JAN. 27 2017 (The Conway Bulletin) — In an unusual step, Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev took to the airwaves to announce constitutional changes, suggesting the septuagenarian has fired the starting gun for his succession. Proposed amendments to Kazakhstan’s constitution were received with scepticism by the Kazakh people; yet they include changes that will prove significant.

Planned limits on presidential power have little immediate impact as Nazarbayev’s personal, informal influence determines the rules of the game. However, in the post-Nazarbayev era, formal institutions are likely to play an increasingly influential role.

Nazarbayev is setting the scene for his successor to be less powerful. This likely reflects recognition on his part that no individual has the authority or legitimacy to succeed him as a strongman (or –woman) ruler. While the proposed strengthening of parliament will not result in a multi-party democracy, a form of pluralism already exists with elite factions supporting differing policies.

Verisk Maplecroft considers intra-elite differences the only plausible source of a more competitive political environment in the immediate post- Nazarbayev era, but they equally raise the potential for instability. Elite factionalism is currently mediated by the president, but with a less powerful successor facing a potentially more vocal and influential government and parliament, the scene is set for more overt elite clashes.

In the absence of strong state institutions, clashes over policy – or of personalities – risk undermining government stability. A particular cause for concern is therefore Kazakhstan’s weak rule of law, specifically the little emphasis Nazarbayev put on the importance of the judiciary in refereeing the balance of power between different branches of government.

A more complex collective system of government would be a step-change in the political landscape for businesses after a quarter of a century of

relative stability. Collective government implies less clarity around who the power brokers are, particularly as the system is established and elite jostle for power.

When the time comes, navigating Kazakh politics will, in all probability, prove challenging. Policy and political volatility is bound to increase without a single power broker to mediate between different factions of the ruling elite.

By Camilla Hagelund, senior Europe analyst at risk consultancy Verisk Maplecroft

ENDS