By Gemma Ferst

The lack of global leadership, what we at Eurasia Group call the G-Zero, has become a common refrain among international thinkers. But while others wring their hands, over in his Ak Orda (White Horde) palace in windswept Astana, Kazakhstan's President Nursultan Nazarbayev is planning to do something about it.

In February, he launched G-Global: a bid to hatch a new world order through the exchange of ideas. Styled as an "electronic Bretton Woods," G-Global will disseminate a plan for global reform in May. On hand to provide intellectual firepower is the Eurasian Economic Club, which, bringing together top economists from Tajikistan to Moldova, has already produced a draft.

The road to Utopia could be long, though. Although G-Global boasts 10,000 members from 28 countries, the vast majority (more than 40,000) of the posts on its forum emanate from a single doctoral candidate at Irkutsk State Technical University, formerly the Siberian Mining Institute. None of the 543 participants who signed up in the last month has so far weighed in, suggesting that global traction may still be a ways off.

Nazarbayev, a former metallurgist who has ruled his oil-rich country since Soviet times, has long been something of a blue-sky thinker. The absence of criticism from his citizenry, combined with plenty of petrodollars, has fed an apparently genuine belief that it is his destiny to solve more than just Kazakhstan's problems. Previous schemes include a new, as yet unrealized global currency dubbed the Akmetal and an annual Congress of World Religions in Astana. (Nazarbayev commissioned British architect Norman Foster to design the $58 million Palace of Peace and Reconciliation -- a pyramid housing an opera house in its basement -- just to host the event.) He also came up with the idea of a Eurasian Union, well before Putin took it up again last year. 

Nazarbayev cares greatly about how outsiders perceive him. He spends huge sums on Western public relations campaigns and has taken on Tony Blair as an adviser. Indeed, at 71, he is hoping to establish his legacy as an international statesman, peace-builder, and possible Nobel Peace Prize winner.

What G-Global really shows us, though, is what happens when authoritarian states try to innovate. Billed as a platform for free-wheeling discussion, G-Global comes with a code of conduct that is both granular and draconian. Contributors are forbidden to "maliciously non-adhere to the rules of the Russian language," for example, and are instructed to exclude any "political content" from their posts -- a practice that would seem to put the kibosh on serious attempts at revamping global governance.

This same autocratic reflex will hamper Kazakhstan's bid to become one of the world's most competitive economies by 2015. Nazarbayev refers to innovation as a "gigantic leap of the Kazakhstani snow leopard into the future" and has ordered the country's state-owned firms to modernize. But these firms -- even the start-ups -- are ruled with a centralized iron fist. And the government's response to unrest, notably the deadly violence in Zhanaozen last December, is always to tighten the leash.

With G-Global, Nazarbayev wants to "radically widen the number of participants in seeking anti-crisis solutions for the world." But he won't countenance a similar widening of Kazakhstan's own political process (letting the opposition stand in elections would be a start), which is why this particular snow leopard won't be influencing global leaders any time soon.

Gemma Ferst is an analyst in Eurasia Group's Eurasia practice.

By Eurasia Group's Eurasia practice

It looks like a relatively calm year for Eurasia, the area encompassing the former Soviet successor states at the crossroads of Europe and Asia. For the most part, the region is politically stable and countries will continue to see slow but steady economic growth. Russia and Kazakhstan face elections in 2012, but both are governed by well entrenched soft-authoritarian regimes. Ukraine is stabilizing, but risks remain in Georgia.

The ruling Putin-Medvedev tandem in Russia continues to govern with a minimum of internal friction, and the risk of social instability that rose following the financial crisis has now receded. Russian politics in 2011 will be defined largely by two events: the State Duma elections, scheduled for December, and the run-up to the presidential election set for March 2012. Russia's regional influence is strong enough that it may be exercised more subtly than in the past. Russia's GDP is expected to grow by 3 percent to 5 percent. Policy will be molded by two competing goals: the populist impulse to increase social and military spending ahead of elections and the finance ministry's push to slash deficits and impose fiscal discipline. To shrink its budget deficit, Russia will turn to international capital markets, raise taxes, and embark on a massive privatization program. In terms of foreign policy, Moscow will work to improve relations with the West, the United States in particular, as part of a general strategy to draw more foreign investment.

In Kazakhstan, aging President Nursultan Nazarbayev remains firmly in charge and is expected to run for reelection in 2012 -- unless a referendum is passed that extends his rule until 2020. But he will eventually need to groom a successor who is acceptable to the country's various elite groups. In the meantime, political and business leaders will throw a few more elbows without destabilizing the current system. Most forecasts put Kazakh growth between 3 percent and 4 percent for 2011. The country will probably follow Russia's lead on trying to shrink its budget deficit, raising taxes on oil and gas producers, and implementing measures to cut spending.

The implementation of IMF-mandated reforms in Ukraine may hurt the popularity of Viktor Yanukovych's government, but the country's perennially turbulent politics promise to stabilize next year. Popular anger could trigger protests against the government in 2011, and this could pose a longer-term threat to stability, particularly if Yanukovych's popularity declines and the opposition is able to regroup. It also presents a risk to the implementation of measures required by Ukraine's IMF loan. Regionally, there is also still a risk of a natural gas crisis between Ukraine and Russia that could affect supplies in 2011. Recently improved ties between Moscow and Kyiv are a major factor in containing the danger.

The major exception to Eurasia's general sense of tranquility is in Georgia, where relations with Russia remain tense. It's possible that another limited military flare-up between the neighbors could occur at some point in 2011. This would have an immediate negative effect on markets and the investment climate and cast a shadow over the rest of the region.

This post was written by analysts in Eurasia Group's Eurasia practice.

By Ana Jelenkovic and Willis Sparks

You may not have heard much about the growing violence in Kyrgyzstan, an impoverished and corruption-plagued former Soviet republic that's home to 5.5 million people and a delicate ethnic balance that has now completely broken down. But the deteriorating security situation and growing ethnic conflict there matters-for the people who live there, for the region, for Russia, and for the United States.

Kyrgyzstan has been in turmoil since April, when a bloody confrontation between an increasingly unpopular government and opposition activists ousted President Kurmanbek Bakiev, who is now in exile in Belarus. A government led by interim president Roza Otunbaeva took power, but it hasn't been able to establish full control in the south of the country, home to most of Bakiyev's supporters and much of the country's Uzbek minority.

There's a long history of ethnic tension in the region -- the current unrest is reminiscent of a 1990 bloody conflict which was resolved with Soviet troops -- and the power vacuum that emerged in the region in the wake of Bakiyev's ouster in April has helped reignite ethnic resentment.

Last weekend, Kyrgyz gangs, began attacking ethnic Uzbeks in house-to-house raids. The interim government was unable to contain the violence, which quickly spiraled out of control. Reports of large-scale rape and murder have drawn the attention of neighboring governments, international institutions, Washington, and Moscow.

Why should the world be watching more closely?

First, what began as thuggery reached ethnic cleansing levels of violence. While the situation appears to have calmed down somewhat after a nasty weekend, violence is likely to continue. Under attack, huge numbers of the country's Uzbeks have fled in fear for their lives. U.N. officials have called on Kyrgyzstan's interim government to provide refugees with safe passage. It remains unclear if state officials can or will do that.

Second, the current violence is starting to look a bit like the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico: It won't stop until someone stops it. The new Kyrgyz government appears to believe that only Russian soldiers can accomplish that and has called on the Kremlin for help. Though interim leader Otunbaeva today says that international peacekeepers are no longer needed, it is clear that international support is necessary to ensure the safe passage of refugees and the delivery of humanitarian aid to all communities in need.

Third, Russia remains reluctant to wade into a conflict that might turn into a quagmire. But the risks generated by violence so close to Russia's borders and the fear that the country could become a safe haven for anti-Russian militants/terrorists will probably compel Moscow to move forward.

Fourth, to persuade a reluctant Russia, the Kyrgyz foreign minister has now suggested that his government might be willing to revisit a decision to extend the lease on an airbase used by U.S. forces as a vital line of supply for NATO forces in Afghanistan. Moscow holds the cards and could insist that the Americans leave. In what has become typical for the provisional government, individual leaders are sending mixed signals. Otunbaeva, for instance, insists that the lease will be extended, and Russia and the U.S. share an interest in the stability of Afghanistan.  

Finally, the governments of the largest of the Central Asia republics-Uzbekistan and energy-rich Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan have done well for themselves politically and economically by playing Russia, America and China off one another. If Russian troops enter Kyrgyz territory in large numbers, that delicate balance could be overthrown in Russia's favor. At the very least, the leaders of countries neighboring Kyrgyzstan will have to weigh Russia's capacity for mischief with each decision of regional importance.

Things are looking up for those in Moscow who would like to rebuild Russian influence across former Soviet territory. A brief war with Georgia in August 2008 proved that Russia could assert itself with a minimum of lasting international outcry. The most recent presidential election in Ukraine produced a more Moscow-friendly government in Kiev. Now a Central Asian government is offering the Kremlin concessions in return for an armed intervention in its territory.

Obscure though the players may be, this conflict is one to watch.

Ana Jelenkovic is an analyst in Eurasia Group's Europe and Eurasia practice. Willis Sparks is a global macro analyst.