Kyrgyzstan International Affairs - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 43 - 48 of 589

EAEU

As Armenia Looks West, Could Uzbekistan Move Closer to the EAEU?

Armenia’s increasingly uncertain future within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) appears to have entered a new phase. On May 29, the presidents of Kazakhstan, Belarus, Russia, and Kyrgyzstan issued a joint statement calling on Yerevan to clarify whether it intends to pursue deeper integration with the European Union or remain committed to the Eurasian bloc. The four leaders announced that members of the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council would present a report at the next meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council in December 2026 outlining the possible consequences of suspending Armenia’s participation in the EAEU treaty framework. “We share the view that the Republic of Armenia should, within the shortest possible timeframe, hold a nationwide referendum on joining the European Union or continuing its membership in the Eurasian Economic Union,” the statement said. Speaking to journalists after the summit in Astana, Russian President Vladimir Putin drew parallels between Armenia’s current trajectory and the developments that preceded the crisis in Ukraine. “I have mentioned this before: the crisis in Ukraine began with attempts to join the EU,” Putin said. He added that significant differences between European and EAEU standards, particularly in agriculture and industry, make simultaneous participation in both integration projects difficult. “Combining the two is practically impossible,” Putin said. “Therefore, we would be forced to curtail much of our economic integration work with Armenia.” The following day, Russia recalled its ambassador to Armenia for consultations amid Yerevan’s growing engagement with the European Union. According to Russian political analyst Arkady Dubnov, the move was a clear diplomatic signal of Moscow’s dissatisfaction with the pro-European course pursued by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s government and indicated a downgrading of bilateral relations. Dubnov also argued that Armenia’s representative at the Astana summit, Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan, avoided harsher criticism from Putin partly because of the position taken by Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. “Kazakhstan itself signed an Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with the European Union in 2020,” Dubnov noted, suggesting that arguments about Armenia’s European integration harming the EAEU are largely political rather than economic in nature. One recent poll appears to reinforce confidence within Armenia’s ruling camp. A survey conducted ahead of parliamentary elections indicates that Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party could secure nearly 65% of decided voters, positioning it for a convincing victory and a substantial parliamentary majority. Against that backdrop, Moscow’s pressure on Yerevan may be less about influencing the outcome of Armenia’s elections than about preparing for a longer-term strategic realignment. Supporters of Pashinyan increasingly associate his political project with closer ties to Europe, a perception reinforced not only by European leaders but also by U.S. President Donald Trump, who recently expressed support for Pashinyan’s re-election campaign. For his part, Pashinyan appears focused on a broader regional recalibration. Speaking via Facebook Live on May 31, he emphasized the importance of normalizing relations with neighboring states. “I am convinced that we will achieve the goal of normalizing relations with Azerbaijan and Türkiye,” he said. “This means that a balanced and balancing...

EAEU

EAEU Leaders Meet in Astana Amid Growing Internal Trade Disputes

Astana is hosting Eurasian Economic Union events on May 28-29, with leaders arriving on Thursday and the main meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council scheduled for Friday, May 29. The first part of Thursday was dominated by President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and his delegation during Putin’s state visit to Kazakhstan. At the Palace of Independence, Tokayev and Putin introduced their official delegations to each other during the Russian president’s state visit, while Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov said the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council meeting would begin on Friday morning in narrow and expanded formats. The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council is the highest body of the Eurasian Economic Union, which came into force on January 1, 2015. Now more than a decade old, the bloc is facing deepening internal contradictions driven largely by external economic pressure on Russia, the Union’s core member. Some of those tensions are linked to the bloc’s expansion beyond its original Russia-Belarus-Kazakhstan core. To understand the current state of Eurasian integration, it is necessary to revisit its origins, particularly the role played by Kazakhstan and its first president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who had sought to preserve a looser union among the Soviet republics as the USSR collapsed. As prime minister and later president of the Kazakh SSR, Nazarbayev understood the economic consequences that would follow the collapse of the integrated Soviet economic system, and how deeply Kazakhstan remained tied to Soviet-era supply chains, infrastructure, and decision-making structures centered in Moscow. Nazarbayev first publicly proposed the idea of Eurasian integration in 1994 during a lecture at Moscow State University. At the time, however, the administration of Russian President Boris Yeltsin showed little interest in the concept. That changed after Vladimir Putin came to power. In 2001, the Eurasian Economic Community, known as EurAsEC, was established, bringing together Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan. The founding agreement had been signed in Astana in October 2000. Uzbekistan joined EurAsEC in 2006, but suspended its membership only two years later. Meanwhile, Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan launched work in 2007 on creating a Customs Union, which officially came into existence in 2010. In the autumn of 2011, Putin announced plans to establish a Eurasian Economic Union based on a future Single Economic Space. Two years later, Nazarbayev proposed dissolving EurAsEC in connection with the planned creation of the EAEU by Russia, Kazakhstan, and Belarus. Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Armenia were invited to join the Customs Union. However, by 2014, when the treaty establishing the EAEU and dissolving EurAsEC was signed, neither Armenia nor Kyrgyzstan had initially been central to the Eurasian project. At that stage, much of the discussion revolved around the possible accession of Ukraine. Russian political commentator and current State Duma deputy Anatoly Wasserman devoted several books to the idea of integrating Ukraine into the Russia-Belarus-Kazakhstan project, including Ukraine and the Rest of Russia. Wasserman argued that Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine needed to move away from a raw-materials-based economic model by creating a unified market...

Organization of Turkic States (OTS)

Opinion: Silk Seven or the OTS? Central Asia May Not Have to Choose

A new proposal circulating in Washington – the Silk Seven Plus (S7+) initiative – aims to reshape Central Asia by linking its five post-Soviet states with Afghanistan and Pakistan into an integrated economic region. Azerbaijan is also seen as a potential addition. The idea, advanced by the New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy, is straightforward: connect landlocked Central Asia to the Black Sea and Arabian Sea through new trade corridors. On paper, the bloc looks compelling. The seven countries form a contiguous zone in the heart of Eurasia, potentially turning geography from a constraint to an advantage. “Central Asia needs an organization built by Central Asian states and for Central Asian states,” said Justin Burke, a resident senior fellow at the New Lines Institute, at a recent event in Washington. “If Central Asia can speak with one voice rather than five different voices, that will make it a more reliable investment destination.” There are signs of momentum. Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev made back-to-back visits to Pakistan earlier this year, highlighting regional connectivity. Proponents argue that if Afghanistan stabilizes, the Silk Seven could become a formidable cluster. But that is a big “if.” It also raises a deeper question: why construct a new, geographically convenient bloc when an existing organization – the Organization of Turkic States (OTS)—already offers something deeper: shared language, history, and identity? While the Silk Seven spans broadly Muslim-majority countries, it is linguistically and culturally diverse. The grouping spans Turkic-speaking Central Asia, Persian-speaking Tajikistan, and Indo-Aryan Pakistan. ASEAN offers a cautionary example. Despite decades of cooperation, its religious, linguistic, and geopolitical diversity – combined with consensus-based decision-making – has often prevented it from speaking with one voice, particularly on China. In The Clash of Civilizations, Samuel Huntington wrote that when ASEAN was created in 1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand, it was an organization of “one Sinic, one Buddhist, one Christian, and two Muslim member states.” Such multicivilizational regional organizations have limits, he said. The Silk Seven risks similar limitations. The OTS, by contrast, rests on a narrower but deeper foundation: its core members—Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan—share closely related languages and overlapping historical experiences. Tucked away in the eight-page document issued after the informal OTS summit earlier this month was a revealing signal of intent: clauses dedicated to cataloguing Turkic cultural heritage, promoting youth engagement through Khiva’s designation as the 2026 Youth Capital, and launching a “Turkic Heritage” digital platform. Together, they show that the OTS is actively building a shared cultural space. Yet even as members emphasize common heritage, differences remain over how far the organization should evolve politically. Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, the summit host, stressed in his remarks that “the Organization of Turkic States is neither a geopolitical project nor a military organization,” but rather “a unique platform” for cooperation across trade, technology, culture, and humanitarian ties. Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev struck a more ambitious note, saying that “the Turkic world must grow into one of the influential geopolitical centers of the 21st century,” and pledging...

Border Disputes

UN General Assembly Adopts Kyrgyzstan-Led Resolution on Border Disputes

On May 20, the United Nations General Assembly adopted by consensus a Kyrgyzstan-backed resolution titled “Peaceful Settlement of Border Disputes,” Kyrgyzstan’s Foreign Ministry announced. More than 40 countries co-sponsored the document. The resolution was presented by Kyrgyzstan jointly with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. According to the ministry, the main purpose of the resolution is to share with the international community the historic achievement of the three Central Asian countries in resolving border disputes through peaceful means, including dialogue and negotiations, in accordance with the UN Charter and international law. The resolution proposes what Kyrgyz officials described as a simple and universal principle: when states face border disputes, the way forward should be peaceful, lawful, and based on dialogue. According to the ministry, the Central Asian achievements highlighted in the resolution offer the international community an example of good-neighborly relations and peaceful dispute resolution. The adoption of the resolution is another confirmation of the ability of Kyrgyzstan and its neighbors to peacefully resolve complex issues that had remained unsettled for decades, the ministry stated. Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan have recently resolved long-standing border delimitation disputes in the Ferghana Valley inherited after the collapse of the Soviet Union. During a summit in Khujand, northern Tajikistan, on March 31, 2025, Kyrgyzstan’s President Sadyr Japarov, Tajikistan’s President Emomali Rahmon, and Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev signed a historic agreement on the junction point of the three countries’ state borders, effectively ending decades-long territorial disputes. The three leaders also inaugurated the Friendship Stele, marking the exact point where the borders of the three countries meet. The monument symbolizes friendship among the three nations, the resolution of long-standing border issues, and a new stage of regional cooperation. The Times of Central Asia previously reported on Kyrgyzstan’s initiative to establish the Dostuk (Friendship) International Trade and Economic Park jointly with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan in the border area where the three countries meet. The proposed project is expected to increase cross-border trade, attract investment, and create new economic opportunities across the region.

UN Security Council

Japarov Calls for Support of Kyrgyzstan’s Bid for UN Security Council Seat

Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov has called on world leaders to support Kyrgyzstan’s candidacy in the election for non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, scheduled for June 3, 2026, for the 2027-2028 term. In a statement published on his Facebook page, Japarov said Kyrgyzstan has the backing of the other Central Asian countries and is prepared to promote “pragmatic and depoliticized solutions” on the international stage. According to the president, the underrepresentation of small, developing, and landlocked countries in the Security Council “undermines the sustainability of the entire architecture of collective security.” “This is not a political preference but an objective necessity,” Japarov said. He argued that intensifying geopolitical competition, the erosion of universal international law, and ongoing armed conflicts in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East continue to test the resilience of the international system. “More than $3 trillion is spent annually on military conflicts worldwide. These resources could provide humanity with a decent life. If these expenditures were directed toward greening the planet and eradicating hunger, our world could become a flourishing garden,” the Kyrgyz leader said. Japarov emphasized that Kyrgyzstan is not part of military blocs and does not participate in confrontational geopolitical formats, which he said allows the country to maintain a “balanced, independent, and pragmatic position” on international issues. The president also highlighted Kyrgyzstan’s peaceful settlement of border delimitation issues with neighboring states, describing it as an example of how even highly sensitive security disputes can be resolved through negotiations. Japarov devoted particular attention to Kyrgyzstan’s work within the UN Human Rights Council, to which the country has been elected three times. According to him, Bishkek continues efforts to strengthen democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. The claim comes amid continued scrutiny of Kyrgyzstan’s domestic political trajectory. International observers and rights groups have raised concerns in recent years over pressure on independent media, civil society, and opposition figures, while the authorities have argued that tighter regulation is needed to protect stability and national interests. Japarov also pointed to the introduction of quotas for women, youth, ethnic minorities, and people with disabilities under amendments to the law “On the Election of the President of the Kyrgyz Republic and Deputies of the Jogorku Kenesh,” adopted in 2025. Japarov claimed that Kyrgyzstan ranks first in the world for women’s parliamentary representation. However, Inter-Parliamentary Union data shows that Kyrgyzstan has 30 women in its 90-seat parliament, or 33.3% of deputies. The IPU has instead identified Kyrgyzstan as recording the largest increase in women’s parliamentary representation among countries that held parliamentary renewals in 2025. The president stressed that Kyrgyzstan remains committed to the principles of non-proliferation and disarmament and, if elected to the Security Council, would promote preventive diplomacy, mediation mechanisms, nuclear disarmament, and addressing the growing nexus between climate and security issues. Japarov noted that Kyrgyzstan was among the initiators of the Central Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone and signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in 2025. He also said Bishkek intends to devote particular...

Middle Powers

Opinion: Middle Powers and the “Voice of the Region” – Is Central Asia Becoming a Coordinated Actor?

Against the backdrop of growing global fragmentation and the weakening of universal international institutions, the role of so-called middle powers is increasing. These are states able to influence regional agendas without possessing great-power status. In this changing system, Central Asia is gradually moving beyond its long-standing image as a geopolitical periphery and is beginning to act more like a region with shared interests. For decades, the region was viewed mainly as a space where the interests of external powers, including Russia, China, the U.S., and others, intersected. Today, that paradigm is beginning to shift. Central Asia is showing greater signs of agency through what may be described as a cluster effect: individually, the countries have limited influence, but collectively they form an important transit hub between Europe and Asia, a growing market, a significant resource base, and a strategic security zone. This creates the conditions for a more coordinated regional position, even if a single regional voice is still emerging rather than fully formed. C5+Azerbaijan as a Foundation for Regional Architecture The institutional foundation of this process is the Central Asian leaders' consultative format, which is now expanding through Azerbaijan's participation. That is turning what was once a C5 dialogue into a looser C5+Azerbaijan, or C6, framework focused on transport, energy, and practical cooperation. Within this framework, the countries of the region are learning to act in a more coordinated manner without supranational pressure. In practice, this process is developing through three main areas. The first is transport and logistics. Azerbaijan's participation has strengthened efforts to make the Middle Corridor more coherent, though the route still faces bottlenecks in capacity, customs coordination, and Caspian crossings. Through tariff coordination, simplified border procedures, and investment in port and rail infrastructure, Central Asia and the Caucasus are increasingly functioning as parts of a single transport artery. That gives the region a faster option for cargo between China and Europe, even if it remains far smaller than traditional maritime routes. Shipping goods via the Suez Canal or the northern route can take between 35 and 45 days, whereas the Middle Corridor can reduce transit times to around 13-21 days under favorable conditions. According to forecasts cited by BCG, shipping volumes along the route could increase three- to fourfold during the current decade. Beyond logistics, the project is creating a new economic framework for the region. Its status as a crossroads is attracting investment in transport hubs and manufacturing facilities along the route, with the potential to turn transit corridors into zones of economic growth. This gives participating countries not only transit revenue but a stronger basis for long-term strategic resilience. The second major area is energy integration, where historical disputes over water and fuel resources are increasingly being supplemented by models of joint development. The Kambarata HPP-1 hydropower project in Kyrgyzstan, being developed with Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, has created an important precedent for shared management of water and energy interests. The project is expected to support cleaner electricity generation while helping stabilize irrigation flows...