On 5 November 2025, the President of Kazakhstan, Kasym-Zhomart Tokayev, signed a decree approving the main principles, values, and directions of the country's domestic policy. The document is the first systematic act defining the ideological framework of state policy.
State Advisor Yerlan Qarin, in his recent article on the Kazakhstanskaya Pravda website, elaborated on the essence of these principles, placing particular emphasis on digital ethics and the fight against information manipulation. These provisions are especially relevant amid the increasing instances of public initiatives being used for self-serving purposes, where carefully planned influence campaigns are disguised as civic activism.
The adoption of the decree can be described as a timely step, which, for the first time at the state level, clearly formulates the concept of 'domestic policy', its goals and directions. An important distinction of the current approach is the rejection of costly special projects and PR campaigns — the document serves as a conceptual basis for systematic governance without excessive spending and formalism.
FROM INFO-EXTORTION TO ASTROTURFING
Special attention should be paid to the section of Qarin's article concerning digital ethics. The State Advisor directly named the problem of 'info-extortion', where the activities of certain bloggers and activists turn into blatant blackmail. According to him, such practices arose from a 'policy of pandering' to destructive elements, which gave rise to various sorts of pseudo-public figures and 'puppet oppositionists'. Their scheme is primitive: artificially inflate topics, then offer to delete the posts for a fee.
However, the problem is far broader than simple information blackmail. Over the past few years, the editorial board of FBRK has systematically tracked a more complex phenomenon — astroturfing, where carefully planned influence campaigns are hidden under the guise of public initiatives. An analysis of high-profile events over the last two years demonstrates a persistent trend of using public hearings and rallies to achieve hidden objectives.
MANIPULATION THROUGH THE 'ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA'
A telling situation occurred in the village of Maraldy in the Kurchum district of the East Kazakhstan Region in 2023. Local residents opposed the construction of a factory and a gold mining quarry, despite the obvious prospects for the population. FBRK materials recorded signs of incitement from activists based in the capital, and one of the speakers demanded that each person be given 20 million tenge during construction — a demand clearly detached from reality.
A similar picture was observed in the autumn of 2024 ahead of the referendum on the construction of a nuclear power plant. Some environmentalists used paid promotion of content on social networks. Targeted advertising of posts appeared on Instagram from well-known eco-activists, including representatives of the 'Social and Ecological Fund', which works closely with the American organisation Crude Accountability.
This raises a legitimate question: whose funds did the eco-activists use to pay for content promotion, especially considering that in September 2023, the Ministry of Finance published the so-called 'register of foreign agents' — a list of individuals receiving money from foreign states?
ECONOMIC DEMANDS AS A PRESSURE TOOL
Equally telling are cases of manipulation through inflated economic demands. In December 2023, around 500 workers of the company West Oil Software in the village of Zhetibay went on strike, demanding a salary review, even though the average salary in the company exceeded 700,000 tenge.
In May 2024, in Kulsary, residents demanded 400,000 tenge per square metre for a flooded house — a sum significantly exceeding the market cost of construction.
In November 2024, in Zhanaozen, the chairman of the trade union, Tagan Koshanov, who was receiving over 2 million tenge, used threats to call workers to strike, manipulating information about double taxation, which was ultimately refuted by a representative of Ozenmunaigas JSC.
SIMULATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The culmination was the public hearing on the adjustment of the Astana general plan on 22 July 2025. The event turned into a simulation of democracy: strange behaviour by 'participants' who left the hearing immediately after registration, the collection of ballots before the discussion ended, and formal answers from the speakers. An elderly participant summed up the general sentiment: 'Pointless discussions lead nowhere. This is all a sham.'
These examples share a common pattern: ordinary people are used unwittingly, with their emotions skilfully played upon to provoke a negative reaction in a desired direction. The consequences of such protests often do not benefit the participants, but instead harm them and the future development of their localities.
WHEN PUBLIC ACTIVITY WORKS CONSTRUCTIVELY
However, it would be wrong to assert that all public initiatives are manipulation. There are examples of constructive civic activity, where organisations genuinely defend the interests of the population and achieve real results through systematic work.
A telling example is the work of the public association 'Menin Elim Dala', which systematically addresses issues of construction development in Astana and the preservation of the ecology of Maly Taldykol. Their approach is fundamentally different from the cases of manipulation described above.
The association's activists work through official channels: they participate in meetings with the city akim, interact with state bodies, and provide specific proposals for solving problems. The results of the association's work are concrete and measurable.
The difference between constructive activity and astroturfing is obvious. Genuine public figures work transparently, achieve specific results, and cooperate with the authorities to solve the real problems of citizens. Manipulators, on the other hand, exploit people's emotions, put forward unrealistic demands, and often pursue hidden objectives unrelated to the well-being of the population.
THE STATE'S INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE
Recognising the scale of the problem, the state is forming a systematic response. Qarin notes that a Centre for Combating Disinformation has been established within the structure of the Central Communications Service, similar to those existing in many countries. Its task is to identify and neutralise manipulation and protect the media space. The centre's effectiveness will depend on its ability to detect not only primitive info-extortion but also complex astroturfing schemes.
The State Advisor outlined 'red lines' in public discussions on inter-ethnic, religious, linguistic issues, and foreign policy. This is not censorship, but a call for common sense. Parliament is considering amendments regarding administrative liability for the dissemination of illegal content that threatens stability.
Qarin rightly points to the problem of 'cancel culture', where, under the influence of emotions, people support calls for boycotts without understanding the substance. This creates an atmosphere of aggression and psychological violence. A blind fight against injustice can breed even greater injustice.
DIGITAL ETHICS AS A FOUNDATION FOR RESILIENCE
Protecting stability cannot be reduced to bans. It is necessary to form a new digital ethics — a culture of responsible consumption and dissemination of information. It is important for citizens to develop critical thinking, verify sources, and analyse the reliability of data.
In conditions of political pluralism and freedom of speech, the formation of a value system becomes an evolutionary process. Straightforward propaganda is ineffective. Kazakhstan is developing a culture of behaviour through a consistent policy aimed at engaging citizens in constructive processes, rather than stoking conflicts.
The new decree and the state's position create the necessary foundation for countering manipulation. It is important that these principles become a real tool for protecting society from those who seek to use democratic institutions for selfish purposes. At the same time, the state must support constructive public initiatives that genuinely work for the benefit of citizens.