14 OKA Natsuko Transnationalism As a Threat to State Security? Case Studies on Uighurs and Uzbeks in Kazakhstan Transborder ethnic groups are often considered to be a threat to the se- curity of states in which they reside. In particular, if an ethnic minority in a “host state” calls for help from a state in which their co-ethnics dominate (a “kin state”), this, it has been argued, might lead to conflict between the host state and the kin state, as the latter tries to meddle in the internal affairs of the host state to protect its ethnic kin, or even claim sovereignty over their settlements. Post-Soviet Kazakhstan provides a variety of examples for the study of interrelationship between host state, minority, and ethnic homeland. 1 Among ethnic communities straddling Kazakhstan’s borderlands, the ex- tant studies have focused almost exclusively on the Russians, the largest non-titular nationality in the republic. In the years following the end of the Soviet order, their potential call for unification with the Russian Federa- tion was seen as the greatest danger to Kazakhstan’s integrity. The Rus- sians, however, did not take to the streets with separatist demands. The passive attitude by the Russian population has been explained by several 1 For definition of ethnic homeland and kin state, see Charles King, “Introduction: Na- tionalism, Transnationalism, and Postcommunism,” in Charles King and Neil J. Melvin, eds., Nations Abroad: Diaspora Politics and International Relations in the Former Soviet Union (Boulder: Westview Press, 1998), p. 12. 351 OKA Natsuko factors, among others, large out-migration to Russia, weak and diffused ethnic identity that made mobilization difficult, and Russia’s vocal but not necessarily substantial policy toward its compatriots abroad.2 While considerable attention has been paid to the Russians, there re- main only a limited scholarly account on Kazakhstan’s other transborder nationalities. This paper focuses on the Uzbeks and the Uighurs, Turkic Muslim communities who have historically grown a strong attachment to their settlements within Kazakhstan, and examines why, despite pre- dictions by some observers, these ethnic communities have not become a threat to the host state. As discussed below, the two groups’ relation- ships with homelands have developed quite differently under the Soviet rule and since Kazakhstan’s independence. By comparing them, the pa- per also highlights the varied nature of the relationship between Ka- zakhstan, its minority, and their ethnic homeland. Minority‐Homeland Relationship One of the most important characteristics of the Soviet state structure was its multilayered federalism based on ethnicity. In the USSR, ethnic- ity was territorially institutionalized; each republic was perceived as a homeland for a particular nationality, in which its language and culture were promoted and ethnic cadres and intelligentsias were cultivated.3 Needless to say, however, not all Soviet nationalities were fortunate to have their own national republic, and even if they did, not all of their members resided in it. 2 Neil Melvin, Russians Beyond Russia: The Politics of National Identity (London: Pinter, 1995); Neil J. Melvin, “The Russians: Diaspora and the End of Empire,” in King and Melvin, Nations Abroad, pp. 27–57. 3 For detailed accounts of institutionalization of ethnicity under the Soviet rule, see Terry Martin, The Affirmative Action Empire: Nations and Nationalism in the Soviet Union, 1923–1939 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001). On Soviet institutional legacy for ethnic mobilization during perestroika and nation building in newly independent states, see, for example, Rogers Brubaker, Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Dmitry P. Gorenburg, Minor- ity Ethnic Mobilization in the Russian Federation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). 352 Transnationalism As a Threat to State Security? How did the Soviet breakup affect lives of non-titular minorities who found themselves on the “wrong” side of the border or did not have “their own” republic from the beginning? Focusing on the cases of the Uzbeks and the Uighurs in Kazakhstan, I analyze how their relation- ships with ethnic homelands have changed before and after the end of the Soviet order. Uzbeks The number of the Uzbeks in Kazakhstan is 370,000, or 2.5 percent of the country’s whole population (based on the 1999 population census). 89.6 percent of them reside in the South Kazakhstan oblast, in which the Uz- beks amount to 16.8 percent of the oblast’s population. Among its lower administrative units, areas in which Uzbeks are most concentrated are the city of Turkestan (42.7 percent), the Sairam raion (61.3 percent), and the oblast’s capital Shymkent (15.0 percent). From Shymkent to Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan, it is less than a two hour drive (120 kilometers), while it is a one hour and forty minute flight to Almaty, a former capital and the biggest city of Kazakhstan. The Uzbeks located in the south have developed a strong sense of rootedness to their settlements and consider themselves indigenous to the region. Interestingly, this claim seems to be accepted by the authorities of Kazakhstan,4 who have been asserting since independence that the current borders of the republic “correspond completely to the historically formed area of habitation of the Kazakh people.”5 And yet, the Uzbeks have never demanded that their settlements be incorporated into Uzbekistan’s territory or a territorial autonomy be established within Kazakhstan. Most probably, during the Soviet period, the Kazakhstan’s Uzbek community did not feel that they lived outside of their homeland; they 4 On the official website of the Assembly of the Peoples of Kazakhstan [http://www.assembly.kz/ (accessed June 23, 2005)], the Republican Association of Social Unions of the Uzbeks Do‘stlik declares that the Uzbeks are an indigenous population (ko- rennoe naselenie) to the South Kazakhstan oblast. In my conversation with officials from the oblast administration, they also supported this point of view. 5 Natsional’nyi sovet po gosudarstvennoi politike pri Prezidente Respubliki Kazakh- stan, Kontseptsiia formirovaniia gosudarstvennoi identichnosti Respubliki Kazakhstan (Almaty, 1996), pp. 25–26. 353 OKA Natsuko belonged de facto to Uzbekistan’s cultural, social, and economic space. In 1936, an oblast Uzbek newspaper printed in Shymkent in the 1920s was abolished.6 An Uzbek theater in Kazakhstan—another important component of the Soviet nationalities policy—was also closed in 1941.7 This lack of cultural institutions, however, did not cause serious incon- venience to the Kazakhstani Uzbeks. They subscribed to newspapers from Uzbekistan, enjoyed Uzbek TV and radio programs broadcast from there. Upon graduation of an Uzbek school in Kazakhstan, those who wished to receive higher education in their native language went to Tashkent or other cities within the neighboring republic. Many students remained there and joined the ranks of Uzbekistan’s party apparatus. Thus, if Uzbeks wanted to enjoy privileges as members of the titular ethnicity, they could move relatively easily to neighboring Uzbekistan, without cutting themselves off from their hometown. The collapse of the Soviet Union gradually but completely changed this situation. Although visa-exempt agreements are still in force between Ka- zakhstan and Uzbekistan, presenting an international passport is not enough to cross the border. According to the residents in the borderland area, it is necessary to certify a reason for visiting Uzbekistan; such regula- tions, they complain, have been intensified since the late 1990s.8 The growing distance between the Uzbek communities in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan is symbolized by the reopening of an official Uzbek newspaper, theater, and the establishment of a new university for Uzbek students within Kazakhstan. A state-owned oblast newspaper Janubiy Qozoghiston was launched in April 1991, shortly before the Soviet breakup.9 In March 2003, the Oblast Uzbek Drama Theater was opened 6 Author’s interview at the editorial board of the newspaper Janubiy Qozoghiston, March 9, 2005. Throughout the Soviet period, however, there were two Uzbek local newspapers printed in Turkestan and the Sairam raion. 7 The theater had been established in 1934. Author’s interview with Z. Mominjanov, Director of the Uzbek Drama Theater, March 16, 2005. Kazakhstanskaia pravda, December 23, 2003. Here and below, non-Russian names are Latinized from Cyrillic script using the Rus- sian spelling. 8 It is not unusual for people to cross the border at locations other than a checkpoint. Il- legal border crossing “business” is also rampant. 9 The newspaper holds this name since 1998. In addition to official ones, several inde- pendent Uzbek newspapers have been issued since the collapse of the Soviet Union. 354 Transnationalism As a Threat to State Security? in the Sairam raion.10 Although not state-sponsored, the Uzbek-Kazakh Engineering-Humanities University was established in the South Ka- zakhstan oblast in 1999.11 According to an Uzbek school principal in the Sairam village, in re- cent years almost all of the pupils go on to university in Kazakhstan.12 One of the key issues here is the alphabet for the Uzbek language; in Uzbekistan, the Latin alphabet was introduced in 1993. Although the Cyrillic is still widely used, school education has completely shifted to the Latin script. Meanwhile, in