Political integration of ethnic minorities in post-Soviet Central Asia

2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3389/fpos.2025.1710013
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The study aimed to analyze the political integration of ethnic minorities in the post-Soviet states of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan), taking into account modern national policies and socio-political processes. The work used a mixed design. The quantitative stage included a survey of 320 respondents, which made it possible to assess indicators of trust and political effectiveness. The qualitative stage consisted of 40 semi-structured interviews aimed at revealing the mechanisms of integration of statistical patterns. The study indicated that electoral participation is the dominant form of political activity; however, non-electoral practices (membership in parties, public initiatives) are much less common. In all countries, national elections attract more respondents than local ones, but the gap is smallest in Kazakhstan (7%), where trust in institutions is higher. In Kyrgyzstan, there is stronger civic engagement outside elections, which correlates with the presence of horizontal networks. In Uzbekistan, integration rates are generally lower due to institutional closure and risks of self-censorship. Analysis of identity profiles revealed a monotonic gradient of trust: integrated ( M ≈ 53) > assimilated ( M ≈ 49) > separated ( M ≈ 41) > marginalized ( M ≈ 36). The combination of ethnic and national identities works as a “bridge of trust” to institutions.