Kazakhstan International Affairs - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 1395

EAEU

Growing Trade Disputes Test the Eurasian Economic Union

Trade disputes within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) are as old as its creation. Restrictions on the import and export of certain goods have long been common practice. However, analysts increasingly warn that tensions have reached a point at which the organization risks losing its core function, ensuring the free movement of goods across borders and maintaining simplified conditions for migrant workers. Mounting Restrictions The EAEU currently comprises Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia. Economic integration among several post-Soviet states began in 2000 with the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC), formed by Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan. Uzbekistan joined in 2006, but suspended its participation in 2008. The foundation of this organization was the Customs Union agreement, intended to abolish customs duties among member states. The structure of the integration project has since evolved. The EAEU treaty was signed in 2014 and entered into force on January 1, 2015. Tajikistan and Uzbekistan did not join, while Armenia became a member in 2015. More than two decades after the first integration agreements, however, many of the bloc’s original promises remain only partially fulfilled. Experts have long argued that protectionist measures remain widespread within the bloc and that full freedom of movement for all categories of goods, including strategic products, has not been achieved. They also point to pronounced economic asymmetry: Russia accounts for approximately 85–87% of the union’s combined GDP, whereas Kazakhstan accounts for approximately 9–10%. Russia’s significantly larger population and political influence have further reinforced perceptions of structural imbalance. Moscow is now preparing new regulatory measures affecting its partners. From April 1, 2026, a national system for confirming the arrival of goods will be introduced for road imports from EAEU countries. According to the Russian authorities, shifting key control procedures to the pre-border stage is intended to improve transparency in the administration of indirect taxes. Previously, such checks were conducted after goods entered the country through desk and field audits. At the same time, Russia has intensified selective customs controls on its borders with Kazakhstan and Belarus, officially citing efforts to combat counterfeit goods. Particular scrutiny is being applied to product labelling and accompanying documentation. Controls were tightened last summer, when mobile checkpoints were established along the Kazakh-Russian border, followed by the inspections of vehicles leaving Belarus in the autumn. Full-scale checkpoints are now operating on the Kazakh-Russian border, while a simplified regime linked to the Union State and EAEU agreements continues to apply on the Belarusian-Russian border. Logistics industry representatives report that stricter controls on the Kazakh border have significantly increased transit delivery times. Carriers often face lengthy delays at checkpoints even when their documentation is in order. According to Alexandra Pokumeiko, head of a freight-forwarding department, the changes have created uncertainty in delivery schedules along Belarus-Russia transport corridors and on transit routes through Russia to Kazakhstan. The growing number of administrative restrictions has begun to spill into specific sectors of the economy, triggering retaliatory measures between member states. Escalating Tensions in the Automotive Sector A new dispute...

Middle East Crisis

Kazakhstan Condemns Missile, Drone Strikes from Iran on UAE

Kazakhstan has condemned aerial attacks “from Iranian territory” on the United Arab Emirates, in remarks that emphasized de-escalation and diplomacy while refraining from directly criticizing the Iranian government. “President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev condemned the missile strikes and drone attacks from Iranian territory on the United Arab Emirates, which resulted in numerous casualties among the population and damage to civilian infrastructure,” according to a statement posted by Aibek Smadiyarov, spokesman for Kazakhstan’s presidency. “The head of state considers such actions unacceptable, as they lead to a dangerous escalation of the armed conflict in the Middle East,” said the statement, which was released on Tuesday. “In Kassym-Jomart Tokayev's opinion, the use of diplomatic means is the only correct method of resolving all disputed international issues.” The statement maintained a diplomatic tone and emphasized de-escalation, differing from a statement from Tokayev several days ago in which he welcomed comments by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian about ending Iranian missile and drone attacks on neighboring countries. However, attacks by Iran on some U.S. allies in the region have continued in retaliation for intense U.S. and Israeli air strikes on Iran that began on February 28. Without providing evidence, some Iranian officials have claimed that some strikes on neighboring states, including a recent drone attack on Azerbaijan, were false flag operations aimed at undermining the Iranian government. Pezeshkian’s apology for Iranian attacks raised questions about the cohesion of Iranian government narratives following the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the first day of the war. His son, Mojtaba Khamenei, was appointed to replace him. Central Asian countries have been trying to maintain a balance in their public pronouncements on the war, maintaining ties with the Iranian government while expressing support for Gulf Arab countries that have been targeted by Iranian missiles and drones. Central Asia has trade ties with both sides.

Organization of Turkic States (OTS)

Informal OTS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting Tests Limits of Turkic Coordination

Escalating tensions linked to the widening conflict in the Middle East have tested the political cohesion of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), according to Kazakh political commentator Dzhanibek Suleyev. Recent incidents affecting both Azerbaijan and Turkey — including drone strikes in Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic and a missile intercepted by Turkish air defenses — have raised security concerns across the wider region. Suleyev argues that developments of this scale might normally prompt an urgent summit of heads of state. Instead, Turkey convened an informal meeting of foreign ministers and senior diplomatic representatives from OTS member states. The gathering took place on March 7, when officials convened at the invitation of Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. According to Turkish media, ministers later met with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan during their visit. Speaking to The Times of Central Asia, Suleyev drew attention to how the meeting was covered in the media of Central Asian member states. “In the Uzbek press, coverage was limited, and even on the website of their Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there is not a single word about the informal summit of OTS foreign ministers. Kazakhstan, moreover, was represented not by Foreign Minister Yermek Kosherbayev but by his deputy Alibek Bakayev. Kyrgyzstan’s Foreign Ministry issued four notes about the trip of its minister Jeenbek Kulubaev to Istanbul, three of which were devoted to the summit, but without any particular details,” Suleyev said. Kazakhstan’s Foreign Ministry published a short summary of the meeting, noting in broad terms that representatives discussed cooperation among Turkic states and regional developments. According to Suleyev, the joint statement adopted after the meeting was difficult to find outside of Azerbaijani media. One of the few outlets to publish the text in full was Azerbaijan’s APA news agency. Much of the statement focused on the incidents affecting Azerbaijan and Turkey, stressing that “any threat to the security of OTS member states causes concern for the entire Organization… The ministers strongly condemned the attacks carried out from the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran against the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of the Republic of Azerbaijan, including strikes against civilian facilities and the territory of the Republic of Turkey,” the statement continued. “The rest of the statement boils down to destabilization in the Middle East could lead to a global economic crisis, the Palestinian conflict must be resolved taking into account UN resolutions, and so on,” Suleyev told TCA. One notable event during the meeting was the foreign ministers’ reception by President Erdoğan. Official summaries released by participating governments described the discussion in diplomatic terms. “Kazakh sources wrote that ‘prospects for the development of cooperation within the framework of Turkic cooperation were discussed,’” Suleyev said. Kyrgyz statements used similar language, stating that the “President of Turkey… noted the importance of regular dialogue on current regional and international issues and expressed interest in further developing multilateral cooperation within the framework of the Organization.” “In short, these are streamlined diplomatic formulations without specific details,” Suleyev said. According to a press...

Iran

Central Asia Faces an Arc of Instability to the South

Until a few weeks ago, looking south from Central Asia, observers of the region saw nothing but opportunities for connectivity. Admittedly, Iran on one side and the area between Afghanistan and Pakistan on the other have never been known for their stability. However, the current situation sees two serious conflicts on the southern border of Central Asia, which risk representing an arc of instability that will be difficult to overcome. While the global energy implications of the ongoing war in the Middle East, which began following the joint attack by the United States and Israel on Iran, are likely to be felt for months to come, the greatest risk for the Central Asian region is related to connectivity. This could also compromise significant efforts made in this regard by regional governments. Consider, for example, the recent trip to Pakistan by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, which focused on the possibility of building a railway from Pakistani ports to Kazakh territory via Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. For much of the past decade, Central Asian governments have invested heavily in opening southern trade routes to global markets. Railways through Afghanistan, port access through Iran, and new logistics corridors to Pakistan were meant to reduce dependence on northern routes and expand the region’s economic options. The sudden emergence of conflicts along the southern frontier now raises questions about how secure those connections will be. The Times of Central Asia spoke with Peter Frankopan, author and Professor of Global History at Oxford University, about the potential implications of the two wars on Central Asia’s southern border. According to him, the main risk is not related to connectivity, but to contagion: “The key issue is about the safety of civilians and the protection of infrastructure in Central Asia,” he told TCA. “In times like these, nothing can be ruled out. With Iran lashing out at neighbors and realizing that attacks on oil, gas and more give it leverage, it is not hard to see what might come next. Second, of course, are threats to national economies. Wars create winners and losers. One can see a boom for some people in Central Asian states, but plenty of pressures, especially on inflation.” Indeed, the economic repercussions of the Middle East conflict are already being felt in the region, particularly in Turkmenistan, which maintains some of the closest trade ties with Iran and shares a long border with the country. Frankopan does not see any particular differences in terms of the danger to Central Asia posed by what is happening in Iran and between Pakistan and Afghanistan: “Clearly, instability in Afghanistan is an immediate concern, but it is not related to Iran and will have its own velocity and rhythms. But the risks of expanding violence and terrorism, of refugees, of narcotics and other illicit trafficking are real - and may well get worse.” Regarding connectivity, one of the topics that Central Asian governments pay the most attention to, according to Frankopan, the current situation should not be considered an...

Iran

How an Incident on the Azerbaijan-Iran Border Became a Test for Diplomacy in the Region

The drone strike on Azerbaijan's Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic on March 5 has become one of the most serious incidents in relations between Baku and Tehran in recent years. Azerbaijani authorities described the incident as a terrorist act and demanded explanations and an apology from Iran. Tehran, in turn, rejected the accusations, suggesting the possibility of a provocation by “third forces.” Following the drone incident, Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev held a phone call with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev to discuss regional security. According to the Azerbaijani presidency, Aliyev thanked Tokayev for condemning the attack on Nakhchivan and for voicing support for Azerbaijan. What began as a local security incident has raised concerns about regional stability in the South Caucasus. Terrorist Act Against the State Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev issued a statement strongly condemning "this despicable terrorist act. Those who committed it must be brought to justice immediately,” Aliyev said. According to Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, one drone hit the terminal building of Nakhchivan International Airport, while another crashed near a school in the village of Shekerabad. Two civilians were reportedly injured. Baku stressed that the attack, allegedly launched from Iranian territory, violated international law and could lead to a dangerous escalation of tensions in the region. Diplomatic Escalation Despite the harsh rhetoric in the first hours after the incident, Baku opted to rely primarily on diplomatic tools. The Iranian ambassador was summoned to the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry and handed a formal note of protest requesting official explanations. Azerbaijan said on Friday that it was evacuating staff from its embassy in Tehran as well as its consulate in the city of Tabriz. At the same time, Azerbaijani security forces were placed on high alert. According to Aliyev, the country’s armed forces were instructed to prepare possible countermeasures. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke by phone with Aliyev, condemning the attack and expressing support for Azerbaijan, according to official statements. Reports of alleged Iranian-linked sabotage plots also surfaced, with the Azerbaijani authorities stating that several terrorist attacks had been prevented on the country’s territory. According to the State Security Service, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was behind the plots. Among the alleged targets was the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, a strategic energy corridor linking the Caspian region with Turkey and one of the main routes for exporting Azerbaijani oil. According to Azerbaijani sources, other potential targets included the Israeli embassy, a synagogue in the capital, and a leader of the local Mountain Jewish community. The security service reported that three explosive devices had been brought into the country but were discovered and defused before they could be delivered. The development of the crisis has prompted increased diplomatic contact between world leaders. Russian President Vladimir Putin held a telephone conversation with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian amid the growing regional tensions. Shortly thereafter, Russia’s Foreign Ministry called on both sides to exercise restraint and emphasized the need for a thorough investigation into the drone strike. On March 7, the foreign ministers of all the Central...

Iran

OTS Faces Security Test from Turkey to Central Asia

Iran's widening war has now reached the institutional space linking Turkey, the South Caucasus, and Central Asia. Turkey said on March 4 that NATO air defenses destroyed an Iranian ballistic missile entering Turkish airspace, while Azerbaijan said the next day that four Iranian drones crossed into Nakhchivan, injuring four people, and damaging civilian infrastructure at the exclave’s airport. Iran denied targeting Nakhchivan; in the Turkish case, the missile’s intended target has not been fully clear in public reporting. Even so, the combined effect was unmistakable. By March 7, the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) had become more than a bystander to a Middle Eastern war that had earlier seemed outside its main agenda. This is what gave the OTS foreign ministers’ meeting in Istanbul its significance. The Turkish Foreign Ministry announced on March 6 that the informal meeting of the OTS Council of Foreign Ministers would be held in Istanbul on March 7, with Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan hosting. After the meeting, the ministers adopted a joint statement declaring that threats to the security of any OTS member are a matter of concern for the whole organization. That language does not make the OTS a military alliance. It does, however, show the organization moving more openly into collective political-security signaling when member states come under attack. Why Nakhchivan Matters Nakhchivan is central to the logic of this story. The exclave is an integral part of Azerbaijan, but is separated from the rest of the country. It borders Armenia, Iran, and Turkey, making it significant out of proportion to its size. A military strike there is not a routine border incident. It reaches one of the most sensitive nodes in the wider Turkic political space: it is a meeting point for Azerbaijani sovereignty, Turkish strategic concern, and Iranian proximity. Until recently, Nakhchivan’s special status and borders were anchored in the 1921 Moscow and Kars treaties, which gave Turkey and Soviet Russia a formal say over the exclave’s autonomy and, it could be argued, its external security. But last year, Baku folded Nakhchivan more tightly into Azerbaijan’s domestic legal order by removing those references (along with other changes) from the constitution of the exclave, which has suddenly become a target in a much wider regional confrontation. Baku’s response to the Iranian attack showed that it saw the incident in political as well as tactical terms. President Ilham Aliyev said Azerbaijan would prepare retaliatory measures. Reuters later reported that Azerbaijan had ordered the evacuation of its diplomats from Iran, citing safety concerns. This is understandable, particularly in light of the January 27, 2023, incident when an armed attacker entered Azerbaijan’s embassy in Tehran and opened fire, killing the head of the embassy’s security and wounding two other staff. Baku called this a terrorist attack, evacuated most of its diplomatic personnel, and suspended embassy operations. Azerbaijani officials also said the March 5 attack on Nakhchivan violated international law, rejecting any implication that it could have been a technical mishap. The stakes widened further after...