• KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01144 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00197 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.09648 0.31%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28575 -0.14%
13 May 2025

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 75

Opinion: Balancing Rights and Realities – Engaging Afghanistan for Change

The attention of the international community has once again turned to human rights in Afghanistan following the latest report by Richard Bennett, the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan. In his report, Bennett recommended that member states consider the concept of gender apartheid and support its codification, noting that Afghan women regard this term as the most accurate description of their situation. This initiative emerged in response to the tightening restrictions on women and girls imposed by the Taliban. The renewed focus on gender issues is not exactly what Central Asian countries expect in the context of Afghan settlement. For them, it is far more important to address pressing issues of security, economic cooperation, and control of migration flows, which directly affect regional stability. Therefore, Central Asian states prefer to concentrate on practical steps and avoid over-politicizing issues that could complicate dialogue with the Taliban and exacerbate the situation in neighboring Afghanistan. Today, women’s rights have become a cornerstone in the international community’s attempts to establish dialogue with the Taliban. The rights of women in Afghanistan have been a journey, with different periods bringing different challenges. Back in the 1920s, Amanullah Khan was a real game-changer, giving Afghan women the official equal status they deserved. But then things changed a bit during King Zahir Shah's reign (1933–1973) when education became a priority, and girls started going to school. By 1973, a heartening number of 150,000 girls were proudly enrolled in schools across the country. And let's not forget the momentous step of Kabul University opening its doors to women in 1947. Since the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, women’s rights in Afghanistan have been significantly curtailed. Women are banned from attending educational institutions, working in most sectors, traveling without a male escort, and participating in public life. These measures have already received widespread international condemnation — rightfully so — but the official recognition of "gender apartheid" as a crime against humanity could give this issue a new legal status and increase pressure on the Islamic Emirate. The question is: How productive is this approach? The politicization of Afghan settlement, especially through the lens of women’s rights, may only worsen the situation. Making gender issues a precondition for dialogue severely limits the space for negotiations with the Taliban regime. In the United Nations itself, the Taliban are considered the "de facto authorities" of Afghanistan, and dialogue with them takes place at various bilateral and multilateral levels. In this context, strict demands on women’s rights could delay or even halt the process of engagement. This is because the Taliban perceives such conditions as interference in their internal affairs and cultural norms. Dialogue at an Impasse: Is an Inclusive Government Being Set Aside? The international community — primarily its Western segment — and the Islamic Emirate have taken extremely rigid positions. For international actors, women’s and girls’ rights have become the top priority, while the issue of forming an inclusive government in Afghanistan has receded into the background....

Kyrgyzstan Hails Border Deal with Tajikistan as Major Diplomatic Success

Kamchybek Tashiyev, head of Kyrgyzstan's State Committee for National Security (GKNB), addressed parliament for the first time regarding the Kyrgyz-Tajik border agreements. He clarified the terms of the final agreement and explained the territorial concessions Kyrgyzstan made to prevent future border conflicts. The document has sparked mixed reactions in Kyrgyz society, with some deputies expressing dissatisfaction with the delimitation results, while ordinary citizens hope for lasting peace between the two countries. Final Agreement Tashiyev stated that the border agreement was based on the 1991 accords, countering earlier Tajik proposals to rely on documents from 1924-27. Years of work by geographers enabled both sides to reach mutual compromises. The Kyrgyz-Tajik border spans 1,006 kilometers. By 2011, 520 kilometers had been delineated, while the remaining 486 kilometers were settled over the past three years. “We have prepared several documents for signing by the presidents of both countries, including an agreement on the state border, an agreement on water resources—a previous water dispute in 2022 led to armed conflict—as well as agreements on cross-border road use and new infrastructure projects,” Tashiyev said. Over the past three years, the two nations have held numerous bilateral meetings, resulting in the signing of 45 protocols. Tashiyev noted that the process could be finalized within a month, as the Kyrgyz parliament has already approved the agreement, leaving only the leaders' signatures. Parliamentary Debate “We are making history! We have responsibly completed border delimitation with Uzbekistan. We approved the agreements with Tajikistan without debate. The people appreciate this. But public opinion is divided—that is common. If 50-60% of citizens support it, stability will follow,” said MP Nadira Narmatova during the parliamentary session. However, some MPs opposed the government's decision. Sultanbai Aizhigitov, an MP from Batken Oblast, criticized the transfer of Dostuk village, where Kyrgyz authorities had previously built roads and reinforced the state border. He also disapproved of the shared water intake arrangement, arguing that the territory had always belonged to Kyrgyzstan. Voices from Border Villages In an interview with The Times of Central Asia, Kanybek Myrzamuratov, a resident of Samarkandek village near the border, said most locals supported the government's decision. While some land was ceded, he emphasized that peace was the priority. “In some places, one street belongs to two countries—Tajiks on one side, Kyrgyz on the other. Disputes often started over minor issues but escalated into larger conflicts. At times, entire villages would mobilize against each other, leading to casualties,” he said. According to villagers, tensions with Tajikistan became serious in 1996, though minor disputes occurred even during Soviet times. The Soviet authorities, however, downplayed such incidents. Both sides engaged in stone-throwing, livestock theft, and occasional violence. Myrzamuratov noted that Kyrgyz authorities kept negotiations with Tajikistan confidential to prevent unrest among border residents. “In Dostuk, Leilek District, houses were burned down in last year’s clashes. Residents would not have accepted a transfer to Tajikistan. To prevent confusion and disputes, the authorities remained silent,” he said. He added that locals now look forward to reopening the...

Afghanistan: Rentier State or Hostage to Foreign Aid?

The current geopolitical turbulence presents Afghanistan and the countries of Central Asia with serious challenges. After the Taliban's return to power in 2021, Afghanistan found itself in a state of deep economic crisis, and its continued stability once again depends on external assistance. However, with the shifting global order, traditional donors such as the U.S. and the European Union are scaling back their involvement in Afghan affairs, while new sources of support remain uncertain. This creates significant risks for the countries of the region, which must find ways to minimize the consequences of Afghanistan’s crisis and ensure their own security. Historical context: dependence through the ages Afghanistan has always been dependent on external sources of income. This historical context was explored by Ali Nuriyev (historian, blogger, and researcher of the Ottoman world) in his article for TRT, "Afghanistan: The Graveyard of Empires or a Rentier State?" “As flattering as it may be for Afghans to have a reputation as [a nation that has kept its independence despite incursions from Great Powers], everything comes at a price, including Afghanistan’s independence”. Nuriyev provides a detailed analysis showing that since the founding of modern Afghanistan in the 18th century by Ahmad Shah Durrani, the country has built its economy and politics on external sources of income. Durrani financed his campaigns through raids on India, while his successors received subsidies from the British in exchange for maintaining neutrality in the "Great Game" between the British Empire and Russia. Later, in the 20th century, Afghanistan skillfully played on the rivalry between the USSR and the U.S., securing billions of dollars for infrastructure, education, and military modernization. By the 1970s, two-thirds of the country's state budget came from foreign aid. Even after the Soviet withdrawal in 1989 and the overthrow of the Taliban regime in 2001, Afghanistan continued to rely on external support. The governments of Hamid Karzai and Ashraf Ghani survived primarily due to funding from the United States and its allies. Today, following the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, Afghanistan is once again searching for new sources of income. Sanctions and frozen assets have forced the Taliban to seek support from China, Russia, and other nations, further proving that the country’s reliance on foreign aid remains unchanged. This is the historical reality: Afghanistan is a state that, for centuries, has survived thanks to external resources. Its independence has always been closely tied to its ability to extract benefits from the geopolitical maneuvers of great powers. In the present day, this historical context can be interpreted in different ways. However, one fact remains clear, today’s geopolitical turbulence is already having a negative impact on Afghanistan. Afghanistan's adaptation As the global order shifts, the key players on the "Afghan track" are adjusting their strategies toward Afghanistan, exacerbating the country’s economic crisis. United States – For Afghanistan, the new realities in the U.S. mean reduced aid and frozen assets. The U.S., which had long been Afghanistan’s primary donor, is unlikely to increase financial support soon. Following...

First Kyrgyz-British Strategic Dialogue Meeting Held in London

The first meeting of the Kyrgyz-British Strategic Dialogue was held in London on February 13, co-chaired by Kyrgyz Deputy Foreign Minister Meder Abakirov and UK Minister of State for Europe, North America, and Overseas Territories Stephen Doughty. According to the Kyrgyz Foreign Ministry, the meeting covered key areas of bilateral cooperation, including politics, security, trade, investment, finance, energy, sustainable development, culture, education, and tourism. Strengthening Bilateral Relations Abakirov emphasized the Strategic Dialogue as a new platform for deepening relations between the two countries. Meetings will be held regularly to advance cooperation. The first session focused on: Expanding trade and investment, attracting British investors to Kyrgyzstan, and increasing Kyrgyz exports to the UK. Enhancing education and scientific exchanges, including scholarship programs and digital education projects. Joint initiatives in the green economy, climate change, and sustainable development. UK-Kyrgyzstan Trade and Investment Growth The UK is a key economic partner for Kyrgyzstan. In 2024, total bilateral trade reached £144 million, a 73.5% increase from the previous year. Since June 2023, Kyrgyzstan has been part of the UK’s Developing Countries Trade Scheme (DCTS), which grants preferential or duty-free access to the UK market for around 8,000 Kyrgyz products. In December 2024, the UK Export Finance (UKEF) agency approved a £1.8 billion soft loan to support sectoral projects in Kyrgyzstan. The British government has also pledged funding for the development of Kyrgyzstan’s national strategy on critical minerals. This project is being carried out by Boston Consulting Group, which is also leading efforts to digitize Kyrgyzstan’s geological data, a move expected to attract further investment in the mining sector. Additionally, negotiations have begun with the London Stock Exchange to prepare Kyrgyz state-owned companies for initial public offerings (IPOs).

EU Sanctions Envoy’s Kazakh Visit Signals Rising Stakes

On January 30, David O’Sullivan, the European Union’s Special Envoy for Sanctions, made his fourth visit to Kazakhstan. Following the visit, he gave a briefing in Astana, where he discussed the new sanctions package, which could theoretically include Kazakh companies that assist Russia in circumventing restrictions. What O’Sullivan Said  According to O'Sullivan, only companies with indisputable evidence against them of involvement in violations will added to the sanctions list. “We are currently working on preparing a new, 16th package of sanctions. It is possible that Kazakh companies may be added to the list, but no decision has been made yet. We conduct a detailed analysis of companies, examine their trade relations, and review the goods they have previously traded. Of course, we prefer to work with governments to find a systematic solution rather than simply adding individual companies to the list. However, when there is no other option, we do add them,” O’Sullivan explained. The EU Sanctions Envoy reiterated that the EU remains one of Kazakhstan’s key economic partners, with mutual trade turnover reaching nearly 40 billion euros per annum. The EU accounts for 38% of Kazakhstan’s exports and 55 billion euros in direct foreign investments. Highlighting the importance of economic ties, O’Sullivan stated that the EU fully respects Kazakhstan’s position on sanctions, but urged authorities to take strict measures against third-party entities using the country’s trade channels. “We have concerns that unscrupulous actors may try to use Kazakhstan as a platform to circumvent our sanctions,” O’Sullivan warned, pointing to the import of high-tech goods such as microchips, sensors, and circuits, which have been found in Russian drones, missiles, and artillery shells. O'Sullivan noted that these goods, listed in an open “common high-priority list” of 50 codes, are not produced in Kazakhstan but are allegedly being re-exported from EU and G7 countries through Kazakh intermediaries. While they make up less than 1% of Kazakhstan’s total trade volume, O’Sullivan emphasized that these are “lethal products that kill innocent Ukrainian civilians.” The special envoy recalled that in 2024, the EU blacklisted two Kazakh companies and issued a warning that this list could be expanded. He noted that particular attention is being given to companies that emerged immediately after the invasion of Ukraine and the start of the new sanctions regime. “These are usually not well-established, well-known companies with a long history of trading. The fact that a company was created right after the invasion and the imposition of sanctions suggests that its sole purpose may be to evade sanctions,” he stated while stressing that merely registering after 2022 is not sufficient grounds for inclusion on the sanctions list. Strategically Important Central Asia Given the statistics cited by O’Sullivan, there was no pressing need for his fourth personal visit to Kazakhstan. The blacklisting of two Kazakh companies last year went largely unnoticed by the country’s general public. However, his visit highlights the mechanisms of international politics set in motion following Donald Trump’s return to the White House and the opening gambits of his administration,...

Japanese Musician Mashu Komazaki Named “Ambassador of Uzbek Culture”

Japanese singer and musician Mashu Komazaki has been awarded the title of “Ambassador of Uzbek Culture,” becoming the first Japanese citizen to receive this distinction, Uzbekistan’s Ministry of Culture has announced. As an Ambassador of Uzbek Culture, Komazaki will work to promote Uzbekistan’s traditional music and arts in Japan. The Ministry of Culture has pledged full support for her activities, providing national costumes, musical instruments, and other cultural materials. Komazaki has a close connection to Uzbek music, having previously volunteered as a music teacher in Bukhara. She plays the dutor, a traditional Uzbek stringed instrument, and has performed at major cultural festivals in Uzbekistan. Speaking at the award ceremony, she expressed gratitude for the honor and shared her passion for introducing more Japanese audiences to Uzbek music. “When I perform Uzbek music, many in Japan tell me it creates a vivid image of a mysterious land along the Silk Road. Some even say they want to visit Uzbekistan because of the music,” she said. The “Ambassador of Uzbek Culture” title is part of a new initiative under a presidential resolution aimed at recognizing foreign citizens who actively promote Uzbekistan’s cultural heritage. Those granted the status receive cultural materials and may even be recommended for state awards based on their contributions. Komazaki plans to organize concerts and educational events in Japan to further showcase Uzbekistan’s rich musical traditions.