Uzbekistan Features - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 31 - 36 of 861

Middle East Crisis

Trump’s New Threat Against Iran Collides With Central Asia’s Economic Interests

U.S. President Donald Trump has threatened economic consequences for any country that continues to provide support to Iran, promising Tehran “Economic Warfare and Isolation on an unprecedented scale.” Washington has not yet announced specific new measures. For Central Asia, the warning comes as economic and transport links with Iran are developing. Kazakhstan is building its own terminal at Iran’s largest port, Tajikistan is discussing fuel purchases and new transport routes, Uzbekistan is trying to protect trade that passes through Iran, and Turkmenistan is expanding transport and energy cooperation with Tehran. Each country has its own reasons for developing these ties, but they share one concern: for landlocked Central Asia, Iran provides one of the few overland routes to the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. Washington’s attempt to tighten Iran’s economic isolation therefore affects not only the region’s relations with Tehran, but also its own plans to diversify trade and transit. None of this means that Central Asian governments are prepared to disregard U.S. sanctions or enter into a political confrontation with Washington on Tehran’s behalf. The threat of secondary restrictions could cause banks, carriers, and private companies to withdraw from individual transactions even without formal decisions by their governments. Trump has not yet explained exactly what instruments he intends to use to enforce the isolation he announced. Kazakhstan Looks to the Persian Gulf Iran intensified its work with Central Asia well before Trump’s latest threat. In mid-June, the Iranian Minister of Roads and Urban Development Farzaneh Sadegh visited Astana. In talks with Kazakhstan’s Deputy Prime Minister Serik Zhumangarin, the two sides noted that bilateral trade had increased by 26.4% in 2025 to $430.2 million. Astana and Tehran now want to raise it to $3 billion, using, among other things, the free trade agreement between Iran and the Eurasian Economic Union, of which Kazakhstan is a member. The plans go beyond trade. Freight traffic along the International North-South Transport Corridor, which links Russia and Central Asia with Iran and Persian Gulf ports, rose by 12% in 2025 to 3.5 million metric tons. Rail freight between Kazakhstan and Iran also increased by 69%. Astana’s main interest lies even farther south. Iran has allowed Kazakhstan to establish its own transport and logistics terminal at Shahid Rajaee in Bandar Abbas, the country’s largest commercial port. On June 28, the two sides signed a Build-Operate-Transfer agreement. It runs for 27 years, with two years allocated for construction and another 25 for operation. Commercial operations are scheduled to begin in the project’s third year. For Kazakhstan, this is more than simply an overseas terminal. Its Foreign Ministry explicitly links the project to opening access for Kazakh cargo to markets in the Persian Gulf, South and Southeast Asia, and East Africa. In July, Foreign Minister Yermek Kosherbayev again reaffirmed Astana’s interest in the project during a visit to Iran. The ministry also cited a 26.4% increase in bilateral trade in 2025 to $430.2 million. Astana is also considering another Iranian port, Chabahar, on the Indian Ocean....

Environmental Safeguards

Pasture Gives Way to Solar Power in Uzbekistan as Audit Remains Unpublished

Each spring, nine households grazed livestock on a stretch of desert pasture in Uzbekistan’s Bukhara Region. The land is now the site of the Nur Bukhara solar and battery plant, but an audit intended to show whether promised livelihood protections worked remains unpublished. Seven of the households came from the nearby settlement of Kirilishon and used the state-owned pasture without permits or formal agreements. A herder and his partner, identified publicly only as H1 and H2, grazed animals there through a short-term agreement with Alat Qorakolchilik LLC, a local livestock company holding a sublease on the land. The nine households included 43 people. The plant began operating in September 2025 and was inaugurated that December. The Uzbek government awarded the project to Masdar, an Abu Dhabi-based renewable energy developer that built the facility and now operates it. Nur Bukhara combines a 250-megawatt solar plant with a 63-megawatt battery system capable of storing 126 megawatt-hours of electricity. Masdar says it can supply more than 55,000 homes, while the World Bank described it as Central Asia’s first utility-scale renewable energy project to combine solar generation with battery storage. During a consultation on May 7, 2023, Kirilishon residents asked for the solar plant to be moved. If construction went ahead, they wanted replacement grazing land near the village and priority consideration for project jobs. H1 and H2 had a documented right to use the pasture, while the seven Kirilishon households did not. However, the safeguards required by Nur Bukhara’s international lenders covered both formal and informal users whose livelihoods would be disrupted by the project. Masdar commissioned a livelihood restoration plan setting out the assistance the households were to receive before construction cut off access to the site. It identified about 260 hectares of replacement pasture, equivalent to one square mile, for H1 and H2. Alat Qorakolchilik also identified approximately 1,000 hectares, or 3.9 square miles, of additional land available to herders. The seven informal households were to be allowed to use replacement pasture without obtaining formal agreements. The larger tract was not described as land reserved exclusively for those households. The published map did not record which final area each household would receive. The livelihood measures also included priority access to project employment and additional support for households considered vulnerable. In an official statement to The Times of Central Asia, a Masdar spokesperson said replacement grazing arrangements were provided before access to the project site was restricted, “maintaining equivalent grazing conditions,” and that “several members of affected households obtained project-related employment opportunities.” The statement cited monitoring by international lenders and an independent third-party review, with the completion audit finalized in September 2025. It reported no related complaints from affected households through the project’s grievance mechanism. The completion audit was not included with Masdar’s response. As of August 20, 2026, it was also absent from Masdar’s Nur Bukhara page and the International Finance Corporation’s project disclosure. Simonyan Consulting, which says it was engaged by the project company to conduct the audit, lists the assignment as “2025–ongoing.” Without the audit,...

Foreign Investment

Tashkent’s Rise Reshapes Central Asia’s Business Landscape

Tashkent is changing faster than it can adjust to its own growth. The city is already pressing against the limits of its existing airport; a vast new city designed for up to two million people is being built alongside it, and a separate financial jurisdiction drawing on English common law is being created. Uzbekistan is opening up further to foreign investment, and nearly two-thirds of the country’s foreign-invested enterprises are already concentrated in the capital. But being the leading business city in your own country and becoming a regional hub are not the same thing. Tashkent already has strong competitors in Central Asia. Given that competition, it is more useful to examine why companies are choosing Tashkent now and what the city still lacks than to declare it the region’s new business capital. As of July 1, 2026, Uzbekistan had 20,502 operating enterprises with foreign investment. Their number had increased about 1.4 times over five years. China accounted for the largest number, with 6,060 companies, followed by Russia with 3,454, Turkey with 2,293, and Kazakhstan with 1,307. As of June 1, 12,480 of the 19,921 enterprises with foreign investment then operating in Uzbekistan were located in Tashkent. That was almost 63%. Why Tashkent? Part of the answer is obvious: the institutions and services businesses rely on are concentrated there, from government and finance to professional services, technology firms, and skilled workers. That creates a network effect: companies come because partners, clients, and suppliers are already there. But the capital had roughly the same administrative advantages ten years ago without attracting business on anything like the current scale. What changed first was Uzbekistan’s economy itself. After 2016, the country began moving away from its previous closed economic model. One of the first major steps was currency liberalization in 2017. Changes followed in trade, taxation, privatization, and the treatment of foreign investors. The state still plays an enormous role in the economy, but it has become considerably easier for foreign private businesses to operate. Uzbekistan’s GDP grew by 7.7% in 2025. The IMF expects growth of about 6.8% in 2026, while pointing to a longstanding problem: the state’s large footprint in the economy, including major state-owned enterprises and banks, continues to constrain competition and private-sector development. The combination of rapid growth and a gradually more open economy has benefited Tashkent more than any other city in the country. Uzbekistan also has an advantage that cannot be created by government decree. With a population of about 38.5 million, it is Central Asia’s most populous country and has a large domestic consumer base. It is also the region’s only country that borders all four other Central Asian republics. For an international company, Tashkent can serve both as an office for the Uzbek market and as a gateway to neighboring countries. Now, Tashkent is entering territory long occupied by others. For decades, Almaty has concentrated banks, international representative offices, private companies, and professional talent. In 2018, the Astana International Financial Centre began operations, with a...

Cybersecurity

Uzbekistan’s Cerberus Wins Road to TechCrunch Regional Final

Uzbek startup Cerberus has won the regional final of Road to TechCrunch Startup Battlefield 2026, earning a ticket to San Francisco. For Uzbekistan’s young technology industry, the result is another sign of its push beyond the domestic market. For Cerberus, the challenge is now to convince international investors and clients that an AI tool developed in Tashkent to find vulnerabilities can compete in the global cybersecurity market. Cerberus took first place in the regional final on August 12. WeGlobal AI finished second, followed by LOOQ. Twenty-two startups reached the final after being selected from 726 applications from 39 countries. Uzbekistan was represented by six projects. The three winners will represent Central Eurasia at Startup Battlefield 200 in San Francisco. TechCrunch Disrupt 2026 will run from October 13 to 15. Twenty of the 200 companies will be selected to pitch on the main stage, with five advancing to the final round to compete for the $100,000 equity-free grand prize and the Disrupt Cup. The three regional winners will share a $100,000 investment pool, with Cerberus receiving $50,000. Competition rules state that each investment will be made on standard market terms in exchange for equity. Astana Hub Ventures and IT Park Ventures are providing the funding in partnership with Silkroad Innovation Hub. According to the organizers, the winners will also receive a combined $100,000 in OpenAI API credits. Cerberus founder and CEO Aziz Akhmedkhodjaev told The Times of Central Asia that two factors were behind the company’s success: the product and the team’s ability to explain the problem it solves. “I would say there are two main things here. The first, of course, is the product. Everyone understood that we had created something the market really needs,” he said. “I think that was the key to winning. I didn’t spend a single second of the pitch on anything other than clearly explaining the problem, how the solution works, and its potential.” Cerberus describes its product as an AI-powered cybersecurity system capable of finding vulnerabilities in corporate applications and IT infrastructure. Demand for such tools is growing alongside the spread of generative AI: companies and individual developers can write software faster, but the volume of code that needs to be checked for errors and potential attack vectors is also increasing. “Literally everyone is writing code with artificial intelligence now. Vulnerabilities, coding errors, and other weaknesses are appearing much faster,” Akhmedkhodjaev said. The company says Cerberus allows users to give its AI agent access to an application or IT infrastructure and task it with finding vulnerabilities. The agent can also test authentication and perform other security checks. According to Akhmedkhodjaev, however, using a general-purpose AI model for such work can itself create risks. “If you give Claude or another AI access to a vulnerability in a real bank, even the smallest mistake can lead to serious financial losses,” he said. The company says Cerberus is designed to restrict what its AI agent can do after identifying a weakness. “In our project, there is a...

Women's History

Opinion: A Century Apart, Two Official Visions of Uzbek Womanhood

A century ago, in 1926, the Russian-language Uzbek newspaper Pravda Vostoka published an appeal to the “working women of the Soviet East” written by Clara Zetkin – a Marxist and a women’s rights advocate from Germany. In its appeal for women’s unveiling, it asked where the mullahs had been while women suffered through the “dark past” and promised that Soviet law now shone “bright rays” over a liberated and free Soviet present. It closed not with a tribute to women, but with a slogan: “Forward to socialism! Always ready to fight for world revolution!” There was a significant problem with this text. Literacy among Uzbek women was extremely low, particularly in rural areas, and those who could read generally read Uzbek rather than Russian. Historian Marianne Kamp documents this gap in her book The New Woman in Uzbekistan. The article calling women to political consciousness was, therefore, not directly accessible to the overwhelming majority of its stated audience. That gap is not just a flaw in the propaganda or evidence of its exaggerated reach. Rather, it explains how the propaganda worked. A Russian newspaper speaking to Uzbek women who largely could not read it depended on party cadres, activists, public readings, meetings, and other literate intermediaries who could disseminate the message in Uzbek. It did not address an existing constituency so much as construct one – handing local organisers a model of the politically awakened Soviet woman they were expected to promote in villages where practically no woman could have read the article herself. [caption id="attachment_54189" align="aligncenter" width="1774"] Uzbek women in the old city of Tashkent before going out into the street on International Women’s Day, March 8, 1924. Photo: Public domain.[/caption] The “working women of the Soviet East” were therefore both an audience and an emerging political category. That category served a larger claim the Soviet state was making about Central Asia: that the region was “backward” and required revolutionary socialist transformation. In Soviet rhetoric, as in some earlier Russian imperial writing, the condition of women became one of the principal measures by which a society’s level of development was judged. A society’s position on the imagined path from feudalism to modernity could be read from whether its women were veiled or unveiled, secluded or employed, illiterate or educated. Transforming women’s appearance and public role offered the state an especially visible means of demonstrating that Central Asia was leaving its supposedly backward past behind. This does not mean that Soviet female emancipation was merely an empty disguise for imperial domination. Many contemporary works by historians such as Adrienne Edgar, Marianne Kamp, and Shoshana Keller showcase the genuine changes produced by Soviet literacy campaigns, education, employment, family law, and women’s political participation. Soviet gender policy did not simply reproduce the restrained paternalism of the tsarist administration. It attempted, and in many ways succeeded, at a much more radical transformation in the realm of gender politics. What it does complicate is who was doing the defining. It is tempting to read...

Power Grid

Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan Give Conflicting Accounts of Four-Country Blackout

Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan have given differing accounts of what triggered the August 14 blackout that cut electricity across swathes of Central Asia. Three days later, the initiating event remains unresolved, and the times released by the two sides do not fit neatly into the same sequence. Kazakhstan’s national grid operator KEGOC says two hydrogenerators at Kyrgyzstan’s Toktogul Hydropower Plant, with a combined capacity of 600 MW, disconnected at 2:37 p.m. Kazakhstan time. KEGOC said the sudden loss of generation overloaded the North-East-South transit corridor, separating southern Kazakhstan from the rest of the national grid and the interconnected systems of Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. A special commission is investigating the causes. Meanwhile, Kyrgyzstan’s National Electric Grid has given a different chronology. It said that at 3:34 p.m. Kyrgyzstan time, an external disconnection occurred on a high-voltage line linking the northern and southern parts of Kazakhstan’s power system. The Central Asian network then split into an isolated section, and Kyrgyzstan temporarily operated separately while automatic protection systems worked to protect equipment. The one-hour difference between the countries’ clocks makes the discrepancy clearer. Kazakhstan has used UTC+5 nationwide since 2024, while Kyrgyzstan uses UTC+6. That puts Kyrgyzstan’s reported line disconnection at 2:34 p.m. Kazakhstan time, three minutes before KEGOC’s stated 2:37 p.m. Toktogul shutdown. The two times may describe different stages of a fast-moving cascade, but they do not establish the same starting point. A third timestamp complicates the sequence. Alatau Zharyq Company said three 500 kV KEGOC transmission lines shut down at 2:38 p.m., and that those lines triggered automatic load-shedding and frequency protection in Almaty and the surrounding region. Taken together, the public statements leave a sequence of 2:34 p.m., 2:37 p.m., and 2:38 p.m. that investigators will need to reconcile. TCA reporters in Almaty and Bishkek experienced power cuts, while local media reported outages in Dushanbe, Khujand, and southern parts of Uzbekistan. In Kazakhstan, the disturbance affected consumers in the Zhambyl, Turkistan, Kyzylorda, Zhetysu, and Almaty regions, with further restrictions in Karaganda, Ulytau, and Abai. KEGOC said supplies were restored across the affected regions later that afternoon. The four-country impact reflects how tightly the systems are connected. Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan operate in parallel through the Central Asian power system. Cross-border links allow operators to share electricity and reserve capacity, but also mean that a sudden loss of generation or a major transmission line can be felt beyond one national grid before protection systems isolate the disturbance. Central Asia has been here before. In January 2022, a major blackout hit southern Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. The event also involved a sharp imbalance on the regional network and the separation of Kazakhstan’s northern and southern grids. Its precise starting point was disputed in the immediate aftermath. The regional grid dates to the Soviet period. Uzbekistan later withdrew from the old electricity ring, leaving Tajikistan largely isolated for years. Regional links have since been rebuilt; Tajikistan began reconnecting to the unified system in 2024. An Asian Development Bank project is adding...