Turan Research Center

Turan Research Center Research Fellow Andrei Kazantsev-Vaisman spoke with DKNews about the significance of President Tokayev's participation in the inaugural session of the Board of Peace in Washington, Kazakhstan's potential role in Gaza's humanitarian recovery, and the strategic dimensions of Kazakh-American economic diplomacy. Below is an English translation of his comments, which appeared in the original Russian-language interview.

On the significance of Tokayev's participation in the Board of Peace:

"The participation of Kazakhstan's President in the inaugural session of the Board of Peace is of fundamental importance both for the country itself and for the broader architecture of international relations. First and foremost, it is a step that strengthens Kazakhstan's positioning as a responsible middle power — one capable of acting not as an object but as a subject of global politics. The President's presence at such a forum demonstrates Kazakhstan's readiness not only to support peacekeeping initiatives but to participate in their institutional design.

Second, this is a logical continuation of the country's multi-vector foreign policy. For three decades, Kazakhstan has consistently advanced an agenda of trust, disarmament, and diplomatic mediation — from the closure of the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site to initiatives within the UN and regional cooperation formats. Participation in the Board of Peace reinforces this image and solidifies the country's reputation as a constructive and predictable partner.

For the Board of Peace itself, such a participant also introduces important nuances. Kazakhstan's example, if followed by others, would strengthen the collective agency of 'middle powers' as an independent group of actors. As President Tokayev himself has noted in his publications, in conditions of transformation of the world order, it is precisely such states that are capable of advancing ideas of inclusive security, sustainable development, and multilateralism without being directly drawn into the geopolitical rivalry of great powers."

On the invitation from President Trump and Kazakhstan's niche:

"The invitation from President Trump can be read as a diplomatic signal of Washington's desire to broaden the circle of international partners involved in finding paths toward de-escalation of the conflict in Gaza — and potentially, in the longer term, in addressing a wider range of issues. In conditions of a protracted global crisis and high polarization of the international community, the United States has an objective interest in engaging states with a reputation as neutral and constructive actors.

Kazakhstan fits this context very organically. The country consistently adheres to a policy of multilateralism and balance, building pragmatic relationships with Western states, with the countries of the Islamic world, with Russia, and with China. This creates potential for a dialogue function — Kazakhstan is perceived as a moderate partner not associated with a confrontational agenda.

Additionally, the personality of Kazakhstan's President himself can contribute to the development of this new format. As is well known, he is a very experienced diplomat with solid experience in the UN system. Accordingly, his personal competencies can make an additional and serious contribution to the advancement of international dialogue and the cause of peace."

On Kazakhstan's potential humanitarian contribution:

"Kazakhstan's potential contribution to ensuring sustained humanitarian support for the region can be assessed as significant and in demand, particularly given the deficit of trust among key international actors.

First, Kazakhstan has a reputation as a state that adheres to a balanced and neutral foreign policy line. The republic maintains good relations with Israel and the United States and recently, as is known, endorsed the Abraham Accords framework. At the same time, Kazakhstan has very good relations with Arab and other Muslim countries. This position allows it to build working contacts with various parties to the conflict and with a broad circle of international partners. In the humanitarian sphere, this is especially important: access to affected populations, coordination of deliveries, and agreement on monitoring mechanisms all require mutual trust and political impartiality.

Second, the country has practical experience participating in international peacekeeping and humanitarian initiatives under the UN aegis. Kazakh peacekeepers and humanitarian structures have been deployed in various regions, building institutional competence in coordination, logistics, and interaction with multilateral missions. Most importantly, Kazakh peacekeepers have gained experience with a presence in Syria, Lebanon, and in the mission monitoring the ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. They are even present in such hotspots as the Golan Heights.

Third, Kazakhstan's experience in intercultural and interreligious dialogue could serve as an important resource. In the long term, humanitarian support must be accompanied by programs for restoring interreligious and interethnic peace. Here, Kazakhstan — as a state with a multi-confessional and multi-ethnic society that has developed its own unique model of tolerance — can offer positive solutions."

On the Tokayev-Trump personal dynamic:

"Personal contacts between Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and Donald Trump can certainly play a role in Kazakh-American cooperation within the new organization. Donald Trump's diplomatic style has traditionally been characterized by pronounced personalization. Therefore, establishing a trusted communication channel between the presidents can facilitate discussion of sensitive issues. For his part, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev is an extremely professional diplomat who excels at establishing channels of international dialogue.

However, it is important to understand that personal relationships between leaders do not replace institutional foreign policy mechanisms. They can accelerate decision-making, create an additional layer of trust, or ease tensions, but sustainable agreements still rest on the work of diplomatic teams and interstate procedures."

On economic diplomacy and strategic trust:

"Tokayev's meetings with the heads of major American companies during his visit to the United States should be viewed not only as an economic event but as an important element of strategic diplomacy. When a relationship features a stable economic interest, dialogue acquires a more predictable and pragmatic character. The economic dimension is especially important in the context of Trump's views on foreign policy. He is, above all, a businessman by personal experience. His approach to foreign policy has traditionally relied on the logic of favorable deals, investment agreements, and trade balances.

For Kazakhstan, this logic largely resonates with its own foreign policy philosophy. The Kazakh model of multi-vector diplomacy was built from the outset on pragmatism: strengthening political ties for the purpose of economic development, diversifying partners, and creating stable channels of interaction with all global centers of power. Engagement with American business strengthens not only the investment climate but also strategic trust — since major corporations, which have particular influence on the Republican administration but can also influence Democrats, become additional stakeholders in stable bilateral relations. Moreover, it is very important for Kazakhstan to maintain a balance between relations with the United States and relations with Russia and China. If the emphasis is on business and diplomacy rather than military-political alignment with Washington, this allows Kazakhstan to sustain its balanced multi-vector policy. In the context of Kazakhstan's multi-vector foreign policy, it is also important that active diplomatic consultations are underway between Moscow and Washington, so the very fact of the visit to the United States again reflects the logic of 'both-and' rather than 'either-or' that has always distinguished Astana's foreign policy."

Read the full interview on DKNews (Russian).

Andrei Kazantsev-Vaisman is a Research Fellow at the Turan Research Center.