I am not sure why this is downvoted, because this is what happened in Iran, the islamists took advantage of the 1979's revolution.

This glosses over the historical context of the Iranian revolution. Iran's leftist, democratically-elected prime minister (who nationalized the oil fields in 1951 that were originally taken by British Petroleum) was overthrown for a West-backed dictatorship in Iran in 1953 that lead to the mass killings of leftists and pro-democracy advocates. The 1979 revolution led to the restoration of elections.

Good writeup here: https://www.npr.org/2019/01/31/690363402/how-the-cia-overthr...

"The 1979 revolution led to the restoration of elections."

Elections where candidates are extensively vetoed by the clergy before being allowed (or not) to run. Even if the population wanted to reduce the role of religion in politics, it isn't allowed to elect people whom the clergy deems too secular.

“Restoration of elections” in the same sense as Russia’s elections.

I thought that the former Soviet countries were more moderate Muslims.

Generally yes, but it has been a long time since 1990 and no corner of the Sunni world was entirely spared from Wahhabi influence, which brings radicalism.

You do not need 51 per cent of jihadis to have serious problems. 10 per cent is probably destabilizing enough.

The ones in Central Asia, yeah.

That is a rather simplistic take on things in my opinion.

Kazakhstan is NOT an "muslin republic", never was, and the current unrest has absolutely nothing related to religion.

I called it "old muslim Soviet republic", which means it was a soviet republic of muslim majority.

And I didn't say the protests have anything to do with religion. I said extremists in those countries will take any chance to make a move. Remember the Arab spring? It started as a protests against governments and it didn't end well for some countries.

The thing is, back when Kazakhstan was a Soviet republic, Kazakhs (and other muslims) only accounted for about a half of population, the other half was made of christian Russians, Germans and Ukrainians. [1]

Now demographics has changed and the role of Islam risen, but it is still very far from being a concern, compared to other Central Asia republics:

"As did its predecessor, the 1995 constitution stipulates that Kazakhstan is a secular state; thus, Kazakhstan is the only Central Asian state whose constitution does not assign a special status to Islam." [2]

Of course, some extremist do exist in Kazakhstan (what country they don't?), but their influence is very minor - this is indeed very secular country and not only in constitution, - and I do not think anything close to Arab spring is possible. My biggest concern is Russian intervention, frankly.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Kazakhstan

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Kazakhstan

Well, the Russian are already there.

I don't think anything like the Arab spring is possible there either, but the islamic groups that wander around can do a lot of damage anyway. That was my only thought, I hope they don't manage to do anything.

Interesting. I always thought muslin was weaved into the fabric of Kazakhstan.

Kazakhstan in recent years has somewhat strengthened the link with Turkey.

Russia would intervene if necessary.

Seemingly already getting ready: https://twitter.com/GDarkconrad/status/1478718070080299012

Or maybe genocide and "re-education" camps are bad, no matter the context.

Of course. But it is also important to verify such claims -- especially coming from sources with a tremendous conflict of interest -- and not presume guilt.

Or do we suspend justice when we perceive a party to be the current Big Bad?

Is that an argument against "don't believe what people claim about Chinese abuse of Muslims in Xinjiang" or against "don't believe claims that China is just defending itself against Muslim terrorists, supported by foreign imperialists, in Xinjiang", or both?

My argument is literally as stated. Verify media claims and come to your own conclusions. Be aware of what interests are at play and be skeptical of them.