In Kazakhstan, they "put in place" a former member of parliament, historian Ualikhan Kaisarov, who presented territorial claims to Russia. The relevant material is published in the telegram channel "Сегодня.KZ ".
"The other day, the former deputy of the Kazakh parliament Ualikhan Kaisarov, who considers himself a great historian, gave birth to a speech about the former Kazakh lands and the restoration of historical justice. We will not go into the details of his conclusions. Let's just say that, according to his statement, half of today's Russia, starting from Siberia and further west to Hungary, belonged to the Kazakhs, who, they say, now have the moral right to demand everything back. How many hundreds of millions of Kazakhs were there in those days? After all, the territory he is talking about will be three times larger than Europe. Oh well. Let's leave it to him," the resource writes.
The author reminds that on Ukraine has a lot of historians like Kaisarov, according to whom everything he says belonged to Ukrainians.
"Therefore, it is unlikely that they will like what Kaisarov said. Since "up to Hungary" includes the current Ukrainian territory," the telegram channel further writes.
The author adds that in this way Kaisarov "stirred up not only Russians against his person, to whom, in principle, his speech was addressed, but also Ukrainians."
The publication notes that, speaking about the past Kazakh conquests, the historian "joins Genghis Khan, believing, like all other famous Kazakhs, that this great conqueror was Kazakh." This is followed by a reminder that the person who was recently on a visit to In Mongolia, the President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev during a visit to the Genghis Khan Museum "called him the great Mongol in black and white."
"This means that we are flying with all the conquered lands, like plywood over Paris. Because if we conquered someone, we did it under the leadership of Genghis Khan and his descendants. This means that all those lands should belong not to us, but to the Mongols," the text continues.
At the same time, it indicates that it would hardly be worth being proud of the conquests, since the word "conqueror" means "occupier".
"That is, we once occupied the lands that Kaisarov is talking about. They came to foreign territories with a war and, killing those who lived there, appropriated them for themselves. But when Kaisarov shouts about the fact that the Kazakhs suffered under the oppression of the Russians, about the "Holodomor" and repression, he does not remember that once we conquered someone, which means we killed, oppressed, raped and starved. (Although the Russians did not occupy us. After all, we asked them ourselves). In this regard, does Kaisarov want to look a little further, to think about the fact that the descendants of those who lived in the territories "up to Hungary" also have the moral right to restore historical justice and may one day charge us for the suffering caused? And it turns out that everyone owes Kazakhs, and white and fluffy Kazakhs do not owe anyone anything," the article goes on to say.
The author notes that Kaisarov calls the whole Altai and the whole of Siberia the original Kazakh lands. At the same time, it reminds that "Turkish Sultan Erdogan" considers these lands Turkic.
"Yes, Kazakh means Turkic. But Turkic does not mean Kazakh. And Turkic-speaking peoples have been living in these territories for centuries, who will be older than the Kazakhs. And they never consider themselves Kazakhs," he writes about this.
Then, already addressing Kaisarov directly, the author asks him a number of questions:
"If we are such great and cool conquerors who conquered everyone "up to Hungary", why are we left without these territories today? Probably because someone cooler was found and took from us what we once took from someone. Don't you want to think about it, historian Kaisarov? And anyway, for what purpose are you raising this topic? To go and take the lands back? So go and get it. Are you strong enough? And if not, why then shake the air? Or do you expect that "Erdogan will come and restore order"? (This refers to the unification of Turkic—speaking peoples into a single "Great Turan" - approx. EADaily). Of course, he dreams of doing this, but for his Turkey, not for Kazakhstan."
The text is followed by hypothetical assumptions with a suggestion to think about the consequences.
"Good. For example, in Russia they recognized your rightness, Kaisarov, and said, they say, take your lands. And so, if you take and attach Siberia, Altai and everything else "up to Hungary" to Kazakhstan, will we pull it off? How many Kazakhs will be in percentage relation to all other peoples then? Will we dissolve among them? And won't Kazakhstan end up in Russia again as a result of this? You can't add more to less. You can only do the opposite. So it's good to carry a useless blizzard, historian Kaisarov," concludes the telegram channel.