Latest - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 19 - 24 of 12685

Identity and a New National Canon: Interview with Kazakhstan Historian Zhaxylyk Sabitov

Interest in Kazakhstan’s history is increasingly moving beyond academic circles. For many people, it has become a way to understand the country’s modern identity as well as its past. The Times of Central Asia spoke with historian Zhaxylyk Sabitov, director of the Institute for the Study of the Ulus of Jochi, about why many chapters of Kazakhstan’s history remain insufficiently studied. The Ulus of Jochi, also known as the Golden Horde, was one of the largest medieval states in Eurasia and is closely tied to debates over Kazakhstan’s statehood and historical memory. The interview also explored which topics resonate most strongly with society today and how a new understanding of national memory is taking shape. TCA: To begin, please tell us a little about yourself. How did you become interested in history, and why did you decide to work in this field? Zhaxylyk: I am the director of the Research Institute for the Study of the Jochi Ulus. My interest in history began in childhood. The problem was that in the 1980s and 1990s, history in Kazakhstan was taught rather poorly. There were few textbooks and teaching materials, and schoolchildren generally knew little about the subject. That is why I was always interested in trying to understand the past for myself. In addition, I inherited a library of history books from my grandfather. I read those books, and in the 1990s my mother helped me buy new publications. All of this gradually shaped my interest in the history of Kazakhstan. You could say I became interested in history while still at school and later continued to study it professionally. TCA: For readers who may not know much about you, how would you describe your research work and the main topics you focus on? Zhaxylyk: I have several main areas of work. The first is the history of the Golden Horde. This was the state that preceded the Kazakh Khanate and occupied a vast territory stretching from the Altai to the Danube. The second area is the history of the Kazakh Khanate. This also remains insufficiently studied. In the history of both the Golden Horde and the Kazakh Khanate, there were more than 100 khans. It is interesting to study how they interacted, where and how they ruled, and under what circumstances their rule took place. The third area is genetics, or the genetic history of Kazakh tribes and clans, as well as those of other Turkic peoples, including Kyrgyz, Karakalpaks, Nogais, and Bashkirs. This topic allows us to address questions that have been debated for two centuries. For example, there are many theories regarding the origins of certain Kazakh tribes. With the help of genetics, we are trying to understand which of these theories is closer to the truth and, more broadly, to better understand the ethnogenesis of the Kazakhs and other Turkic peoples. The fourth topic is nation-building policy and historical memory. I am interested in how the state constructs the canon of national history and how this influences...

Life & Culture Central Asia Opinions

How Koreans Were Deported to Central Asia: Myths and Reality

The 1937 deportation from the Soviet Far East was the greatest tragedy in the history of Soviet Koreans, Koryo-saram, the self-designation of ethnic Koreans living across the former Soviet Union. It became the first case in Soviet history in which an entire ethnic group was forcibly relocated solely on the basis of ethnicity. Later, Soviet Germans, Crimean Tatars, Chechens, Ingush, Kalmyks, Poles, Kurds, and many other peoples would endure similar repression. For decades, this history remained largely suppressed, giving rise to numerous myths and misconceptions surrounding the deportation. Yet it is inaccurate to claim that Koreans first appeared in Kazakhstan and Central Asia only in 1937. Historical and archaeological evidence points to earlier Korean ties with the region. The 1897 census of the Russian Empire recorded 42 Koreans living in Turkestan, while in 1929 a Korean agricultural cooperative called “Kazakh Rice” was established in Kazakhstan. Nevertheless, 1937 marked the beginning of the modern history of Koreans in Central Asia. Myth One: The Deportation Was a Sudden Decision One common belief is that Joseph Stalin suddenly decided to deport Koreans from the Soviet Far East as part of a campaign against Japanese espionage. Reality In fact, plans to relocate Koreans had been discussed since the late 1920s. The Politburo of the Soviet Communist Party repeatedly revisited the issue of the Korean population living in border regions. The joint decree issued by the Soviet government and Communist Party on August 21, 1937 (No. 1428-326ss), was the culmination of a long-term state policy. By the mid-1930s, the Soviet Far East was increasingly viewed as a vulnerable frontier zone. Japan had expanded its military presence in the region, and Soviet authorities feared a possible war. Koreans living in compact settlements near the border, while maintaining cultural and family ties with Korea, came to be regarded as politically unreliable. Ironically, many of them had originally fled to Russia precisely to escape Japanese colonial rule in Korea. Myth Two: The Deportation Was Entirely About Japanese Espionage Officially, Soviet authorities justified the deportation as a measure aimed at preventing Japanese espionage. Reality The espionage threat served more as a pretext than the principal cause. During the years of the Great Terror, Stalin’s regime perceived danger not only in individuals, but also in entire social and ethnic groups. Suspicion replaced evidence, and ethnic origin itself could become grounds for repression. Local officials sought to demonstrate political vigilance, while the state simultaneously pursued broader strategic and economic goals: strengthening military control in the Far East and redirecting labor resources to Kazakhstan and Central Asia, regions devastated by collectivization and famine. [caption id="attachment_48623" align="aligncenter" width="854"] Museum of the History of Russian Koreans (Koryo-saram) in Ussuriysk.[/caption] Myth Three: The Operation Was Chaotic For many deported families, the expulsion felt like a sudden catastrophe, creating the impression of disorder and improvisation. Reality At the state level, however, the operation was carefully organized. Before the deportation, party purges and political repression had already targeted the Korean intelligentsia. Soviet authorities fabricated cases involving alleged...

Home Opinion Head Uzbekistan Tajikistan International Affairs Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Opinions Turkmenistan International Affairs International Affairs Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Kyrgyzstan International Affairs Tajikistan Opinions Kazakhstan Kazakhstan International Affairs Turkmenistan Opinions Opinions Turkmenistan Features Features Kazakhstan Opinions Kyrgyzstan Opinions Uzbekistan International Affairs Kazakhstan Featurees

Opinion: The U.S. Still Doesn’t Know Where Central Asia Belongs

Washington cannot decide where Central Asia belongs. Is it part of Europe? Asia? The Middle East? The confusion is on full display in how the House of Representatives has reassigned the region across subcommittees in rapid succession. In the 116th Congress, which convened in 2019, Central Asia fell under the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, Energy and the Environment. Two years later, in the 117th Congress, it was moved to the Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, Central Asia and Nonproliferation. That arrangement barely settled before the 118th Congress shifted it again—this time to the Subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia. Now, in the 119th Congress, it has been relocated to the Subcommittee on South and Central Asia. On the banks of the Potomac, Central Asia has taken on a nomadic life of its own—constantly on the move, never quite settling in one place. At the State Department, Central Asia is grouped under the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs alongside Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. At the Pentagon, by contrast, the Middle East team oversees relations with Central Asia, alongside countries like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. These mismatches are not just clumsy; they are strategically dangerous. By misplacing Central Asia, Washington is misreading the geography of China’s rise. It is time for Washington to stop the bureaucratic musical chairs and place Central Asia within a coherent grand strategy. Far from being an afterthought, the region is one of the most consequential pieces of the geopolitical puzzle facing the United States: how to respond to China’s strategy. This is because Central Asia sits at the heart of China’s decades-long effort to move its critical lifelines away from the Indo-Pacific and onto the Eurasian landmass. Over the past 15 years, China has quietly reoriented its energy routes, reducing reliance on maritime pathways vulnerable to U.S. naval dominance—particularly chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca—and expanded overland imports across Eurasia. Today, China imports significant volumes of natural gas via pipelines from Turkmenistan and Russia, as well as crude oil from Kazakhstan. These continental routes are largely insulated from maritime interdiction, giving Beijing strategic resilience. Central Asia should be understood through this lens. For China, the region is not peripheral—it is essential. The pipelines, railways and trade corridors that underpin China’s resilience all pass through Xinjiang and Central Asia. In this sense, Central Asia is not merely adjacent to China; it is embedded in China’s vision of the future. This is why Washington’s practice of grouping Central Asia with South Asia misses the mark. The two regions operate under fundamentally different strategic logics. South Asia is centered on the Indian subcontinent, shaped by maritime dynamics and the India‑Pakistan rivalry. Central Asia, by contrast, is a continental crossroads—defined by overland connectivity, energy flows and great‑power competition across Eurasia. India, meanwhile, is geographically constrained—lacking direct land access to Central Asia due to territory administered by Pakistan and separated from China by the Himalayas—leaving it...

Home Turkmenistan Turkmenistan Business & Economy Business & Economy Features Turkmenistan Lead Story

Washington Meets Ashgabat as Turkmen-American Business Cooperation Association Debuts

On May 7, the Turkmen-American Business Cooperation Association (TABCA) and the Embassy of Turkmenistan in Washington marked the organization’s official launch through a series of daylong events attended by members of the business community, diplomats, and dignitaries, including senior representatives from the U.S. Department of Commerce. Serving as a definitive bridge between the business communities of the United States and Turkmenistan, TABCA aims to promote bilateral trade, support market access initiatives, and encourage strategic partnerships and innovation across key sectors. More than 50 Turkmen and American companies joined the meetings, underscoring Ashgabat’s continued push toward a more open and globally engaged economy—one that inevitably brings both opportunity and risk. According to Esen Aydogdyyev, Turkmenistan’s Ambassador to the United States, “We are committed to cultivating broad international partnerships where agreements contribute to national development, economic resilience, and long-term independence for its citizens. Ashgabat is seeking broader investor and commercial engagement, which is compatible with our strategic autonomy and non-aligned status.” [caption id="attachment_48630" align="aligncenter" width="901"] (L/R) Viktoriya Frolova, Commerical Specialist, U.S. Embassy Turkmenistan, former Ambassador of Turkmenistan to the U.S., Meret Orozov, Chairman of the Board, Turkmen American Business Cooperation Association Nurgeldi Meredov, and Mr.Maksat Annamyradov, Board Member, Turkmen American Business Cooperation Association. Image: Kakajan Ovezov, Begench Arazalyyev[/caption] The initiative reflects Turkmenistan’s effort to strengthen ties with Western investors while maintaining its neutrality and independent foreign policy. Economic growth is strongest, the participants echoed, when enterprise creates broad opportunity and shared prosperity. Ambassador Aydogdyyev said that “priority areas for cooperation include trade and commerce, energy, transportation and communications, agriculture, renewable energy, the chemical and food sectors, as well as environmental protection. We especially value entrepreneurship and small business partnerships between Turkmenistan and the United States. In addition, we want Turkmen entrepreneurs to play a role in supporting economic growth and employment opportunities in the United States, which they are already contributing to today.” Win-Win is the Guiding Principle TABCA’s official launch in Washington is more than symbolic—it reflects a meaningful new chapter in U.S.-Turkmenistan relations, grounded in practical business cooperation and a shared commitment to cross-border investment. While some observers in Turkmenistan remain cautious about the risk of outside geopolitical agendas or economic models that favor a narrow set of interests under the banner of long-term prosperity and commercial diplomacy, the focus today is on building fair opportunity, productive partnership, and tangible commercial results. “U.S. and Turkmen businesses are already helping drive jobs and economic growth in both countries—a reminder of why stronger commercial ties matter,” said Nurgeldi Meredov, TABCA’s Chairman. “Our goal is to expand trade, boost investment, and create long-term partnerships that open new opportunities for companies on both sides.” [caption id="attachment_48631" align="aligncenter" width="712"] Jamila Kerimova, founder of “Ish nokady” (standing); image: Kakajan Ovezov, Begench Arazalyyev[/caption] At TABCA’s morning session, Turkmen businesses highlighted B2B engagement and SME growth opportunities, showcasing companies in logistics, e-commerce, manufacturing, consulting, and real estate. The presentations were followed by networking aimed at fostering direct commercial partnerships. Nurgeldi Meredov, alongside Meret Orazov, former Ambassador of Turkmenistan...

Home Tajikistan Life & Culture Uzbekistan Turkmenistan Life & Culture Life & Culture Turkmenistan Tajikistan Kazakhstan Life & Culture Kazakhstan Tajikistan Features Features Uzbekistan Life & Culture Kazakhstan Featurees

Pentagon UFO Files Include 1994 Tajik Air Report Over Kazakhstan

On May 8, the Pentagon released the first batch of U.S. Department of War files on unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP), including a State Department cable describing a 1994 sighting by Tajik Air pilots over Kazakhstan. The new archive, called the Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters, was created in response to a directive from U.S. president Donald Trump. It covers unresolved cases where the government cannot make a definitive determination from available data, with further releases expected “every few weeks.” The department uses the current term UAP as well as the older term unidentified flying object (UFO). The release includes a three-page unclassified State Department cable from the U.S. embassy in Dushanbe. Dated January 31, 1994, it is titled “Tajik Air Pilots Report Unidentified Flying Object” and carries a State Department “Released in Full” stamp dated February 25, 2026. The same cable had previously appeared in CUFON’s archive of State Department UFO records, released in 2000 in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. According to the cable, Tajik Air chief pilot Ed Rhodes, identified as a United States citizen, and two American pilot colleagues reported that they had encountered a UFO on January 27, 1994, while flying at 41,000 feet in a Boeing 747SP. The location was given as latitude 45 north and longitude 55 east, over Kazakhstan. The pilots described the object as an intensely bright light approaching from the east at high speed and at an altitude far above their aircraft. They said they watched it for about 40 minutes as it moved in circles, corkscrews, and 90-degree turns. Rhodes reportedly took several photographs with a pocket Olympus camera and said copies would be sent to the embassy and to the Tajikistan desk at the State Department if they came out. No such photographs appear in the released cable. The crew could not identify the object’s shape because it was dark. They described its light as resembling a “bow wave,” and later said the aircraft flew beneath contrails left by the object after sunrise. Rhodes estimated those contrails to be at about 100,000 feet. The embassy suggested that the object might have been a meteor entering and skipping off the Earth’s atmosphere. Rhodes and the other pilots rejected that explanation, saying their years flying passenger aircraft for Pan Am had given them extensive experience with meteors and space junk. Based on the object’s reported speed and maneuverability, Rhodes expressed the view, which the cable says his crew seemed to support, that it was “extraterrestrial and under intelligent control.” The U.S. government recorded what the pilots said, but the cable does not confirm what they saw, as demonstrated in the file’s cautionary note: “We have no opinion and report the above for what it may be worth.” The release adds an official U.S. record to a regional history in which unexplained aerial reports have surfaced in Soviet research programs and, more recently, in media and online claims. During the Soviet period, reports of anomalous...

Home Tajikistan Life & Culture Uzbekistan Turkmenistan Life & Culture Life & Culture Turkmenistan Kyrgyzstan Life & Culture Tajikistan Uzbekistan Features Kyrgyzstan Kazakhstan Life & Culture Kazakhstan Tajikistan Features Turkmenistan Features Features Uzbekistan Life & Culture Kazakhstan Featurees Kyrgyzstan Features

Pannier and Hillard’s Spotlight on Central Asia: New Episode Out Now

As Managing Editor of The Times of Central Asia, I’m delighted that, in partnership with the Oxus Society for Central Asian Affairs, from October 19, we are the home of the Spotlight on Central Asia podcast. Chaired by seasoned broadcasters Bruce Pannier of RFE/RL’s long-running Majlis podcast and Michael Hillard of The Red Line, each fortnightly instalment will take you on a deep dive into the latest news, developments, security issues, and social trends across an increasingly pivotal region. This week, the team will be tracking the culmination of Bishkek's power struggle as charges are formally brought against Tashiyev, alongside a fresh wave of EU sanctions that look designed to make an example of one Central Asian state. We'll also break down the shutdown of a key Kazakh pipeline carrying oil to Europe, Russia's increasingly blunt statements on foreign military deployments across the region, Ashgabat's crackdown on Starlink connections in Turkmenistan, and the EU's push to turn Central Asia into a transit point for Afghans being deported back to Afghanistan. We'll also cover the spread of a new strain of foot-and-mouth disease tearing through the region. And for our main story, we turn to the mounting ecological crisis in the Caspian Sea, where falling water levels and worsening environmental pressures are becoming impossible for the region to ignore. On the show this week: Vadim Ni, co-founder of the Save the Caspian Sea movement.