Numerous social media posts echoing the demand for Trump’s “attention” toward Kazakhstan have circulated online.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Following the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, global attention has turned to the question of who U.S. President Donald Trump’s “next target” might be. Washington’s blatant disregard for international law once again demonstrates the United States’ self-appointed role as a global judge and executioner.

According to Trump’s own statements, “options” such as Mexico, Colombia, and Greenland are allegedly on the table. Yet amid these discussions, an unusual voice has emerged from Kazakhstan:

“Трамп, Қазақстанға назар сал.”
(“Trump, pay attention to Kazakhstan.”)

This phrase—roughly translated as “Trump, focus on Kazakhstan” or “Pay attention to Kazakhstan”—has been turned into a social media campaign by a segment of the Kazakh opposition. Far from being a mere protest slogan, the call reflects a politically dependent and passive mindset that seeks solutions to domestic political issues through U.S. intervention.

The message openly implies that U.S. President Trump should subject Kazakh leader Kassym-Jomart Tokayev to the same fate as Maduro—namely, abduction by a foreign power. Attempting to legitimize the forcible detention of a country’s leader under the banner of “democracy” lays bare how the concept of human rights is being cynically instrumentalized. The campaign, accompanied by various photomontages, is being promoted by members of the Kazakhstan-based “Atajurt Kazakh Human Rights Initiative.”

Founded around 2017, Atajurt initially emerged as a volunteer human rights movement focusing primarily on alleged rights violations against ethnic Kazakhs and other Muslim communities in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. While the organization defines itself as human rights–oriented, critics in Kazakhstan and across the region—particularly those opposed to U.S. influence—have long accused Atajurt activists of being pro-Western and of advancing American geopolitical interests. The selective invocation of human rights—raised only when it aligns with Western strategic priorities—has only reinforced these criticisms.

The campaign addressing Trump was launched by Serikzhan Bilash, one of the organization’s founders and a well-known civil society activist. Bilash’s rhetoric stands in stark contradiction to any claim of political independence or national dignity.

Bilash was detained in 2019 on charges of inciting ethnic hatred, later left Kazakhstan, and ultimately settled in the United States. From there, he promoted the campaign on social media with the following message:

“Trump, pay attention to Kazakhstan!!!
Write this sentence on a white piece of paper, take a photo or video, and share it on social media!!!”

Appealing to Washington—particularly to a leader notorious for interventions and regime-change operations—to shape Kazakhstan’s political future reveals both political desperation and deep-seated inconsistency within segments of the Kazakh opposition.

The illustration shared by Bilash features the campaign’s main slogan alongside Kazakhs in traditional attire holding the national flag, accompanied by the word “Democracy.” Yet invoking “democracy” rings hollow when viewed against the backdrop of America’s destructive legacy in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Venezuela.

Another prominent figure among pro-Western Kazakh “human rights” circles, Margulan Nurdangazyuly, has also been highly active on social media throughout the campaign. His posts further blur the line between human rights advocacy and explicit calls for foreign intervention.

Nurdangazyuly shared dozens of photos bearing the campaign slogan, including one in which Tokayev’s image was digitally superimposed onto a photograph of Maduro after his abduction by U.S. forces. Turning the kidnapping of a head of state into propagandistic or humorous visual content starkly illustrates how ethical boundaries are abandoned in the name of political messaging.

Despite being one of the campaign’s leading voices addressing Trump, Nurdangazyuly also shared an image stating, “The people of Kazakhstan will arrest Tokayev ourselves.” This contradictory stance—simultaneously calling for U.S. intervention while invoking “national will”—stands out as a clear example of political hypocrisy.

Numerous social media posts echoing the demand for Trump’s “attention” toward Kazakhstan have circulated online. Collectively, these posts indicate that a segment of the opposition prefers appealing to power centers in Washington rather than engaging their own society.

The campaign has failed to generate significant resonance within Kazakhstan, and no official response or sanction has been issued by Kazakh authorities regarding the posts. In this sense, its overall impact appears limited.

Nevertheless, such initiatives by self-described human rights activists lend credence to the frequently raised—and frequently denied—accusations of pro-American alignment. Entrusting the resolution of domestic political issues to a power whose record is marked by coups, invasions, and regime-change operations undermines both the political legitimacy and moral coherence of any opposition movement. The expectation of “external intervention,” constructed through such actions, ultimately calls into question the credibility of opposition forces—regardless of geography.