Central Asia has escaped Soviet domination, but the newly
independent states have replicated communist repression. Nations
like Kazakhstan never really moved forward. Now it is retreating
on religious as well as political liberty. The U.S. and Europe
have to decide whether to allow the Kazakh government to take
over leadership of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE).
The Majilis, or Kazakhstan’s lower house, has passed legislation
punishing unregistered religious organizations, targeting
churches (particularly Catholic and Orthodox) which cross
territorial boundaries, effectively barring proselytizing,
censoring religious materials, and requiring that children
produce written permission from their parents to attend religious
events. The Majilis acted shortly after OSCE representatives
visited Astana to discuss the bill. Spokesman Jens-Hagen
Eschenbaecher plaintively explained: “We expressed our hope that
our comments on the draft would be fully taken into account. We
obviously hope that this still will be the case.”
Good luck.
Kazakhstan is not the only “stan” moving towards greater
repression. Kyrgyzstan’s parliament has approved new legislation
restricting religious liberty. Tajikistan’s legislature is
considering a similar measure limiting freedom of worship and
conscience. Neither Turkmenistan nor Uzbekistan protect this most
fundamental liberty which Americans take for granted. The attack
on religious liberty “is a regional trend,” says Felix Corley,
editor of Forum 18, an Oslo-based group which monitors religious
repression.
But what makes Kazakhstan stand out is the fact that the
government is set to take over as OSCE chairman in 2010. The
vision is jarring: since the Cold War the OSCE’s mission has
emphasized promoting freedom in the newly liberated nations. As
the Institute on Religion and Public Policy recently pointed out
in a letter to the OSCE’s governing Ministerial Council: “Moving
ahead with the Kazakh Chairmanship in 2010 without any changes to
this dangerous law undermines the human rights basket of the OSCE
and the political commitments that make the OSCE a guarantor of
fundamental rights.”
More than the OSCE’s reputation is at risk. Giving Astana a pass
by allowing it to take up such a high-profile position would
encourage other would-be persecutors. International embarrassment
remains a powerful tool to deploy against violators of human
rights. The West must consistently demonstrate through its words
and actions that religious liberty is no less important than
political freedom.
Kazakhstan is a largely Muslim state, though ethnic Russians and
smaller groups of Ukrainians and Belarusians trend Orthodox. Like
those of most authoritarian states, the Kazakh constitution
formally provides for freedom to worship. But Astana fears
non-establishment groups outside of its control.
Churches must register with the central authorities as well as
local governments. Registration can be denied or suspended.
Lacking government approval, churches cannot even hold services,
let alone conduct financial activities or engage in media
promotion. The United States Commission on International
Religious Freedom notes that “some Protestant groups and other
groups viewed by officials as non-traditional have experienced
long delays” in winning official registration. Astana is
particularly sensitive about foreign proselytizing. Reports the
State Department: “All literature and other materials to be used
to support missionary work must be provided with the registration
application; use of materials not vetted during the registration
process is illegal.”
Registered groups generally operate without restriction. Anyone
else, however, is a government target. The authorities routinely
break up home churches — today’s analog of the First Century
church — and deport any foreigner with the temerity to engage in
religious activity without declaring himself to be a missionary.
President Nursultan Nazarbaev has denounced missionaries, calling
for legislation “to stop destructive phenomena such as religious
radicalism and extremism.”
OFFICIAL KAZAKH ATTITUDES toward religious liberty turned more
hostile last year. The Justice Ministry declared that
“transferring to other religious faiths represents treason to
one’s country and faith.” Attacks on unregistered groups
increased. Jehovah’s Witnesses and Hare Krishnas suffered
significant harassment even after registering. Then came
President Nazarbaev’s outburst. After that the official media
broadcast and published stories critical of non-traditional
groups. Notes the State Department: “Several religious freedom
advocates maintained that the negative media stories were
sponsored by the government as part of its program to educate the
public about the purported dangers of religious extremism in the
country and to lay the groundwork for amendments to the religion
law.” Forum 18 speaks of “a climate of officially-incited
intolerance of religious minorities.”
Now the latest bill is moving forward. The requirements are
nominally objective, but almost certainly would sharply restrict
the free exercise of religious faith. The legislation, reports
State, would “establish more restrictive procedures for
registering religious organizations; require all existing
religious organizations to reregister; prohibit smaller groups
from preaching or teaching outside of the group, producing
religious literature, or maintaining worship facilities open to
the public; and require local government authorization for the
construction of a religious facility.” Penalties for violating
religious restrictions would be enhanced. Forum 18 observes that
“the authorities seem particularly keen to deprive minority
religious communities of places of worship and other buildings.”
It is hard to imagine parliamentary approval of the new
legislation without President Nazarbaev’s support, but he still
could veto the measure. As Joe Grieboski, president of the
Institute on Religion and Public Policy points out, the proposal
“is completely inconsistent with fundamental human rights as it
contravenes the principles of equality and non-discrimination.”
Even if the legislation becomes law, Kazakhstan won’t be the
worst religious persecutor: countries like North Korea and Saudi
Arabia are in a category of their own. Nevertheless, the measure
represents a major step backwards.
And religious liberty should not be seen as merely an
afterthought for a liberal society. Observes Grieboski: “[A]s
history has shown us, religious freedom has direct bearing on
every aspect of society. Freedom of religion or belief is
arguably the most fundamental human right.” A government
unwilling to respect freedom of conscience is unlikely to respect
human life and dignity. Indeed, protection of religious liberty
represents the proverbial canary in the mine, signaling a
government’s (and sometimes a people’s) willingness to protect
political and economic freedom.
Safeguarding religious liberty may never be the highest priority
of Washington. But in the case of Kazakhstan America and Europe
can easily strike a blow for freedom of conscience. The OSCE, to
which the U.S. belongs, should announce that Astana will not
chair the organization unless the Nazarbaev government rejects
the new restrictions and reverses the larger hostile environment
behind them. If the Western allies instead reward Astana, notes
Grieboski, they risk compromising “the integrity and authority of
the OSCE and its dedication to religious freedom and
corresponding human rights.”
(Mr. Bandow is the Senior Fellow in International
Religious Persecution at the Institute on Religion and Public
Policy.)
