The uproar in Kazakhstan did not come out of the blue.
There have been numerous smaller protests on various occasions in recent years, which have shown that the official image of a nation living in harmony did not correspond to reality.
However, none of these movements posed any real danger to those in power, who always prevented the formation of serious opposition movements at an early stage.
Kazakhstan still looked calm and stable when the country celebrated thirty years of independence in December.
In a regional comparison, Kazakhstan did well
The events of the past few days now dramatically confirm the old insight that rulers who suppress criticism also deprive themselves of the ability to correctly assess the mood of the population. Just as in Belarus Alexandr Lukashenko had not noticed before the 2020 election how much his country's society had changed, the authoritarian regime in Kazakhstan was apparently not aware of the pent-up resentment just waiting for a reason to do so To break the path. It wasn't completely wrong for the Kazakh leadership to portray their country as a success story: In a regional comparison, it was doing well.
That this is now in danger is of course primarily the fault of the rulers.
The violence of the riot reflects their failures in modernizing the country and their corruption.
Rescuing the regime through Russian intervention will prolong and exacerbate Kazakhstan's problems.
And at the same time the deployment of Russian troops is changing the international situation.
It is unclear how the escalation in Kazakhstan will affect the tensions with Ukraine and the upcoming talks between Russia and the West: is the Kremlin temporarily moderating because it needs its forces in a sensitive area for Russia's security?
Or does he come to the opposite conclusion: now even more so?