Critical Minerals - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 112

U.S.-Central Asia Engagement

Washington Links TRIPP and Jackson-Vanik Repeal in Push Toward Central Asia

A notable strategic shift is taking place in U.S. foreign policy, one that could have a long-term impact on the economic architecture of Eurasia. After decades in which Central Asia and the South Caucasus were viewed largely through the lens of security, counterterrorism, and competition with Russia and China, Washington is increasingly emphasizing trade, investment, transport routes, and access to critical minerals. One of the clearest signs of this shift came during a recent hearing before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where Senator Steve Daines and Secretary of State Marco Rubio discussed the implementation of the U.S.-backed Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP) framework, as well as the need to remove the outdated Jackson-Vanik trade restrictions. At first glance, these may appear to be separate issues: the peace process in the South Caucasus and Cold War-era trade legislation. In reality, however, they are closely connected. Together, they point to a broader U.S. effort to link Central Asia, the South Caucasus, and Western markets through trade, transport, and investment. In recent years, Republican Senator Steve Daines of Montana has emerged as one of the most active advocates of expanding America’s presence in Central Asia. As co-chair of the Senate Central Asia Caucus and one of the leading proponents of legislative efforts to repeal Jackson-Vanik restrictions, Daines has consistently argued for stronger trade and investment ties between the United States and the countries of the region. During the hearing, Daines placed particular emphasis on the importance of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process, describing it as one of the most underappreciated diplomatic efforts of recent years. According to the senator, resolving the conflict could open the door to a large-scale economic transformation of the wider region. Particularly noteworthy was his reference to a geopolitical concept associated with former U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski. In Daines’ formulation, Central Asia represents the “bottle,” while Azerbaijan serves as its “cork.” Opening transport routes through the South Caucasus, he argued, would allow flows of oil, gas, critical minerals, and other resources to move toward Western markets rather than toward Russia, China, or Iran. Daines said this approach helped address some of the most difficult issues in the Armenia-Azerbaijan settlement process and laid the foundation for what he called a “landmark agreement” after nearly four decades of conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described TRIPP as an initiative capable of fundamentally transforming Armenia’s economic role in the region. According to Rubio, the framework not only addresses the issue of transport access, which had long been a source of disagreement between Baku and Yerevan, but also creates an opportunity for Armenia to become a major trade and logistics hub connecting Europe and Asia. Rubio described TRIPP as central to the Armenia-Azerbaijan settlement framework, emphasizing that the project could generate substantial investment flows and attract U.S. companies to infrastructure and transport projects across the region. Washington’s argument is that trade, transit, investment, and infrastructure can give the political settlement a stronger economic base. Unlike many previous peace...

Caspian Region

Why the Caspian Is Becoming Eurasia’s New Energy Crossroads

Russia’s war in Ukraine and instability in the Middle East are accelerating the emergence of a new Eurasian energy architecture, with the Caspian region increasingly at its center. In international politics, moments when several global crises simultaneously create opportunities for new centers of influence are rare. Today, a vast area stretching from Central Asia to the South Caucasus is experiencing just such a moment. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has fundamentally reshaped Europe’s approach to energy security. Tensions in the Middle East have also raised questions about the reliability of traditional energy supply routes. Meanwhile, the global energy transition is driving demand for both clean-energy sources and alternative transport corridors. Against this backdrop, the Caspian region is no longer viewed as a peripheral economic space. It is increasingly emerging as a critical hub in Eurasia’s evolving energy system. Baku Energy Week 2026 shows how far this shift has come, highlighting Azerbaijan’s transformation from a traditional oil and gas producer into a strategic connector linking Central Asia, Türkiye, Europe, the United States, and the Middle East. One of the forum’s most significant political signals came in the form of a message from U.S. President Donald Trump to participants. His remarks went beyond a routine diplomatic greeting and reflected a broader shift toward a more pragmatic view of global energy policy. Trump described the United States as a strong supporter of Azerbaijan’s oil and gas industry and said the U.S.-Azerbaijan energy partnership would become more important in the years ahead. For much of the past decade, Western energy strategies appeared increasingly focused on rapid decarbonization and climate objectives. However, rising energy prices, Europe’s energy crisis, and growing global electricity demand have prompted policymakers to reassess those priorities. Trump openly reaffirmed support for the oil and gas sector and emphasized that the United States remains a long-standing energy partner of Azerbaijan. More importantly, Washington appears to recognize Baku’s strategic role in global energy security. The Trump administration increasingly views energy security as an element of geopolitical competition and is prepared to support projects that diversify supplies of hydrocarbons and critical raw materials. Speaking at the opening of Baku Energy Week, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said Trump’s policies had helped return energy policy to “normality.” Aliyev also noted that the oil and gas industry had faced sustained pressure from advocates of a rapid energy transition. It was therefore no coincidence that Azerbaijan signed a series of agreements during the forum with major American companies, including Chevron, JPMorgan, Oracle, and Comstock Resources. Particularly noteworthy was a cooperation agreement covering critical minerals and rare earth elements. For Washington, access to these resources is increasingly a matter not only of energy policy but also of technological and national security amid intensifying competition with China. In effect, Washington is beginning to view Azerbaijan as an important platform in a changing Eurasian energy map. While Washington is signaling renewed political backing, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan remains one of the principal architects of the region’s practical integration. Over the past...

Trade and Logistics

Kazakhstan Proposes Kenyan Trade Hub to Access Eurasian Markets

Kazakhstan has proposed establishing a Kenyan trade and logistics hub on its territory to facilitate the export of Kenyan goods to Eurasian markets, as Astana seeks to position itself as a key transit link between Asia, Europe, and Africa. The initiative was announced by President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev of Kazakhstan during the Kazakhstan-Kenya Business Forum, held as part of Kenya’s President William Ruto’s state visit to Astana. “We are committed to opening a Kenyan trade hub in Kazakhstan that will provide your businesses with direct access to the entire Eurasian region,” Tokayev told representatives of the Kenyan business community. Kazakhstan hopes to expand exports of grain and other agricultural products to Africa, while Kenya could increase supplies of tea, coffee, and flowers to Central Asian and broader Eurasian markets. Astana is also promoting itself as an important part of international transport corridors. According to Tokayev, approximately 85% of overland transit traffic between China and Europe passes through Kazakhstan. The country is actively developing the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, commonly known as the Middle Corridor, which is increasingly viewed as an alternative to traditional transit routes through Russia. Tokayev proposed integrating the Middle Corridor with East African maritime routes by using the potential of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Kazakhstan specifically expressed interest in cooperation with the ports of Mombasa and Lamu, which are regarded as the region’s largest logistics hubs. “It is necessary to connect the Middle Corridor with Africa’s vital maritime arteries,” Tokayev said. The two sides also discussed the development of direct cargo air links between Kazakhstan and Kenya, as well as the possibility of launching direct passenger flights between Astana and Nairobi in the future. Beyond logistics, Kazakhstan and Kenya plan to expand cooperation in the extraction of rare earth metals and critical minerals, resources in growing global demand amid the energy transition and the expansion of digital technologies. During the forum, Kazakhstan’s sovereign wealth fund, Samruk-Kazyna, and Kenya’s National Mining Corporation signed an agreement on joint geological exploration and subsoil development projects in Kenya. Tokayev also proposed establishing a Kazakhstan-Kenya Business Council and a specialized expert group focused on transport and logistics infrastructure development. According to the president, these steps should accelerate the creation of an intergovernmental commission on trade and economic cooperation. Ruto said Nairobi was interested in creating a “new economic bridge” between Central Asia and Africa. “The logistics ports of Mombasa and Lamu will be available to companies from Kazakhstan interested in entering East African markets,” Ruto said. The visit comes as Kazakhstan seeks to diversify its trade routes and expand economic ties with countries of the Global South. Earlier, authorities in Kazakhstan announced plans to expand the country’s maritime fleet on the Caspian Sea to increase the capacity of the Middle Corridor.

Critical Minerals

Central Asia Seeks More Local Value From Critical Minerals

Rising demand for critical minerals is drawing Central Asia deeper into global supply chains, but the region’s harder test is not whether it has the deposits. It is whether more value can stay at home. Copper, tungsten, graphite, antimony, rare earths and other metals now sit at the center of battery production, power grids, chips, weapons systems, and renewable energy. Governments across the region want the sector to bring capital, jobs, and technology. The risk is another cycle in which raw materials leave the region, and most of the value is created elsewhere. The scale of the region’s reserves explains why outside interest is rising. An OECD review of critical raw materials in Central Asia says the region holds 39% of global manganese ore reserves, 31% of chromium, 20% of lead, 13% of zinc, 9% of titanium, 6% of aluminum, and 5% each of copper, cobalt, and molybdenum. The same review says Kazakhstan can export 21 of the 34 critical raw materials on the EU list, while Kyrgyzstan has the world’s third-largest antimony reserves, and Uzbekistan has the world’s eleventh-largest copper reserves. Uranium widens the picture: Kazakhstan is the world’s largest uranium producer, accounting for 39% of mined uranium supply in 2024, according to the World Nuclear Association. Kazakhstan has moved fastest in turning this base into policy. The prime minister’s office says the country will spend about $500 million over three years on geological exploration and modernizing infrastructure. The plan includes seismic surveys, new data systems, and a geological cluster in Astana. The government wants to raise geological study coverage to 2.2 million square kilometers. President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has linked the sector to Kazakhstan’s wider industrial plans. In his 2025 state-of-the-nation address, Tokayev said the mining and metallurgical complex still had “significant growth potential, particularly in the production of high-value-added products.” New discoveries have sharpened that push. Kazakhstan’s industry ministry said in 2025 that geologists had identified the Zhana Kazakhstan rare earth site, with estimated resources of more than 20 million metric tons. The site contains neodymium, cerium, lanthanum, and yttrium. Officials have also cited the Kuirektykol site in the Karaganda Region, where confirmed reserves are estimated at 795,800 tons, with total resources estimated at 935,400 tons. Uzbekistan is making its strongest move in copper and processing capacity. In March, President Shavkat Mirziyoyev launched Copper Concentrator No. 3 at the Almalyk Mining and Metallurgical Complex. The $2.7 billion facility is designed to process 60 million tons of ore and produce about 900,000 tons of copper concentrate per year. Once fully operational, it is expected to raise daily concentrate output at Almalyk from 2,400 tons to 5,000 tons. Uzbekistan’s minerals push has also drawn U.S. support. Uzbekistan and the United States signed a memorandum on critical minerals and rare earth supply chains in February, giving Tashkent a clearer place in Washington’s effort to diversify critical minerals supply chains beyond China. The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation later signed a Joint Investment Framework with Uzbekistan, stating that this would “promote cooperation...

Critical Minerals

Central Asia Enters the Minerals Race

Central Asia is entering the critical minerals race at a time when deposits alone no longer confer strategic advantage. The Astana Mining & Metallurgy Congress, scheduled for June 11–12 at Hilton Astana, gives the issue operational form: supply chains, investment, and commercial projects. U.S. Under Secretary Jacob Helberg will participate there and in the preceding C5+1 Critical Minerals Dialogue on June 10–11. The Astana agenda also puts Central Asia’s role in global supply chains directly into view. The test is how quickly governments, investors, and industrial buyers can finance, process, move, and purchase minerals before they are locked into industrial supply chains. The G7 is moving in the same direction, but through institutional design rather than industrial action. The group is discussing a permanent critical minerals secretariat to maintain continuity across changing G7 presidencies, possibly at either the International Energy Agency or the OECD. The proposal acknowledges a real deficiency in Western coordination, but it also reveals the larger problem: continuity is useful only if it becomes execution. At the same time, reports have circulated about disagreements over stockpiling and leadership, including European resistance to both a single shared stockpile and a U.S.-led structure. For Central Asia, the practical question is not institutional architecture alone, but whether such coordination produces finance, processing capacity, and long-term offtake. The June dialogue in Astana is part of a wider C5+1 movement from diplomacy toward operational cooperation. Its participants are trying to convert the platform from a talk shop into a vehicle for business transactions. As TCA has reported, U.S. engagement in the region is increasingly tied to business mechanisms, export-credit support, and project finance. Kazakhstan has already moved into this framework track. Kazakhstan and the United States signed a memorandum of understanding on critical minerals cooperation during Tokayev’s November 2025 visit to Washington, and the agreement took immediate shape through the Tau-Ken Samruk–Cove Capital tungsten project. Kazakhstan’s Foreign Ministry later described the MOU as the first agreement of its kind in Central Asia, providing for processing capacity in Kazakhstan, technology transfer, and expanded access for Kazakh products to the U.S. market. In February 2026, Uzbekistan followed with its own U.S. critical minerals track: TCA reported that Tashkent signed a critical minerals MOU on February 4, and that DFC heads of terms for a Joint Investment Framework followed on February 19. Central Asian governments are not passive terrain for outside competition. Kazakhstan, with Central Asia’s most developed mining and metallurgical base, and Uzbekistan, with a rapidly expanding minerals program, are using minerals competition to attract capital and build processing capacity. They are seeking to diversify partners and move beyond dependence on raw material exports. The regional objective is industrial upgrading while preserving room for maneuver between China, Russia, the United States, Europe, and other partners. The minerals question cannot be separated from the larger Eurasian setting. Central Asia is trying to widen its own field of choice before its options are narrowed by what Hudson Institute senior fellow Ken Moriyasu called, in comments to...

CA5+UK

Opinion: UK’s C6 Engagement and the Opportunity for British Geostrategic Renewal

Along with Nicholas Spykman, Sir Halford Mackinder is one of the most pre-eminent thinkers in the field of geopolitics. Whilst today geopolitics is a term used interchangeably with “world affairs,” “international relations,” and “foreign policy,” Spykman and Mackinder used the phrase to describe the narrow academic study of how geography influences international relations and the conduct of states. In the 1904 paper, The Geographical Pivot of History, Mackinder theorized that the key to controlling the balance of power in the world rested in a “heartland” of Eurasia, comprising Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Mackinder described the heartland region as the “pivot region” for regional and global hegemony. The word “pivot” has recently been popularized in international relations, with examples including President Obama’s pivot to the Pacific and Britain’s Indo-Pacific pivot in the 2021 Integrated Review. In 1997, former U.S. National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski built on Mackinder’s ideas in his work, The Grand Chessboard. Brzezinski defined a geopolitical pivot as being “determined by their geography, which in some cases gives them a special role either in defining access to important areas or in denying resources to a significant player. In some cases, a geopolitical pivot may act as a defensive shield for a vital state or even a region.” To Mackinder and Brzezinski, Central Asia was a crucial geostrategic pivot. Central Asia - comprising the five states of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan, collectively termed the C5 - is located between China, Russia, Iran, and Afghanistan. Thus, the near abroad of the region is defined by conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Iran and Israel/U.S., and between Taliban-run Afghanistan and Pakistan. Pragmatic engagement is a necessity for the C5 but has not stopped them from pursuing greater diversification in security and economic arrangements, and they remain committed to U.S.-led diplomatic initiatives. Faced with a regionally assertive superpower in China, risks created by Russia’s war in Ukraine, theocratic Iran, and the Taliban in Afghanistan, Central Asia has continued to show its desire to build and deepen its economic and security partnerships from beyond traditional powers – such as China and Russia – to states in the Gulf, the Caucasus, Western Europe, and elsewhere. The United Kingdom has emerged as a new and important partner. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has raised concerns in the Central Asian states about its regional revisionism, territorial ambitions, and Putin’s reconstruction of the Soviet Union. In 2014, Putin credited Nursultan Nazarbayev with having “created a state in a territory that had never had a state before,” adding that “the Kazakhs never had any statehood.” The remarks sparked anger in Kazakhstan and fed concern about Moscow’s view of post-Soviet sovereignty. Finally, Putin said that it would be best for Kazakhstan to “remain in the greater Russian world.” In The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski predicted that “Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status, but it would then become a predominantly Asian imperial state, more likely to be drawn into debilitating conflicts with aroused Central Asians.” Central Asia has been a...