The Risks of External Intervention in Ongoing Protests: Lessons from History

When considering ways to support protesters in Kazakhstan, it is crucial to understand the historical and geopolitical context. The recent involvement of Russian troops in Kazakhstan has shifted the landscape, making external intervention more complex and potentially harmful. Here, we explore the risks and draw lessons from past events, including those in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, which provide critical insights into the perilous nature of supporting rebel forces.

Russia’s Philosophy and Intervention in Kazakhstan

Russia's stance on government stability and authority is rooted in a philosophy that supports authoritarian regimes over anarchy. This perspective has been evident in its actions across the Middle East, where interventions often have unintended and often negative consequences.

For instance, in both Libya and Iraq, Russia supported governments backed by the United States, leading to civil unrest and anarchy. Moreover, in Syria, the Russian military intervention alongside the Assad regime has exacerbated the conflict, resulting in significant humanitarian crises. These interventions have also supported groups such as Al Qaeda and ISIS, which can hijack revolutions and destabilize regions further.

The Potential for Islamists to Hijack Protests in Kazakhstan

The history of extremist groups in the region, such as ISIS, highlights the potential for such organizations to hijack revolutionary movements for their own gain. In Kazakhstan, the fear of violent and radical elements taking advantage of the protests is a significant concern.

The methods used by these groups, such as the beheading of individuals, are reminiscent of the tactics used by ISIS. This reality underscores the importance of caution in any external assistance being considered for the protesters, as it could potentially escalate the conflict and bring in groups that would aim to control the situation in their favor.

History Repeats: The Case of Afghanistan

Forty years ago, the question of how to support the rebels in Afghanistan against a supportive Soviet government saw the US host and fund the Mujahideen. This intervention included providing Stinger missiles and other military aid. The outcome was a graveyard for the Soviets, with the Mujahideen gaining control and leading to the rise of the Taliban.

The Taliban's rule in Afghanistan saw a dramatic downturn in women's rights, education, and basic freedoms. The society devolved into a state where strict interpretations of Sharia law were enforced, including public amputations. The lessons from Afghanistan are stark and reveal the long-term ramifications of external support for rebel groups.

Lessons from Ukraine and Other Cases

Ukraine serves as another critical case study. The Maidan protests saw the attempted overthrow of a government, with external support leading to a de facto civil war and the rise of strongly authoritarian leadership. The failure of the revolution to bring about lasting democratic change highlights the risks associated with hasty and unsanctioned peace interventions.

In light of these historical experiences, it is imperative to consider the potential consequences of supporting pro-democracy protests in Kazakhstan. While it might be tempting to intervene to support peaceful and democratic movements, the history of external interventions in other regions suggests that such actions can have catastrophic and long-lasting impacts.

Conclusion: Mind Your Own Business

Given the complex and often volatile nature of these situations, the best course of action is often to maintain a stance of non-intervention. Supporting the legitimate government, as it has already made concessions to protestors' demands, might be a more prudent and effective strategy.

Western nations should focus on rebuilding and supporting stability without stoking flames of unrest. This approach fosters a more balanced and sustainable environment for democratic reforms to take root, without the risk of unintended and harmful consequences.