DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17978087
title: Public sources

description: This dataset contains 75 systematically collected official statements, speeches, policy decisions, and UN voting records from five Central Asian states (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan) regarding Russian foreign policy discourse, particularly following two critical junctures: the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The dataset supports the article "Between Moscow and Sovereignty: Comparative Analysis of Central Asian Leaders' Discursive Positioning Toward Russian Foreign Policy" which examines how Central Asian leaders respond to Russian normative narratives under conditions of asymmetric dependence through critical discourse analysis methodology.

DATA COLLECTIONPeriod: 2014-2024 (with select historical context from 2012)Primary Sources: Official presidential websites (akorda.kz for Kazakhstan, president.uz for Uzbekistan, gov.kg for Kyrgyzstan, president.tj for Tajikistan, gov.tm for Turkmenistan), Kremlin.ru for Russian baseline narratives, UN Digital Library for voting recordsSecondary Sources: Official press services, Foreign Ministry statements, verified news agencies (Gazeta.uz, Sputnik, RIA Novosti, TASS), international media (The Diplomat, Al Jazeera), analytical reports (RIAC, CABAR.asia)All sources are publicly accessible and part of the public domain.

DATASET STRUCTURETotal Records: 75 entries- Kazakhstan: 26 records- Russia (baseline): 12 records  - Uzbekistan: 12 records- Kyrgyzstan: 11 records- Tajikistan: 10 records- Turkmenistan: 4 records

Variables:1. Date: Date of statement/event (YYYY-MM-DD format)2. Country: State issuing statement3. Leader: Head of state or institutional actor4. Source_Type: Presidential address, press statement, bilateral meeting, UN vote, policy decision, media interview, legislative action, humanitarian action, expert analysis5. Event_Context: Specific occasion or forum where statement was made6. Theme: Primary thematic category (multipolarity, territorial integrity, neutrality, sanctions compliance, traditional values, etc.)7. Original_Text_Russian: Direct quotation or description in Russian8. English_Translation: English translation of key content9. Source_URL: Direct link to publicly accessible source10. Convergence_Divergence_Code: Analytical coding (Strong Convergence, Selective Convergence, Neutral, Strategic Ambiguity, Selective Divergence, Strong Divergence, Strategic Hedging, Forced Pragmatism, Strategic Silence, Institutionalised Non-participation)11. Notes: Contextual information and analytical observations

KEY THEMATIC CATEGORIES- Russian baseline narratives: Multipolarity, sovereignty/NATO threat, protection of Russian speakers, denazification, traditional values vs. Western liberalism- Central Asian responses: Non-recognition of territorial changes, neutrality declarations, sovereignty assertions, UN voting patterns (abstentions/non-participation)- Material decisions: Sanctions compliance/violations, humanitarian aid to Ukraine, arms export restrictions, economic dependencies- Legislative convergence: Adoption of anti-LGBT legislation modeled on Russian laws- Structural constraints: Military base dependencies, remittance flows, institutional memberships (EAEU, CSTO, SCO)

METHODOLOGYData collection employed systematic monitoring of official government sources during critical junctures (February 2014, February-November 2022, ongoing developments through 2024). Critical discourse analysis (Hansen 2006) was applied to identify patterns of convergence/divergence with Russian normative narratives. Each statement was coded for:- Degree of alignment with Russian discourse- Use of Russian terminology vs. alternative framing- Strategic silence or explicit positioning- Materialization in concrete policy decisions

Coding categories were developed inductively through comparative analysis, revealing five distinct discursive strategies: Kazakhstan's pragmatic distancing, Uzbekistan's confident neutrality, Kyrgyzstan's forced pragmatism, Tajikistan's strategic silence, and Turkmenistan's institutionalised non-participation.

RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONThis dataset enables:- Comparative discourse analysis of small state positioning under asymmetric great power pressure- Examination of relationships between discursive strategies and structural dependencies (economic, military, demographic)- Analysis of materialization of discursive positions in concrete policy decisions (UN votes, sanctions compliance, humanitarian aid)- Study of selective convergence patterns (divergence on territorial integrity, convergence on traditional values)

LIMITATIONS- Turkmenistan's extreme information opacity limits available public statements- Tajikistan's strategic silence creates data gaps on explicit positioning- Some statements represent indirect reporting by news agencies rather than verbatim official texts- Dataset captures official discourse only; does not include internal deliberations or non-public communications- Coding of convergence/divergence involves interpretive judgment based on comparative analysis