Kazakhstan Opinions - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 65

Uncategorized

How Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan Anchor a Strategic Middle-Power Hub in Central Asia

Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are driving Central Asia’s global significance. Together, they are turning Central Asia into a strategic middle-power hub. The two countries increasingly act as central nodes in a region key to global supply chains and, inevitably, geopolitical competition. However, they are not merely reactive to changes around them, but are highly dynamic. What does it mean to say that the region is emerging as a strategic middle-power "hub"? The notion of a hub extends beyond the national profiles of the two principals, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, to include the aggregation of collective influence. Central Asia is recognized as a cohesive entity in global forums. Kazakhstan’s energy wealth combines with Uzbekistan’s demographic strength, creating an influential synergy beneficial to the entire region. The interplay between their respective strengths allows them to amplify Central Asia’s voice in international institutions and negotiations collectively. By integrating their regional strategies within global frameworks — such as the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA) — Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan enhance the region’s geopolitical relevance. Kazakhstan, for example, has successfully advocated for the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR, also called the "Middle Corridor"). This transcontinental trade route is emerging as a lynchpin in Eurasian logistics, connecting China to Europe via the Caspian Sea. Uzbekistan, for its part, has emphasized the integration of transport and energy infrastructure. These initiatives align with the broader vision of a unified Central Asia. The leadership of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan has reinforced the region's collective identity as the "C5" group, also including Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan. This regional bloc has become a diplomatic focal point for major powers like the United States, China, Germany, and Japan. All of them engage with Central Asia through structured consultations within the C5 framework. These meetings have given the region traction in international diplomacy. The elevation of the C5 group reflects the region's new prominence. The United States engages with the C5 on issues ranging from regional security to sustainable development, emphasizing its commitment to a secure and prosperous Central Asia. China’s cooperation under the C5+1 mechanism complements its transcontinental infrastructure initiatives. Germany focuses on sustainable energy and governance, while Japan prioritizes infrastructure and technology transfers. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan together have over two-thirds of the region's gross domestic product and two-thirds of its population. Kazakhstan's vast natural resources undergird its economic influence, while its geographic expanse (as the ninth-largest country in the world) makes it central to major connectivity initiatives. Through President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev's nuanced foreign policy, Kazakhstan has adeptly balanced relationships with major powers, ensuring that it remains a key partner for Russia, China, and the European Union. Uzbekistan has surged to prominence through its ambitious domestic reforms and proactive engagement for regional cooperation under the leadership of President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, who has implemented market liberalization measures attracting foreign investment and reinvigorating its economy. As the most populous country in Central Asia, Uzbekistan is an indispensable actor in regional affairs....

Uncategorized

Kazakhstan, with China’s Help, Plans to Export Green Energy to Europe

Although Kazakhstan is a major producer of all fossil fuels – coal, crude oil, and natural gas – it also has the capacity to secure its energy future by prioritizing renewable energy. Fully aware of that, the European Union – one of the former Soviet republic’s most significant trade partners – aims to strengthen its energy ties with Astana, hoping to begin importing not only “green electricity” from the Central Asian nation, but also green hydrogen. On November 25, at Nazarbayev University in Astana, the “Energy in Transition – Powering Tomorrow” traveling exhibition was held, and one of the major topics discussed by energy experts was green hydrogen – hydrogen produced using renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power. It is unlikely a pure coincidence that the German Federal Foreign Office initiated the event. Over the past few years, Germany has shown interest in the development of the Kazakh green hydrogen sector. The most prominent green hydrogen project in Kazakhstan is currently being developed by Hyrasia One, a subsidiary of the German-Swedish energy company, Svevind. In 2021, the company announced its plans for €50 billion ($55 billion) green hydrogen project in the Mangystau Region in western Kazakhstan. It is expected that Hyrasia One will begin the production of green hydrogen in 2030, and the power plant will reach full capacity by 2032. Meanwhile, the authorities in Astana will need to find a way to export this form of renewable energy to Europe, a major energy market for Kazakhstan. Although Astana and Brussels signed a strategic partnership on the production of green hydrogen in November 2022, several challenges remain in the implementation of the deal. Issues such as the high cost, water scarcity in the largest Central Asian state (with water being the key component of green hydrogen production), and a lack of transport infrastructure, are significant barriers to exporting hydrogen from Kazakhstan to Europe. Using Russian gas pipeline systems for transportation of the Kazakh green hydrogen to Europe is not an option given current geopolitical circumstances. To resolve this transportation issue, the Kazakh authorities and their European partners could build hydrogen pipelines across the Caspian Sea, the Caucasus and Turkey to reach southern European countries. The problem is that building such a pipeline infrastructure is very expensive, and it remains uncertain who would be willing to fund such a project. That, however, does not mean that Kazakhstan cannot become Europe’s major green hydrogen supplier. What Astana would have to do, according to experts, is to convert the green hydrogen into green ammonia and then export it to Europe via the Middle Corridor – running through Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. On the Black Sea coast, ammonia would be loaded onto ships and transported past the Bosphorus to EU members such as Greece, Romania, and Bulgaria. From there, it would be sent further north, where green hydrogen would eventually be extracted from the ammonia. This is a rather complex process, and it is unclear how feasible and...

The Geopolitical Battle for Control Over Transportation Routes in Central Asia

Russia and Kazakhstan may be nominal allies, but their geoeconomic interests are not always aligned. As Astana seeks to develop the Middle Corridor – a transportation link connecting China and Europe through Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, bypassing Russia – Moscow reportedly aims to build a trade and logistics route that would connect Russia and Kyrgyzstan, thereby circumventing Kazakhstan. While various regional actors and international institutions actively invest in the Middle Corridor, also known as the Trans-Caspian International Transportation Route (TITR), a potential route linking Russia and Kyrgyzstan, through Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, remains merely an idea. From the geopolitical perspective, the TITR is seen as an alternative to reach European and international markets and bypass Russia. But what is the primary goal of the Russia-Kyrgyzstan route? Although both Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan are members of the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union, queues of trucks at the Kyrgyz-Kazakh state border seem to have become a norm. Bishkek accuses Kazakhstan of “artificially creating obstacles at the border to weaken competition from Kyrgyzstan”, while the Kazakh authorities claim that Kyrgyz truckers are “unwilling to comply with Astana’s requirements and submit fraudulent documents for cargo.” Since Kyrgyzstan’s main connection with Russia – the major market for its agricultural products – goes through Kazakhstan, it is Astana that has the upper hand over Bishkek. From a purely economic perspective, a new route, including sea transport across the Caspian Sea, would enable faster delivery of vegetables, fruits, as well as other goods from Kyrgyzstan to Russia. However, it remains highly uncertain if Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, as transit countries, are genuinely interested in this project. “Both nations are far more interested in East-West trade, actual supply chain relocations into the region, and new gas contracts with the West,” Samuel Doveri Vesterbye, Managing Director of the European Neighborhood Council, told The Times of Central Asia. In his view, a Kyrgyzstan-Russia corridor would offer a limited amount of trade, due to the sanctions the West imposed on Moscow over its actions in Ukraine. But in spite of that, Kyrgyzstan, like all countries, tries to be part of any connectivity corridor. “There is a lot of ‘corridor competition’ at the moment. Most of it is bluff. It is important to look at which projects are being built and how much investments is going into them. The Russia-Kyrgyzstan corridor, at present, is more hot air than reality. There is no funding from the United States, the European Union, China or Turkey. Also, major players like the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the European Investment Bank (EIB) do not seem interested in funding the construction of this route. Therefore, its lifespan and potential look rather limited,” Vesterbye stressed. European institutions seem interested in further development of the Trans-Caspian International Transportation Route. From the European Union’s perspective, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has increased the need to find alternative, reliable, safe and efficient trade routes between Europe and Asia. That is why Brussels is reportedly willing to invest €10 billion ($10.5...

Uncategorized

Kazakhstan and Taliban Afghanistan: An Overview of Relations

Diplomatic relations between Kazakhstan and Afghanistan began more than 30 years ago, on February 12, 1992. However, in April of that year, the republican regime in Kabul fell, and the country plunged into the abyss of civil war after becoming the Islamic State of Afghanistan. Such chaos had never been seen before. The first Taliban Emirate was established and then overthrown by the US-led coalition, after which the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan was proclaimed Politics Kazakhstan's first diplomatic mission in Kabul was opened in September 2002, less than a year after America launched Operation Enduring Freedom. In 2003, it was transformed into an embassy. From then on, the relationship between the countries became operational. The new starting point of the Kazakh-Afghan relationship was August 15, 2021, when the Taliban seized power in Kabul. Kazakhstan's foreign policy was put to a test, but Astana demonstrated foresight and pragmatism. The Kazakh embassy, unlike most other countries, was not evacuated, diplomats continued to work in the new conditions and began to establish the first contacts with the Taliban authorities. From the very beginning, Kazakhstan took a clear and understandable position and began to promote it at various levels. A month after the Taliban seized Kabul, Kazakhstan's President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev drew attention to the situation in Afghanistan at the SCO meeting in Dushanbe (September 17). As he stated, "Kazakhstan sees future Afghanistan as a truly independent and united state living in peace with itself and its neighbors. At this crucial historical moment, the multinational people of Afghanistan should not be left alone in the face of unprecedented difficulties". A few days later, on September 22, during the UN General Assembly, the Kazakh president detailed the position of his country and was one of the first politicians to point out the current problem of “inclusiveness.” Tokayev reaffirmed that Kazakhstan supports the UN Security Council's call for the formation through negotiations of a new government that would be inclusive and representative. In his words, “It is necessary to create a consensus-based system in which groups with different values or ethnic, religious and gender backgrounds can coexist in one country.” For a better understanding and retrospective assessment of Astana's actions on the “Afghan track,” it is worth citing other theses mentioned by the president in New York at a time when most of the world was still doubting the success of the Taliban campaign. "Afghanistan must continue to fulfill its international obligations and ensure that its territory does not become a springboard for terrorists, drug trafficking, and human traffickers. Regardless of our political or personal convictions, we must not abandon the people of Afghanistan to their fate now. The acute humanitarian situation must be our top priority. UN agencies and other humanitarian organizations must have immediate, safe, and unimpeded humanitarian access. Kazakhstan has provided for the temporary relocation of the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and other UN offices in Afghanistan. We are ready to provide a logistical platform for the delivery of humanitarian aid to Afghanistan...

Central Asia Home Kazakhstan Local Politics International Affairs Local Politics Kazakhstan Kazakhstan International Affairs Opinions Features Kazakhstan Opinions Kazakhstan Featurees

Who Will Build Kazakhstan’s Nuclear Power Plant?

There are three generally discussed possibilities for construction of Kazakhstan’s newly approved nuclear power plant (NPP). One is that Russia is sole contractor. Another is that China is sole contractor. Each of these choices has its own rationale yet also geo-economic and geopolitical drawbacks for Kazakhstan. Third, Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has publicly stated that he favors an international consortium with participation by companies from China, France, Russia, and South Korea. This option, however, faces logistical challenges, particularly in dividing responsibilities among consortium members and determining the sourcing of critical components. Tokayev has already discussed with France’s President Emmanuel Macron the possible participation of the French companies Orano and EDF in particular. Orano focuses on various aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle, including uranium mining, enrichment, and waste management. EDF specializes in design, construction, and operational management. This opens the door to a fourth possibility. Orano, EDF and the British-German firm Urenco together can provide all the NPP construction and management services necessary to realize the project. But Kazatomprom, which focuses on mainly on mining and processing, has not been mentioned in any of these schemes. Such an alternative approach, involving Western companies like Orano, EDF, and Urenco, could ensure comprehensive services with strong Western involvement, possibly including Kazatomprom, thus boosting local capacity and creating a "demonstration project" for broader natural resource collaboration within NATO frameworks. This kind of partnership could help Kazakhstan reduce its dependency on single external actors, thereby enhancing its strategic autonomy. Moreover, by involving Kazatomprom, the project could focus on knowledge transfer and capacity building, fostering local expertise and reducing external dependencies over time. It is reasonable that an offer to take Kazatomprom into a Western consortium and to make capacity building in Kazakhstan, at Kazatomprom and elsewhere, an explicit goal of the project, would be welcome in Astana. Cooperation via NATO platforms could likewise offer Kazakhstan access not only to technical specialists from NATO countries but also to more joint training exercises and workshops, to complement an exchange of knowledge on best practices in nuclear safety and energy resilience. And that would be only a “demonstration project” for the constructive expansion of the energy component of NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) into broader natural-resource and rare-earth domains. Indeed, there is no reason even to wait for the NPP project. Central Asia, especially Kazakhstan, is a periodic table of the elements, especially rare-earth elements, and their exploration and development has been under way for some time. Building upon the energy-security successes through NATO's PfP, this proposal suggests expanding cooperation with Caspian region Partner countries into the mining sector, specifically for rare-earth elements critical to defense. Extending PfP to include these resources aligns with NATO's and Partners' core security goals, offering broader opportunities to secure the supply chain and enhance collective defense capabilities. This extension also presents a strategic avenue to mitigate risks associated with supply disruptions and geopolitical tensions. Leveraging the extensive experience of partnership in energy security, NATO and its Partner countries could begin with...

Uncategorized

Kazakhstan and Serbia Strengthen Ties Despite Different Geopolitical Paths

Serbian President Vucic (54) might physically resemble Kazakh leader Kassym-Jomart Tokayev (71), but the geopolitical positions of Sebia and Kazakhstan could not be more different. While the Balkan nation – a European Union candidate since 2012 – remains in the EU’s “eternal waiting room”, the Central Asian country – a member of the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union – seems to have found a delicate balance between Russia, China, and the West. Those differences, however, have not prevented Serbia and Kazakhstan from strengthening their bilateral ties. Over the past six months, the two countries have been actively preparing for Tokayev’s trip to Serbia. This year, he spoke by phone with Vucic twice, while various Serbian and Kazakh officials held several meetings. On November 18-19, Tokayev finally visited the Southeastern European nation, where he met with his Serbian counterpart. According to the Kazakh leader, they discussed strengthening trade and economic relations and bilateral partnerships between the two nations. “It is essential that we develop cooperation. We had constructive talks and reached important deals,” Tokayev stressed. During his visit to the Balkan country, Serbian and Kazakh ministers signed several bilateral agreements. One of them is a 2025 plan on military cooperation. It is, therefore, no surprise that, following the talks in Belgrade, Vucic and Tokayev attended an exhibition of arms and military equipment at the Batajnica military airport near the Serbian capital. Indeed, military ties seem to be an important aspect of the Serbian-Kazakh relationship. Back in 2017, the two nations signed a memorandum of understanding in the field of military-technical collaboration. Six years later, in November 2023, Kazakhstan and Serbia inked intergovernmental agreements on military-technical cooperation, while in June of this year Serbian and Kazakh defense ministers discussed in Astana military relations between the two countries. Also, in September, Roman Vassilenko, Kazakhstan’s Deputy Foreign Minister, announced that Belgrade and Astana plan то expand cooperation in the defense industry. It remains to be seen how Moscow – Astana’s nominal ally in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) – will react to Kazakhstan’s ambitions to deepen military ties with Serbia – a nominally neutral country that has indirectly supplied Ukraine with $885 million worth of weapons. Despite being in different geopolitical positions, Serbia and Kazakhstan seem to share the same approach regarding Ukraine. Both nations support the Eastern European country’s territorial integrity, while trying to preserve relatively good relations with the Kremlin. At the same time, they support each other’s territorial integrity, which is particularly important for Serbia given that Kazakhstan does not recognize the 2008 unilateral independence of Kosovo. In 2022, sitting next to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Tokayev said that if the right to self-determination is put into practice worldwide, then there will be over 600 countries instead of the 193 states which are currently members of the United Nations. “For this reason, we do not recognize either Taiwan, or Kosovo, or South Ossetia, or Abkhazia… This principle will also be applied to quasi-state territories, which, in our opinion, are Lugansk and...