Our People > Timur Serikuly

Contributor

Timur Serikuly is Editor-in-Chief at Open World Policy Lab, an independent policy research center based in Astana, Kazakhstan. He has professional experience in diplomatic and peacekeeping activities in the Middle East and previously led analytical units in government service. His areas of expertise include Central Asia, regional security, geopolitics, Afghanistan, and transport connectivity. He contributes analysis and policy-oriented commentary on political, economic, and security developments across Central Asia and the wider region.

Articles

Finance

Central Asia’s Digital Currency Ambitions: New Opportunities and Old Constraints

Central Asia is entering a period of accelerated financial transformation. Kyrgyzstan has launched one of the world’s first state-backed gold-backed stablecoin, USDKG, a digital asset fully backed by physical gold and issued under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Finance. Simultaneously, Kazakhstan is advancing one of the most mature central bank digital currency (CBDC) initiatives in the post-Soviet space: the digital tenge (national currency). Uzbekistan is developing its own digital economy framework, while Tajikistan and Turkmenistan are slowly initiating financial modernization. Amid these developments, Central Asia is emerging as a surprisingly bold laboratory for digital finance. This raises a pressing question: can the region develop a unified digital currency ecosystem that reduces dollar dependency, facilitates cross-border transactions, and enhances economic sovereignty? Strategic Logic of Digital Integration The idea of a regional digital currency is no longer utopian. Central Asia is one of the world's most significant hubs for cross-border remittances. In 2024 alone, migrants sent back a record $5.8 billion to Tajikistan (45% of GDP), approximately $15 billion to Uzbekistan, $2.9 billion to Kyrgyzstan, and $258 million to Kazakhstan. The current system is costly, slow, and heavily reliant on the dollar. Digital currencies could drastically reduce transaction costs for both migrant workers and businesses. In remote areas, where banking infrastructure is underdeveloped, cash still dominates. CBDCs could allow citizens to access state payment services directly, bypassing commercial banks. Digital finance also offers protection against external economic shocks, sanctions, and volatility. Coupled with the digitalization drives in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan, and regional integration ambitions, such as Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s proposal to create a Central Asian Community, conditions are forming for financial cooperation. Diverse National Models Approaches to digital currency vary significantly. Kazakhstan’s digital tenge, led by the National Bank, emphasizes institutional stability, security, and integration with existing banking systems. A full launch is expected by the end of 2025. Kyrgyzstan has taken a more unconventional route. Its USDKG stablecoin, built on the Tron blockchain and backed by gold, aims to assert financial autonomy. However, it raises concerns about transparency, sustainability, and the reaction of traditional banks. A gold-backed stablecoin also directly challenges dollar dominance. Crypto analysts such as Ryan Adams speculate that Washington may be monitoring Kyrgyzstan’s experiment closely, fearing it could inspire similar moves in India, China, and Brazil. Uzbekistan is advancing its digital economy cautiously. While its government maintains strict cryptocurrency controls, this regulatory clarity may lay groundwork for a CBDC, though it limits space for innovation. Tajikistan and Turkmenistan remain on the sidelines, but rising demographic pressures, migration, and logistics projects are nudging both toward digital finance. The lack of coordination among these models represents both an opportunity for experimentation and a barrier to integration. Key Challenges Despite growing momentum, the road to a unified digital architecture in Central Asia remains fraught. The first major obstacle is regulatory fragmentation. Digital currencies require legal reforms across currency legislation, taxation, customs, and anti-money laundering/counter-financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) protocols. At present, each state operates independently, making regional harmonization...

11 months ago

Peace Talks

Opinion: After the UN Gaza Resolution – Kazakhstan’s Potential Role

The implementation of any new approaches aimed at a rapid, peaceful resolution of the Middle East conflict, including the latest UN Security Council resolution, which authorizes the deployment of International Stabilization Forces (ISF), shows that the international community is once again reaching the limits of tools that rely solely on security measures, temporary control, and external administration. Even the most carefully calibrated political or administrative frameworks cannot produce sustainable results unless the ideological nature of the conflict, including its spiritual, historical, and value-based foundations, is changed. It is increasingly clear today that peace in the Holy Land requires not only diplomatic and humanitarian efforts, but also a deep dialogue between the religious and civilizational traditions of the region. In this context, the experience of Kazakhstan, which initiated the creation of a unique collective mechanism for religious reconciliation, deserves particular attention. After lengthy discussions, the UN Security Council approved the U.S.-proposed resolution to form an international stabilization force in Gaza. That means authorizing external actors - for the first time through a UN-mandated transitional authority - to participate in Gaza’s administrative and security arrangements. Thirteen countries supported the resolution, with only Russia and China abstaining. This step creates a new legal reality: the international community now holds a formal mandate to support Gaza’s security, humanitarian access, and reconstruction. Yet the resolution raises another question: will this become the foundation for lasting peace, or merely another temporary structure that keeps the situation under control without changing its essence? The U.S.-Israeli planning model - widely discussed in reporting - proposing dividing Gaza into "green" and "red" zones, reflects an approach in which security replaces reconciliation. Historical cases, such as Bosnia and Lebanon, suggest to many analysts that such strategies rarely lead to sustainable stability. Territorial divisions, from Bosnia to Lebanon, tend to freeze conflicts rather than resolve them. The Palestinian enclave risks becoming an example of a “permanent transitional zone,” where military stability exists without political resolution or trust. In the future, a divided Gaza could face humanitarian collapse, intensified radicalization, and deep fractures in how the Islamic world perceives the West, especially if European troops are deployed. All this underscores a key point: without addressing the ideological and religious dimensions of the conflict - as many experts argue - territorial schemes remain temporary. The conflict in the Holy Land cannot be resolved solely with demarcation maps and international mandates. Breaking the deadlock requires more than another control mechanism; it requires a new architecture of reconciliation. And it must engage the roots of the conflict, including religious thinking, historical grievances, and cultural trauma, rather than its surface-level manifestations. Kazakhstan can play a unique role here. It is not just a new participant in the Abraham Accords, but a country with remarkable political, diplomatic, and spiritual legitimacy. It enjoys the trust of the Islamic world, maintains stable relations with Israel, is perceived by the West as a neutral partner, and has a successful record of coordinating great-power and regional actor efforts, such as the Astana process on...

11 months ago

Geopolitics

Opinion: Multi-Vectorism 2.0 – Kazakhstan Seeks Balance in a Shifting Geopolitical Landscape

The world is reverting to the logic of bloc confrontation. Sanctions regimes, technological barriers, and deepening mistrust between major powers are compelling medium-sized states to chart independent courses. Kazakhstan stands at the center of this evolving geopolitical matrix. While Moscow remains a vital partner in defense and energy, Astana is simultaneously cultivating strong ties with other global power centers, including China, the U.S., Turkey, the European Union, and the Gulf states. Yet Kazakhstan refuses to align with any single bloc, adhering instead to a strategy of "flexible autonomy", cooperating broadly while preserving its sovereignty. Russia: Alliance with Strategic Boundaries On November 11-12, 2025, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. The two leaders signed a declaration on a comprehensive strategic partnership and alliance, reaffirming cooperation on security, energy, and logistics projects. Key discussions included the gasification of border regions, the modernization of energy infrastructure, and the transit of Russian energy via Kazakhstan. Tokayev emphasized Kazakhstan’s interest in a stable and prosperous Russia, calling Putin a “statesman of global stature.” Still, this alignment does not supplant Kazakhstan’s multi-vector policy. The Moscow visit directly followed Tokayev’s talks in Washington, underscoring that Astana views relations with Russia as one of several strategic pillars. The U.S.: Investment and Critical Minerals Diplomacy During Tokayev’s visit to the U.S. in early November 2025, he and President Donald Trump oversaw the signing of 29 agreements totaling approximately $17 billion. The deals spanned industry, energy, digitalization, education, and innovation. Highlights in recent collaboration between Kazakhstan and the U.S. include a $2.5 billion John Deere production facility in Kostanay and Turkestan, a $1.1 billion development of tungsten deposits, and over $1 billion in digital infrastructure cooperation with companies such as Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Oracle, and Starlink. Leading global funds also pledged roughly $1 billion in new investments. These agreements reflect growing trust and a shared commitment to investment-driven, high-tech cooperation. China: Strategic Synergy and Technological Convergence China remains Kazakhstan’s largest trading partner and a cornerstone of its eastern vector. During Tokayev’s October 17, 2023 visit to Beijing, he and President Xi Jinping reaffirmed a “comprehensive strategic partnership” built on political trust and economic cooperation. In June 2025, Xi Jinping visited Astana for the second China-Central Asia Summit, where he and Kassym‑Jomart Tokayev reinforced their countries’ “comprehensive strategic partnership”, oversaw deals spanning energy, infrastructure, agriculture, and digital technology. Later that year, at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Tianjin, the two leaders used the platform to deepen cooperation within a multilateral framework, promoting connectivity and regional trade under the Belt and Road Initiative. Turkey: Civilizational Ties and Strategic Growth Ties between Kazakhstan and Turkey are underpinned by shared cultural and historical foundations. At the fifth High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council meeting in Ankara on July 29, 2025, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan welcomed Tokayev, reaffirming Turkey’s role as a major investor and educational partner. More than 12,000 Kazakh students are enrolled in Turkish universities. Defense cooperation is expanding under the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), and tourism and...

11 months ago

Geopolitics

Cyprus as a Mirror of Turkish Geopolitics: How Ankara Uses Northern Cyprus to Project Influence in Central Asia

Northern Cyprus has become a microcosm of Turkish foreign policy, a space where Ankara combines military presence, the ideology of “Turkic brotherhood,” and economic leverage. For Turkey, this territory is not merely a long-standing geopolitical dispute but a laboratory for a new diplomatic model centered on the vision of a “great Turkic world.” As noted by Stratfor, despite the decisive victory of Republican Turkish Party leader Tufan Erhürman in the October 19, 2025, presidential elections in the self-declared Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), a candidate who supports renewed negotiations with the Republic of Cyprus and advocates for a federal model, Ankara has shown no intention of revising its entrenched two-state doctrine. Analysts suggest Turkey may apply economic pressure and diplomatic isolation, including suspension of subsidies and credit lines, should Erhürman attempt to implement a federal solution. Concurrently, Turkey is lobbying for the TRNC’s recognition within the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), aiming to set a symbolic precedent: if Turkic-speaking nations will not support each other, who will? For Central Asia, this initiative reflects Ankara’s commitment to unifying the Turkic world under its political leadership, extending far beyond cultural solidarity. Political Implications for Central Asia Turkey’s push to incorporate the TRNC into the OTS shifts the organization from a cultural bloc to a geopolitical instrument. Should Northern Cyprus gain observer status, Ankara will likely expect symbolic support from its Turkic partners. This poses a significant dilemma for Central Asian states. Aligning with Turkey could be perceived by Western actors as a breach of international law, while maintaining neutrality might be viewed as a rejection of Turkic unity. Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan have so far emphasized adherence to international law and sovereignty. At the April 2025 EU-Central Asia summit in Samarkand, these states jointly reaffirmed UN Security Council resolutions from the early 1980s, which declared the TRNC’s independence and all related separatist actions legally invalid. Kyrgyzstan may face a more delicate challenge due to its deep humanitarian and educational ties with Turkey. Northern Cyprus thus serves as a litmus test for Turkic integration: how closely can nations align without compromising their political autonomy? Economic and Energy Dimensions Cyprus plays a strategic role in Turkey’s energy policy, linking the Caspian region, the Caucasus, and the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkish control over Northern Cyprus bolsters its influence over maritime logistics, offshore gas development, and export corridors. This holds direct relevance for Central Asia. A stronger Turkish position in the Mediterranean enhances its leverage over energy transit routes from the Caspian to Europe, particularly in relation to the Trans-Caspian pipeline and the Middle Corridor. Over time, Ankara is expected to use energy infrastructure as a tool for political engagement, promoting an “economy of Turkic solidarity”, offering mutual benefits, but often tied to strategic conditions. Security and Military Presence The TRNC functions as a prototype for Turkey’s military protectorate model, a way to retain control while presenting itself as a guarantor of stability. This model is echoed across the Turkic region through Turkey’s expanding military partnerships...

12 months ago

Caspian Sea

Kazakhstan Leads Regional Efforts to Save the Caspian Sea

Today, Central Asia and the Caspian littoral states face growing challenges that extend well beyond national borders. Climate change, water scarcity, land degradation, and the shrinking of the Caspian Sea are no longer only environmental concerns but matters of regional security and sustainable development. The Caspian Sea, the world’s largest inland body of water, has become a symbol of crisis. Its rapid decline threatens ecosystems, navigation, fisheries, and food security from the Caucasus to Central Asia. Dushanbe: ecology as a new agenda for regional security A week ago, Dushanbe hosted two major international events: the “Central Asia–Russia” Summit and the meeting of the CIS Heads of State Council. At both forums, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev called for moving from declarations to concrete action, proposing to Establish a Council of Ministers for Ecology among the Central Asian countries and Russia Develop an Interstate Program for the preservation of the Caspian Sea’s water resources Expand the use of space technologies to monitor transboundary water bodies These initiatives are part of a broader effort to build a new environmental framework for Eurasia, positioning Central Asia as a laboratory for sustainable solutions rather than a zone of ecological risk. The environmental disaster of the Caspian Sea The Caspian Sea is shrinking rapidly. According to data from Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Ecology, since 2006 its surface area has decreased by more than 31,000 square kilometers, and water levels have fallen by about 1.5 to 2 meters. Projections indicate severe consequences for spawning grounds, the Caspian seal population, port infrastructure, and the regional economy. The crisis mirrors the Aral Sea disaster, where environmental degradation caused widespread illness and social disruption. Experts warn that toxic dust from the exposed seabed could lead to respiratory diseases among millions of people. According to estimates by Save the Caspian Sea, the shoreline could retreat by as much as 89 kilometers, pushing fishing communities to the edge of survival. Falling sea levels already threaten unique wildlife, navigation, water supply, and agriculture, creating risks of migration and conflict. Because the Caspian is landlocked and not connected to the world’s oceans, its water losses cannot be naturally replenished. A coordinated response is needed, including sustainable water management, pollution control, and climate adaptation. The Caspian Sea as a crossroads of interests and contradictions The Caspian region today is more than an ecosystem; it is a geopolitical nexus where the interests of coastal states and global powers converge. Key transport routes such as the North–South Corridor and the Middle Corridor meet here, linking the economic, energy, and political interests of Russia, Iran, Turkey, China, and the European Union. The United States has also shown growing interest, particularly through its support for infrastructure projects in the South Caucasus and initiatives related to the Zangezur Corridor. Yet logistics, energy, and trade risk losing their purpose if the region’s natural foundation disappears. An ecological collapse could undermine multibillion-dollar investments, threaten food security, and turn the Caspian from a zone of cooperation into a battleground over resources. That is why saving...

12 months ago

Organization of Turkic States

Gabala 2025: What the Turkic World Will Discuss Amid Global Turbulence

On October 7, leaders of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) will gather in Gabala, Azerbaijan, for the 12th summit under the theme “Regional Peace and Security.” At first glance, it may look like another routine engagement. Yet against the backdrop of overlapping global crises, the forum is increasingly a test of the OTS’s maturity and relevance. The summit unfolds amid a turbulent international landscape. Afghanistan continues to cast a shadow over Central Asia: economic volatility, migration risks, and the activity of extremist groups remain sources of concern for OTS members. The ongoing war in Ukraine, meanwhile, is reshaping Eurasian transit routes, placing the bloc’s states in delicate positions between East and West. At the same time, violence in the Middle East is adding to the pressures on Turkey’s already complex foreign policy environment. The Middle Corridor at the Center A key theme in Gabala will be the advancement of the Middle Corridor, formally known as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route. This east–west route connects China with Europe via Kazakhstan, the Caspian ports of Aktau and Kuryk, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey. Investments are moving forward across the chain: Kazakhstan is expanding port and rail capacity, Azerbaijan is modernizing the Port of Baku in Alat, Georgia is upgrading its railway hubs, and Turkey is reinforcing the Baku–Kars line. Once a logistical project, the corridor is evolving into a strategic framework that ties together economic, environmental, and security considerations. Customs harmonization, digital tracking systems, and sustainability standards are now discussed as much as cargo volumes. Security, Coordination, and Soft Power Security will also be on the table, though framed in practical rather than military terms. Issues such as counter-terrorism cooperation, cyber resilience, disaster response, and the safety of emerging transit corridors are likely to feature. In this sense, security is increasingly seen as the foundation for trade and investment rather than a standalone agenda. Beyond infrastructure, OTS continues to develop soft power tools. Educational exchanges, cultural cooperation, green energy initiatives, and water management projects are part of efforts to build intra-regional trust. The recently inaugurated UN Regional Center for the SDGs in Almaty provides another anchor, aligning the Turkic bloc with global sustainability frameworks. A Turning Point for the Turkic Council? Founded in 2009 primarily as a cultural and humanitarian forum, the OTS is now edging toward a broader role. By coordinating infrastructure projects, harmonizing regulations, and cautiously addressing security concerns, it is positioning itself as a relevant player in Eurasian affairs. Much will depend on whether Gabala produces more than communiqués. Concrete steps on the Middle Corridor, digital customs corridors, joint water initiatives, or disaster coordination could demonstrate that the OTS is maturing into a platform for practical solutions. While major breakthroughs are unlikely, even incremental progress would signal that the Turkic Council is becoming a pillar of regional stability and integration.

1 year ago

domestic development

Central Asia and Regional Integration: Logistics, Water, Energy

Central Asia is undergoing a profound transformation, where questions of domestic development and the region’s ability to act in a coordinated way are coming to the forefront. For many years, Central Asian states were viewed as fragmented, each pursuing separate strategies that often put them in competition. Today, however, shared challenges and growing interdependence are making gradual convergence increasingly likely. The region now confronts common pressures such as water scarcity, energy imbalances, environmental degradation, and the fallout of instability in Afghanistan -- issues that no single country can effectively address in isolation. Increasingly, regional platforms such as the Interstate Commission for Water Coordination (ICWC) are being leveraged to mediate water-energy tradeoffs, while joint initiatives in transport, transit, and energy infrastructure foster new integration. Moreover, leading actors like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are pushing coordinated strategies -- modernizing rail and aviation links, coordinating transboundary water allocations, and exploring nuclear cooperation -- that point toward a more interconnected regional future. Shared Challenges and Points of Convergence The region faces problems that no country can solve alone. These include water shortages, energy imbalances, environmental risks, and instability in Afghanistan. Such challenges can be seen as both threats and opportunities, since they also represent areas of overlapping interest. Joint action in these fields can deliver more than fragmented national strategies. Water is particularly important, remaining one of the most sensitive issues in interstate relations. Yet it also offers opportunities for coordinated action through existing regional platforms, such as the Interstate Commission for Water Coordination of Central Asia. The “water for energy” model is increasingly seen as a practical tool, already under discussion and applied in bilateral and multilateral projects. Environmental issues are similarly shared. The disappearance of the Aral Sea, land degradation, air pollution, and glacier melt create threats that transcend national borders. Joint monitoring, data exchange, and coordinated adaptation measures, particularly within the United Nations Regional Centre for the Sustainable Development Goals for Central Asia and Afghanistan, opened in August 2025 in Almaty, could become a new direction for regional cooperation. Afghanistan remains another risk factor that affects the security of the entire region. At the same time, transportation and energy projects linking Central Asia with South Asia through Afghan territory can turn a challenge into an opportunity. Reducing instability and integrating Afghanistan into regional trade and transit networks serves the interests of all Central Asian states. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan as leading forces To understand how closer integration might work in practice, it is useful to examine the strategies of the region’s two key players: Astana and Tashkent. The major agreements concluded by Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan with the United States in transport and aviation should be viewed not as isolated deals, but as evidence of the complementary strengths of the two largest economies in Central Asia. Kazakhstan signed its largest locomotive contract to date with U.S. company Wabtec, a $4.2 billion agreement for 300 TE33A freight locomotives to be assembled at the Wabtec Kazakhstan plant in Astana, along with servicing support. This will modernize...

1 year ago

UN General Assembly

Opinion: Almaty as a Model for the Future: Central Asia’s Role in the Global Agenda

Almaty is gradually becoming a hub for resolving issues of not only regional but also global significance. The recent opening of the UN Regional Center for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for Central Asia and Afghanistan here was an event no less significant than the 80th anniversary session of the General Assembly in New York. This is no coincidence: the global agenda at the UN today is increasingly focused on the regional level. Central Asia is not a periphery, but a kind of “model for the future,” where climate, water resources, and security challenges are intertwined. For example, the Tian Shan glaciers have shrunk by more than 25% over the past decade and continue to melt faster than predicted, directly threatening the Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers. These rivers are increasingly failing to reach the Aral Sea, and its dried-up bed is turning into a giant source of dust and salt. Air pollution levels in the region's cities, as measured by PM2.5, exceed World Health Organization guidelines by an average of 4–6 times. Extreme heat and drought are leading to the loss of agricultural land and the degradation of ecosystems, which affects not only regional but also global food security. Central Asia has already become a unique “testing ground for the future.” The region is testing mechanisms for cross-border cooperation. The CASA-1000 energy project connects Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan with Afghanistan and Pakistan, creating a “green energy corridor.” Meanwhile, Afghanistan’s Qosh Tepa Canal is altering the balance of water usage on the Amu Darya, forcing neighboring countries to seek new models of agreement. The question is whether these nations can develop a system of joint water and energy management. The outcome will shape not only regional but also global processes. At the same time, the United Nations itself is grappling with a deficit of trust and effectiveness. The Security Council is paralyzed, while General Assembly resolutions often carry only advisory weight. In the face of nuclear risks, environmental upheavals, and the threat of epidemics, the global community is stalling. Even large-scale initiatives such as the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) remain largely declarative rather than actually limiting “dirty” investments. Therefore, reform proposals are becoming increasingly vocal, in particular, to strengthen regional UN divisions that are capable of responding more quickly to crises and ensuring practical cooperation between countries. Another way to overcome the trust deficit could be to involve independent expert councils – scientists, NGOs, think tanks – more widely in the decision-making process, which would reduce the influence of political gridlock at the global level. Overall, Almaty can be seen as a model of a “UN in miniature” – a regional center capable of promptly addressing issues that may seem “too small” for New York, yet are critically important for the countries of the region. For instance, the SDG Center could initiate the creation of a regional water monitoring system with unified measurement standards and transparent data sharing. Such decentralization could form the basis for future UN reform....

1 year ago

Previous 1 2 3