UK alone would have enough power to rely on their influence to speed up democratisation in Central Asia. However, the European interest, particularly from countries who keep human rights as a core component of their foreign policy, namely Scandinavian countries, and desires in Washington for the Biden administration to continue with Obama’s policy, allow for a combined effort which ups the pressure for Central Asian nations. Background of Central Asia The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and subsequent independence for Central Asian countries led to a long-term struggle for democracy. Many of these countries contain deeply embedded ethnic tensions dating back to Stalin’s policies, for example in the Osh region of Kyrgyzstan. These countries have had to deal with civil wars, widespread humans rights abuses and as a result their economies have struggled to achieve their full potential. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan still rely heavily on remittances. However, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have seen a near doubling in per capita income in purchasing power parity since independence and political conflicts have not deterred interest from abroad in trade and investment. These countries are rich in natural resources, which constitute 65 per cent of exports in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, as well as over 90 per cent in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. The UK has now left the EU and thus has the freedom to pursue its own trade deal. Economic, security and geopolitical considerations make Central Asia a good trade partner, including the appetite for British goods in countries such as Kazakhstan and the pre-established trade and diplomatic presence of the UK in each of the nations. The Department of International Trade has put in effort to build on existing standing especially in Kazakhstan, where UK cultural, service and educational exports are popular. For example, 4,000 Kazakh students are currently studying in the UK and more visas are issues to Kazakh students than Australians. With two established UK trade offices in Kazakhstan, a comparatively large economy and a consistently open approach to free trade, McGlynn deems the country a promising contender for UK export growth. In comparison, Uzbekistan also has potential since the United Kingdom-Uzbekistan Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) signed in 2019 enabled the two to grant each other the most favoured nation (MFN) treatment. This is important because Uzbekistan does not belong in the World Trade Organisation. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have less ample economic opportunities due to widespread poverty, a relatively low GDP of $8.09 and $7.52 billion respectively, although it is still important to include them. The UK accounts for almost half of all Kyrgyzstan’s export, mainly gold, which provides leverage to promote democratisation. Trade between the UK and Turkmenistan has flourished under the auspices of the Turkmen-British Trade and Economic Council, even if it allows for a growth in controversial arms deals. The UK is not alone in the rush to take advantage of such lucrative deals: Italy has established a business forum with Central Asian countries, signing arms deals with Turkmenistan. The USA has just launched the Central Asia Investment Partnership and the Scandinavian nations have recently held the Kazakhstan Northern European Investment Forum. McGlynn advises the UK to hurry in these countries’ footsteps but paying heed not to lose sight of their moral and democratic values. Impact on other countries

Economic investment can also improve security interests, namely in helping to stabilise the countries. With a combined population of 75million, the average age of a Central Asian citizen is 27.6, highlighting the need for economic opportunities for young people. Without such opportunities, the likelihood for young people to become radicalised or turn to extremist groups is far greater. The UK’s trade influence can be used as a positive counter example to major geopolitical players in that region- Russia and China. The UK has condemned China’s campaign against the Uyghur people in Xinjiang, a campaign which has also targeted ethnic Kazakhs and Kyrgyz, the Kazakhs being the second largest Turkic-speaking indigenous community in the region after the Uyghurs. It also contains many ethnic Kyrgyz. The UK’s economic approach must take into account these people, support them and help refugees.

 Lily Shanagher Edited by Tommy Hodgson

The post How can Britain develop trade in Central Asia? appeared first on Novastan English.

The LGBTQ community in Uzbekistan is facing increased repression in the wake of an attack on an independent blogger outside of his home in Tashkent.

Miraziz Bazarov, who has actively called for improved LGBTQ rights within Uzbekistan, was attacked by three unknown assailants with a baseball bat on the night of 28 March 2021. The attack was witnessed by at least one person, and led to Bazarov receiving multiple bruises, a leg fracture and a brain injury.

Want more Central Asia in your inbox? Subscribe to our newsletter here.

Bazarov had been gaining notoriety in some parts of Uzbekistani society for his open views on gay rights, advocating for the decriminalisation of same-sex relations for example. He has also criticised the government on numerous other counts, including on President Shavkat Mirziyoev’s COVID-19 response, instances of corruption and misuse of IMF loans.

Bazarov mostly communicates these messages through his Telegram channel and TikTok account. He has gained popularity and attention to the point where he was summoned by the state security services (SGB) in 2020 over an open letter he wrote to the IMF contesting what the loans will actually be used for in Uzbekistan.

Harsh anti-LGBTQ laws

Currently, Uzbekistan punishes the crime of “sodomy” by up to 3 years in prison. Gay Uzbek men are often harassed by members of the public or choose to leave for fear over the safety of themselves or their families.

Bazarov has been notably vocal in opposition to homophobia within Uzbekistan, often making political points in videos and sometimes controversial remarks in public. He usually frames his support for improving these rights as about personal autonomy, insisting he is not an LGBTQ activist but concerned with privacy.

This attack comes at a time of more visible tensions between the LGBTQ community and other parts of the public. On 28 March, the same day that Bazarov was assaulted, an all-male crowd was recorded marching in Tashkent chanting “Allahu Akbar”, or “God is Great”, apparently in a show of defiance against the LGBTQ community.

It is unclear on the size or origins of the crowd, but it is alleged they attempted to attack two people they perceived to be LGBTQ activists in Tashkent’s Amir Temur square. Some arrests were made, but it is unknown if this has led to convictions and there are mixed accounts of what specifically occurred.

Although it is not yet confirmed that the attack on Bazarov was motivated by homophobia, it is likely given how vocal his comments have been and the conflict which transpired on the same day in Tashkent. Bazarov has also made it clear that he has received multiple threats on these grounds leading up to the attack, and had alerted police ten times before with no action previously taken.

Increased repression

The attack on Bazarov also correlates with increased repression against the already marginalised LGBTQ community in Uzbekistan. It also comes after calls to decriminalise homosexuality led to anger and claims it would destroy traditional values.

The Polish journalist Agnieszka Pikulicka-Wilczewska, who reports from Uzbekistan, tweeted on 29 March: “The security services are now actively searching for gay men. showing pictures of individuals they suspect of being gay and putting immense pressure on people to give away info about the LGBT community… This is the new #Uzbekistan.”

Read more: Uzbekistan: harassment incident underlines mistreatment of journalists

Pikulicka-Wilczewska has also claimed her boyfriend and several others were questioned by the authorities because they were present at the hospital where Bazarov was being treated after the attack.

This paints a bleak picture for the LGBTQ community in Uzbekistan, with the authorities often showing indifference. Victims also say the police choose to blame them for violence.

As of early April, Bazarov remains in hospital.

Tommy Hodgson
Novastan.org

For more news and analysis from Central Asia, follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, Linkedin or Instagram.

The post Uzbekistan: pro-LGBTQ blogger victim of violent attack appeared first on Novastan English.

As parts of Kazakhstan face new restrictions in 2021, Novastan looks back at life during the country’s second lockdown, from 5 July to 16 August 2020. Strict measures were enacted to slow down the crisis, impacting people’s daily lives.

A version of this article first appeared on Novastan’s French website on 11 August 2020.

The health crisis is still ongoing in Kazakhstan. In order to deal with the situation, new restrictions are in place in Nur-Sultan, the capital, and Almaty, the largest city.

It’s not the first time Kazakhstan faces restrictions due to Covid-19: one after the other, cities and regions imposed quarantine measures from March 2020, starting with Almaty and Nur-Sultan. These measures were lifted on 11 May, only for the country to enter a second lockdown on 5 July. Initially planned for 14 days, this second period of quarantine was extended to mid-August.

Want more Central Asia in your inbox? Subscribe to our newsletter here.

During the second lockdown, Novastan interviewed five locals about their experience. From Nur-Sultan to Almaty, this is the story of ordinary people fighting against an unprecedented health and economic crisis.

The first lockdown quickly established strict measures

After the appearance of the first cases of coronavirus in Kazakhstan on 13 March 2020, the largest country in Central Asia declared a first lockdown from mid-March to mid-May. The unprecedented situation considerably modified the population’s habits, who are usually more inclined to enjoy the great outdoors that Kazakhstan has to offer.

“The first quarantine was strict in our city,” Tasha Parshina, who lives in Almaty, told Novastan. “All of our outings were restricted, nobody was outside and there were nearly no cars around. Our city is very green and people like spending time outside, in terraces, in parks or just out on walks. It was unusual for our people to stay home, it was probably the first time in their lives this happened.”

However, the first lockdown did not stop the virus from spreading. As the harshest measures were lifted, precursory signs of a major resurgence of cases appeared.

“While the government decided to impose an early lockdown and declare a state of emergency as soon as the virus arrived in Kazakhstan, we found ourselves in a rather dramatic situation three months later,” Asel, another Almaty resident, said. “On 11 May, as soon as the relaxation of lockdown began, the number of cases started increasing. Towards the end of June, we also saw many pneumonia cases that appeared to come from complications of the virus.”

Hospitals rapidly found their capacities stretched, despite Kazakhstan being the richest country out of the former Soviet republics of Central Asia.

“I have many colleagues who work in hospitals that tell me how critical the situation really is. There are no more medical gowns, no medicine, no government support,” Aidana Ramazanova, who lives in Nur-Sultan, said.

Read more: Covid-19: Kazakhstan to use colour-coded system through new app

When the country recorded the most coronavirus cases in the region the government decided on less restrictive measures for the second lockdown, in an effort to revitalise the economy.

“This time the lockdown is lighter, so we could say that it’s only a partial lockdown. We can go out, we can move around,” Asel said. ‘‘It is recommended to stay at home, but it’s not forbidden to go out either. So I see a lot of people outside, even if places like markets or malls are closed. Cafés and restaurants cannot welcome clients inside: they are limited to 30 people on their terrace,” the young woman explained.

“The second lockdown is way less strict, people go to work and go out all the time,” Tasha Parshina agreed.

Economic weakening and distrust of the government and the media

The pandemic impact has had a severe impact on Kazakhstan’s economy. For many households, the crisis has accentuated the fragility of their situation.

“Many companies and shops have closed, including mine, and some haven’t reopened. This situation has put a lot of people in danger because there were many who didn’t have the necessary financial stability to allow them to be without work for several months,” Tasha Parshina said. “I think we are heading towards a very impactful crisis.”

Adana Ramazanova agrees: “Banks await people to pay their mortgages and their rents while unemployment has risen and new job opportunities are rare. It’s a vicious circle!”, says Aidana Ramazanova.

This worrisome economic situation leads to more and more citizens questioning the handling of the crisis by the government. “I don’t think that the second lockdown has been correctly understood or felt necessary as it’s not strict enough, everyone is going out,” Tasha Parshina said. “Some measures are incoherent, such as the restrictions on transport which are ridiculous: the number of buses on some lines have been reduced, leading to an over-attendance on those lines left. Social distancing is not respected on there, which generates more infections.”

“Public transport has completely stopped on Saturdays and Sundays: it forces me to go grocery shopping during the weekdays when I’m supposed to be working,” she added.“The list of measures that don’t make sense is still long. The tighter the lockdown, the more I feel the population’s anger. Nowadays, I don’t know a single person who feels favourable to the lockdown.”

Exacerbating inequalities

“Communication was badly handled: measures haven’t been planned properly nor coherently explained,” Asel said. “For example, when the health minister announced the relaxation of lockdown, shopping centres and markets prepared to reopen. But two days later, the president announced an extension of the same lockdown.”

Facing confusion between communication errors, real news, rumours and malicious misinformation, some of the population distrust traditional forms of media.

“Trust towards traditional media has never been that high and lots of fake news, each item more absurd than the last, circulates on social media and people really believe them!,” Tasha Parshina said. “Many throw the blame on emigration. Others have been convinced for a while that we are the only central Asian country to face such difficulties.”

On the other hand, with official media becoming less and less credible in the eyes of the population, the alternatives provided better information: “Independent media organisations united to launch their own website to count victims. It put pressure on the government and is partly the reason that the pneumonia cases will now be counted in the official statistics,” Asel explained.

Read more: Central Asia in 2020: the year in review

The miscommunications and lack of clarity in the government’s action has made much of the population question the credibility of the whole situation. “No one is fighting against the virus, but the government is fighting its people,” Sana Aikyn, from Nur-Sultan, said.

Aidana Ramazanova said: “I am sure that most of the people do not support the government’s strategy concerning Covid-19. Some don’t even believe in coronavirus. All the same, I don’t think that the government made all the right choices.”

“The fact is that we still are a young nation. Before independence [December 1991], our doctrine was based on a welfare state, the idea that government serves all,” Tasha Parshina went on. “The current situation showed that we have to count on ourselves first, before the government. And this reality is not easily accepted by most of the people.”

The pandemic and its consequences have highlighted social and economical inequalities, as all crises do. Kazakhstan is not an exception, with the daily news shedding light on a worrisome situation: “There wasn’t any space left in hospitals, the emergency services weren’t coming to people’s houses, it was impossible to take a test, those who became sick stayed at home without a chance to visit the hospital or see their doctors,” Aya Sharifkanova, of Nur-Sultan, said.

Similarly, Asel points out the importance of connections to get treatment: “A lot of people used personal connections such as relatives in order to get hospitalised, an X-ray or a test.”

Tasha Parshina added: “I think there is a separation between those who are able to work from home and are concerned by the health crisis, and those who don’t consider lockdown an effective measure but only economically damaging.”

Uncertain future

Will Kazakhstan have the resources to recover? Nothing is certain, as the situation seems fragile. “We are aware that the country is facing a great crisis. The health crisis should be over soon, but we will find ourselves in an economic crisis,” Asel said at the time.

“A third of small and medium-sized companies have closed or are about to. Lockdown has lasted so long and many people will continue being unemployed. We don’t know if the government will have sufficient resources to support the economy or social programs,” she added. “I do hope that from now on, the number of Covid cases will drop but at the moment there is no decrease, we count about 1,500 new cases per day”

Some Kazakhstanis assess their government’s difficulties in responding to the crisis as a disappointment. “This crisis has been a real ordeal for the government, for the people and for the healthcare system. Unfortunately no one has been up to the task,” Asel said.

However, others see the potential for political renewal. “When lockdown is over, I think a lot of shops and companies will have closed, a lot of people will be angry. There will be a number of people willing to emigrate and an overall feeling of general dissatisfaction towards the government’s actions. Maybe there will be a collective realisation,” Tasha Parshina concluded.

Some names have been changed.

Alexandra Tivet
Novastan.org

Translated from French by Lorraine Lavolley

Edited by Tommy Hodgson

For more news and analysis from Central Asia, follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, Linkedin or Instagram.

The post Kazakhstan’s second lockdown told by those who lived it appeared first on Novastan English.

CENTRAL ASIAN CINEMA. The film The Wounded Angel (2016) follows four adolescent boys in a rural village in mid-1990s Kazakhstan, each trying to come to terms with the lack of opportunities and injustices around them, leading to patterns of self-destructive behaviour.

“Central Asian Cinema” is a series of collaborative articles written by different members of the Novastan team to share their favourite cinematographic moments about Central Asia. Each article describes a film produced or shot in Central Asia which is available to watch online.

The Wounded Angel (2016) is a sparse, quiet film set in Kazakhstan in the years after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, when the country was spiralling into a deep economic crisis. This is the setting in which director Emir Baigazin weaves this slow-burn narrative about young men who are victims of the wider issues dominating their upbringing.

Want more Central Asia in your inbox? Subscribe to our newsletter here.

The film is beautifully shot, making heavy use of lingering shots in darkened, empty rooms or the sepia-toned vastness of the Kazakh Steppe. The undeniably attractive visual aspect of The Wounded Angel does not overshadow the strange plot turns, drawn out through deliberately limited dialogue, and the emotional scenes contrasted to impressively stoic reactions.

The strength of Baigazin’s piece is what it illustrates about Kazakhstan’s post-Soviet identity. Through the four young protagonists, we see clearly the limitations of their home life, and can share their deep-seated desire to break free of the monotonous hopelessness of their village. Each story has overlap on this theme, but brings about a new dimension of Kazakhstani culture following the collapse of the USSR, including the exploration of petty crimes, the stigma of being an ex-prisoner, the practice of making money from selling scrap metal, and the pressures of obtaining education. Each plot carefully crafts the generational and cyclical nature of the poor choices made, often in haste or as a cry for help.

Read more: Igla: plunge into the underworld of Kazakhstan’s perestroika with the legendary Viktor Tsoi

Each vignette is thought-provoking in its own way, providing loose moral lessons with no fixed resolution for the protagonists. Through its use of close-ups and extended scenes, The Wounded Angel feels especially realistic, acting as a glimpse into a place which seems reflective of the real conditions of any rural setting in Central Asia at this time. Ultimately it is a film about graft, hardship and the often harsh reality of confronting one’s own dreams. Though difficult to watch at times and slow to develop, even grinding to an almost complete stop at times, The Wounded Angel is a truly profound addition to Kazakhstani cinema, and showcases human tragedy at this point of historical stagnation.

The Wounded Angel is available on MUBI with English subtitles.

Tommy Hodgson
Novastan.org

For more news and analysis from Central Asia, follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, Linkedin or Instagram.

The post The Wounded Angel: a dramatic and profound portrait of 1990s rural Kazakhstan appeared first on Novastan English.

Directed by Kana Beisekeyev and produced by Kairat Nurmugambetov in association with Qazaq TV, the short documentary The Wife is a powerful and harrowing account of four women’s experience of domestic abuse.

Zhena, or The Wife, is a 2021 documentary which focuses on domestic abuse in Kazakhstan. This issue is not often discussed or acknowledged in Kazakhstani society, and it speaks to the wider social problems in the country, and the region as a whole. The narrative in The Wife highlights the psychological and systemic reasons for ongoing violence in the home, and what can be done to remedy this problem. 

Want more Central Asia in your inbox? Subscribe to our newsletter here.

The short film is freely available on YouTube with English subtitles. Novastan spoke to director Kana Beisekeyev about what he wanted to achieve with the film and what the reaction has been. His answers have been edited for clarity and brevity.

Novastan: What made you want to approach the subject of domestic violence in Kazakhstan now?

Kana Beisekeyev: In the last year, a lot of newspapers have started discussing domestic abuse so I was interested in making a project about this subject. When you think about domestic abuse, you imagine a really harsh, extreme story, but this is the reality of what is happening in Kazakhstan. I don’t think there’s been a documentary made like this before in our country. It was actually last spring, when my crew and I decided to make this film but then lockdown delayed it. Afterwards, we heard that cases [of domestic violence] increased during lockdown, when people were closed in at home. And we knew we had to talk about this difficult subject now.

I thought about how I could tell people my age, the younger generation, about this topic. Honestly, it was so painful to make because I was so far from this subject with my own upbringing. I had never really heard about this before, I have an older sister and I was a bit surprised when I heard stories of how, within our culture, it’s very difficult to be a woman. But if men talk about this issue with their girlfriends, they begin to hear many stories of abuse. There’s abuse in the home, even from brothers and other relatives, abuse in the street, abuse at work. Things from the outside may seem okay, but they really are not. 

Your documentary touches a lot on how gender roles are very rigid in Kazakhstan. There is this culture of blame around women, that they are at fault for minor things such as when their child gets in trouble or the dinner is burnt, and then it escalates. Where does this come from?

The gender issues come from our culture and idea of family. It is seen a more of a privilege to have a boy than to have a girl. This is true not only in Kazakhstan but in most Central Asian cultures, even in the Caucasus and Russia. Most of the countries around here have this social issue around boys. There’s not a good gender balance, parents are probably going to be happier with a son. It sounds like a joke, but the joke is that it’s really true. 

It’s coming from all directions actually. From novels, from movies. Even women in our culture often believe having a son is better for them. These are widespread opinions, we have a really huge gap between girls and boys. In our society, women have to show their balls to succeed. So you’re not just a woman, you have all these extra responsibilities and expectations. It is not fair game between men and women.

So you mean, women have to prove themselves more because they start life with a disadvantage?

This pressure starts all the way from school actually. Boys can start school without good grades and make up for it later, but girls are expected to have ‘A’ marks only. Even if a woman graduates school to prove herself, her older parents will ask: “why do you need this diploma? You should be getting married instead.” Girls have to be learn to be a “good woman” and a good professional. A lot of families act like this, especially in the smaller villages. I’m not talking about all of the people, but this opinion exists in our society and leads to larger problems.

The film touches on alcohol as a trigger for domestic violence. Is alcoholism considered a big problem in Kazakhstan?

Yeah, especially outside of the big cities. In small towns, if you go to the local store, you’re probably gonna see a lot of alcoholic products. Mainly vodka. It feels like the 90s, like the USSR or Russia. People here don’t know how to drink without going crazy but now they can drink like crazy. Alcoholism is mainly happening with men.

This comes back to money: a lot of men don’t have a job. Without earning, it is very hard to survive and that means a lot of men become depressed. This depression leads to drinking vodka with similar people, the same friends who can’t find a job. It’s the same problem, over and over. They will talk about their hard lives, about their problems with women. The wife, looking after the children at home, will ask her husband: “Why are you doing this? We don’t have money for alcohol, we need you to get a job to support us.” The husband will argue back: “I’m the man of the house. Don’t talk to me like this.” And it can escalate badly after that. 

One of the biggest problems in Kazakhstan, around the subject of domestic violence, is that a lot of parents don’t teach their kids how to be a good husband or wife when they’re older, how to be a good carer. We have a big knowledge gap around this. Family is not a toy, a lot of people are not ready for it. Women start getting married early, even like 18 or 19 years of age in small towns. If you are older than 25, you are seen as too old to marry, even in cities. As a society, we seem to be making such early commitments. Two people at this age don’t know how to be proper adults, they’ve only just stopped being kids. Our issues come from this cultural and educational gap, and leads to dangerous situations.

One of the quotes that stood out in the film was “the system allows this to happen”, meaning that domestic violence has been enabled by the police and lawmakers not taking the issue seriously. This is compounded by the ease in which bribery and corruption takes place, as another quote illustrates: “you can buy anything here”. 

With this film, were you hoping to open the conversation to discussing other, related issues in Kazakhstani society such as corruption and power systems?

It is more about reaching ordinary people, getting them to wonder why abuse is not talked about or discussed more openly. I made this movie for the people, they just have to know what is happening in our country. They need to understand what needs to be done and what to do if the same situation happens to them. This might mean changing our laws to save people’s lives. It is a struggle because we have cultural issues which reach higher than law.

When women go to the police after violence occurs, they often meet men who know their husband or do not take it seriously. The police treat the case as a small family dispute, telling the women to go home and try again. They will give reassurances, telling the victims that it’s going to be okay. They may write a report about the husband, but if you try to access the report again two days later, it might just not exist anymore. This is what many are up against.

What was the effect of having a comedian comment and make jokes about the situation on an empty stage? What were you trying to achieve with this?

He is a real comedian who wrote his own jokes for this. I had heard his jokes about domestic violence before and asked him why he was making humour out of these situations. He answered that it was because of his own family experiences. This actually inspired us to make the documentary from a comedian’s point of view, which is where we started from. At least in comedy, he’s talking about the problem, even though he’s making jokes, it’s bringing the conversation to life a bit. 

What was the reaction in Kazakhstan to this documentary? Has it been met with any resistance? 

It has been really interesting. Some reaction has been good, but not all. Some people have blamed us because they think we are extreme to bring this subject up and we support changing the existing laws about domestic abuse. Even some voices in the feminist community did not like the documentary because they asked why it is mainly men talking about this abuse.

You know, it’s really hard, the subject has not been easy to talk about. I just wanted to make something that is going against the abuse. I just wanted to talk to a few people about it. But, in the film, there are some conversations between men and some have asked, why not include women having this same talk? There has also been some backlash from smaller communities like family groups. It was surprising. But we do talk to women. I mean, the film is about men and women. It’s about this culture where boys and girls are taught from a young age to think differently, and how this affects us when we’re older.

At the end, the documentary states that a new law on combating domestic violence will come into force in the spring of 2021. How do you anticipate this changing things?

I hope this will change things, making it a bit harder to get away with domestic violence. Right now the process is very slow if you are even fined for domestic abuse. So I think the new law has to protect women much more. We also have to work with the husband on this, where possible. I’m not a lawyer so I’m not sure how it will work specifically but I think it is a step in the right direction.

What projects are you working on next?

I’ve been working on a documentary which talks about the Uyghur camps in Xinjiang, which has included Kazakhs too. I have found some people who have been in these camps, who now live in Washington, DC. Right now I’m editing, so hopefully in the next month or two it will be uploaded to YouTube. 

The Wife is available to watch on YouTube.

Tommy Hodgson

For more news and analysis from Central Asia, follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, Linkedin or Instagram.

The post The Wife: the short film highlighting domestic violence in Kazakhstan appeared first on Novastan English.