Well, it's called a shadow on a fence. Why invent some "Russian interests in Central Asia", and even blame them on the Russians?
It is as if Central Asia has no interests in the Russian Federation.
So, the Russian language in Kazakhstan is primarily a matter of internal Kazakh policy, and only then of external Russian policy.
We, citizens of Kazakhstan, write and speak Russian. Why drag Russia in and play with your post-imperial phantom pains?
And in fact, Russia, together with Kazakhstan, and what is typical, on the initiative of Kazakhstan, also promotes the Russian language in the international arena, and therefore in the post-Soviet arena.
My post was not about who is better and who develops their language worse, Moscow or Astana. And it certainly has nothing to do with the fact that Kazakhstan is deliberately pushing the Russian language backwards, building its "own identity", as Mr. Parshan tries to twist it. For sane experts have long known that you cannot build your development and your identity on the humiliation of others. That's what I'm talking about.
My point is simple. The president of Kazakhstan proposes, for example, to create a national digital database. And he adds: Kazakh language. I somehow do not believe that the executors of this initiative will exclude Kazakh books, newspapers or archives from those in the Russian language. The correct and correct formulation of the task is digitization of the entire cultural and linguistic heritage of the country, regardless of language. I guess that's what the president meant.
Because something else is exactly what is called linguistic fascism. Surely we will not digitize only the Kazakh language, and condemn everything else to digital death or a digital concentration camp?
This attitude is unacceptable and incomprehensible neither in Astana nor in Moscow.
Although, judging by the comment above, there are probably handsome guys who still dream of promoting Kazakh, having run over Russian.