• KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00193 -0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10851 0%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
21 December 2025

Viewing results 25 - 30 of 427

Opinion: Strengthening the Silk Bonds — India’s Renewed Push Towards Central Asia

The velvet-draped tables of New Delhi’s 4th India-Central Asia Dialogue convened under the stewardship of External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar on June 6, 2025, radiated congeniality, with history and strategy converging. This high-level engagement, attended by foreign ministers from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, marked more than a diplomatic ritual — it signaled India's deepening resolve to recalibrate its strategic posture in a region too long shaped by other powers. Yet beneath pledges of shared civilizational futures and energy corridors, an uncomfortable truth lingered as India remains a guest, not a player, in Central Asia’s great power theatre. Further, India’s internal socio-political landscape presents notable challenges that inadvertently shape its foreign policy credibility, particularly in the eyes of Central Asian nations. Persistent communal tensions — most visibly manifested in the Hindu-Muslim divide, the controversial demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, and the politically charged construction of the Ram Mandir — have deepened perceptions of religious polarization. Such domestic developments, while largely internal, resonate beyond India’s borders, especially in the Muslim-majority Central Asian republics, raising concerns about inclusivity and pluralism in India’s governance model. Simultaneously, India’s strained relations with key neighbors — Pakistan, and China, and increasingly volatile dynamics with Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka — have reinforced a regional image of discord and inconsistency. These internal and regional complexities contribute to a trust deficit, making Central Asian countries cautious in placing long-term strategic confidence in India. For New Delhi to emerge as a dependable partner in the region, addressing internal fissures and presenting a coherent, inclusive national vision is as vital as economic or diplomatic outreach. Central Asia sits at the center of ancient trade routes and modern geopolitical competition. For India, its importance is twofold: the region is a bridge to Eurasia and a repository of energy resources critical to India’s growing economy. But India’s historical connectivity to Central Asia — through the Silk Road, shared cultural legacies, and spiritual exchanges — has, for decades, been overshadowed by geographic and political barriers, notably the lack of direct overland access due to Pakistan. Recognizing these constraints, the dialogue showcased a strategic pivot. India reaffirmed its commitment to enhancing regional connectivity through the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and the Chabahar Port in Iran. While geopolitical instability in Iran and Afghanistan poses challenges, India's emphasis on multimodal routes demonstrates pragmatic flexibility. In an era defined by supply chain resilience and multipolar geopolitics, connectivity is no longer just an infrastructure question — it is a currency of influence. The dialogue also addressed the evolving regional security architecture. India’s proposal for counter-terrorism cooperation, capacity building, and intelligence sharing was timely and necessary. However, the dialogue echoed with familiar refrains, viz. civilizational bonds, shared destiny, and multipolar cooperation. Yet beneath the diplomatic choreography lies a haunting question. Can India transcend its historical role as Central Asia’s cultural cousin to become its strategic confidant? History whispers caution. The Burden of History: From Silk Roads to Shadow Roads For centuries, the Silk Road...

Opinion: What Uzbekistan’s FIFA World Cup Breakthrough Tells Us About State-Building

When Uzbekistan's goalkeeper Utkir Yusupov made those crucial saves against the UAE last night, securing his country's first-ever FIFA World Cup qualification, he was putting the finishing touches to a decade-long story about how nations build capacity, and what happens when they finally get it right. Uzbekistan's journey to the 2026 World Cup is not just a sports story. Go deeper, and you'll find something more interesting: a case study in institutional development. The Numbers Don't Lie Consider what Uzbekistan has pulled off in recent years. At Rio 2016, the country won 13 Olympic medals, placing 21st globally. In Tokyo, they obtained three gold medals despite disruptions caused by the pandemic. Uzbekistan achieved its best-ever performance at the Paris Olympics, securing 13 medals (8 gold, 2 silver, and 3 bronze), placing them 13th overall in the medal standings, first among post-Soviet states, and fourth among Asian nations overall. But the real story is the systematic nature of their success. Seven of those 13 Rio medals came in boxing alone, with three golds. At the 2023 World Boxing Championships in Tashkent, Uzbek fighters received five gold medals, the tournament's best overall performance. Boxers also dominated the Paris Olympics, bringing five gold medals to the national team’s account. Uzbekistan’s youth football teams have been even more dominant: AFC U-23 champions in 2018, U-20 Asian Cup winners in 2023, and U-17 continental champions twice since 2012. This is not random. Big tournaments reward institutional capacity, not just individual talent. Success on this scale requires functional sports federations, coherent youth development systems, and the kind of long-term planning that only works when bureaucracies can actually implement policies rather than just announce them. Small Economy, Outsized Results What makes Uzbekistan's breakthrough particularly striking is the economic context. Uzbekistan is not Germany or Japan leveraging massive GDP advantages. Uzbekistan's sports budget doubled to roughly $230 million by 2025, serious money for the country, but pocket change compared to what traditional powers spend. Yet they're outperforming nations with far deeper pockets. Their junior teams dominate youth football rankings. Their boxers routinely defeat athletes from wealthier countries. That efficiency ratio, results per dollar invested, suggests something important is happening at the governance level. The government has built over a hundred new sports facilities while doubling coaches' salaries. President Mirziyoyev's Presidential Olympics program scouts talent across all regions, attracting the best prospects to national training centers. Athletes now receive meaningful incentives: houses, cars, and scholarships. This is a systematic investment with clear metrics and accountability. The Quiet Politics of Athletic Success Sports remain one of the few arenas where state effectiveness can reveal itself without the outsized intrusion of politics. You can't fake your way to consistent Olympic medals or sustained success in FIFA youth competitions. These achievements require multiple sectors - education, healthcare, and urban planning - to function in coordination. Uzbekistan's sporting surge coincides with broader signs of improved state capacity under Mirziyoyev's administration. The infrastructure investments are real. The youth development programs are producing measurable results....

Opinion – The Quiet Competition: How the U.S. Is Losing Ground to China in Central Asia

Over the past decade, China has steadily expanded its presence in Central Asia, not through military force, but by building roads, trade corridors, and digital infrastructure. As the United States scaled back its regional footprint following its withdrawal from Afghanistan, Beijing moved quickly to fill the void. Today, China has positioned itself as the region's dominant external power, while the U.S. risks being left on the sidelines. At the heart of China’s strategy is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which has provided over $1 trillion into infrastructure projects globally since its launch in 2013. This includes $704 billion in construction contracts and $470 billion in non-financial investments. In 2024 alone, BRI engagement reached $121.8 billion – $70.7 billion in construction and $51 billion in investments – and trade between China and the countries of Central Asia hit a record $95 billion, highlighting the depth of China's economic integration. This engagement has also created significant financial dependencies. Central Asian countries owe China roughly $15.7 billion, about 8% of the region's total external debt, and these loans are often opaque and carry terms that provide Beijing with outsized political leverage. Chinese firms are also laying fiber-optic networks and constructing electric vehicle corridors to link western China with its neighbors. In Tajikistan, for example, contractors are upgrading the Pamir Highway to support cross-border EV transport. Huawei and other Chinese tech giants are also expanding the region’s telecommunications infrastructure, raising serious concerns about surveillance, data sovereignty, and long-term digital dependency. China’s economic outreach is reinforced by high-level diplomacy. The China–Central Asia (C+C5) format has become the centerpiece of Beijing’s regional engagement. At the 2025 summit, leaders from across the region gathered to coordinate on connectivity, climate resilience, and trade facilitation. The regularity and substance of these summits stand in sharp contrast to the United States’ more sporadic diplomatic presence. The U.S. maintains the C5+1 platform and launched a promising Critical Minerals Dialogue in 2024. However, these initiatives have yet to match the scale or consistency of China's approach as U.S. infrastructure investment is limited, its commercial footprint is small, and diplomatic engagement is too infrequent to shift the region’s strategic trajectory. This matters. Central Asia is strategically located, resource-rich, and increasingly central to global supply chains and geopolitical competition. Kazakhstan alone supplies more than 40% of the world’s uranium. The region also serves as a testing ground for competing development models, and if the United States fails to become a more engaged and credible partner, China’s infrastructure-heavy, state-centric model may become the default. To remain competitive, Washington should recalibrate its approach in Central Asia. This includes pursuing bilateral deals that deliver real impact, such as deepening ties with Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan through targeted investment packages, trade agreements, and joint-sector initiatives. It also means securing access to critical minerals by expanding private-sector investment in mining, processing, and transport infrastructure aligned with U.S. supply chain needs. Offering digital infrastructure alternatives is equally essential; the United States must support secure, interoperable, and transparent technology networks that...

Opinion: The Ukraine-Russia Peace Talks Need Multiple Platforms for Negotiations

The proposed Istanbul meeting between Zelensky and Putin on May 15 did not take place, with no Russian ministers attending the talks Putin himself had called for, leading Zelensky to describe the Russian delegation as "phony". Hopes for peace remain, however, as other stakeholders have expressed their eagerness to support a resolution. With its unique geopolitical position as a bridge between Europe and Asia, Turkey was an obvious choice to host the negotiations. While Turkey has sought to maintain balanced relations throughout the conflict, its provision of military support to Ukraine, including drones, has complicated its image as a neutral party. Despite this, as a NATO member with significant energy partnerships with Russia, Turkey serves as a crucial intermediary. Furthermore, its active role in initiatives like the Black Sea Grain Agreement has reinforced its credibility in international diplomacy. Turkey’s continued involvement, therefore, benefits not only the peace process but also its own economic and strategic interests. Turkey is not the only stakeholder on the periphery of Russia, however; Kazakhstan is also well-positioned to contribute to the peace negotiations. Kazakhstan’s shared history with Russia and Ukraine as former Soviet republics has shaped mutual economic and security frameworks, rooted in decades of centralized governance and cooperation. The continued use of the Russian language as one medium of communication across these nations underscores intertwined cultural and historical links. Kazakhstan’s relationship with Russia spans centuries, marked by alliances, trade, and cultural exchange, further deepening ties beyond the Soviet era. In recent years, Kazakhstan has diversified its alliances through its multi-vector foreign policy. It has forged strong relationships with China, the U.S., the EU, and organizations like the SCO and EAEU while cultivating robust economic ties. Its energy sector has attracted major foreign investors such as Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Shell. By hosting peace talks and global summits, Kazakhstan has established itself as a neutral mediator, balancing traditional ties with Russia while expanding its global influence. Kazakhstan also has an impressive record in terms of peace negotiations. President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev hosted pivotal talks in Almaty in 2024 between Armenia and Azerbaijan, addressing over three decades of conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. Kazakhstan also played a key role in facilitating the 2018 agreement on the Caspian Sea’s legal status, which resolved disputes over resources and territorial boundaries. The country hosted multiple rounds of Syrian peace talks starting in Astana in 2017, bringing together the Syrian government, opposition groups, and international stakeholders, including Russia and Turkey. Similarly, it provided a platform for the Iran nuclear talks in 2013 and supported the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. Kazakhstan’s neutrality and commitment to diplomacy have earned it credibility as a Middle Power in fostering agreements on contentious issues. Additionally, Kazakhstan hosted the 2010 OSCE Summit that led to the adoption of the Astana Declaration. This reaffirmed the Helsinki Principles on peace, security, and cooperation from Vancouver to Vladivostok. It represented a critical collective commitment to territorial integrity, sovereignty, and human rights since the dissolution of the USSR. The summit underscored Kazakhstan’s role in...

Slippery Slope: How Volatile Oil Prices Threaten Kazakhstan’s Energy Giant

With global oil markets in flux and prices dipping below $70 per barrel, Kazakhstan’s state oil company faces mounting financial strain. If KazMunayGas (KMG) fails to adapt, it risks edging toward a fiscal cliff. Yet, political constraints, exacerbated by the ongoing specter of potential social unrest, have hindered the company’s ability to implement reforms. OPEC+ Fuels Market Uncertainty The global oil market is entering a new period of turbulence reminiscent of the pandemic era. Despite prolonged efforts by OPEC+ to manage output and stabilize prices, the alliance’s fragile consensus unraveled this April, when Saudi Arabia and Russia led an unexpected increase in production, undermining earlier commitments and tipping the market into oversupply. Meanwhile, U.S. shale producers have continued to expand their output and export aggressively, squeezing traditional suppliers out of lucrative Asian markets. A decelerating Chinese economy, the world’s largest oil importer, adds further downward pressure. As a result, Brent crude fell below $70 per barrel in early May and briefly traded under $65. For Kazakhstan, where oil exports are a key source of budgetary and foreign exchange income, this trend spells trouble, and KMG is particularly exposed. The “Black Hole” in KMG’s Finances Public data shows that KMG’s production costs vary from $40 to $70 per barrel, depending on the field. However, factoring in transportation, taxes, and social obligations, the real breakeven point nears $90 per barrel. Aging infrastructure in the Mangistau region, reliant on constant technical upkeep and subsidies, only adds to the burden. KMG’s debt load compounds the challenge. At the end of 2024, its total debt exceeded 4 trillion tenge ($7.87 billion). With export revenues dwindling, debt servicing is becoming untenable. Even short-term dips to $60-65 per barrel could have systemic consequences, stalling new investments, triggering layoffs, and slashing social spending. A key drain is OzenMunayGas (OMG), KMG’s subsidiary in Zhanaozen, where production costs reportedly hit $90 per barrel. “OzenMunayGas exemplifies how populism, inflated promises, and stagnant reforms can turn a major asset into a financial sinkhole,” Arman Bataev, a former internal auditor at KMG has stated. On his Telegram channel, Finmentor.kz, Bataev warned that a $90 production cost versus Brent at $59 is “not a temporary hardship but a dead end.” OMG required 30 billion KZT in financial aid last year, and Bataev predicts it may require 60-70 billion KZT in 2025. KMG Downplays Risks KazMunayGas officials maintain that the company is “prepared for all scenarios” and holds “sufficient reserves.” At a May press briefing, Deputy Chairman Aset Magauov emphasized that 70% of KMG’s output is sold domestically, insulating it somewhat from global price volatility. “Analysts expect prices to average $65 per barrel this year, but forecasts are inherently uncertain,” Magauov said. “We have contingency plans and cost-optimization measures ready. We are equipped to handle price fluctuations.” Magauov also noted that domestic oil prices are lower than export prices, and products like gasoline and diesel, refined at KMG’s three facilities, are now sold at market rates following the end of state price controls. He added...

Victory Day Diplomacy: Central Asia’s Balancing Act and Putin’s Diminished Spotlight

Every year, Moscow’s Red Square transforms into a stage for one of Russia's most celebrated traditions: Victory Day, an event which marks the Soviet Union’s triumph over Nazi Germany in World War II. Yet, as tanks roll through the cobblestone streets and military bands echo under the Kremlin walls, the occasion feels more heavily laden with geopolitical undertones than historical reminiscence these days. Against the backdrop of ongoing conflicts and shifting alliances, the presence of Central Asian leaders at this year’s event speaks to the region’s delicate relationship with the Russian Federation. But the question remains: amidst the pomp and circumstance, is there much for Vladimir Putin to celebrate? Central Asia’s Careful Balancing Act The attendance of Central Asian leaders at the Victory Day parade is a striking show of diplomatic choreography. On the surface, their presence will underscore the shared historical legacy of the Soviet era, when the sacrifices of the Central Asian republics contributed to the Allied victory in the Second World War. However, a more pragmatic lens reveals a balancing act that defines the region’s foreign policy. The region finds itself at the crossroads of global powers vying for influence in Central Asia. While Moscow leans on historical ties and cultural commonalities to retain its sway, Beijing’s economic clout continues to reshape the region’s trade networks and infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, as the inaugural EU-Central Asia Summit attests to, the European Union is eager to expand its reach, whilst hungry for Rare Earth Elements in which the region is rich, the U.S. is waiting in the wings. For Central Asian leaders, participating in Victory Day celebrations signals a nod to Russia’s historic role but also keeps the door open for economic and security cooperation. Amidst the shifting architecture of global politics, their diplomatic strategy remains one of pragmatism, seeking benefits from multiple partners while avoiding any over-alignment. What Does Russia Gain from the Optics? The presence of 29 leaders from across the globe – including Chinese President Xi Jinping - offers Moscow valuable optics at a time when its international relationships face significant strain. Last year, only nine attended. Isolated by Western sanctions over the invasion of Ukraine and with much of the world’s media painting Russia as cut off from the global stage, the impression of a united front with Central Asia helps the Kremlin portray the opposite. Victory Day, therefore, becomes a geopolitical tool, with the attendance of Central Asian leaders enabling Putin to send a message of shared unity within Russia’s historical sphere of influence. It tells both domestic and international audiences that Moscow retains significant allies, reinforcing the image of resilience despite ongoing challenges. How Much Does Moscow Truly Celebrate? The Victory Day parade is an event that is watched by an estimated three-quarters of the Russian public, drumming up patriotism as the state seeks to become the custodian of collective memory. Behind the spectacle, however, signs of disquiet are proving hard to ignore. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has disrupted trade and migration flows...