Kazakhstan’s multi-vector policy with regard to the international relation’s theories

The President of Kazakhstan Qassym-Jomart Toqayev approved Kazakhstan’s new Foreign Policy Concept in March 2020, which is based on the principles of multi-vectorism, pragmatism, and proactivity. This aims to help Kazakhstan develop friendly, equal, and mutually beneficial relations with all states while also participating in interstate organizations and international organizations of practical interest to Kazakhstan. Since its independence from the former Soviet Union, Kazakhstan has employed a policy of multi-vector diplomacy, involving interactions with a variety of countries. Multivectorism was a necessary strategy in its early years, but it has evolved to empower Kazakhstan to effectively protect its independence and negotiate its relationship with the great powers on its borders and further afield. The multi-vector foreign policy, which is described as “a foreign policy evolving within a framework based on a pragmatic, non-ideological foundation,” has been pursued by Kazakhstan. The first President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev stated that a multi-vector foreign policy entails the development of friendly and predictable relations with all governments that play a significant role in international affairs and are of real practical relevance to the country when describing the objectives of the strategy. Kazakhstan has pursued a multi-vector approach, focusing on maintaining partnerships with Russia, the European Union, China, the USA and other nations, as well as prioritizing economic relations. As a result, international community found that Kazakhstan’s multi-vector foreign policy is effective in safeguarding the country’s autonomy and attaining its objectives. The experience of Kazakhstan poses a theoretical question. Kazakhstan is a state with moderate regional influence and moderate international recognition. It has managed to maintain good relationships with its neighboring Great Powers such as China and Russia. We witness comparable behavior from the EU and the US. The EU is Kazakhstan’s largest foreign investor and economic partner, and the government sees the EU as a key partner in the country’s multifaceted foreign policy. Energy resources are Kazakhstan’s main export to Europe, and the country has an Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with the EU. Kenneth N. Waltz American political scientist and educator views power and state conduct in a way that the classical realists do not. The absence of central authority, is for K. Waltz the ordering principle of the international system. Power was both a means and an objective for Morgenthau, and rational state behavior was just the course of action that would accrue the maximum power. Neorealists, on the other hand, believe that each state's first concern is its security, and so focus on power distribution. Methodological rigor and scientific self-concept also distinguish neorealism from classical realism (Guzinni 1998). Waltz insists on empirical testability of knowledge and falsificationism as a methodological ideal, which, as he admits, can only be applied to international relations in a restricted way. Realism is a logical place to start when trying to understand multivectorism, as it involves the involvement of great powers. The balance of power theory argues that states form alliances to protect themselves from the potential dominance of another state. The development of liberalism leads to the belief that through better communication, institutions, and interdependence, a more peaceful world could be achieved. A lot of the misunderstandings of liberalism come from the way it is being used today. For example, the idea of human rights is closely tied to liberalism. From the history we know, that there were times in the past when Kazakh society was enjoying liberalism as the word ‘kazakh’ commonly means “liberal”, “free” and “independent”. Liberalism is skeptical of authority based on tradition and instead favors authority that is justified by reason and/or contract. It opposes despotism and later totalitarianism as forms of government in which the private and public spaces are merged, and it supports the separation of the private from the public space. Liberalism is against the concentration of power, and it favors a separation of powers – executive, judiciary, and legislative. Hedley Bull, Australian scholar believes that an international society exists when a group of states come to recognize a shared set of interests and values and agree to abide by common rules in their dealings with one another. In this theoretical framework, “integration” means the ability of states to recognize and abide by common rules of interaction, as well as share common responsibilities for the functioning of the institutions they build together. There has been agreement among English School thinkers that an international system represents a weak form of an international society. For example, ES researchers attempted to demonstrate the validity difference between system and society, pointing out the difference between the international system with a low degree between state interaction (a weak form of internationalsociety) and the international system in which interstate interaction reaches a significant degree (strong form of international community). Moreover, international scholars have used the terms ‘thin’ and ‘thick’ to express the difference between a ‘weak’ and a ‘strong’ form of international society. When charting international relations theories against individualist/holist and materialist/idealist axes, Alexander Wendt placed constructivism and the English School in the same holist/idealist quadrant, subsuming all theories in this quadrant under the generic term of ‘Constructivism.’ The Frankfurt theorists argued that social theory was insufficient to explain the turbulence of political factionalism and reactionary politics that characterized liberal capitalist democracies in the twentieth century. Critical of both capitalism and Marxism–Leninism as conceptually rigid forms of social organization, the School’s critical theory study revealed alternate paths to achieving a society’s and nation’s social growth. Their focus on the critical component of social theory stemmed from their attempts to overcome the ideological limitations of positivism, materialism, and determinism by returning to Kant’s and his successors’ critical philosophy in German idealism – particularly Hegel’s philosophy, which emphasized dialectic and contradiction as intellectual properties inherent in human grasp of material reality. Each actor’s security in a region interacts with the security of the others. Within a region, there is typically a high level of security interdependence, but not between areas, which is what distinguishes a region and makes regional. Because realism fails to account for the myriad of mechanisms through which Kazakhstan and other small powers can engage the Great Powers, due to its narrow focus on military power and economic prosperity. At the same time realism is the most persuasive theory for understanding the activities of Great Powers. It is critical in light of the rapidly changing global geopolitical scenario, as well as the threat posed by our “friendly partners” and their openly aggressive and hostile policies. It should be Kazakhstan’s securitization issue in the toxic and wild environment, both geopolitically and regarding climate matter as in accordance to the constructivism the world surrounding us depends on our perception. Here, it will be relevant to mention Aron’s hypothesis that “the states would still require traditional nuclear forces”. Central Asia is a sub/global, regional international society in the sense of the English School theory of international relations, with a thin development of intra state relations ranging in location from imperial to independent on Watson's spectrum, set within a broader context of a thicker global society that includes well- integrated and functioning organizations such as the United Nations. Simultaneously, it is critical to consider the current problems posed by many philosophies, especially idealism. It is my firm belief that a complicated and individual approach to each scenario leads to the resolution of a wide range of challenges, and this concept is reflected in my master research work to indicate the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape. In it is turn, the concept will have to be closely connected with the constructivist politics that accounts on identity running on ideology taking the notion of liberalism, but more than just it applying the way in which states perceive other states to be based on materialism as realism which recognizes materials base of reality. Even though, we need to be in consent with the constructivist view that social reality is a product of human consciousness, which is created and constituted through knowledge that forms meaning and also shapes the categories understanding and action. Finally, constructivism provides with better explanation for the social relationship structure with it is fundamental believe that human beings are social beings, and we would not be human if not being made by social relationships. Multi-vectorism began as a necessity in Kazakhstan’s early years, but it has since evolved to enable the country to effectively maintain its independence and negotiate its relations with large countries on its borders and beyond. Based on this, it’s important to take into account diplomatic activities in the energy sector within the context of several theories in synthesis with the multi-vector policy. Adilbek Ishanbekuly