No surprises here. Kazakhstan voted and Nazarbaev cleaned house, receiving about 91% of votes in the preliminary count. But of course the real winner isn’t Nursultan Nazarbaev…
Nazarbaev’s victory was more decisive than most observers had predicted. Shortly after the announcement of his victory, Nazarbaev told a rally in the capital Astana that his reelection to another seven-year term is “a victory for the country, for all Kazakhs.”
“The people voted for our country’s stability, for our nation’s unity, for our state’s modernization, for the improvement of people’s lives, for the future of our children and grandchildren. I consider it a victory for the Kazakh people. I thank all those who voted for me yesterday,” Nazarbaev said.
The CIS has wonderful things to say about the vote.
Rushailo announced that his team determined that the Kazakh election was fair. “The state electoral bodies that organized elections in the Republic of Kazakhstan ensured the realization and protection of the electoral rights of citizens in the presidential elections of Kazakhstan,” he said. “International observers from the CIS concluded that Kazakhstan’s presidential elections of 4 December 2005 were held in accordance with the country’s legislation. We assess them as free, open, and legitimate.”
The OSCE commented, saying the election lacked meaningful competition and calling on Nazarbaev to open political life in Kazakhstan. Their most recent report on the election, covering October 17 through December 5, can be found here.
Though not directly related to this election, the US defended OSCE election monitoring from Russian attacks.
For more election news, visit KZ Blog for a news roundup and report on the election atmosphere and neweurasia for a number of posts, including the Caspian Information Centre’s take on the election.
UPDATE: The OSCE report is here (PDF). Thanks, David!
UPDATE II:
- Putin send felicitations.
- RIA commentator Dmitry Kosyrev argues that, with the exact same leader that it’s had since independence, Kazakhstan is clearly on the verge of tremendous change.
- China weighs in
- The NYT has a good summary report, noting that 75% would have been believable for Nazarbaev.
{ 4 trackbacks }
{ 1 comment }
The actual OSCE report (rather hidden away) is much more critical than Rupel’s statement. See
http://www.osce.org/documents/odihr/2005/12/17232_en.pdf
The CIC report is pretty embarrassing, even if you’re a Nazarbaev fan, but what can you expect from Cecil Parkinson?
Comments on this entry are closed.