The youth is the future of any state. But this is usually remembered by politicians, with “sincere warmth” in their voices in the period of regular elections or speeches in front of a student audience.
However, there is practically no youth policy in the countries of Central Asia. Most often, those who are meant by the term “youth” are primitively used. This anglo-slang term most clearly conveys a coarse in form and cynical in essence method of using the state by young people. In one country - with an anachronistic agricultural holding (cotton harvesting and the like), in another - when creating crowd scenes at rallies, etc. In this case, a comparison of the basic laws by which the younger generations of fraternal Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan live is very significant.
So, for example, the Kyrgyz law “On the fundamentals of the state youth policy” of 2000 is much more specific than the more “fresh” law of 2004 - Kazakhstan “On the state youth policy in the Republic of Kazakhstan”. With all the external "glossy" and elegance of the wording, the Kazakh law is substantively poorer and more declarative. Most of the proclaimed tasks are in the nature of abstract humanism - the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of young people; the provision of assistance and social services; implementation of socially significant initiatives. But almost no word about the embodiment of all this in life. It is also interesting that the text of Kazakhstan law contains only 4 chapters and 20 articles that fit on 10 A4 pages. Only the largest strata of social relations in the field of youth policy are superficially regulated by the articles of the law: the competence of state bodies in its implementation; social and political rights of young people, job security and housing problems; state support of entrepreneurial activities of young people, young families; financial support of youth policy; youth participation in the implementation of youth policy, social services for young people; informational support and scientific substantiation of youth policy. The current law, in essence, is only a concept. In reality, the entire Kazakhstan youth policy is based on targeted programs, their implementation bodies are the youth policy department at the center of the Ministry of Education and Science and state youth funds in the field.
Kyrgyzstan has a more thoughtful approach to solving youth problems. The law has 6 chapters and 39 articles with enforcement mechanisms. He is more solid and according to the degree of social orientation.
Both laws are generally different and the main perspective - Kazakhstan declares “liberalism”, Kyrgyz - “paternalism”. Thus, Kyrgyzstan proclaims the creation of equal starting conditions for the young generation as the main priority, and the basic goals are upbringing, social development and the spiritual development of young people, the formation of optimal conditions for them. That is, the state does not hesitate to talk about the "fatherly care" of young people, even if it looks somewhat Soviet-Asian.
Another very important difference is the age limits of youth laws in two countries. If in Kazakhstan, young people are persons up to 29 years old, then according to Kyrgyz legislation, citizens up to 35 years old are considered young. On the one hand, the Kyrgyz version is more democratic because it is intended for a much larger target group, but on the other hand, it stimulates dependent moods up to middle age, which is contrary to world practice and the socio-economic realities of Kyrgyzstan. It should be remembered that the law on youth is social and contains a number of fixed social benefits for the young generation, which are endowed with people who, because of age criteria and personal development, should be perceived as mature citizens of their country.
It should also be noted that in the Kyrgyz youth law, much attention is paid to funding mechanisms, and measures of state support for the younger generation are clearly marked. For example, according to the law, young families and citizens are granted long-term concessional loans for the construction or purchase of housing up to 75% of its value (art. 16); and on "acquiring a household subsidiary in the amount of up to 5 times the amount of the annual minimum wage with a maturity starting from the fifth year." There are serious benefits for youth entrepreneurship, when creating public associations, guarantees of protection of the social rights of various categories of young people - students, schoolchildren, etc. are actually enshrined. The implementation of these provisions, of course, for the most part, is not conducted. And this is a common problem of both states. In this regard, it is very appropriate to quote the statement of the English historian and political figure Thomas Macaulay "A good government is not the one that wants to make people happy, but one that knows how to achieve it."
If we compare the actual youth in the two countries, there is a noticeable big politicization and hyperactivity in Kyrgyzstan. It is enough to go to any Kyrgyz political forum on the Internet to see a vigorous emotional discussion of all the problems of Kyrgyz society and international relations. And for the guys from Kyrgyzstan there are no taboo topics in politics, they speak quite openly and substantively about everything. In terms of the number of political parties and politicized organizations per capita, Kyrgyzstan in the CIS is probably behind only Ukraine, many times ahead of any Asian republic.
This is how Anna Kalashnikova, a representative of the Eurasian Youth Union, explains this phenomenon: “In Kyrgyzstan, the state actually cares little about young people who are left to themselves. And therefore, the political activity of the young generation of Kyrgyzstan can be explained by two main reasons: the inability to spend time interestingly, since the government bodies are inactive in this regard without providing the youth with absolutely nothing; The second reason is the poverty of a very large percentage of the Kyrgyz people, including the young population. In addition, there is a lack of confidence in the authorities on the part of young citizens of Kyrgyzstan, since there has been no change for the better since the arrival of the new head of state. It is for this reason that young people desperately rush into politics, take part in rallies, protest rallies - the desire to change the situation for the better makes them act actively. ”
According to human rights activist Bareta Yergaliyeva, the youth in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan are absolutely the same. Another thing is who is leading and educating the younger generations of our countries. Kyrgyz youth are purposeful, they want to get a quality education, to participate in politics and determine the course of their country. But inside the country is torn apart by cruel confusion that traumatizes young people, does not allow them to realize themselves and find some interesting niche in life. The clan contradictions, the threat of disintegration to the north and the south put pressure on the youth of Kyrgyzstan, which again aggravates the mass psychological “trauma”.
In Kazakhstan, society and young people are mostly apolitical, because the pressing problems are not as acute as those of the fraternal people. Kazakhstani youth is relatively inert, showing, however, activity in rest and periods of political climaxes.