1. THE RUSSIAN-KAZAKHSTAN RATIOES AT THE PRESENT STAGE
5
2.2 The factors of
economic interaction of Kazakhstan and Russia 24
4. VITAL PROBLEMS OF THE
PRESENT-DAY STATE OF 44
KAZAKHSTANI-RUSSIAN RELATIONS
CONCLUSION
61
LIST OF USED SOURSES
65
The
origins of Kazakhstani-Russian relations lie in hoary antiquity, when Kazakhs
and Russians lived on the vast Eurasian territory and, being neighbors,
developed good-neighborly relations in all the spheres of human activity.
In analyzing the relations between Rus and the Great
Steppe, one cannot fail to mention the work of the greatest specialist in this
field, Lev N. Gumilyov. In his preface to Gumilyov's book, Ancient Rus and the
Great Steppe, Academician Dmitry S. Likhachev wrote this: Rightly taking into
account the links between subsistence economy and the level of prosperity of
ancient societies, and thus their military power, the author also compares
historical events and climactic fluctuations of the steppe zone of Eurasia. In
this way he arrived at a series of clarifications, which enabled him to
describe in detail the historical-geographic backdrop against which various
cultural influences came in conflict with the local forms of the original
culture of Eastern Europe.
It must be noted in any analysis of the emergence of the
15 new, post-Soviet states on the map of Eurasia that certain specific features
marked the genesis of each of them. The present study focuses on the processes
of sovereignty of Kazakhstan, and the specificity of these processes lies in
that from the very beginning the republic's political leadership did not
initiate centrifugal tendencies, regarding reasonable integration an imperative
of the times and endeavoring to ease as much as possible the destructive consequences
at every stage in the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Kazakhstan was the
last former Soviet republic to declare its independence - not out of any strong
gravitation toward the past or peripheral political development let us recall
that Kazakhstan was one of the first to experience, in December 1986, the
repressive power of totalitarianism then already withering away but because it
understood that artificial acceleration of this process is fraught with the
danger of serious upheavals. The history of numerous bloody ethnic, social, and
even interstate conflicts in the post-Soviet space bears striking evidence of
that.
The immediate subject matter of the present study is not
just the isolated process of the sovereignty of one of the post-Soviet countries
but the emergence and development against this background of new interstate
relations of two major republics of the Soviet Union, Kazakhstan and Russia.
In our view, it is relations between precisely these two countries that can be
seen as a model for the establishment of equal and mutually advantageous
between newly independent states. This view is borne out by a sufficiently
smooth and planned, though far from problem-free, development of bilateral Kazakhstani-Russian
relations, a meaningful historical tradition of mutual relations, and an
absence of sharp turns or wavering due to subjective or external causes.
Another unifying factor is time—the many centuries of
the history of mutual relations between the peoples of the two countries that
have been neighbors in these great open spaces since the beginning of time.
This far from simple history, full of drama and heroism, these strata of time
bound together by the unremitting toil of numerous generations, unite the two
peoples.
The Soviet period in the relations between the two
states let us recall that, according to the 1977 Constitution of the USSR, the
constituent republics of the Soviet Union were declared to be "sovereign
Soviet socialist states" united in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and having the right to enter into relations with foreign states, conclude
treaties and exchange diplomatic representatives, and - theoretically -secede
from the USSR was marked by the prevalence of the so-called converted forms.
The ubiquitous and all-round dominance of All-Union structures made meaningless
all talk of real interstate relations between Kazakhstan and Russia. Both sides
were in this case the objects of a grandiose social experiment. Although
positive achievements of tills period cannot be discarded either.
The emergence and further development of relations of
equal partnership between new independent states, the Republic of Kazakhstan
and the Russian Federation, became a sort of synthesis of the entire
centuries-old history of Kazakh-Russian relations. Only now can the relations
between the two countries be justifiably described as subject-subject ones. At
this stage, both states solved such problems as defining their status in the
system of world politics, establishing relations with leading world nations,
and entering the field of international law.
The dominant role of Kazakhstani problems has determined
the chronological framework of the investigation.
The overall time frame covers the period from December
1991 the setting up of the Commonwealth of Independent States, which finally
marked the disintegration of the USSR to the end of 1995.
In the four years, bilateral Kazakhstani - Russian relations
went through a series of significant stages the study of which can adequately
determine the level of mutual relations between the two countries, the scope
and range of integration. We single out three stages in the development of
Kazakhstani-Russian relations:
— Defining the legal interstate relations of the two
countries December 1991 - May 1920
— Searching for a model of economic and political cooperation
between the states May 1992 - March 1994
— Expanding and deepening integration between Kazakhstan and Russia
in the economic and other spheres March 1994 - 1995.
Although some elements of legal contractual relations
between Kazakhstan and Russia may be discovered before December 1991, when
attempts to preserve the Soviet Union were made, it will be more
chronologically correct, in our view, to choose the moment at which the CIS was
legally formed and the activity of the Union structures of authority was
discontinued as the starting point of the study.
We propose that the signing in May 1992 of the treaty of
friendship, cooperation, and mutual assistance between the two countries be
singled out as the concluding moment of the first stage in the relations
between Kazakhstan and Russia and at the same time as the beginning of the new
stage. That document became the foundation for qualitatively new relations in
the history of the two states, opening the first page in the official
interstate relations in the new history of Kazakhstan and Russia. It determined
the principles of bilateral relations in the political, economic,
military-strategic, cultural, and spiritual spheres, lending a colossal
impulse to the entire subsequent negotiation process.
During the search for a model of interstate economic and
political cooperation between Kazakhstan and Russia, the principles were
developed for bilateral relations, which were later recorded in the treaty of
friendship, cooperation, and mutual assistance. The first official visit of
President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan to the Russian Federation in March 1994
marked the beginning of the third stage in the development of Kazakhstani-Russian
relations - that of expanding and deepening integration between Kazakhstan and
Russia.
This division of the time frame of
bilateral Kazakhstani-Russian relations into periods shows that one of the
goals of the present work is to demonstrate continuous development between
Kazakhstan and Russia in the post-Soviet period.
As the period of political history
analyzed here is extremely close to the present, it cannot be regarded as
worked out in detail in Russian and foreign scientific literature. However,
the problems of development of the new statehood of post-Soviet countries of
Kazakhstan in this case, of the birth and evolution of interstate relations, of
their entry into the international community, are being studied ever more
actively.
The crucial period of the disintegration of the USSR and
the emergence on the map of the world of new, independent states was primarily
reflected in scientific periodicals. Special mention should be made of the
collective work The New Treaty of Union: The Search for Solutions.
Problems of mutual relations between newly independent states have
also become the subjects of attention of Russian experts and political
scientists. The period of disintegration of the USSR and of the development of
Kazakhstan as a sovereign independent state are at present actively studied by
Kazakhstan scientists. Works have been written on the problem of the emergence
of the new statehood, development of the system of separation of powers,
democratization of society, evolution of party structures and institutions of
democracy, and the construction of a new legal and judicial system. Present
State and Works on the subject of bilateral Kazakhstani-Russian relations from
the moment the two states achieved independence can be divided into several
groups. The first and the most numerous one deal with relations between
Kazakhstan and Russia within the framework of the Commonwealth of Independent
States.
In recent years the development of market relations has
considerably boosted interest for economic and trade cooperation between the
two independent states. Mention must be made of a joint work by the staff of
the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies under the title Kazakhstan: Realities
and Perspectives of Independent Development, It should be noted, though, that
this work suffers from an obviously incomplete documentary and factual basis
and a certain superficiality in the analysis of the problem.
The study is based on such sources as
legal acts and interstate Kazakhstani-Russian treaties, agreements, declarations,
joint protocols, and other documents and materials, as well as decrees,
decisions, and resolutions of the organs of state power in Kazakhstan and
Russia.
Extremely important sources for the
study of the last five years in the history of Kazakhstan and of
Kazakhstani-Russian relations are the works of President Nursultan Nazarbayev
of Kazakhstan: Without the Right or the Left, The Strategy of the Formation and
Development of Kazakhstan as a Sovereign State, The Strategy of Resource Saving
and the Transition to the Market, The Market and Socioeconomic Development, and
especially his new book, On the Doorstep of the 21st Century, as well as his
speeches at various forums.' Just as important as sources for the present study
are the books by President Yeltsin of Russia: Confessions on a Given Theme,
Memoirs of a President as well as his official speeches, and also the works of
other Russian politicians and public figures, which afford a deeper grasp of
the essence of events happening in the post-Soviet space in the 1990s.
The process of market reform in the republic and the
tendencies and prospects for further reform in the socioeconomic sphere are
reflected in several books by Kazakhstan's Prime Minister A.M.Kazhegeldin: The
Socioeconomic Problems of Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Times of
Reform, Kazakhstan in Times of Reform, Problems of State Regulation Under the
Conditions of Socioeconomic Transformation.
The formation of the republic's diplomatic service and
problems of its civilized entry in the world community are studied in the works
of K.K.Tokayev, Kazakhstan's foreign minister.
Intense legislative processes at all levels in the given period
necessitated close attention to the legal basis of the newly independent
states. As far as Kazakhstan is concerned, that legal basis includes above all
the Constitutions of 1993 and 1995, of which the content and the sociopolitical
background may be seen as the quintessence of the given period in the country's
history.
The main distinctive feature of the source base of the
study is the fact that most documents of the given period of political history
have not yet been moved to the archives; it was therefore necessary to turn on
many occasions to various central and departmental current archives. The
identification and systematization of many sources, their publication in a
collection of materials devoted to the development of Kazakhstani-Russian
relations was in themselves an important task.
It may thus be said that extensive sources have been
used in the analysis of the above-mentioned problems; their study made it
possible to paint a comprehensive picture of the development of
Kazakhstani-Russian relations against the background of the sovereignty of
Kazakhstan in 1991-1995.
In a context of events, which have taken place in region
after September 11, the role of Russia in Central Asia a little has varied, as
well as all has varied geopolitical formulated in region last years.
In these
conditions of one of important external policies of tasks of Kazakhstan is the
adjusting of tactics and strategy in ratios with Russia, which would correspond
by modern geopolitical realities and long-term interests of our country.
Central Asia and Caspian Sea, so-called recently Caspian –
Central Asia region, go into an region of traditional interests of Russia.
In this
region it always had the important national interests, which, however, in
different periods were defined by different circumstances and factors.
The key interests of Russia in this region at the present
stage can be reduced to the following.
The
importance of this region for Russia is stipulated not oil by the factor
implying from desire to save influence on Caspian Sea;
Our
region is of interest for Russia territorial, where its compatriots live. Are
those, on our sight three dominating interest of Russian Federation,
dominating, Caspian – Central Asia region at the present stage. It in this
region has also other interests trade, cosmotron of “Baikonur”, industrial
communications etc. but they now in basic carry not so priority character.
Until recently Russia ensured above-mentioned
interests without the special efforts. All countries of region
in the majority were that or are otherwise dependent on Russian Federation.But
the events, which have occurred after September of the last year, have brought
in serious enough variations to a geopolitical situation in Central Asia and have
affected on common position of forces in region.
One
of the occurred key variations consists that the break in sphere of traditional
vital interests of Russia is watched which today faces to necessity Central
Asia of policy.
As a whole by 2001 in Central Asia the private tripartite balance
between interests of Russia, China, USA was folded.
The given balance can figuratively be presented as a
triangle, in which upper corner Russia, in one lower corner - USA, in the
friend - China settled down. These countries have occupied three strategic
niches in Caspian – Central Asia region: military-political, oil and gas,
commodity-raw.
The Russian presence at region
last years was ensured, first of all, with strategic military-political
component. A peaking of a problem extremism and the terrorisms in Central Asia,
activation Islamic of driving of Uzbekistan, irreconcilable part of Integrated
Tadjik opposition at immediate support Talib have established in 1999 - 2001
real threat for the countries of region.
In
these conditions only Russia was considered by the states of region as the real
factor and safety. It is enough to recollect, that these years the contacts
through link DKNB, intensive two-sided ratios in military and
military-engineering sphere were especially made active.
Thus,
USA has occupied oil and gases a niche in our region, and Russia and China by
virtue of economic circumstances could not with it compete in this direction.
In this geopolitical triangle Russia all the same
occupied a little bit dominating positions. This majoring in many respects was
determined strategic military-political component, which role in the
international ratios is traditionally high.
In a context of a common global situation Russia
forced to be reconciled with a determination of military basses of USA in
region of its traditional interests.
Taking
into account all these circumstances, Russia faces to necessity of the policy
in Central Asia. The further prolongation above-mentioned of the tendencies
will have for it painful enough consequences.
Despite of some variation of a
role of Russia in Central Asia, for Kazakhstan the strategic interests in a
ratio of Russia continue to be saved.
The
necessity of activation of ratios with Russia and holding of constructive
cooperating on much important for Kazakhstan to directions is dictated as well
by that in case of essential weakening of Russia in Central Asia it will be
fraught with negative consequences. The situation in region can become unstable
and badly forecast.
In the whole traditional interests of Kazakhstan in a
ratio of Russia are founded on four factors having long-time character and
diminuendos by such eternal categories, as geography and history.
First,
the maintenance partner of ratios with Russia is necessary valid intercontinental
of an arrangement of Kazakhstan, for which the exit on the world market is
vital for an economic development. Russia in this respect occupies the
strategically important position; being by the state, on which region pass
vital for us strategy of transport and communication.
Secondly,
Russia is one of the important subjects of the international system, having
significant political weight and rather large military-engineering
opportunities. The Russian factor in many respects determines external policy a
situation around of Kazakhstan, both on regional, and at the international
level.
Thirdly, Russia is the major
economic partner Republic of Kazakhstan. It not only imports different
production and techniques to Kazakhstan, but also is the market of selling of
Kazakhstan production. About 70 % of Kazakhstan industrial potential is
involved on economy.
In - fourth, both states are combined with a historical
generality, spiritual and cultural links. In region of Russia the man is Kazakh
Diasporas including 740 thousand. In Kazakhstan Russian are second on number
ethnic group, making about 30 percents of the population of the country.
In this context the Russian direction of exterior policy of
Kazakhstan remains to one of priority and strategic.
As a whole at the present stage in the Russian-Kazakhstan
ratios the following most priority and perspective directions of cooperating
are meant:
It is necessary to mark, that last years the growth of a
share of Russian Federation in import and reduction in export is watched. The specific
gravity of Russia in total amount of the Kazakhstan export is sequentially
reduced (from 44,5 % in 1994 up to 20,2 % in 2001) and is augmented in import
(from 36,3 % per 1994 up to 45,4 % per 2001). Within several last years of
Kazakhstan has negative trade balance with Russian Federation.
Considering structure of export and import on groups of the
commodity spectrum, it is possible to select the following characteristic
features.
Export. Structure of export Republic of Kazakhstan in Russian
Federation for the last few years has varied the separate commodity groups have
occupied a leading position.
Now
on four commodity groups (glow iris3) (fuel mineral, oil and petroleum;
products of inorganic chemistry; grain bread and ores) are necessary about 80 %
of the Kazakhstan export in Russia, whereas in 1994 on the pointed groups it
was necessary 53,3 %. In 2001 as contrasted to 2000 the separate outbound
delivering tended to lowering, so, for example, the specific gravity of export
of a grain was reduced from 12 % up to 6 %; the export of products of inorganic
chemistry was reduced from 14 % up to 13 %. Certainly, on lowering of export in
Russia renders influence a variance between the in-house prices and prices of
outbound delivering.
At the same time it is necessary to mark, that the reduction
of export has taken place not on all basic groups of the commodity spectrum.
The specific gravity of export of ore has increased from 8 % up to 10 % and
export of fuel from 46 % up to 47 %.
Import of republic of Kazakhstan goes into first five of the
countries of the basic trade partners of Russia in import. The specific gravity
of import of Russia has increased in total amount of the Kazakhstan import from
36,7 % per 1999 up to 45,4 % per 2001. There were insignificant variations in
groups of imported commodity production. So, the volumes of import were reduced
Transport,
accordingly, from 15 % in 2000 up to 11 % in 2001, alongside with it the
magnifying of import on such commodity groups is marked: fuel mineral (from 17
% up to 21 %), chemical production (from 14 % up to 16 %), black metals and
work pieces from them (from 11 % up to 13 %) (Diagrama4).
The
analysis of export and import displays, that in structure of import as against
export there is no predominance of separate commodity groups, it more diversification,
at the same time grows a specific gravity of articles of food, products of
processing ready articles.
From 89 regions of Russian
Federation 72 have trade - economic links with Republic of Kazakhstan.
Depending on volume trade turn over with Kazakhstan these regions Russia can
divide into a series of groups. The active participants of the foreign trade
activity with Kazakhstan are first three groups of regions of Russia (table 1).
As
a whole on 16 regions of Russian Federation from 72 it is necessary 80 %
exterior trade turn over of Russia with Kazakhstan. The high activity pointed
16 regions is stipulated by more developed structure of their industrial
manufacture with predominance of fuel-raw, petrochemical and machine-building
specializations.
Feature of transport -geographical
interregional links of regions of Russia with Kazakhstan is the directedness
mutual goods traffic primarily with Ural, Western and East Siberia, and also
with Moscow and Moscow region.
Group
|
Annual
commodity circulation
|
Regions
|
A
share in common commodity circulation
|
I
|
From
200,0 up to 500,0 mln of dollars
|
Moscow,
Chelyabinsk, Ekaterenburg, Orenburg and Tyumen region
|
0,465
|
II
|
From
100,1 up to 200,0 mln of dollars
|
Omsk,
Irkutsk, Kemerovo, Moscow region. Altay region and Novosibirsk region
|
0,22
|
III
|
From
50,1 up to 100 mln of dollars
|
Kurgan
region, Republic of Bashkortostan, Republic of Hakasya, Krasnoyarsk region
and Samara region
|
0,115
|
IV
|
From
20,1 up to 50,0 mln of dollars
|
Perm,
Tomsk region, Republic of Tatarstan, Nizhniy- Novgorod, Belgorod, Volgograd,
Saratov, Rostov, Vladimir, Tula region and. St.-Petersburg
|
0,095
|
V
|
Up
to 20 mln dollars
|
Others
45 regions of Russian Federation
|
0,105
|
The
important place in the Russia -Kazakhstan links occupies frontier cooperating,
on which share it is necessary 71,5 % from common commodity circulation. Most
actively explicate trade -economic links with frontier regions of Kazakhstan
Omsk, Orenburg, Astrakhan, Chelyabinsk, Novosibirsk region and Altay region.
From regions of Russia the ready roll stock of black metals, pipe steel,
petroleum, electric motors, automobiles, forest products, coal, footwear,
fabrics and other goods is taken out. In export of many frontier subjects of
Federation significant volume is necessary on production of a petrochemical
industry (Volgograd, Omsk, Samara region, Altay region - more than 70 %).
In
the Russia -Kazakhstan frontier region more 300 share enterprises, among which
such large interstate join, as “Kazroshim”, “Koksohim”, automobile complex on
basis Ural - for and Kustanay diesel factory operate.
The
essential propagation in trade with Kazakhstan was received with barter
operations (57 %). So, Orsk meat factory the combine sends in Kazakhstan in
basic production of the manufacture and receives in exchange raw material for
manufacture of this production - living cattle and meat. The joint-stock
company “Nosta” receives from Kazakhstan immovable coal and delivers metals.
The
significant experience of mutual economic cooperating with frontier regions of
Kazakhstan accumulated in the Orenburg region, and also Pavlodar region of
Kazakhstan with frontier regions of Russia. Now 18 % of the Orenburg export and
more than 40 % of import have on Kazakhstan.
By the largest
foreign trade partner of Republic Bashkortostan, Altay and Krasnoyarsk edges,
Kemerovo, Irkutsk, Omsk, Orenburg, Sverdlovsk and Chelyabinsk regions is the
Pavlodar region.
As a whole before Kazakhstan in mutual trade with
Russia there is a series of perspective tasks, which decision will influence
definitely a common economic situation in the country.
One
of the important tasks is the variation trade balance of Kazakhstan from
Russian Federation from negative in positive. Besides the gradual variation of
structure commodity circulation in favorable for Republic of Kazakhstan a
direction is desirable.
Radiating
from interests of two states, it is expedient in the nearest perspective to
consider a complex of measures on hardening links of frontier regions. The
necessity of creation of legal fundamentals of a development of frontier
regions does not call doubts. On our sight, it is necessary to speed up
development of the defining laws. Among them Laws About state support of a socio
economic development of frontier territories Republic of Kazakhstan, About free
economic regions, About frontier trade. It is necessary also to speed up
ratification four sided of the Agreement on basic principles of frontier
cooperating of the states - the participants of the Contract about a deepening
of integration in economic and humanitarian regions from March 29, 1996.
Obvious
presence of potential and mutually advantageous opportunities of Russia and
Kazakhstan also is by way of use of the optimum shapes of specialization,
density of the industrial and financial capital, use of effective financial
instruments, architecture of optimum commodity, financial and transport
streams. In this connection special urgency in a development Kazakhstan –
Russia of links was got with problems of a synchronization of legislative and
normative basis of the countries. It would be expedient to realize step-by-step
transition to collection of the VAT on destination in Kazakhstan – Russia to
trade, having begun it(him) from machines, equipment, vehicles.
Not
less important the coordinated marketing strategy of Kazakhstan and Russia in
the international markets is represented, where the saving and hardening of
common positions is quite possible. The priority direction represents
perfecting the organizational shapes of activity Kazakhstan and Russian
suppliers in the world markets. Them can become cartel of the agreement.
One
of the important instruments of hardening of two-way communications could
become creation of conditions for expansion of contacts between the
enterprises, creation of the share enterprises. On official dates (2000) in
republic 220 share Russia -Kazakhstan enterprises and 88 enterprises with the
100--percent Russian capital actively work. The majority JV in republic,
including Russia-Kazakhstan JV, has trade –intermediary directedness. However
as against other states Russia- Kazakhstan JV of an industrial directedness
envelop considerably wider spectrum of spheres of activity - from production
and processing of natural operational life up to production of a high scale of
processing that in a defined measure confirms an overall performance Russia-
Kazakhstan JV. At the same time Russia –Kazakhstan JV for the present do not
play that role, which they could play in a development of trade -economic
cooperating. Therefore in this direction the active support is expedient on the
part of state structures.
1.2 Cooperating in oil gas and power sphere.
The
given direction of cooperating between two countries by us is one of
perspective. The structure of the Kazakhstan export of oil on the countries in
2001 is characterized by lowering of a share of delivering in the countries of
CIS (17 %) and expansion of geography of export of oil in the countries of
foreign countries (83 %) (Diagrama5).
The indexes of export of petroleum in 2001 essentially
have varied as contrasted to 2000. Alongside with export of Kazakhstan realizes
import of petroleum. And 98 % of all imported volumes of petroleum are
necessary on Russian Federation.
The
lowering of the excise rates on imported petrol with 80 up to 31 EURO per ton
in 2001 and falling recently of world prices per oil promoted magnifying of
delivering of the Russian oil for in-house processing. The export of petroleum
to the countries of CIS became more attractive for Russia, than the delivering
of oil on the world market, as, for example, in Kazakhstan of the price on the
same aspects of petroleum is much higher Russian.
Kazakhstan
more than on 50 % depends on Russia in a ratio of delivering of crude oil on
refinery factory in Shimkentand Pavlodar receive west Siberian oil on the
algorithm manifold from Omsk. Pavlodar refinery factory on 100 % depends from
west Siberian of oil. Shimkent usually works on 75 % on west Siberian and on 25
% on raw material Kumkol of a deposit. Today dependence from of west Siberian
oil “Orgsintez” is reduced half at the expense of use of the Aktyubinsk oil,
transport by a railway transportation from west of Kazakhstan. Because of
lowering production of oil on west Siberian deposits, fadeout of payments and
mutual debts the question of security by oil Pavlodar and Shimkent refinery
factory more than once acquired critical character, and the capacity factor of
powers of these enterprises frequently lowered below 0,5.
Its
technological dependence on Russia falls into basic problems Pavlodar refinery
factory: the production cycle of the enterprise is calculated for consumption
west Siberian of oil with the low contents of sulfur and paraffin. The
perspectives flagship of the Kazakhstan oil processing is complicated with its
neighborhood with the Russian factories - competitors:
Omsk,
Ufa, Volgograd refinery factory by the enterprises being vertically -
integrated, they have stable access to crude oil, besides on reduced prices,
which the necessities of northern Kazakhstan in petroleum could at desire
completely satisfy.
Structure of export of the
Kazakhstan oil, 2001
Diagram 5
In
oil and gas of branch the cooperating explicates also through link of share
development of the Kazakhstan deposits. Russia in the projects on natural
resources users in region of Republic of Kazakhstan, as it is possible to see
from the Diagrama6, occupies the fourth place and makes 6 %. The Russian investments
in a mineral-raw complex (MSK) of Kazakhstan have made in 2000 32,2 million of
dollars, including in investigation hydrocarbon of raw material (UVS) 3,5 mln
of dollars, in production of hard minerals (TPI) - 28,7 mln of dollars.
Two
Russian investors “Bashnevt” and OJSC “Lukoil” submit the investments in UVS.
In oil branch of Kazakhstan the company “Lukoil” is submitted in such large
projects, Tengiz and Karachiganak Besides “Lukoil” is ready to expand the
presence at Kazakhstan, messages not only development of ready deposits, but
also prospecting operations.
The
large interest in relation to Kazakhstan is expressed with the large oil
Russian company “Yokus” which has received a section for developments in Russia
and region of Kazakhstan.
Structure of the
direct foreign investments in Kazakhstan,2000 Diagram 6
In
sphere TPI of Kazakhstan the Russian investors are submitted by such large
companies, as the Russian Academy of Science of European Economic Community
(83,9 %), OJSC “Magnitogorsk” metallurgical combine (10,6 %) and NPK “Investor”
(3,8 %).
The
Kazakhstan enterprises also show interest to the Russian projects. So,
“Kazakhoil” (“Kazmunaigas”) negotiates for share developments in Tomsk region,
on a deposit “Komsomolsk” in the Astrakhan region. At Kazakhstan oilman there
are intentions to develop deposits in the Arkhangelsk region.
Since 2000 the electric power system of Kazakhstan
works in a parallel condition from European Economic Community of Russia and
grid system of the countries of Central Asia.
The
parallel operation of electric power systems considerably has boosted quality
of electrical power and reliability of electro supply of consumers of
Kazakhstan, Central Asia and Russian Federation, and also has allowed operatively
to realize surplus of electricity both transit of electrical power and powers,
it is more rational to use power powers of electrical stations. The electric
power system of Kazakhstan and Russian Academy of Science European Economic
Comminity of Russia is called secure each other in case of crashes.
In
the whole cooperating of Kazakhstan and Russia in fuel and energy sphere has
noticeable perspectives.
Rather
perspective the project of transfer of a direct current Ekibastuz - Tambov by
voltage 1 500 sq is. This project opens an opportunity of transport of the
electric power of the Siberian power stations and Ekibastuz heater in central
regions of Russia and in the countries of Europe.
With the purposes of security of a mutually acceptable
uniform tax condition of trade in the electric power, utilities equipment it is
expedient to realize transition of the countries at collection of indirect
taxes on a principle the countries of assignment. In this connection for a
heightening of efficiency of a parallel operation of electric power systems the
simplification of customs procedures is important at migration of electrical
power through the customs boundary.
The
major factor of a development of the power market is the deepening of
cooperating in the field of scientific researches and developments of advanced
techniques in manufacture of power, electro technical equipment. Now all
aspects of equipment are made for power stations in Russia, (Leningrad metal
factory, Belenergomash, Uralenergomash, Siberenergomash). With disintegration
of Union economic links between the manufacturers and consumers of a utilities
equipment considerably have worsened, that is negatively reflected in
availability index of product of power complexes of the country. On this question
it is expedient except of concrete measures at a level of Government.
1.3 Cooperating in sphere of transport and communications.
Cooperating
in sphere of transport and communications one of the most perspective regions
of a development of two-sided ratios between Kazakhstan and Russia. Both states
in a context of a development of transport cooperating have the friend for the
friend a strategic value, as, apart from a wide national transport web, occupy
defining a geographical position.
Kazakhstan and Russia are closely coupled by the
transport communications. In this connection of Kazakhstan is sensitive reacts
to any variations under the tariffs for freight traffic on region of Russia.
One of key here of questions -
transportation of oil and gas through region of Russia. In aggregate
transportation of the Caspian oil and in the whole oil is one of the major
sides of the Russia -Kazakhstan cooperating. First of all this magnifying of a
channel capacity of an oil pipeline Atyrau – Samara up to 15 millions tons of
oil per one year. The intimation into service CPC ensures export of the
Kazakhstan oil on a long-term perspective.
In a period with 1995 and till
1999 Russia gave Kazakhstan such quota, which did not allow the Kazakhstan
exporters to involve the algorithm manifold Atyrau – Samara on an apparent
watts its annual channel capacity in 10,5 mln of tons of oil. And only in 1999
the algorithm manifold was loaded almost on 100 %. The agreement on magnifying
of a quota at transit of oil in long-distance foreign countries at first up to
5 mln of tons (December 23, 1998) was signed, and then (February 25, 1999) up
to 7,5 mln of tons (the quota in short-range foreign countries has remained
former - 3,5 mln of tons). This decision initiated occurrence of the project of
reconstruction and modernizing of the algorithm manifold Atyrau – Samara for
magnifying of a channel capacity at first up to 12 mln of tons, then - up to 15
mln of tons.
This project, designed transport companies of both
countries - Russian “Transoil” and Kazakhstan “Kazakhoil”, is favorable to both
sides. For “Transoil” the transportation of the Kazakhstan oil on the algorithm
manifolds that for complete use of their powers does not suffice 20 mln tons,
brings additional profit.
The first stage of reconstruction of the algorithm
manifold Atyrau - Samara- its channel capacity now is realized is lifted up to
12 mln of tons. Due to this the arrangement with Russia about magnifying of a
transit quota in 2000 also was reached.
For
Kazakhstan the magnifying of a channel capacity of the algorithm manifold
Atyrau – Samara and export of oil through
Russia opens the perspective market of selling, what Europe is. On a system of
oil pipelines "«Friendship" the Kazakhstan oil can act in Germanium,
Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Czechia and Slovakia, where there is a stable demand
for oil. Under the forecasts of the experts, by 2010 Central and East Europe
will import about 80 mln of tons of oil to one year. Now more than half of
volumes of imported oil in this region make delivering of the countries of CIS,
primarily - from Russia (51 %). Having expanded outbound opportunities in this
direction, Kazakhstan can become one of the largest suppliers of raw material
in the European countries.
By
share efforts of Kazakhstan and Russia is put into operation Caspian Pipeline
Consortium (CPC). The common extent of the algorithm manifold makes 1 580 km,
primal channel capacity 28 mln ton / year. Thus for reaching a maximum channel
capacity 67 mln of tons of oil per one year (from them 45 mln ton - for
Kazakhstan oil supplier) it is necessary only to augment opportunities of pump
stations, that is recognized schedule to carry out in four stages. There is a
construction of the algorithm manifold up to Atyrau, which will connect Karachiganak
with CPC and will allow originally pumping up to 7 mln of tons of oil, and in
future - up to 11 mln of tons.
During nearest of forty years CPC will be a stable
source of the incomes for the shareholders, and also Russia and Kazakhstan.
According to accounts, for a period of maintenance of the algorithm manifold in
federal and regional budgets of Russia will arrive approximately 23,3 billion
of US dollars as deductions and profit, of Kazakhstan will receive
approximately 8,2 billion of dollars.
The
development of transport cooperating with Russian Federation is most actual for
Kazakhstan’s for today within the framework of architecture of regional and
transcontinental transit.
Regional
transit. Russian Federation is one of the basic countries of shaping and
assignment of transit weights; on its share it is necessary about 26 % of
shaping and 20 % of assignment of weights from total amount of all transit
transportations.
Transcontinental
transit. In the whole transit streams in directions Southeast and East Asia
Europe are evaluated approximately in 330 - 400 billion of dollars. Thus up to
20 % of these streams can pass through region of Russia and Kazakhstan.
Taking into
account in the whole size commodity circulation, iron roads of the Eurasian
continent and primarily Kazakhstan and Russia have real potential for partial
stylus orientations transcontinental good traffic with sea on railway routes.
For Kazakhstan in this direction
of activity has a primary value a development of transportations on Northern
corridor Trans Asian of a railway turnpike on a route “China - Kazakhstan -
Russia – Byelorussia Poland - Germany. Now Kazakhstan together with Russia
Europe - Asia and back carries on active operation on shaping this terrestrial
transport corridor by the message.
As
a whole in transport-communication sphere before Kazakhstan the following tasks
stand:
• Saving conditions
for transit of the Kazakhstan power resources through region of Russia,
maintenance at a necessary level of quotas on transit of oil for Kazakhstan.
• Scheduled
magnifying of a channel capacity CPC.
• Decision of
accumulating questions between the Ministry of means of communication of
Russian Federation and CJSC of “Kazakhstan Temir Joli” on railroad rates and
other questions.
• Creation of the
share enterprises in transport branch.
• Realization
share transport - communication of the projects on active use of transit
potential of Kazakhstan and Russia.
2.
ABOUT A CONDITION OF FOREIGN TRADE BOTH
DEV’T OF THE JOINT / ENTERPRISES KAZAKHSAN AND RUSSIA
Indexes of foreign trade of RK with RF, 1995-2001
|
1995
|
1996
|
1997
|
1998
|
1999
|
2000
|
2001
|
Commodity
circulation mln of US dollars
|
4
265,5
|
4
809,0
|
4
257.2
|
3
323.2
|
2489,2
|
4227,6
|
4
639,3
|
In
% to the appropriate period of the previous year
|
|
112,7
|
88,5
|
78,1
|
74,8
|
169,8
|
109,7
|
Export,
mln of US dollars
|
2
365,8
|
2484,4
|
2
287,8
|
1
611,4
|
1
138,6
|
1
769,1
|
1
748,4
|
In
% to the appropriate period of the previous year
|
|
105
|
92,1
|
70,4
|
70,7
|
155,4
|
98,8
|
Import,
mln of US dollars
|
1
899.7
|
2
324,6
|
1
969,4
|
1
711,8
|
1
350,6
|
2458,5
|
2
890,9
|
In
% to the appropriate period of the previous year
|
|
122,4
|
84,7
|
86,9
|
78,9
|
182
|
117,6
i
|
Balance,
mln of US dollars
|
466,1
|
159,8
|
-100,4
|
-212
|
-689,4
|
-1
142,5
|
Specific
gravity of Russia in total amount of export from Kazakhstan, in %
|
45,1
|
42
|
35,2
|
29,6
|
19,8
|
19,4
|
20,2
|
Specific
gravity of Russia in total amount of import in Kazakhstan, in %
|
49,9
|
54,8
|
45,8
|
39,4
|
36,7
|
48,7
|
45,4
|
Russian Federation of the valid historically folded
processes of an economic development is the basic trade partner of Kazakhstan
and basic consumer of Kazakhstan production. The specific gravity of Russian
Federation in volume of export in the countries of CIS annually makes not less
than 91-93 %.
In 1997 the reorientation on a development of the
foreign trade links with the countries of long-distance foreign countries
began. In this connection a -percent ratio in volumes of export between the
countries of Commonwealth essentially has varied. In 1997 there was cutting
volumes of foreign trade between Russia and Kazakhstan, per consequent years
this tendency continued to be magnified. On many goods occupying a powerful
share in export of Kazakhstan production in Russia, there was a significant
lowering of standard items.
In 2000 there was an essential heightening of volumes
of export with all countries - basic trade partners from among Commonwealth.
The foreign trade turnover of Kazakhstan with Russia in 2000 has approximated
to a level of 1997. The export has increased as contrasted to 1999 in 1,5
times, the import has increased by 82 %. In 2001 as contrasted to 2000 of
delivering in Russian Federation practically have remained at a former level
(reduction by 1 %).
The
share of Russia in total amount of export in 2001 has made 20,2 % (in 2000
-19,4 %).
The
greatest specific gravity in structure of export in Russian Federation occupy:
Mineral
products - 47,1 of % in 2001 (46,8 % in 2000): coal - 91 % of export coal from
Kazakhstan, oil and gaseous condensate - 12 %, ores and concentrates iron,
chrome, zinc -10,3 % (7,9 %); products of inorganic chemistry junction,
inorganic and organic precious and rarely of metals of radioactive elements and
isotopes 13 % (13,5 %): an oxide and hydracids of aluminum - 90 % of all
outbound delivering; ferrous metals - 8,2 % (6,3 %).
In
import from Russian Federation predominate: mineral products, machines and
equipment.
In 2001 basic paper of import was:
purchase of mineral fuel, oil and petroleum - 21,4 % (more than 77 % from
common import of fuel, from them coke, diesel fuel, lubricant oils, electric
power;the machines and equipment - 16,3 %, metallurgical production -14,5 %,
vehicles -13 %, production chemical and industries, coupled to it,-12 %,
plastic and work piece from it -4 % were imported.
On
October 1 2001 in Republic of Kazakhstan 740 share and foreign enterprises
created with participation of Russia (including 466 share and 274 foreign
enterprises) with the authorized capital - 22,7 billion tenge operated. The
share of the foreign founder in the authorized capital has made 1,3 billion
tenge, or 5,94 %. From them 121 enterprises manufactured production, 72 -
realized deliverings on export, 182 - had import receipts and 456 realized
delivering on a home market. In 2000 in republic 461 enterprises, in 1999 - 325
operated.
The
enterprises created together with the Russian partners, realize the following
aspects of activity: production of crude oil, mounting of the process
equipment, construction of civil engineering buildings, manufacture of the
electric power both electro distributive and monitoring equipment,
pharmaceutical products, copper, woolen and synthetic fabrics, flour,
processing and conservator of production, rendering of different aspects of
services and researches, maintenance and repair of automobiles, activity in the
field of a wireless and television.
2.1 Some aspects of economic interaction Kazakhstan and Russia
For adjustment and intensive development of mutually
advantageous two-sided ratios within the framework of CIS Republic of
Kazakhstan and Russian Federation have necessary objective premises. Russia and
Kazakhstan make a basis of huge Eurasian region, in which historically there
were steady geopolitical, economic, ethnic and cultural links of two countries
and peoples. In many vital spheres the national interests of two countries are
close or coincide, both countries hold on to course on saving of common
defensive, humanitarian and information space and the stability and prosperity
of two countries, further democratic of
a society and success of market transformations are equally interested in
hardening safety.
The interaction of Kazakhstan with Russia is a priority in
external policy, external economic and military-strategic course of republic. A
complex of the reasons conditions and factors having not tactical, but basic
essence and long-time character stipulates it.
Today
common balance of mutual relation between Kazakhstan and Russia has positive
character, as consider each other as the strategic partners and it establishes
the important premise for their mutual cooperating in the field of policy,
economy, science, engineering and other spheres.
Kazakhstan-Russian economic partnership belongs to the
most advanced regions of two-sided ratios between two states, as for this
purpose both countries have premises for rapprochement. It in many respects
defines character, both mutual relation, and other economic links, folding in the
European direction, of Kazakhstan.
On today there are favorable and
unfavorable factors inherent in Kazakhstan on a path to economic cooperating to
Russia.
Alongside with the
favorable factors of a development of two-sided economic ratioes exist as well
unfavorable or constraining moment. The overcoming of economic barriers by
means of restoring cooperation links will allow introducing the operations in
frameworks EAEU (Euro-Asian Economic Union).
2.2 The
factors of economic interaction of Kazakhstan and Russia
Favorable
a) Presence in
Kazakhstan of large mineral operational lives.
b) Transit
potential and favorable geopolitical position of Kazakhstan at the center of
the Eurasian continent: on a crossroads of trade and transport paths from
Europe in Asia: through China on Far East ports, Pacific Ocean of the state;
through Iran and Turkey in the Mediterranean pool.
c) Determination
of Kazakhstan and Russia as basic trade partners on export and import.
d) Retention of
Kazakhstan in the majority large international architectures UN, Architecture
of Economic Cooperating, Economic union Central Asian of the countries
(together with Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan) and Central-Asian Bank of Cooperating
and Development (CABCD); Great five Republic of Kazakhstan in frameworks of CIS
(Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Tadjikistan).
e) The large region
with the common boundary (more than 6.000 kms) with Russia, that has for two
countries a serious value in matter of hardening of their national and collective
safety.
f) The residing in republic of the large ethnic
interlayer of the European origin (Russian, Ukraine, Germany) is one of the
factors of rapprochement of Kazakhstan with the European civilization and
culture.
Unfavorable
a) A close
arrangement of Kazakhstan to the inconsistent states Central Asian of region.
b) Support by
Kazakhstan of multifactor policy in a ratio of transportation of the Caspian
oil.
c) The
boundaries Central Asian of the states from a point of view of international
law properly not democratic of Republic of Kazakhstan; Kazakhstan has appeared
as a matter of fact cut off from Western Europe
d) Increase of ecological crisis, that weakens its
positions in region and world, narrows down opportunities of fast industrial
growth.
e) Absence in
Kazakhstan of a direct exit to World Ocean, exterior warm seas, that hampers
links with the largest centers of a modern civilization.
f) Support by the
countries of trade wars (introduction of limitation on import of the goods,
policy of an ascertaining dumping in relation to the exported goods, raw
interdependence of the countries etc.).
In
the beginning 1990s. It seemed, that the revived democratic states within the
framework of their new statuses would be and further dynamically to explicate
the ratios, filling their contents, adequate to a new position. However it has
not taken place and in basic for past years of two-way communications were
characterized defined inertia.
As displays the analysis, the policy of Russia in a
ratio of the states of Commonwealth for flowing out five years did not differ
by a sequence.
There was a natural process of comprehension of key
national-state interests attended by searching for new, as it seemed, more
perspective partners.
Certainly,
the today's level of economic integration does not answer necessities national
economic of Republic of Kazakhstan and Russian Federation. Available on it is
necessary to evaluate the today facts of economic interaction between two
countries as insufficient and requiring in serious adjusting. The priority of a
development of the Kazakhstan-Russian economic links is possible to support
with existing numerous perspective directions of a development, it:
·
Trade-economic
cooperating of Republic of Kazakhstan and Russian Federation;
- Frontier
cooperating Republic Of Kazakhstan and Russian Federation;
- Development
of industrial-cooperation links in machine-building and chemical
complexes, by means of creation of share financial and industrial groups;
- Cooperating
and development fuel and energy of complexes of Russia and Kazakhstan;
- Cooperating
in sphere of transport;
·
Cooperating
of Kazakhstan and Russia in mastering vehicle launching of Baikonur;
- Cooperating
in mastering natural riches of the Caspian sea;
- Scientific
- technological cooperating;
- Cooperating
in the market of agricultural production.
The historically folded trade ratios of the countries
of the Eurasian region, including Russia and Kazakhstan from times “Silk road”
- allow to hope for success in a development of economic cooperating in modern
conditions.
At the same time it is necessary
to mark the common tendencies, natural for the new independent countries. The
orientation to the market of long-distance foreign countries makes production
of raw in branches of the countries rarely for them raw refined in branches, as
last valid by considerably lower, than world, efficiency of the manufacture can
not acquire production first on world or close to world prices. Stronger links
with the world market of branches of the states of Commonwealth inevitably
preclude with their demand for production domestic resource refinery of
branches by virtue of its non-competitiveness in the world market. It
inevitably reduces different branches to of an economic development resource
producers and resource refinery of branches in the countries of CIS.
2.3 Engaging the
foreign investments
The
participation of the foreign capital promotes the decision of the following
tasks:
- Heightening of
efficiency of an export potential, overcoming of its raw directedness and
development import substitute of manufactures;
- Heightening of a
scientific and technical level of production with the help new scientific of
techniques, methods of management and selling of production;
- Magnifying of tax
receipts in the state budget;
- Assistance to a
development backward and depressive of regions and creation of new workstations
in national economy;
- Use of modern
industrial and administrative experience through tutoring and retraining of the
staff.
It
is necessary to mark, that the cooperating of Kazakhstan and Russia can
explicate in different regions of economy. For power engineering and mineral
operational life’s priority directions are: the opportunity of an effective
shared use of mineral operational life’s, introduction new and development of
available processing manufactures oriented on export to long-distance foreign
countries, creation of a reliable system energy supply, development of the
transport communications, which development is stipulated by presence of
investment operational life’s.
Figure 1. Structure of the direct foreign
investments in Kazakhstan in 2000
In
structure of the direct foreign investments in Kazakhstan the share of Russian
Federation makes 5 %. In spite of the fact that the Russian economy requires
not less to investment means, the enclosure of the investments serves the
factor of interest by Kazakhstan. The interests of Russia consist, first of
all, in natural operational life (oil, coal, ore etc.), mastering and
development.
2.4 Cooperating in the field of electric power industry
As other step which has
strengthened a positions of power branch, it is possible to name creation on
the basis of bankrupt CJSC “Ekibastuz Energy Center”, half of which shares the
European Economic Community of Russia on account of cancellation of duties of
Kazakhstan for the electric power was transferred to the Russian partners from
the Russian Academy of Science.
Since
2000 the integrated power Grid of Kazakhstan works in a parallel condition from
European Economic Community of Russia and grid system of the countries of
Central Asia.
The parallel operation of electric power systems has
allowed considerably to boost quality of electrical power and reliability of
electro supply of consumers of Kazakhstan, Central Asia and Russian Federation,
operatively to realize flow both transit of electrical power and powers, it is
more rational to use power powers of electrical stations. The electric power
system of Kazakhstan and Russian Academy of Science European Economic Community
of Russia is called secure each other in case of crashes. It will ensure with
the electric power not only Republic Of Kazakhstan, but also Southern Ural.
With the purposes of a heightening of efficiency of a
parallel operation the measures on simplification of customs procedures are
studied at migration of electrical power through the customs boundary.
The
operation coal extraction of the enterprises is stabilized. In 2002 the
production 78 mln of tons coal is forecast, from which more than 25 mln of tons
will be exported.
2.5 Cooperating
in the field of machine construction industry
The lowering of manufacture in machine construction industry
and metalworking is called by aggravation of a financial condition of basic
consumers of machine-building production, significant rise in price of import
furnishing work pieces.
The cooperating of Russia and Kazakhstan in machine
construction industry is possible at the expense of a shared use of available
industrial potential for issue of competitive production. On basis Kentau
excavator factory assembly manufacture of dredges together with joint-stock
company Tver excavator a factory and joint-stock company Sarex. On Pavlodar
tractor together with joint-stock company the “Altay” motor factory. Barnaul
and Sibzavod (Omsk) it is planned to adjust manufacture of new tractors, and
the enterprises agricultural machinary of Kazakhstan together with Rostelmash
can master assembly manufacture a grain and of combines.
Besides
in machine building branch the creation JV on manufacture of diesel drives
(planned on the basis of joint-stock company the “Kustanay” diesel factory and
joint-stock company “Hurrah Laz”) and Transnational of financial and industrial
group “Electropribor”.
2.6 Cooperating in the field of a uranium
industry
Annually Kazakhstan extracts and sells about 3 % (1,5
thousand tons) from it Whole World of production. Production of the National
company “Казатомпром” consumes Russia, USA, Western Europe, Southern Korea and
other countries.
The company “Казатомпром” combines investigation,
production and manufacture of uranium, and also accompanying rarely of
elements. Into its structure go into: joint-stock company “Volkovgoelogy” one
of highly professional in all CIS of the geological enterprises, joint-stock
company “Stepgeology”. Three ore management “Central”, “Steppe”, “Sixth”.
The
basic manufacturer of uranium fuel in Kazakhstan - Ulbinski a metal works. This
versatile enterprise specializing on issue rarely metal and super conducting
production, and also special material, used in an atomic industry, electron
technology, instrument making, space engineering. The raw material - enriched
uranium - is made in Kazakhstan or is delivered from Siberia, on Ulba make of
it tablets and deliver them on the Russian factories, where make ready heat
distributor of assembly for atomic power plants. Ulbinski the metal works
occupies the important place in a nuclear-fuel cycle of Russia and Kazakhstan.
In
the near past the nuclear -fuel complex of Russia and Kazakhstan made a single
unit. To tear this line-up was it does not pay Russians, Kazakhstan.
Last
years the Kazakhstan raw material in basic went on export, and the fuel tablets
on Ulbinski factory were manufactured from the Russian raw material. Besides is
acute there was a problem solvency. Russia paid for services by the consumer
goods. An exit from the folded situation became the offer of the Kazakhstan
side to the partners from Russian "«fuel element" of start-up of a
new uranium line-up. As a result of the enterprise deliver each other necessary
components, in particular from Kazakhstan in Russia - fuel tablets. The
financial accounts between the countries are made at the end of a line-up in
accordance with sale of products higher remake in the exterior market.
Within
the framework of this cooperating, with the purposes of an ascertaining of the
greater confidence the National company “Kazatomprom”, releases the gold share,
which is transferred and gives it the right to superimpose the veto on such
decisions of Kazakhstan,
As,
for example, refusal to work in one nuclear-fuel cycle to not produce fuel
tablets for Russian Atomic Electric Station or other irrational variations in
the strategy and tactics of behavior in the market. In turn, Russia has given
us assurances of a reliability and long term of the orders. It concerns
uranium, but also tantalum raw material, beryllium etc. Durability of strategic
interests of the sides by the plans on interchanging the shares Ulbinski
factory on the similar shares of the enterprises of a nuclear -fuel cycle of
Russia.
In
October, 2000 the long-term contract for manufacture CJSC Ulbinski factory of
dusts of uranium and fuel tablets for AES with their further annual delivering
in Russian Federation up to 200 т of a dust and 300 т of tablets, on a period
till 2005 inclusively is made.
Besides the
arrangement on creation of the share enterprise on production of uranium on
deposits “Zarechni and “Budenovski” in Southern Kazakhstan is reached.
Considering
problems of integration of Russia and Kazakhstan, it is possible to conclude,
that the activation of economic links between the countries directly depends on
the decision of legal, political, economic and ecological problems precluding
their more effective activity. The opportunities by wider attract in a
long-term perspective appreciably depend on those political courses, which will
be selected by both countries. According to our reckoning, the creation of the
common market of Kazakhstan and Russia will allow to support steady solvency
demand for production of real sectors of economy of the countries on the basis
of the long-term target and selective contracts.
Thus,
the necessity of effective economic interaction between the countries stipulates
necessity of the further decision of existing problems and uses of every
possible redundancy of premises of rise of manufacture.
3. involvement in international organizations,
kazakhstan and russia
For anybody not a secret, that creation
and the operation of regional systems of safety in Central Asia was called by
the following basic reasons:
First, inability of the states becoming in plants of
aggressive plans of the international terrorist architectures, appearing under
Islamic by the slogans and using financial support international extremism of
architectures to give them effective defense;
Secondly, double standards of the
conducting countries of West, including USA, Great Britain, in a ratio of
operations of a series of terrorist architectures considered by them as battle
groups national fight for freedom of driving. By characteristic development of
double standards was, for example, the refusal of the American authorities to
satisfy the request Ministry of Foreign Affairs Peoples Republic Of China about
output gripped in captivities in Afghanistan of hits - citizens of Peoples
Republic of China Uygur of a nationality. A motivation: the Washington does not
consider Driving for independence East Turkestan as terrorist architecture;
Thirdly, the anti Soviet moods,
cultivated in West by decades, in a defined measure were transformed in anti
Russian, especially to first half 90 years. Therefore warnings of Russia,
states of Central Asia, closely face with operations of the international
terrorist gangs in Chechnya, in Batken, about real consequences of their
activity were not heard.
It would be possible to explain creation of
military-aerial basses of USA in Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tadjikistan,
Uzbekistan still by war against a condition taliban. But there is a question,
why these basses began to be established as a matter of fact after completion
of an active military phase of rout taliban of a condition. Moreover, arranging
of basses air force of USA not only in Afghanistan, but also in Kyrgyzstan, and
also Tajikistan bordering with China, on defined reflections. In particular,
involuntarily there is an idea: whether can these basses hypothetically and in
a defined situation to be used as basis of a dual purpose - not only against hits
in Afghanistan, but also against China or even against Russia.
After September 11 and especially after an overthrow
reactionary taliban of a condition in Afghanistan and ascertaining of the
American military presence in Central Asia basic; in essence there is a
consideration of an opportunity of cooperating of these architectures from USA,
for, without the account of policy of Russia, China and USA and understanding
of principles of a guard by these states of the national interests, it is
impossible to explain a situation in sphere of a safety in region.
Whether such script of a development of events in next
China is necessary to Kazakhstan and other countries of region.
Uniquely
- is not present. The consequences of disorder USSR, as is known, have done without
in tens thousand life and millions refugees.
The important element of regional cooperating is the
effective military-engineering cooperating between the countries by the members
DKNB. Today any country of Central Asia is not capable in the nearest perspective
to refuse from former Soviet, so, present Russian weapon and military
engineering. Hence, the key role of Russia in this direction will be saved.
The
important element of regional cooperating is the effective military-engineering
cooperating between the countries - members DKNB Today any country of Central Asia is not capable in the
nearest perspective to refuse from former Soviet, so, presents Russian weapon
and military engineering. Hence, the key role of Russia in this direction will
be saved. Though other points of view take place also:
a)
In opinion of the Uzbek experts, principal reason of an exit of Tashkent from
DKNB was ostensibly refusal of the Russian side to sell to Uzbekistan necessary
arms and military engineering, when the country has exposed to attacks of gangs
of the international terrorists.
In these conditions
of Uzbekistan forced to convert to active cooperating from USA;
b)
In mass - media the hearings, on the one hand, are persistently spreader that
Russia ostensibly is not interested in maintenance vehicle launching of
Baikonur, recognizing schedule to transfer all rocket start-ups on vehicle
launching or to realize start-ups from tropics, and with another - that vehicle
launching of Baikonur to Kazakhstan anything, except for harm, does not bring.
Tragedy
of September 11 and military action, which has followed behind it, of USA in
Afghanistan by a radical image, have changed a situation in our region. In this
connection experts of Kazakhstan Contract, being the member, of collective
safety, expected, that the states the members DKNB will consult among
themselves on all questions of the international safety, including regional,
but, unfortunately, such has not taken place also it once again speaks that one
of the reasons of an inefficiency DKNB is an existing level of ratios between
Russia and other sides of the Contract. On my sight, on the one hand, Russia
till now is not ready to equal in rights partner to ratios with the new
independent states, and, with another - in the countries FSU of space the
suspiciousness and uncertainty is still saved in what policy Russia will
realize further.
Therefore, on my sight, the
special urgency is acquired now by necessity of amplification of mutual
confidence, openness, knowledge, first of all, between Kazakhstan and Russia
having on FSU space the special level of ratios and the best premises for
creation of allied ratios.
Thus,
at folding geopolitical the structure of regional systems of safety is
necessary different level. In particular, Kazakhstan and Russia should not wait
of operations on the part of other countries of region, by a phantom of the
dollar help, and actively be shaded slide on a path not only economic
integration in frameworks EAEU (Euro-Asian Economic Union), but also development
of systems of safety in frameworks DKNB.
Similar
situation in a ratio of cooperating with China within the framework of the
Shanghai architecture of cooperating in a direction of struggle with terrorism,
extremism and separatism
Appearing on January
25 this year at the extended meeting of the principals of the executive
authority Republic Of Kazakhstan, the President N.Nazarbayev has formulated seven tasks facing to
government, including in the field of exterior policy.
January 25, 2002 in Almaty the
third session Integration of committee EAEU (Euro-Asian Economic Union) has
passed, on which 28 questions were considered, from which on 27 the decision is
accepted. The totals of operation of this session, unfortunately, have appeared
unfavorable:
a)
The participants still were not defined, in what direction it is necessary to
explicate cooperating;
b)
Each participant wants first of all to defend the interests, instead of
interests of the partners. Therefore, in particular, customs duties till now
are not strip-chart unified to establish a condition of preference for mutual
trade;
c)
The countries EAEU (Euro-Asian Economic Union) tend in WTO, supposing already others, and very rigid,
condition, not having matched the positions.
Nevertheless of Kazakhstan appears
for a development EAEU (Euro-Asian Economic Union), and also others
(organization structures with participation of Russia, as such policy in
finished the score answers interests without dangerous of our country.
3.1 The Eurasian Union: Realities and Perspectives
For five years already Kazakhstan,
Russia, and other post-Soviet states, most of which are united in the Commonwealth
of Independent States, have developed in the situation of a new political
reality as equal agents of the world order. But the process of the formation of
new independent states and open democratic social systems has just begun.
Without going into detailed critique of the CIS, let us
note that all its activities and all the bilateral and multilateral efforts of
its member states clearly show that the time has come for a more effective,
deep, and diverse integration of the countries involved - the kind of
integration that would achieve a stabilization of the situation in the economy
and ensure its development on a qualitatively new basis. This applies above all
to the economies of Kazakhstan and Russia, which might become the engines of
future integrative processes in the post-Soviet space. There are also quite a
few issues pertaining to cooperation in the military-political,
scientific-technological, humanitarian, and other spheres, which are awaiting
their solution in the framework of a more effective integration model. The idea
of the formation of the Eurasian union of states proposed by President
Nazarbayev is precisely such a model; it organically combines both the existing
realities and the objective needs of today and tomorrow.
Taking into account the differences between our countries
in the levels of development of market economy, in the democratization of
political processes, we propose to establish an additional integrative
structure, the Eurasian Union, whose activities would be combined with those of
the CIS. In doing so, the member states will take into account the diversity
of integration scenarios and differences in the rate, form, and direction of
CIS states’ development. Thus there is an urgent need for the formation of a
new economic order in the CIS.
It can thus be said that the draft project for the formation of the
EAU is in keeping with the natural aspirations of the peoples living in the
post-Soviet space, the idea of new integration. The project has not only
acquired a great many supporters but has also proved that it is realistic,
urgent, and vital.
Turning to the genesis of that integrative idea, it must
be recalled that the Kazakhstan leader advocated the preservation of good
relations and re-integration on a new basis of the former Soviet republics from
the very first days of the new states acquiring independence. President
Nazarbayev stressed repeatedly that he never raised the idea of independence to
the status of a fetish but rather endeavored to preserve old ties and create
new ones. The idea of the Eurasian Union originates in the midst of life, in
the simple and universal human needs.
From that moment, the debate on the idea of the EAU
assumed a new tone. It accelerated the political crystallization on the choice
between further disintegration and re-integration on a new basis.
Many participants in the hearings stated that the EAU
project offers a chance for entering the 21st century in a civilized
manner, and that it reflects the objective logic of development of the
post-Soviet space and the consciously realized objective need for the
development of integration processes.
In this way the initiative of forming the Eurasian Union
was gaining momentum. The number of its adherents increased at scholarly
events, in government offices, and in the diplomatic circles. An understanding
and sincere approval of the EAU project was expressed, among others.
The proposals contained in the EAU project - to introduce
unified visa procedures, to guarantee the freedom of movement, to make the
ruble the settlement unit, to create a unified system of defense, parliament,
legislation, and an executive committee as an interstate organ - were at first
guardedly received by some public figures. However, the numbers of adherents of
integration are growing. Clearly, their approaches to the problem differ, but
their desire for integration remains strong.
On the question of the main
principles of the EAU project, it must be stressed that the EAU is a union of
equal, independent states aimed at the realization of the national interests
of each member state and of the available integration potential. The EAU is a
form of integration of sovereign states with the aim of consolidating stability
and security and socioeconomic modernization in the post-Soviet space. Economic
interests determine the foundations of the rapprochement among the independent
states. The political institutions of the EAU must adequately reflect these
interests and facilitate economic integration.
The following principles and
mechanism of formation of the Eurasian Union are proposed:
— National referendums or decisions of parliaments on
the entry of states in the EAU;
— The signing by member states of a treaty on the
setting up of the EAU on the basis of the principles of equality,
noninterference in the affairs of each other, respect for sovereignty,
territorial integrity and inviolability of state borders. The treaty must lay
the legal and organizational foundations for deeper integration, with the
formation of an economic, currency, and political union as its goal;
— No associated membership is permitted in the EAU;
— Decisions are carried in the EAU by the qualified majority of
four-fifths (4/5) of the overall number of member countries.
Independent
states join the EAU, if the following preliminary conditions are satisfied:
— Mandatory compliance with endorsed inter-state agreements;
— Mutual recognition of the existing political
institutions of the EAU member countries;
— Recognition of territorial integrity and inviolability
of the borders;
— Rejection of economic, political, and other forms of
pressure in inter-state relations;
— Cessation of hostilities among member countries.
New members enter the EAU after an
expert evaluation is passed on their readiness to enter the EAU and all EAU
members vote unanimously on it. An organ formed on parity terms by the states,
which expressed their readiness to become EAU members, proposes expert
evaluations.
EAU states may take part in other integrative alliances,
including the CIS, on the basis of associated or permanent membership or in the
role of an observer.
Every member can leave the EAU,
giving notice not later than six months before the decision is made.
It is suggested to form the
following supranational bodies:
— The Council of EAU Heads of State and Heads of
Government - the highest organ of EAU political leadership. Each member state
chairs the EAU for a period of six months in rotation according to the Cyrillic
alphabet.
— The highest consultative and advisory body is the EAU
Parliament. The Parliament is formed by delegating deputies of the member
states' parliaments on the basis of equal representation of each member
country or through direct elections. Decisions of the EAU Parliament come into
force after their ratification by the parliaments of the EAU states.
Ratification must be effected within the period of one month.
— The main area of the activity of the EAU Parliament is
coordination of the member countries' legislation to insure the development of
a unified economic space, protection of the social rights and interests of
individuals and of mutual respect for state sovereignty and civil rights within
EAU states.
— The EAU Parliament creates a common legal basis to regulate the
relations between the member countries' economic agents.
— The Council of EAU Foreign Ministers, to coordinate the member
countries' foreign-policy activities.
— The Inter-state Executive Committee of the EAU - an executive and
supervisory body functioning on a permanent basis. The EAU heads of state
appoints the head of the Executive Committee -a representative of the member
countries — for a period defined by the heads. The Executive Committee's bodies
are formed to include representatives of all the countries.
The EAU as represented by its Executive Committee must receive
observer status in a number of major international organizations, such as:
— The EAU Executive Committee's Information Bureau. The member
countries must assume a special obligation or law not to permit unfriendly
statements about the treaty's member states, which may damage relations between
them.
— The Council for Education, Culture, and Science. The formation of
coordinated policy on education, promotion of cultural and scientific
cooperation and exchange, and joint activity on compiling textbooks and
manuals.
— To achieve a deeper coordination and effectiveness of the
activities of the EAU countries, it is deemed advisable to set up in each of
them a State Committee (or Ministry) for EAU Affairs.
— Regular meetings and consultations on health services, education,
labor, employment, culture, combating crime, and so on, by ministers of EAU
countries.
—
Encouraging the activities of non-governmental
organizations in various areas of cooperation in accordance with EAU member
countries' national legislation.
— The Russian language is the official EAU language,
functioning side by side with the languages of legislation in the member
nations.
— Citizenship. Free movement of citizens within EAU
borders requires coordination of external visa policy with regard to third
nations. On changing the country of residence within the EAU, an individual
automatically receives the other country's membership.
— One of the cities at the juncture of Europe and Asia,
such as Kazan or Samara, might be proposed as the capital of the EAU.
In order to create a unified economic space within the
EAU framework, it is proposed to establish a number of supranational
coordinating structures:
— A commission on the economy under the Council of EAU
Heads of State to work out the main directions of economic reform within the
EAU framework; the commission takes into consideration the interests of the
national states and offers its proposals for endorsement by the Council of the
EAU Heads of State;
— A commission on the raw materials of the EAU exporter
countries to coordinate and endorse the prices and quotas for exported raw
materials and fuel and energy resources, an appropriate inter-state agreement
to be signed by the member countries; coordination of policy in the mining and
sale of gold and other precious metals is to be envisaged;
— A fund for economic and technological cooperation
formed with EAU members' contributions. The fund will finance promising
science-intensive economic, scientific, and technological programs and render
assistance in the solution of a wide range of problems, including legal, tax,
financial, and ecological issues;
— A commission on inter-state
financial-industrial groups and joint ventures; — an EAU international
investment bank;
— An inter-state EAU court of arbitration on economic problems,
to resolve conflicts on a legal basis and to impose sanctions;
— A commission on the introduction of a clearance monetary unit
(transfer ruble).
It is proposed to implement a number of measures to preserve the
potential achieved in the previous decades and to enhance integration in the
field of science, culture, and education:
— The setting up of common EAU research centers to carry out
fundamental research in contemporary knowledge;
— The setting up of an EAU fund for the development of scientific
research to unite the scientific collectives from various countries;
— The setting up of a committee on links in the field of culture,
science, and education under the Council of the Heads of EAU Governments;
— Encouragement of the formation of non-governmental associations in
the sphere of culture, education, and science;
— The setting up of a grants fund under the EAU Executive
Committee.
It is proposed to conclude the following accords on defense within
the EAU framework:
— A treaty on joint actions to
strengthen the national Armed Forces of the EAU member countries and to protect
EAU external borders.
The EAU will establish a unified defense space to coordinate
defense activities:
—
The formation of joint peace-making EAU forces
to maintain stability and eliminate conflicts within the member countries and
between them. The sending of peace-making forces to conflict areas on EAU
territory - with the agreement of EAU member states and in accordance with
international legal norms;
—
The tabling of joint proposals by EAU member
countries at international organizations, including the United Nations
Security Council, on lending EAU joint contingents the status of a peace-making
force;
— The setting up of an inter-state center on problems of nuclear
disarmament attended by representatives of international organizations.
— All EAU states except Russia maintain their nuclear-free status.
In the area of ecology, the following mechanisms must be
formed in the nearest future, according to the EAU project:
— An ecological fund under the EAU Council of Heads of State, to
realize ecological programs within the EAU framework, to be financed by all
member states;
— Coordination of actions with international organizations to
reduce the extent of environmental pollution;
— Endorsement of short- and long-term programs for major problems of
restoration of the environment and liquidation of the consequences of
ecological disasters (the Aral Sea, Chernobyl, the Semipalatinsk nuclear
testing ground);
— The endorsement of an inter-state EAU agreement on storing nuclear
waste.
The Eurasian Union of States is thus based on three principal
provisions:
— Joint supranational coordinating organs for the management of the
economy, defense, and foreign policy;
— A unified economic space;
— A common defense complex.
The supranational institutions include the highest organ of
political leadership of the Union - the council of heads of state and heads of
government; the highest consultative organ, the parliament; the councils of
foreign and defense ministers;
And the interstate executive committee - a permanently
functioning executive and controlling body whose head is appointed by the
heads of government for a term which they themselves define.
As for the unified economic space, it may be built,
e.g., on such a basis as coordinating economic policies and mandatory
programs; a common legislative basis regulating relations between economic
agents; a supranational currency on the European ECU model; coordination of
direct links between enterprises; the setting up of joint and mixed
industrial-financial groups, transport firms, trade houses, and exchanges. The
defense and foreign trade complexes may be just as effective. The EAU as
represented by its executive committee must receive the status of an authorized
representative in all the leading interstate organizations of the world.
The practical realization of the
provisions of the EAU project in the bilateral Kazakhstan!-Russian relations is
excellent proof of the viability of this program.
On January 20, 1995, a package of
extremely important integration documents was signed during the working meeting
between presidents Nazarbayev and Yeltsin. This package included a declaration
on expanding and deepening Kazakh-stani-Russian cooperation and an agreement on
the Customs Union, which was also signed by Belorussia. Both of these were
discussed in detail before. This last agreement opens the way to the
establishment of a unified customs space to be followed by a unified economic
space, as envisioned in the EAU project.
With the setting up of the Customs Union,
the economic cooperation of the three countries is built on the principles of
free, non-discriminatory trade; a common market of commodities, services,
capital, and labor; and close interaction in the production, investment, and
financial spheres.
At present, the first stage in the
formation of the Customs Union is largely completed. The work done by the
three sides is generally recognized to be an important element of the
realization of the foundations of the Economic Union and the formation of the
common market of CIS countries.
The legal acts on tariff and non-tariff regulation of foreign trade
have been unified. Kazakhstan and Russia have signed an agreement on unified
control of customs services. An agreement has also been reached on the identity
of trade procedures in both countries in relation to third nations, and unified
procedures have been introduced on the customs statistics on foreign trade and
customs registration of commodities subject to excise. Customs controls on
railroads and passenger air traffic between the two countries are lifted step
by step.
A treaty has been signed between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the
Russian Federation on joint efforts on the protection of outer borders, the
term “outer borders” taken to mean the sectors of the border between our
countries and the states that are not part of the CIS. The edict of the
president of Kazakhstan dated September 19, 1995 On the Lifting of Customs
Control on the Border between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation
concludes the first stage in the formation of the Customs Union and orders the
implementation of joint customs controls on the Kazakhstan and Russian sectors
of the outer borders of the Customs Union.
At the second stage of the formation of Kazakhstani-Russian-Belorussian
economic efforts to form a customs union, the most important areas of
cooperation are a closer coordination of economic reforms; harmonization of
civil and economic legislation; unification of currency, tax, and price regulation
by the state with the aim of leveling out the economic and legal conditions for
the activities of commodity producers within a unified customs space; working
out coordinated positions of the members of the Customs Union in relations with
third countries and international organizations. At the meeting of heads of CIS
countries in November 1995, three more countries stated their desire to join
the Customs Union: Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. Later, only
Kyrgyzstan went through with the necessary procedures and entered the Customs
Union.
Another example of collaboration in the field of integration is the
agreement on the Baikonur space vehicle-launching site, which makes it possible
to use this great scientific and technological facility in the interests of
Russia and Kazakhstan, as well as documents on the issues of citizenship signed
by the presidents of Kazakhstan and Russian.
Let us consider in somewhat greater detail the problems
of citizenship, of which the solution on a bilateral basis was also outlined in
the draft project of the EAU.
Issues of citizenship became particularly prominent at
the time of the emergence and building of sovereign independent states after
the disintegration of the USSR, when tens of millions of former Soviet citizens
overnight ended up outside their "historical homelands." This problem
is as topical for Kazakhstan and Russia as for other CIS countries. More than
that, it often figures as one of the most important issues of bilateral
relations with Russia.
The more
acute aspects of this problem were lifted as a result of the signing in January
1995 by the presidents of Russia and Kazakhstan of a treaty on the legal status
of citizens of both countries living on the territory of the other state and of
an agreement on simplified procedures for acquiring citizenship in moving from
one country to another. Well-known specialists from the two countries worked
fruitfully on these documents. Authoritative Kazakhstan! and Russian
politicians and jurists believe that these are innovative agreements without
parallel in the world, and they are a fairly rare example of regulating
bilateral issues on a civilized basis. The importance of these agreements both
for progressive development of our countries and for normal life of the citizens
of Kazakhstan and Russia cannot be exaggerated.
These documents envisage the
introduction of maximally simplified procedures for acquiring citizenship and
for movement without visas; they also offer possibilities for contract work
and military service; assert the rights of possession, use, and disposal of
property; create conditions for exchange of currency and transfer of sums of
money by individuals and corporate entities of Kazakhstan and Russia; and many
other provisions which reliably protect the rights and interests of the
citizens of the two countries.
Yet another sphere in which combining
the efforts of all the interested parties is needed is the legal status of the
Caspian Sea.
The position of the Republic of
Kazakhstan on this issue is based on the need for an early drafting and signing
of a convention on the legal status of the Caspian Sea, of which a draft was
worked out by the Kazakhstan foreign ministry and sent out to all the
interested states as early as March 1994. Unfortunately, there has been no
response to this initiative for quite a long time now, and the agreement on
regional cooperation on the Caspian Sea issue is still at a standstill.
At the same time preserving this unique object of nature
is a task that the present generation must be worthy of.
The events of the recent years thus
prove conclusively the need to proceed to a new level of integration, which
will fully conform to the vital needs of the peoples. International experience
shows that any interstate association goes through various states in its
development, becoming enriched in the process with new forms of cooperation.
The Eurasian Union should be seen as just one of such transitional forms
capable of optimizing the solution of the problems facing the Commonwealth.
From the time of the publication of
the draft EAU project, politicians and scholars have been paying close
attention to it. Four major scientific and practical conferences were devoted
to this subject, as were hundreds of publications in Kazakhstan, Russia, and
other states. Politicians, scholars, and diplomats continue to study the EAU
project with great attention.
The current period in history is characterized by a radical
breakdown of the old way of life. Society now faces difficult issues, and each
person is subject to serious trials It is quite natural under these conditions
that the peoples of Kazakhstan, Russia, and other countries with an interest
in the unification of the Commonwealth will find it easier to overcome these
difficulties together. A balanced attitude toward the past, a persistent
realization of the present potential, and confidence in a more certain future -
only these things will be able to give the peoples of our countries a natural
feeling of spiritual harmony and a sense of full-blooded life.
History is offering us a chance to enter the 21st
century in a civilized manner. One of the ways to achieve that, in my view, is
the realization of the integration potential for the establishment of the
Eurasian Union, which will reflect the objective logic of the development of
the post-Soviet space and the will of the peoples of the former Soviet Union to
achieve integration.
This is how President Nazarbayev, the author of the
Eurasian project, characterized the development of this idea and his current
vision of its future: "I still remain an adherent of integration of
post-Soviet space. As I formulated my vision of integration I laid no claims to
total realization of all the provisions of the project, being fully aware of
all the political connotations of that period. Two considerations were my primary
motivation. First, I wanted to generalize within a single whole the most
realistic proposals for further integration, which simultaneously appeared in
the countries of the post-Soviet space. Second, I wished to interrupt the
indecently drawn-out pause in the activities of the CIS institutions.
In the last two years there was movement in the CIS
countries on some issues that had been at a standstill, including
4. VITAL
PROBLEMS OF THE PRESENT-DAY STATE OF KAZAKHSTANI-RUSSIAN RELATIONS
The Present State and Prospects for Economic Cooperation
between Kazakhstan and Russia.
The top priority area of Kazakhstan’s policy in foreign trade is the
strengthening of economic cooperation with Russia and consistent integration of
the economies of the CIS countries. This is determined by the traditionally
strong economic links, a high level of mutual complementarily and
interdependence of two economies of a once unified state, the size of the
commodity market and identify of economic problems awaiting solution. “Analysis
of the results of development of the economy of the former USSR and of
experiences of economically advanced nations,” President Nazarbayev stressed,
“shows that the transition to the market is objectively necessary and
historically inevitable.”
The main feature of the present-day situation in
Kazakhstan is the increasing impact of the mechanisms that have evolved in the
years of reform and a weakening of the effect of non-market factors. In the
initial stages, the underdeveloped state of such important instruments of the
formation of the market as privatization, de-monopolization, absence of a
competitive environment, were the main sources of inflation in the republic, a
worsening state of the finances of enterprisers, an acute shortage of turnover
capital, a fall in production due to falling demand and real earnings of the
main mass of the population, as well as growing abuses in trade and banking
structures.
The prevailing technological, economic and
organizational standards made a significant impact on the potential of foreign
trade relations. “The cohesion of the economic space of the former USSR was
affected through centralized state planning implemented by command-administrative
management. In the process, the country’s economy worked as a ‘single
workshop’, and not all production and economic links here were rational from
the market point of view. The transition to a market economy throughout the
economic space of the former USSR required a profound restructuring, and this
called for considerable resources and time,” Ex-Prime Minister A.M. Kazhegeldin
stressed.
The policy of liberalization of foreign trade activity
and of open economy did not result in 1993 in any growth of exports. It
amounted to $1.5 billion, thus remaining at the 1992 level. Shifts in the
geography of Kazakhstan export due to the re-orientation of foreign trade links
to industrially developed nations resulted in the strengthening of raw
materials exports. The share of machines, equipment and transport vehicles in
the export dropped to 2 percent, and the share of fuel and energy complex and
that of metallurgy rose to 80 percent. Rising domestic prices prevented
partners from concluding long-term foreign trade deals, stimulating instead
commodity exchanges. The share of barter and clearing deals in export
operations made up more than 26 percent. More than 56 percent of imports were
affected through exchange of commodities. Barter operations were mostly in the
nature of structurally unbalanced exchanges. The republic suffer considerable
losses due to inadequate knowledge of the market conditions and the desire to
access foreign markets at any price.
A noticeable
feature of Kazakhstan economy is the low level of the development of machine
building, which is not up to present-day requirements, and this makes an
adverse impact on other branches of the economy, as it results in the common
shortage of metal-tooling products. This aggravates the shortage of spare parts
and of products used in several adjacent branches of industry and adversely
affects the standards of servicing.
Some of Kazakhstan most important tasks in 1994 were the closure
of, and changing production lines at, non-viable enterprises and development of
promising export-oriented ones, which also satisfy domestic demand. This called
for a set of measures to identify enterprises in the state of depression,
closing down unprofitable lines of production in energy-consuming industries
and rehabilitation and reorganization of non-profitable production lines.
The basis of
the development of Kazakhstan, just as of Russia and many other CIS countries,
is export of natural resources. In 1994, the government introduced regulations
for the licensing of natural resources, and a law was adopted on payments for
utilization of natural resources. It was at that time that efforts were
initiated to attract domestic and foreign investors to develop the fuel and
energy complex. The development began of the Tengiz, Karachiganak, and some
other oil yields at oil fields continued to be introduced. Open – cut coal
mining was expanded at Ekibastuz, Maykubek, and Shubarkul coalfields, with the
aim of reducing the mining of coal underground at low-profit and non-profitable
mines of the Karaganda coalfields.
In the
metallurgical industry, the development of production of ferrous metals and the
raw-materials basis of such production continued, including the revamping of
the Karaganda metallurgical plant with the aid of foreign investment; its
re-orientation toward the iron ore pellets of the Sokolovsko – Saribai mining
association; the development of production of stainless steel and rolled metal
and the building of an electric metallurgical plant for the production of stainless
steels in Aktobe; further development of ferrous alloys in Aktobe and Aksu and
of its raw-materials basis –the Donskoy ore –dressing plant; the re-orientation
of idle production lines of JSC Khimprom to the production of ferromanganese.
Organizational measures were taken in 1994 to develop production of fireproof
materials.
At the same
time there was a fall in the production of ferrous metallurgy due to an
aggravation of the raw materials and fuel shortage and a parlous state of
equipment at enterprises of this industry. The decline in industrial production
was to a considerable extent due to non-solvency of enterprises in view of
their insufficient financial resources, non-payment by the buyers for products
delivered, and weak financial discipline.
The decline in
non-ferrous metallurgy continued, as production of copper, titanium, and
manganese fell. To check the decline in this branch of industry, the production
lines at the Chilisai ore-dressing plant switched to a different product; the
Zyryanovsky lead plant was rebuilt, and its commissioning was brought forward;
the raw – materials basis for the titanium industry was created, as was the
Syrymbet tin field, the tin being produced at the Tselinny chemical plant. The
functioning gold mines and ore-dressing plants were revamped, and work was
accelerated to develop major gold fields at Vasilkov, Bakyrchik, and Akbakai.
In 1994, the
share of machine-building industry and machine tooling in the overall
industrial production continued to fall, amounting to six percent. Low
investment activity, non- competitiveness of the Kazakhstan machine-building
industry, limited financial consumer capacity predetermined an almost twofold
reduction volumes in most types of machine –building branches even compared to
the crisis-ridden year of 1993.
The situation
was worst in the chemical and petrochemical industries, whose production
capacities far exceeded the republic’s domestic needs. Considerable share of
the product was exported to other CIS countries and the “far abroad”, but the
enterprises suffered from shortage of raw materials, even shortages of oil,
which is produced in Kazakhstan itself. JSC Polipropilen, AKPO, Khimvolokno
production association used imported raw materials only. In 1994, the decline
in most types of petrochemical products reached 55-60 percent. Oil refining
dropped by 20.3percent.
The timber,
woodworking, and papermaking industries suffered from shortage of raw
materials. Between the beginning of 1993 and the end of 1994, the production of
timber fell by 21 percent, and this had a negative effect on the state of
production at sawmills and woodworking factories. The production of saw-timber,
chipboard, and cardboard fell by 31.9, 59.3, and 47.5 percent respectively, but
the production of paper increased threefold.
In 1993 and
1994, decline in production also continued in the construction materials
industry. Production of cement declined to the level of 1973, while production
of pre cast concrete products dropped to the level of 1974. There was a considerable
drop in production at enterprises producing asbestos cement pipes and coupling
(by 34.2percent), linoleum (by 40.3 percent), cement (by 61.6 percent),
asbestos (by 71.2 percent), bricks (by 78.8 percent). Production of sanitary
wares dropped by 25 percent.
During the
last five years, GDP volumes continued to fall, declining roughly twofold; the
greatest decline (by 25.4 percent) was observed in 1994, and in 1995 it was
almost nine percent.
However, during the time of the reform considerable
changes took place in the structure of GDP: The share of services grew
sharply – from 32 percent in 1992 to 47 percent in 1995; the share of
commodity production declined by 12 percent. The volume and share of services
mostly grew in the trade, .•.
•3 • ti '
|
Competitiveness of the Kazakhstan
machine-building industry, limited financial consumer capacity predetermined
an almost twofold reduction in production volumes in most types of
machine-building branches even compared to the crisis-ridden year of 1993.
The situation was worst in
the chemical and petrochemical industries, whose production capacities far
exceeded the republic's domestic needs. A considerable share of the product was
exported to other CIS countries and the "far abroad," but the
enterprises suffered from shortages of raw materials, even shortages of oil,
which is produced in Kazakhstan itself. JSC Polipropilen, AKPO, Khimvolokno
production association in Kustanai, Shymkentshina production association used
imported raw materials only. In 1994, the decline in most types of petrochemical
products reached 55-60 percent. Oil refining dropped by 20.3 percent.
The timber,
woodworking, and papermaking industries suffered from shortages of raw
materials. Between the beginning of 1993 and the end of 1994, the production
of timber fell by 21 percent, and this had a negative effect on the state of
production at sawmills and woodworking factories. The production of
saw-timber, chipboard, and cardboard fell by 31.9, 59.3, and 47.5 percent
respectively, but the production of paper increased threefold.
In 1993 and 1994, decline
in production also continued in the construction materials industry. Production
of cement declined to the level of 1973, while production of pre cast concrete
products dropped to the level of 1974. There was a considerable drop in
production at enterprises producing asbestos cement pipes and couplings (by
34.2 percent), linoleum (by 40.3 percent), cement (by 61.6 percent), asbestos
(by 71.2 percent), bricks (by 78.8 percent). Production of sanitary wares
dropped by 25 percent.
During .the last five
years, GDP volumes continued to fall, declining roughly twofold; the greatest
decline (by 25.4 percent) was observed in 1994, and in 1995 it was almost nine
percent.
However, during the time of
the reform considerable changes took place in the structure of GDP: The share
of services grew sharply - from 32 percent in 1992 to 47 percent in 1995; the
share of commodity production declined by 12 percent. The volume and share of
services mostly grew in the trade] in banking and finances, insurance, and
realty, while the share of everyday services fell. In other words, the main
trend in the changes of macro-economic proportions was a move towards
parameters characteristic of countries with well-developed market economies.
The share of consumption of end products rose to 69 percent of utilized GDP as
contrasted with 58 percent in 1993. Investment in 1995 amounted to some 30
percent of GDP.
Beginning in the
second half of 1994, certain positive changes began to occur: a decline in the
rate of inflation, a growth in accumulation of capital, a stabilization in the
exchange rate of the national currency, a decline in the banks' interests
rates, and a relative growth in industrial production.
The rate of inflation
steadily declined from 4.9 in June 1994 to 3.2 percent in April 1995. The
decline in production, which sharply Increased in November 1993 through March
1994, practically, ceased in some branches in 1994. As a result, industry as a
whole grew by 0.3 percent in September, by 1.1 percent in December, and by 1.2
percent in April. As distinct from the previous years, a certain stabilization
of production, which began in June 1994, was accompanied by a certain slowing
down rather than acceleration of inflation.
The rate of price growth in the
production and consumption sectors of the economy in 1995 slowed down. The
highest inflation occurred in January (an increase of 108.9 percent compared
to the previous month), and the lowest, in August (102.1 percent). The annual
index of consumer prices throughout the republic was estimated at 160 percent
(the monthly index, 104.3 percent, whereas the annual index of inflation of
consumer prices in 1994 amounted to 1256 percent, which corresponds to a monthly
inflation rate of 123.4 percent. (The annual index of production prices was at
the level of 141.2 percent).
The positive
dynamics in the consumer and wholesale prices was achieved above all by harsh
financial and credit policies and the government's measures aimed at stage by
stage liberalization of prices and tariffs for commodities and services, which
resulted hi a sharp reduction in the range of regulated prices. At the
beginning of 1996, only the prices of electric power, heating, gas, passenger
and freight railway traffic were regulated, and at the local level, regulation
involved prices" and tariffs of communal services and the services of
urban passenger transport.
In 1995, the
monetary and credit policies were characterized by changes in the monetary and
credit instruments of the National Bank, its operations at the inter bank
credit, currency, and stock markets, and the development of the market of
state securities. Whereas hi 1994 and January 1995 the principal instruments
were centralized and auction credits, in 1995 the emphasis shifted from
state-apportioned credits to the development of securities markets and auction
credits.
The primary market
of state treasury bonds actively began to develop. The volume of trading on
this market is steadily growing, with demand exceeding supply. Toward the end
of 1995, 4.3 billion tenge's worth of treasury bonds had been issued. In
September 1995, pawnshop credits were introduced, with state treasury bonds as
collateral.
The National Bank's average refinancing rate went from 210 percent
in January to 52.5 percent in December 1995. This reduction was made possible
by a considerable alleviation'' of the inflation situation.
The weighted average
percentage rate for auction credits amounted in 1994 to 292.61 percent; during
ten months of 1995, it went down to 103.29 percent, and in October 1995 it
stabilized at the 52.56 percent level.
In 1995, the
reduction in production output amounted to eight percent. Production output
fell at 44 percent of enterprises. Of the 220 most important kinds of
industrial products, production of 48 kinds increased and that of 167,
decreased. It should be noted at the same time that hi 1995 decline in
production was overcome, and there was an increase in production compared to the
previous year in electric power production, metallurgy, and in the chemical and
petrochemical industries.
In 1995, the policy
of liberalization of foreign trade activity continued; distribution of export
quotas was completely eliminated, and the list of licensed export products was
considerably reduced. Kazakhstan traded with 124 states of near and far
abroad.
In the framework of
official aid for development, Kazakhstan received a number of credits to the
tune of $1.3 billion from international financial organizations and individual
donor countries.
One of the main types of
foreign resources for the republic was direct investment, in particular the
setting up of joint ventures and foreign enterprises. The rate of establishment
of joint ventures in Kazakhstan is fairly high. Thus, at the end: of 1990 there
were just 15 of them, while at the end of 1995 more than 2000. JVs operated in
the republic, of which 500 operated on foreign capital only. Most of these
were set up in the; mining industries.
From the beginning of 1995,
steadily increasing numbers of enterprises were turned over for administration.
Toward the end of December 1995, external administration was introduced at some
20 major industrial enterprises in various sectors. The necessary legislative
basis was created for the involvement of foreign capital in Kazakhstan.
Thus the
implementation of economic policies in 1992-1995 in Kazakhstan resulted in the
liberalization and openness of the economy and the expansion of private
enterprise.
There were
significant shifts in the market infrastructure. Trade and the banking sector
developed rapidly, and other financial institutions were born - in other words,
there was, progress in those spheres of the economy that had previously; been
underdeveloped but that were vital for the functioning of the market economy.
The liberalization of
foreign and domestic trade resulted in a slight reduction of export in 1994 and
early 1995 compared to the decline in the volume of GDP. The export of commodities,
mostly to CIS countries, amounted to $13 billion in 1994 and $4.97 billion in
1995. The greatest share of exports went to the Russian Federation — 47
percent, or $1.4 billion's worth in 1994; in 1995, the exports amounted to $2.8
billion, including $2.1 billion to Russia.
Russia's share in
Kazakhstan's imports from CIS countries at the beginning of 1995 was the
largest - 70 percent; Turkmenistan's, 10 percent; and Uzbekistan's, 9 percent.
Of considerable significance is the fact that more than 50 enterprises securing
Russia's defense interests work on Kazakhstani territory. All principal roads
of Russia leading east and southeast, Yuzhsib and Transsib railways included,
pass through Kazakhstan. Major Russian high voltage power lines, communications
lines, and pipelines are also connected with Kazakhstan.
As before,
Kazakhstan's exports to Russia are raw materials, oil and petrochemical
products, as well as products of ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy.
Deliveries of
ferrous metals (35.2 percent), copper and items made of copper (15.1 percent)
make up a considerable share of exports. Russian enterprises are also the main
consumers of Kazakhstan oil and petroleum products, which amount to 40 percent
of the exports of mineral products.
In 1994,
Kazakhstan's imports of industrial and technical goods and of consumer goods
from the far and near abroad amounted to $3.4 billion; in 1995, the figure was
$3.7 billion. The largest share of imports fell on Russia - $1.3 billion and
$1.8 billion respectively. Imports from Russia covered 30 percent of the
demand of households and the republic's enterprises for raw materials, 70
percent of the demand for industrial manufactured products (including 90
percent of the demand, for complex household appliances), and more than 70
percent of the * demand for products of the chemical and timber industries.
Kazakhstan's imports from Russia are dominated by electric; machines,
equipment, mechanisms, and, transport vehicles. Their share in over imports
amounts to 70-percent. There are also imports of considerable amounts of raw
materials for the foodstuffs industry and the foodstuffs themselves (10.2
percent), mineral products and metals (10.1 percent), and other consumer goods
(7.8 percent). More than half of imported mineral products and non-ferrous
metals come from Russia.
The share of deliveries
against convertible currency in the export-import operations between Kazakhstan
and Russia amounted to 6.5 percent of the total volume of exports; the share of
baiter operations was 32.6 percent; and the share of clearing and similar
operations, 60.9 percent. In this process, baiter deals did not as a rule
result in a balanced and equivalent exchange. Analyses of export-import barter
deals in 1993-1995 shows that total exports were twice as large as imports of
commodities. As a result of these operations, considerable funds of Kazakhstan
Commodity producers annually stay in Russia.
On the whole, the
results of economic development show that the republic was close to achieving
macroeconomic stabilization, that the impact of market incentives increased,
and that a new system of reference points and motivations developed. The main
problems of the critical period of development were partially solved, but new
ones emerged.
Harsh monetary and credit
policies, liberalization of the domestic and foreign markets promoted the
formation in the republic of market mechanisms for the regulations of the
economy and for ensuring equal possibilities and guarantees for all the agents
of economic activity. In this situation the possibility appeared of creating a
common economic space covering Kazakhstan and Russia, in which free
circulation of commodities, capital, and labor would be made possible.
The development of
Kazakhstani-Russian relations between 1991 and 1995 showed that the two states
adopted a great many documents covering a wide range of economic issues.
The implementation
of these agreements created favorable conditions for establishing economic
links between economic agents and for the development of a common market that
would be advantageous for the economic interests of both Kazakhstan and Russia.
The relations
between the two countries in the economic sphere developed, against the
background of improving multilateral cooperation: within the CIS framework.
The legal basis for this, process was the treaty on the jetting-up of the CIS
Economic Union signed on September 24, 1993.' This document proclaimed as the
main goal a voluntary, stage-by-stage re-creation, on new, market principles of
unified economic space, or common market, with free circulation of commodities,
services, capital, and labor. On the basis of the treaty, a solid legal
groundwork was created. On October 21, 1994, an interstate economic committee
was set up at a-session of the council of CIS heads of state, and a memorandum
on the main directions of integration development of the Commonwealth of
Independent States was signed. These documents envisaged a stage-by-stage
formation of a customs union and the possibility of movement of different
countries at different speeds toward a unified economic space within the
Economic Union.
A characteristic
feature of the situation in the CIS is universal recognition of the need for
stepping up integration processes in the economic interaction of CIS
countries. It should be noted that, among CIS countries, economic relations
were most intense between Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, and Byelorussia, with 80
percent of commodity circulation within the CIS taking place within these
countries.
One of the basic documents
on economic integration was an agreement on a customs union between the Russian
Federation, the Republic of Kazakhstan, and the Republic of Belarus.1 Let us
recall that on January 20, 1995 the presidents of Kazakhstan and Russia, in
their joint declaration on the expansion and deepening of Kazakhstani-Russian
cooperation, instructed their governments to sign an agreement on the customs
union. The heads of governments of Kazakhstan, Russia, and Belarus signed this
document.
The formation of the
customs union was preceded by extensive preparatory work aimed at harmonizing
the legislative systems of the two countries. A number of governmental and
interdepartmental agreements, protocols, and joint normative acts were signed,
including those on free trade, on a unified procedure for regulating foreign
trade, on the re-export of commodities, on the introduction of a unified
procedure for non-tariff regulation of trade with a coordinated nomenclature
and volumes of licensed and quoted commodities, on the establishment of a free
trade zone, on the unification and simplification of customs procedures, on
collaboration between customs services, on combating illegal drugs trafficking,
on the terms of maintenance of military facilities on the territories of the
two sides, and on joint security measures for the protection of the external
borders of the Customs Union. These agreements covered a sufficiently wide
range of issues, and they formed the basis for further action.
The agreement on the
setting up of the Customs Union was based on the principles of unified customs
territory of the member states of the Customs Union and the existence of a
uniform mechanism of economic regulation. It is proposed to form the Customs
Union in two stages. At the first stage, tariffs and quantitative restrictions
on mutual trade are lifted that are envisaged in the agreement on a unified
procedure for regulating foreign trade activity of April 12, 1994; fully
identical systems for regulating foreign economic links, identical trade regulations,
common customs tariffs and non-tariff measures for regulating relations with
third countries are introduced. At this stage, work is envisaged on the
unification of legislation on foreign trade, customs, currency, finances, tax,
and of other laws bearing on foreign trade activities.
Agreements on the Customs
Union envisage the possibility of introduction of coordinated time
restrictions on mutual trade in case of shortages of commodities on the
domestic market, acute payment deficit, and other circumstances.
The countries
assumed the obligation to establish unified control over their customs organs
and organize joint supervision of the movement of commodities and transport
vehicles on the borders. The procedures for such supervision are regulated by
agreements between the customs organs of the states involved.
The agreement on the
Customs Union is open to all other CIS member states that will recognize the
provisions of the agreement and express a readiness to fulfill them in their
entirety.
The joint statement was in
effect an agreement on coordinated moves for further realization of economic
reform and creation of a uniform mechanism for regulating the economies based
on market principles. It set the task of unification of legislation on foreign
trade, customs, currency, finances, prices, taxes, and other economic laws
ensuring free development of production links and of enterprise, as well as
equal possibilities and guarantees for economic agents of the three states.
In that document, the heads
of the governments of the three states noted the considerable progress in the
creation of possibilities for a real formation of a customs union on the basis
of agreements and protocols signed. The sides agreed that tariff and
quantitative restrictions on mutual trade will be lifted through the setting up
of fully identical systems of regulation of external economic links,
unconditional guarantees for effective joint protection of the external
borders of the member states of the Customs Union, and establishment of
identical trade procedures, common customs tariffs, and measures for non-tariff
regulation with respect to third countries. It was stressed that the development
of foreign economic links will be promoted by the stage-by-stage formation of a
clearing union to ensure continuous clearing on the basis of mutual
convertibility of national currencies and formation of an effective payment
system.
An agreement was reached to
render state support to the development of direct links and cooperation between
enterprises, to the establishment of financial-industrial groups, formation
of favorable conditions for mutual access and protection of investment, and
acquiring real estate,
Measures were
outlined for the formation of a common scientific/technological space for a
more rational utilization of the available intellectual, scientific, and
technical potential.
State delegations headed by
deputy heads of governments take part in regular monthly sittings of the
commission. These sessions consider the implementation of agreements, analyze
the state of affairs in the practical formation of the customs union, and
coordinate joint measures.
At the same time each side
set up its own national sections of the intergovernmental commission on the
customs union. Five groups were set up in the framework of each national
commission to cover the following areas:
1. Creation of the
Customs Union. Solving tasks in the realization of a mechanism for the
establishment, of a. free trade zone; working out normative acts for the
unification of currency, financial, and general legislation; preparing
proposals for the introduction of unified procedures for foreign trade
regulation and an identical customs tariff, for coordinating a unified
procedure of customs control, for working out an agreement on unified
management of customs services, and so on.
2. Harmonization of
legislative systems to coordinate the legal basis of agreements with agreements
already achieved and to eliminate discrepancies in the economic legislative
systems of the states, and to solve other issues.
3. Realization of
the provisions of treaties; of friendship, cooperation, and mutual assistance;
preparation of draft agreements and documents on freedom of movement, citizens'
legal status, conversion, mutual debts of enterprises, and on military
cooperation.
4. The
development of production and enterprise. Taking coordinated measures for
economic reforms, preparing agreements on scientific and technological
cooperation, investment activity, state support of enterprises participating in
joint financial-industrial groups.
5. In the area of
finances and payment relations: the organization of work on providing regular
quotations for the national currencies, on the setting up of a network of
currency exchange points, on concluding an inter bank agreement on mutual
access to domestic markets of authorized banks, on working out a common
mechanism for currency regulation and control, on unification of taxes and
their size, on the methodology of price formation, and so on.
Practically all issues have
been resolved in. the framework of the three countries on non-tariff regulation
of foreign trade activity; work on the unification of normative legal acts in
this area has been completed. The partners came to an agreement on the
procedure for registering contracts on exports of strategically important
commodities.
Work is being
completed on the establishment of unified operation modes in trading with
countries and on re export of commodities.
Apart from
bilateral agreements, the Customs: Union also relies on a number of
multilateral agreements and conventions adopted by the CIS Countries, including
The Foundations of Customs Legislation, A Unified Methodology for the Customs
Statistics on Foreign Trade, On the Movement of CIS Countries' Citizens
Through Their Territories Without Visas, On Guarantees for the Rights of
Individuals Belonging to National Minorities, On the Establishment of a
Unified System of Air Defense of CIS Member States, and On Legal Aid and Legal
Relations in Civil, Family, and Criminal Cases.
Thus the main principle on
which the Customs Union is founded is the existence of a unified customs
territory and a uniform mechanism for regulating the economy, based on unified
legislation.
Toward the end of
1995, significant changes occurred in the trade and economic relations of
Kazakhstan and Russia. The agreement was revised on trade and economic
relations; the emphasis was made on the development of direct links between
producers, which resulted in a considerable increase in the exchange of
products. In 1995, trade between Kazakhstan and Russia amounted to $319
billion, or 54 percent of the total volume of the republic’s trades, an
increase of 55.4 percent on the same period in the previous year. Exports
amounted to $2.1 billion, which made up 42 percent of the total volume of
Kazakhstan export; exceeding the 1994 figures by a factor of 1.5. Imports
reached the $1.8 billion mark, or 49 percent of all imports, exceeding the 1994
imports by 66 percent.
Work on the
formation of the Customs Union can thus be seen as one of the main achievements
in the field of economic integration of Kazakhstan and Russia. A breakthrough
was achieved in the establishment of a common market. The three countries
established a unified customs zone and eliminated controls at their internal
borders. Close businesslike links were established between the customs
services.
The Customs Union brings
tangible results to each of its members. The overall volume of trade between
the CIS countries outside the Customs Union continued to fall, while the
lifting of custom barriers enabled Kazakhstan, Russia, and Byelorussia to
considerably increase commodity circulation.
In October 1995, the heads
of the governments of Russia, Kazakhstan, and Byelorussia issued a joint
appeal to the governments of CIS member states to join the triple union.
Running somewhat ahead of the story, let us note that in March 1996 Kyrgyzstan
joined the customs union.
At the same time
progress in the development of bilateral economic relations is checked by a
number of problems, notably by chronic nonpayment of mutual debts.
Kazakhstan's debt for electric power received from Russia grew almost threefold
in 1995. In turn, Russia owed a large sum to Kazakhstan for the coal from
Ekibastuz.
Serious
possibilities are sometimes missed for successful cooperation between
enterprises in the fuel and energy complex, in metallurgy, and other branches
of the economy of Kazakhstan and Russia. Close production links became
established between the Orskneftegazsintez JSC and the Aktyubinskneft JSC,
which form the Orenburg JSC. Early in 1995, the management of these
associations conducted mutual consultations and decided that a joint oil
company must be set up.
In Russia, the formation of
financial-industrial groups went on at an increasing pace. The results of their
work in 1995 show that integration of industrial and banking capital had a
positive impact on economic development.
Further effective
economic cooperation between Kazaklistan and Russia calls for systematic
analysis and work on a mechanism of control over the implementation of bilateral
Kazaklistani-Russian treaties and agreements.
The following tasks should
in our view be singled out in the field of economic cooperation between
Kazaklistan and Russia that are of mutual interest and call for coordinated decisions
of the governments:
a) Stabilization of export of raw materials and subsequent increase in
it as a basis for the growth of currency earnings for the modernization of
production;
b) Diversification of
exports;
c) Additional currency and
investment resources for restructuring the economy;
d) Support for active
trading policy on CIS countries' potential markets;
e) Moderate protectionism
in relation to newly created import-replacing production lines.
Under these
conditions the two countries will have to solve new problems in economic
integration in the framework of the Customs Union and in the system of world
economic links, in searching for additional financial resources necessary for
the implementation of economic restructuring and their balanced growth, in
defending the interests of the domestic market from unfavorable conditions in
the world economy and from, foreign competition at the stage of stabilization
of their economies.
In choosing a
promising export and import specialization, Kazakhstan and Russia should give
preference to commodities that are least susceptible to market fluctuations.
To achieve this, it is necessary to conduct regular analysis and forecasting of
the situation on the markets for the principal import and export commodities,
favoring long-term agreements on their purchase/selling over one-off deals.
In the medium-term
perspective, transition should be effected from restrictive policies to
encouragement, consistently facilitating the formation of a progressive,
structure of exports and creating a corresponding system of its state support.
Analysis of export/import
operations of foreign trade companies and enterprises shows that, in the
absence of combined controls over exports and currency and of an obligatory
norm of currency sales, 1 all export earnings reach the republic. According to
Kazakhstan specialists calculations, some $0.6-0.8 billion end up on the
accounts of Kazakhstan enterprises in the countries of near and far abroad.
According to Russian experts, corresponding figures for Russia range from $5 to
$17 billion. In this connection, one of the main tasks of management of
foreign trade activities of the two states is the setting up of systems of
customs control over export and import contracts and banking control over
currency earnings, investments, and other commodities.
In future, it is advisable
to step up coordination of information systems of control over repatriation of
currency earnings by the customs bodies and the banking system, which will
permit a concentration of efforts on securing maximum currency earnings from
exports.
It is advisable to restrict
the decisive role of the state in foreign economic activity to internationally
recognized standards, to be implemented in accordance with the rules and norms
of the World Trade Organization.
It is also advisable, in a
situation of considerable reduction of the share of state property, to export
and import commodities in state interests only within the framework of intergovernmental
agreements, which must not include any privileges or tax or duty exemptions.
For this purpose, the possibility is created for domestic purchases on a
competitive basis.
The state policy of
selective protection in relation to promising exporting industries and
conquering foreign markets gradually becomes one of the main priorities of
economic policy as a whole; it is called, upon to prepare the implementation of
a really proactive export policy, without which it is impossible to ensure
either the payment of foreign debts, or internal financial stabilization, or
investment activity and employment.
Another important
task is the achievement of favorable trading procedures-in relations with
foreign countries and their trade and economic groups, organizations, and
unions, as well as the lifting of existing discriminatory restrictions, and prevention
of new ones, with regard to the member states of the customs union.
To solve this task, plans
are made to work consistently and purposefully toward the entry of Kazakhstan
and Russia in the World Trade Organization, to harmonize our countries' legislative
systems with international norms and principles, and to implement the agreement
on partnership and cooperation with the European Union and agreements with
other countries.
Formation of new
economic relations with states of the near abroad will require a longer that
previously believed period of time and a gradual and coordinated advance
toward generally accepted international norms of organization.
The future economic policy
of Kazakhstan in relation to Russia and the countries of the near abroad must
have the following goals development and rationalization of cooperative
economic links in terms of minimizing expenditure and increasing
competitiveness;
— The utilization of
transit communications serving the export/import commodity flows from Customs
Union members to third countries;
— Cooperation and
coordination of CIS countries' efforts in the restructuring of production and
in optimizing the distribution of production forces. An active economic policy
in relation to countries of the near abroad is seen as one of the levers for
the rehabilitation of the economy and creating conditions for its upward swing.
Particularly
important in the economic relations of Kazakhstan and Russia is the creation of
conditions for establishing horizontal links between agents operating on the
market, the use of new forms of economic cooperation, such as joint ventures,
transnational production, commercial, and financial structures, and of
financial-industrial groups.
Thus the entire
course of economic cooperation between Kazakhstan and Russia and its present
state show that there is no alternative to close, mutually advantageous, and
constructive relations between the two countries. As the two largest countries
of post-Soviet space possessing great natural resources, production potential,
and a desire for cooperation, Kazakhstan and Russia are quite capable of
solving the tasks they face in reforming the economy and achieving the level of
economically developed countries.
Present-day economic
science and practice show that economic integration is the absolute imperative
of the future.
CONCLUSION
The analysis, in terms of history and
political science, of the birth and development of new, sovereign states at the
end of the 20th century, considered here in dynamic interaction with
the development of other states, leads us to a number of significant
conclusions.
The formation of interstate relations between the Republic
of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation is an example of synthesis of mutual
relations between two equal agents of international law. Considering the
unique situation and the entire context of ongoing processes, these relations
may be seen as a considerable contribution to the world political and juridical
experience.
An in-depth analysis of the causes of the disintegration
of the USSR was not the goal of the present study; besides, as President
Nazarbayev pointed out, it is difficult and even practically impossible to
understand everything that is connected with this event, which had such
stupendous consequences. However, it is possible to outline the objective
and subjective characteristics of this historical event.
Among the objective factors, economic causes must above all be
pointed out. The rigidly conservative plan-and-command system of the country's
economy, carrying the unbearable burden of the military-industrial complex and
serious structural unbalance, could not meet the real challenges of the present
level of development of the world economy - the postindustrial resource- and
energy-saving revamping of the economy and a breakthrough in information
technology. The inevitable nationality problems that accumulated in the
ethnically diverse Soviet Union called for considerable attention and timely
response to the challenges in this area. Perestroika suddenly made these
challenges topical almost overnight, but it couldn't provide an adequate
solution of the problems within the framework of a unified state structure. The
Novo-Ogarevo project proved Utopian in view of its goal of achieving a
consensus among nearly forty of its participants.
It is no secret that Russia played an
integrative role, being a kind of backbone in the genesis and architecture of
the unitary state. Considering its actual political and economic weight as the
most powerful republic of the Union, it is easy to understand the centrifugal
effect of the separation of the Russian Communist Party from the Communist
Party of the Soviet Union and the subsequent declaration of the sovereignty and
independence of the Russian Federation.
Among other factors, the subjective
element also played a role in the disintegration of the USSR. This element
could be analyzed in terms of persons and situations, but this is not of the
greatest importance for the purposes of the present study.
The dialectical development of
Kazakhstani-Russian relations in the process of the sovereignty of Kazakhstan
showed the correctness of the view of this process as a consequence of the
disintegration of the USSR and subsequent objective course of events in the
post-Soviet space. It is important to stress, in the context of our study, the
consistent efforts of President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan aimed at developing integrative
processes in the relations between Kazakhstan and Russia and in the
Commonwealth of Independent States.
In turn, the declaration of sovereignty was only the beginning
of a complex process of real sovereignty for the post-Soviet countries. Using
Kazakhstan as a model, we tried to analyze the serious and comprehensive work
that had to be done, and will still have to be done, to achieve a normal, civilized
entry of the Republic in the international community. The formation of the new
Kazakhstan statehood occurred against the background of an all-round political
and economic reform of society. Despite many complicated and contradictory
processes, the country's leadership endeavored therefore to act on the basis of
scientifically well-founded programs and concepts capable of providing the
Kazakhstan is with real reference points, the nearest tactical goals, and
general strategic objectives in this far from simple transition period.
The instituting of the post of president of the republic, the
elections of the first head of the Kazakhstan state, the constitutional reform,
the formation of a full-fledged parliamentarian system in the country were the
landmarks of the development of Kazakhstan as a sovereign independent state.
The parliamentary system developed in Kazakhstan as a
significant part of a general political reform; it went through many political
conflicts and problem situations.
The Supreme Soviet of Kazakhstan, consisting of 360
deputies elected in 1990, was far from perfect. It should be remembered,
however, that it was this parliament that adopted the most important state acts
on sovereignty, independence, and the presidency; under this parliament,
political reform began, and new market laws were discussed and adopted. The
deputies of this parliament nurtured the idea of a professional, compact, and
effective highest legislative organ of the country working on a permanent
basis.
The first professional parliament of Kazakhstan, numbering
177 deputies, was elected in March 1994. Its fate was contradictory and
dramatic. Though elected for a term of four years, this Supreme Soviet was not
quite ready for routine legislative work; besides, there were significant
violations of procedure during its election, and it was therefore dissolved on
a decision of the Constitutional Court in March 1995.
The country's political parties and movements took an
active part in the elections in December 1995 of a new parliament consisting
of two chambers, the Senate and the Mazhilis. Compact and professional, the new
parliament is, in the view of many jurists and politicians, quite capable of
fruitful legislative work and is absolutely in keeping with the democratic
principle of the division of powers.
The constitutional process in the republic also
developed in a dynamic way. This process consistently, step by step opened up
new areas of the rule of law, which corresponded to the vital periods in the
development of the republic. The path traversed from the first Constitution of
sovereign Kazakhstan, adapted in January 1993, to the Fundamental Law of the
country, adopted at a referendum in August 1995, is the path of progressive
dynamic legislative movement, of which many parameters corresponded to the
standards of developed democratic states.
Decisions on a wide range of problems in interethnic relations,
the dynamics of their development from the Forum of the Peoples of Kazakhstan
and the rise of national-cultural centers to the convocation of the Assembly of
the Peoples of Kazakhstan made it possible to conduct, in this most difficult
period in the building of the Kazakhstan state, all-round socioeconomic and
political reforms largely due to the preservation of interethnic accord, civic
peace, and goodwill of the peoples of Kazakhstan.
There is no need to emphasize the importance of Russia
as a magnitude of world order and Kazakhstan's closest neighbor. It is known
all too well what complex, and at times painful, political, economic, and
social processes took place, and are still taking place, in both states. During
the hundreds of years of cohabitation on vast adjacent territories, Russians
and Kazakhs have accumulated, despite certain differences in their culture,
traditions, and religion, a wealth of experiences in good-neighborly relations.
The historical community, interdependence, and inter-connectedness
of the two countries' economies form the basis of Kazakhstani-Russian
relations. Of great significance is the geopolitical aspect of the relationship
between Kazakhstan and Russia as the two biggest states of the region, which
largely affects the general climate of the Eurasian subcontinent.
President Nazarbayev repeatedly stressed that Russia is
our main strategic partner, and the special relationship with Russia helps in
the solution of the most important current and long-term tasks in the
development of Kazakhstan. It may be stated today that a qualitatively new
level of relations is now taking shape in the relations between Kazakhstan and
Russia, characterized above all by the beginning of a practical realization of
the high integration potential accumulated in the public consciousness of the
two countries. It is tills area in Kazakhstan's foreign policy, one that
provides the key to the formation of a new shape of the Kazakhstan state and
is closely connected with the policy of integration, that is an absolute
priority for Kazakhstan.
Under the new historical conditions, the stable and dynamic
development of Kazakhstani-Russian relations rests on a serious legal basis.
That basis is the treaty of friendship, cooperation, and mutual assistance
between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation dated May 25,
1992, as well as treaties and agreements signed in the course of the first
official visit of President Nazarbayev to Russia in March 1994 and his working
meeting with President Yeltsin in January 1995. As a follow-up to these
fundamentally important agreements, a whole series of intergovernmental
documents, agreements, and memorandums were signed which regulate the relations
between concrete ministries and departments.
However, the everyday practical experiences of bilateral
cooperation show that the joint efforts of the two countries must be constantly
kept up. Closer integration, especially in the economy and in the humanitarian
sphere, is necessary in the interests of democratic reform both in Kazakhstan
and in Russia. The process of further elaboration and coordination of new agreements
does not therefore cease. Recent years have seen continuous meetings of heads
of ministries and departments, government delegations, and groups of experts
to consider bilateral issues.
A considerable share of the economic potential of Kazakhstan
and Russia is employed in supporting production in the two countries. In recent
years, integration links have dynamically developed not only on the interstate
level but also between individual regions and enterprises. Besides, our
peoples are linked by centuries-old spiritual and cultural ties, as well as by
kinship and purely human relations, which must be constantly reinforced. That
is why the policy of integration is a principled line of conduct for Kazakhstan
leadership. "On the question of priorities," President Nazarbayev
commented, we must stress the vast importance of relations with the Russian
Federation. The effective factors here are the interdependence of the
economies, historical affinity, and demography. The two countries are simply
doomed to good-neighborly relations and collaboration. This collaboration must
be based on equal rights and mutual advantage, if we have in mind the strategic
goal of consolidating our common economic, defense, humanitarian, information,
and educational space.
Various aspects of economic and financial relations,
problems in state security and military-strategic cooperation, and
humanitarian problems may, as practical experience has shown, be positively
resolved only if mutual interests are taken into account, and if there is a
conscious desire for fruitful and mutually advantageous cooperation.
On March 28, 1994 a package of 23 treaties and agreements
were signed, five of them by the heads of state. These are, above all, the
treaties on further deepening of economic cooperation and integration, on
military cooperation, an agreement on the main principles of using the
Baikonur launching site, and a memorandum on the issues of citizenship and
legal status of citizens of the two countries.
These steps are in keeping with the integration efforts
of our states in the CIS framework, too. The ground has been laid for the
economic and settlement unions, and the Interstate Economic Committee - the
Economic Union's coordinating and executive committee - has begun to operate
in Moscow.
Other agreements, which significantly increase the horizons
of multilateral and bilateral cooperation, also promote the progress of the
Commonwealth toward new integration successes. Apart from the trade and
economic ones, agreements on cooperation in the sphere of defense also belong
here.
While noting the high level and rate of development of
Kazakhstani-Russian relations, it must be said that, both in previous times and
nowadays, unresolved problems naturally remain. There is a certain
stage-by-stage approach in foreign policy due to objective differences between
the two countries in their view of priorities in the phases of declaration,
establishment, and consolidation of sovereignty and independence.
The historical experiences of good-neighborly relations
between Kazakhstan and Russia and the solid relations of strategic partnership
in the present inspire confidence that the peoples of Kazakhstan and Russia
will enter the 21st century in a dignified manner.
LIST OF USED
SOURSES
1.Mansurov. T. “Relationship between
Kazakhstan and Russia”, 1998, /p.p178- 250/
2. Esengalin. N. “ External Economy”
1999, /p.p 12-45/
4. Luts Hoffmann. “ Kazakhstan During the
Transition”1998, /p.p202-235/
5. World Bank “Annual Report” 1998, /p.p
252-259/
6. World Bank “Annual Report” 2000,
/p.p153-159/
7. National Agency of Statistics
“Semiannually Report”2001 /p.p 159-175/
8. Hella Engerrer “Research of
relationship between Kazakhstan and Russia during the Transition” 1999 /p.p
25-50/
9. Katerina Dittmann “Tendency of
Economic Development of Kazakhstan”, 1998 /p.p 89-123/
10. Todaro “Transition in CIS countries
2001 /p.p 25-31/
11. Mishkin “Relation Between Russia and
CIS Countries 2001 /p.p 23-30/
12. Krugman “International Economies”
2001/2 /p.p 31-35/
13. EBRD “Annual Economic Report ” 2001,
/p.p 123-159/
14. Daniel Gross “Economic Transition in
Former Soviet Union” 1995 /p.p 145-160/