Manhandling and mediation: unpacking the repressive repertoire in Kazakhstan’s 2016 anti-land reform protests

Q1 Social Sciences Asian Security Pub Date : 2022-02-02 DOI:10.1080/14799855.2022.2034787
Vera Heuer, Brent Hierman
{"title":"Manhandling and mediation: unpacking the repressive repertoire in Kazakhstan’s 2016 anti-land reform protests","authors":"Vera Heuer, Brent Hierman","doi":"10.1080/14799855.2022.2034787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Regimes generally possess multifaceted repressive repertoires. When faced with societal challengers, a regime can utilize overt or covert forms of coercion as well as indirect forms of repression, known as channeling. Using case material from Central Asia, this article investigates the interplay between channeling and coercion in two contexts: 1) the regulation of civil liberties; and 2) Kazakhstan’s efforts to demobilize a protest wave. Through an overview of freedom of assembly laws across the region, we demonstrate that most Central Asian states mix coercive and channeling tactics to limit opportunities for contentious acts. We then analyze Kazakhstan’s repressive reactions to a single coherent national protest wave (the 2016 anti-land reform protest). Our analysis reveals that in response to the threat of these protests, the Kazakhstani regime utilized coercive and channeling tactics in roughly equal measure. We show that the most prominent form of channeling attempted was elite mediation, whereby officials personally encouraged protesters to relocate to non-public spaces and/or offered to articulate collective grievances to higher authorities in exchange for protest dispersal. Through evaluating the role of channeling in this wave we demonstrate how non-democratic regimes can maintain regime stability when challenged without relying solely on overt forms of coercion.","PeriodicalId":35162,"journal":{"name":"Asian Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2022.2034787","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Regimes generally possess multifaceted repressive repertoires. When faced with societal challengers, a regime can utilize overt or covert forms of coercion as well as indirect forms of repression, known as channeling. Using case material from Central Asia, this article investigates the interplay between channeling and coercion in two contexts: 1) the regulation of civil liberties; and 2) Kazakhstan’s efforts to demobilize a protest wave. Through an overview of freedom of assembly laws across the region, we demonstrate that most Central Asian states mix coercive and channeling tactics to limit opportunities for contentious acts. We then analyze Kazakhstan’s repressive reactions to a single coherent national protest wave (the 2016 anti-land reform protest). Our analysis reveals that in response to the threat of these protests, the Kazakhstani regime utilized coercive and channeling tactics in roughly equal measure. We show that the most prominent form of channeling attempted was elite mediation, whereby officials personally encouraged protesters to relocate to non-public spaces and/or offered to articulate collective grievances to higher authorities in exchange for protest dispersal. Through evaluating the role of channeling in this wave we demonstrate how non-democratic regimes can maintain regime stability when challenged without relying solely on overt forms of coercion.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
粗暴对待与调解:解读哈萨克斯坦2016年反土地改革抗议活动中的镇压手段
政权通常拥有多方面的镇压手段。当面对社会挑战时,一个政权可以利用公开或隐蔽的强制形式以及间接的镇压形式,即所谓的疏导。本文利用中亚的案例材料,从两个方面考察了疏导与强制之间的相互作用:1)公民自由的监管;2)哈萨克斯坦为平息抗议浪潮所做的努力。通过对整个地区集会自由法的概述,我们表明,大多数中亚国家混合了强制和引导策略,以限制有争议行为的机会。然后,我们分析了哈萨克斯坦对单一连贯的全国抗议浪潮(2016年反土地改革抗议)的镇压反应。我们的分析显示,为了应对这些抗议活动的威胁,哈萨克斯坦政权以大致相同的方式使用了强制和引导策略。我们表明,最突出的疏导形式是精英调解,即官员亲自鼓励抗议者迁移到非公共场所和/或提出向上级当局表达集体不满,以换取抗议活动的驱散。通过评估疏导在这一浪潮中的作用,我们证明了非民主政权在受到挑战时如何能够在不完全依赖公开形式的胁迫的情况下保持政权稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Asian Security
Asian Security Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊最新文献
Redefining NATO’s Indo-Pacific partnerships: cooperative security meets collective defence and deterrence Political regimes and self-reliance in the Indian arms industry Sailing close to the wind: Japan’s forward deterrence posture toward the Taiwan Strait A neoclassical realist analysis of the evolving Philippines–India defense partnership in the twenty-first century The dragon in central Asia: Is China’s increased economic involvement resulting in security gains?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1