EU - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 29

Black Sea Tanker Attacks

Europe Must Defend the Distinction It Has Made Between Kazakhstani and Russian Oil

In the early hours of July 30, drones struck two tankers at the marine terminal of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) near Novorossiysk: the Nissos Sifnos while it was loading Tengizchevroil crude at Single Point Mooring 3, and the Marathi as it approached the terminal. Loading was temporarily suspended, although the pipeline remained operational. Neither vessel sank; no casualties or oil spill were reported. Earlier attacks in July had already interrupted CPC loading operations and prompted a formal protest from Kazakhstan. Astana said that an agreed mechanism for exchanging information about civilian vessels entering the Black Sea to load CPC oil had been disregarded. The recurrence was more important than the damage: it could alter commercial expectations and behavior. The pipeline is not the relevant analytical unit; the export chain is. It can remain operational even when the maritime egress of its oil to world markets has ceased to function. Once loading stops and terminal storage fills, CPC must restrict intake from Kazakhstan, transmitting the interruption backward through the system until producers reduce output. After two tankers bound for the CPC terminal were struck in January, Black Sea war-risk premiums rose from 0.6–0.8% to 1% of vessel value, while insurers shortened their review of terms from every 48 hours to every 24 hours. By July, vessels were avoiding the terminal on safety grounds even though no structural damage to it had been reported. Commercial use of CPC was thus impaired despite the integrity of its infrastructure. The concentration of Kazakhstan’s exports magnifies the effect. CPC carries approximately four-fifths of its oil exports, including production from Tengiz, Kashagan, and Karachaganak. The July interruption exposed the consequence: full terminal storage obliged CPC to halt intake, while the Kazakhstani government confirmed that producers had reduced output because of export constraints. The vulnerability reaches backward from maritime egress into production. Crude from Kazakhstan occupies a material place in the EU’s non-Russian import structure, giving Europe a direct interest in the matter. Kazakhstan supplied 11.5% of EU petroleum-oil imports in 2024 and 9.6% in the first quarter of 2026, ranking among the Union’s three largest suppliers in both periods. The EU’s sanctions architecture already recognizes that Kazakhstani oil passing through Russian territory does not thereby become Russian oil. Commission guidance treats CPC crude as originating in Kazakhstan when supported by certificates of origin or other documentation, notwithstanding unavoidable admixture with Russian oil. EU legislation also provides targeted derogations permitting goods, technology, and services required for the operation and maintenance of CPC infrastructure. The differentiated treatment is narrow: it attaches to the origin and documentation of the cargo, not indiscriminately to every vessel, facility, or transaction associated with CPC. Cargo, route, terminal, and vessel remain legally separable. The distinction became especially salient when the sanctioned Nelsa, which had carried Russian Urals crude, was attacked at the same terminal after vessels loading Kazakhstani crude had been struck. Europe nevertheless lacks a CPC-specific public-policy position on repeated disruption of the export chain carrying exempted crude, even though its...

EAEU

As Armenia Looks West, Could Uzbekistan Move Closer to the EAEU?

Armenia’s increasingly uncertain future within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) appears to have entered a new phase. On May 29, the presidents of Kazakhstan, Belarus, Russia, and Kyrgyzstan issued a joint statement calling on Yerevan to clarify whether it intends to pursue deeper integration with the European Union or remain committed to the Eurasian bloc. The four leaders announced that members of the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council would present a report at the next meeting of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council in December 2026 outlining the possible consequences of suspending Armenia’s participation in the EAEU treaty framework. “We share the view that the Republic of Armenia should, within the shortest possible timeframe, hold a nationwide referendum on joining the European Union or continuing its membership in the Eurasian Economic Union,” the statement said. Speaking to journalists after the summit in Astana, Russian President Vladimir Putin drew parallels between Armenia’s current trajectory and the developments that preceded the crisis in Ukraine. “I have mentioned this before: the crisis in Ukraine began with attempts to join the EU,” Putin said. He added that significant differences between European and EAEU standards, particularly in agriculture and industry, make simultaneous participation in both integration projects difficult. “Combining the two is practically impossible,” Putin said. “Therefore, we would be forced to curtail much of our economic integration work with Armenia.” The following day, Russia recalled its ambassador to Armenia for consultations amid Yerevan’s growing engagement with the European Union. According to Russian political analyst Arkady Dubnov, the move was a clear diplomatic signal of Moscow’s dissatisfaction with the pro-European course pursued by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s government and indicated a downgrading of bilateral relations. Dubnov also argued that Armenia’s representative at the Astana summit, Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan, avoided harsher criticism from Putin partly because of the position taken by Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. “Kazakhstan itself signed an Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with the European Union in 2020,” Dubnov noted, suggesting that arguments about Armenia’s European integration harming the EAEU are largely political rather than economic in nature. One recent poll appears to reinforce confidence within Armenia’s ruling camp. A survey conducted ahead of parliamentary elections indicates that Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party could secure nearly 65% of decided voters, positioning it for a convincing victory and a substantial parliamentary majority. Against that backdrop, Moscow’s pressure on Yerevan may be less about influencing the outcome of Armenia’s elections than about preparing for a longer-term strategic realignment. Supporters of Pashinyan increasingly associate his political project with closer ties to Europe, a perception reinforced not only by European leaders but also by U.S. President Donald Trump, who recently expressed support for Pashinyan’s re-election campaign. For his part, Pashinyan appears focused on a broader regional recalibration. Speaking via Facebook Live on May 31, he emphasized the importance of normalizing relations with neighboring states. “I am convinced that we will achieve the goal of normalizing relations with Azerbaijan and Türkiye,” he said. “This means that a balanced and balancing...

Human rights

Rights Groups Urge EU to Tie Turkmenistan Relations to Human Rights Progress

Rights groups have urged the European Union to take a tougher line on Turkmenistan, warning that closer ties with Ashgabat should be tied to measurable progress on human rights. The call came in a briefing by the International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR) and the Turkmen Initiative for Human Rights (TIHR) ahead of the EU-Turkmenistan Human Rights Dialogue, scheduled for June 22, 2026, in Ashgabat. The organizations called on European institutions to press Turkmen authorities to take concrete steps to improve civil liberties, freedom of expression, and human rights protections. Turkmenistan remains one of the world’s most closed and repressive states, according to the briefing. It highlights severe restrictions on independent media, expanding internet censorship, the absence of independent civic space, persecution of government critics, transnational repression, impunity for torture and enforced disappearances, and continuing violations of women’s rights. The groups urged the EU to link any further development of relations with Turkmenistan, including ratification of the pending Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, to measurable progress on human rights. They also called on European officials to demand regular reporting from Turkmen authorities on the implementation of international recommendations and to share this information with independent civil society representatives. Media freedom is a central focus of the briefing. According to the 2026 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders, Turkmenistan ranked 173rd out of 180 countries. The authors state that state-controlled media continue to function primarily as propaganda outlets, promoting an official image of prosperity despite economic hardship and systemic human rights violations. Access to alternative sources of information remains heavily restricted because of extensive internet censorship. The briefing also references cases involving the blocking of circumvention tools and raids targeting owners of Starlink satellite equipment. Rights advocates further argue that civic space in Turkmenistan is effectively closed to independent activity. Much of the public sector is controlled by government-linked structures, while many public-sector employees and students are pressured into financially supporting pro-government organizations. The briefing also highlights the continued practice of forced mobilization for mass state events. According to the organizations, civil servants, university students, and even children are regularly compelled to participate in large-scale public campaigns and rehearsals that can last for extended periods, raising concerns about health and safety. Despite official pledges to cooperate with international institutions, Turkmen authorities continue to restrict access to the country for independent observers and UN experts, the briefing says. It also lists cases of pressure and intimidation targeting journalists, activists, and human rights defenders. The organizations also expressed concern over discrimination against women, entrenched patriarchal practices, and the effects of the country’s prolonged socioeconomic crisis, which they say disproportionately affects women, labor migrants.

Geopolitics

European Summit in Yerevan Sends a Signal to Central Asia

The 8th European Political Community summit in Yerevan highlighted deepening geopolitical fault lines while signaling that some post-Soviet countries, notably Azerbaijan and Armenia, are gradually shifting their geopolitical orientation away from Moscow. It is a realignment that Central Asian states are watching with increasing interest. On May 4, attention across post-Soviet space, from Russia and Belarus to Central Asia and the South Caucasus, turned toward Yerevan. Armenia, still a member of the Commonwealth of Independent States and the Eurasian Economic Union and formally tied to the Collective Security Treaty Organization despite freezing its participation, hosted Europe’s political leadership. Among those attending were French President Emmanuel Macron, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, European Council President António Costa, and prime ministers including Donald Tusk, Keir Starmer, and Petteri Orpo. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev participated via video link. No Central Asian leaders attended the summit. Even so, the gathering carried a message for the region. Armenia hosted Europe’s political leadership while remaining tied to Moscow-led structures, including the CIS and the Eurasian Economic Union. For Central Asian governments pursuing their own multi-vector policies, the summit showed how a post-Soviet state can widen its diplomatic options without a clean break from Russia. The parallel is not exact, but it is visible. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan remain in the Eurasian Economic Union, while Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan remain in the CSTO. All five Central Asian states maintain working ties with Moscow, while expanding contacts with the EU, Turkey, China, and the Gulf, part of a wider effort to diversify foreign policy options through closer engagement with Europe and other outside powers. Turkey was represented by Vice President Cevdet Yılmaz, the highest-level Turkish official to visit Armenia since then-President Abdullah Gül in 2008. Turkey and Azerbaijan largely positioned themselves as counterweights to the dominant European framing, marking one of the summit’s key geopolitical divides. Aliyev adopted a confrontational tone, announcing a suspension of relations with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the European Parliament. “Instead of addressing fundamental problems of some member states, such as xenophobia, Islamophobia, antisemitism, migration, competitiveness, and homelessness, the European Parliament targets Azerbaijan, spreading slander and lies,” Aliyev said. “And the reason is that Azerbaijan restored its territorial integrity and sovereignty, put an end to separatism, and brought war criminals to justice.” In response, António Costa sought to soften tensions, emphasizing the summit’s historical significance as the first of its kind held in the South Caucasus and highlighting Aliyev’s participation as a symbol of peace efforts in the region. Cevdet Yilmaz focused on bilateral diplomacy, meeting Romanian President Nicușor Dan to discuss trade, regional issues, and global challenges. He also held talks with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, the summit’s host. The two sides signed a memorandum of understanding on the joint restoration of the historic Ani Bridge, located on the border between the two countries and dating back to the 11th century. Yilmaz suggested that Armenia would benefit from closer alignment with Turkey...

Hungary

Central Asia Holds Back on Hungary Election as Orbán Era Ends

Central Asian governments have still yet to issue public statements on Hungary’s election, which brought an end to Viktor Orbán’s 16-year tenure. Hungary’s National Election Office published official updates after the April 12 vote, with Orbán conceding defeat after preliminary results indicated a landslide victory for Péter Magyar’s Tisza party. European leaders responded quickly, but no comparable messages have appeared on the main official channels in Astana, Tashkent, Bishkek, Dushanbe, or Ashgabat. The absence is not a breach of diplomatic protocol. Governments often wait for formal certification or initial contacts before issuing congratulations after parliamentary elections. Yet Hungary occupies a distinct place in Central Asia’s external relations. It is an observer in the Organization of Turkic States, and President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev attended the informal OTS summit in Budapest, where Viktor Orbán hosted regional leaders and promoted closer ties. Hungary has presented itself as a bridge between Central Asia and the European Union, with regular high-level exchanges and expanding economic links. Recent precedent underscores the contrast. Following Hungary’s 2022 election, Kazakhstan’s Akorda said Kassym-Jomart Tokayev sent Viktor Orbán a congratulatory telegram on April 4, the day after the vote, and Uzbekistan reported that President Shavkat Mirziyoyev phoned Orbán on April 14, 2022 to offer his congratulations. No similar outreach has been made public so far in 2026. The delay reflects a period of adjustment rather than a clear shift. Orbán’s government had cultivated close personal and political ties with Central Asian leaders, and Budapest played an active role in advancing cooperation through the Turkic framework. A new Hungarian administration may recalibrate those priorities as it seeks to strengthen relations within the EU, creating uncertainty for partners that had relied on Hungary as a consistent advocate in Europe. For now, the silence signals caution. Central Asian governments appear to be waiting for the formal transition in Budapest and for early indications of the new government’s foreign policy. If statements follow in the coming days, the current pause will look procedural. If it continues, it will carry more weight as a sign of recalibration in a relationship that had been unusually close.

EU-Turkmenistan Relations

Turkmenistan Opens the Door a Little Wider to Europe

Turkmenistan has historically been a difficult partner to deal with. The Turkmen government’s isolationist policies run counter to deep cooperation with any foreign party, but the Turkmen authorities seem to now perceive that these policies are costing them opportunities and revenue. In one of the latest shifts in foreign policy, Turkmenistan appears to be warming up relations with the European Union, though currently, the EU has its own reasons to boost interaction with Turkmenistan. Let’s Meet For decades, the EU and many other countries and international organizations have gone through frustrating efforts to establish a reliable relationship with Turkmenistan. Ashgabat’s form of governance is based on a cult of personality, a supposedly infallible leader capable of protecting the country from the evils of the outside world. The UN recognition in December 1995 of Turkmenistan’s neutrality was used by its government to seal off the country. It would normally be easy for the rest of the world to ignore Turkmenistan. However, Turkmenistan possesses the planet’s fourth-largest proven natural gas reserves, and it is located on what is developing into a key global trade route. On March 20, the European Investment Bank’s (EIB) regional representative for Central Asia, Olivier Kueny, complimented Turkmenistan for its “ambitions in transport and… projects that reduce greenhouse gases.“ Kueny noted that, “with direct access to the Caspian Sea, [Turkmenistan] is a key node” of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Corridor (TITR). He hinted the EIB could be interested in investing in Turkmenistan’s “rail, road, rolling stock and port infrastructure [that] could help reduce the cost and time needed to move goods between continents.“ On March 26, Charlotte Adriaen, the head of the EU division for Central Asia and Afghanistan, met in Ashgabat with Turkmenistan’s Deputy Foreign Minister, Myahri Byashimova, to discuss energy cooperation. The two also reviewed EU programs for sustainable energy, trade, and digital connectivity. On the same day, there was also a “New Horizons for Connectivity, Investment and Sustainable Growth” Turkmenistan-EU business forum in Ashgabat. Turkmenistan’s Minister of Finance and Economy, Mammetguly Astanagulov, addressed more than 200 delegates attending the forum, telling them his country is ready to expand trade, transport, and energy cooperation with the EU. Astanagulov noted EU-Turkmenistan trade increased from $1.1 billion in 2024 to $2.1 billion in 2025. EU Ambassador to Turkmenistan Beata Peksa also spoke at the forum. She noted Turkmenistan’s growing role in global transport corridors between Europe and Asia and said the EU is seeking to work more closely with Turkmenistan on improving investment conditions in the country. Peksa also mentioned helping Turkmenistan improve regulatory frameworks and investment in modern technologies to increase efficiency in moving cargo. On April 1, Adriaen met with representatives from Turkmenistan’s State Service of Maritime and River Transportation at the Turkmenbashi International Seaport on the Caspian coast to discuss the port’s role in the TITR and projects at the Balkan shipbuilding yard. And on April 7, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) co-sponsored an “Export Experience Exchange” conference in Ashgabat, the aim...