• KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%
  • KGS/USD = 0.01143 0%
  • KZT/USD = 0.00206 0%
  • TJS/USD = 0.10811 -0.18%
  • UZS/USD = 0.00008 0%
  • TMT/USD = 0.28571 0%

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 387

Iran War Redraws Air Routes, Boosting Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan

Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan are emerging as potential beneficiaries of disruptions in the global aviation fuel market as tensions around Iran force airlines to reroute flights and rethink transit hubs. The escalation of tensions in the Middle East, including heightened risks to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, has led to sharp increases in energy prices and supply disruptions. Gas prices in the EU have risen by 70%, and oil by 60%, with additional costs reaching €14 billion. Roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, making any disruption critically significant for global markets. The aviation industry has been among the hardest hit sectors. According to industry sources cited by Bloomberg, Europe is expected to have sufficient jet fuel supplies in the short term, but stocks are under pressure, and supply risks could emerge if the conflict continues. The cost of jet fuel has risen from about $742 to more than $1,700 per ton in recent weeks in some markets. This increase is outpacing the rise in oil prices, intensifying pressure on airlines. As reported by The Telegraph, citing data from Cirium, around 7% of scheduled flights were canceled at the peak of recent disruptions, equivalent to more than 7,000 departures, compared with about 4.7% a year earlier. Airlines are responding by cutting flight schedules and revising their business models. Lufthansa, for example, is considering temporarily grounding part of its fleet. According to CEO Carsten Spohr, fuel shortages are likely to be felt first outside Europe, where supply chains are more vulnerable. At the same time, airfares have already risen by 15-20%, beginning to dampen demand. As passenger demand softens and costs rise, carriers are balancing route cuts with the need to maintain key markets. Fuel Costs Drive Route Shifts According to Sergey Agibalov, consulting director at Argus in the CIS, significant changes are also occurring in the geography of international air travel. Major Middle Eastern hubs, such as Dubai, Doha, and Abu Dhabi, have seen a decline in transit traffic amid safety concerns and are operating below normal capacity on key routes. Agibalov argues that this creates a window of opportunity for alternative routes between Europe and Asia, including Istanbul, Addis Ababa, and hubs in Central Asia and the South Caucasus. “Airports in Central Asia and the South Caucasus are now attractive not only to passengers, but also to airlines. Disruptions to Middle Eastern jet fuel exports linked to instability around the Strait of Hormuz have led to a sharp rise in fuel prices globally. This increase is outpacing the rise in oil prices, intensifying pressure on airlines. Recent industry data shows prices reaching as high as $1,600–1,800 per ton in some markets. Under these conditions, many airlines have begun optimizing their flight schedules; even if fuel is available, flying has become very expensive,” he noted. Against this backdrop, airports in Almaty, Astana, and Baku are seeing increased traffic and stronger airline interest. Argus estimates suggest volumes are already rising in Baku, as routes across Central...

India–Central Asia: Connectivity, Security, and Sustainable Partnerships in a Multipolar World

A widening conflict in West Asia is forcing India and Central Asia to reassess trade routes, diplomacy, and regional security, with key projects such as Iran’s Chabahar port now facing growing uncertainty. These risks framed discussions in New Delhi on March 25–26, where experts gathered under the banner of “India–Central Asia: Connectivity, Security, and Sustainable Partnerships in a Multipolar World,” with The Times of Central Asia in attendance. The conference unfolded against the backdrop of two active Eurasian wars—the Russo-Ukrainian and the Israel/U.S.-Iran conflict. Central Asian and Indian participants agreed that the West Asian crisis is widening, putting not only ports and logistics routes but also economies across the globe under serious threat. India's Chabahar link to Afghanistan and Central Asia is now a high-risk, uncertain investment, weakening overall continental strategic thinking across Eurasia, including efforts to consolidate new trans-Caspian trade corridors. If the conflict cripples or destroys Chabahar, years of progress, hard-won partnerships, and millions in strategic investment would be erased. On the sidelines, some participants suggested that India could help cool what's becoming a dangerously global conflict. Unbeknownst to them, India had already held an all-party meeting on March 25 on the West Asia crisis. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar's message: India will not mediate. The revelation surprised some participants—others, not at all. In any event, Central Asian states, in principle, have backed any diplomatic push for peace. With West Asia in turmoil and platitudes in abundance, conference participants emphasized the need to rethink geopolitics, trade, security, and cultural ties beyond stale frameworks at a time of conflict. Four themes defined the Central and South Asian moment: the dangers of bloc politics, even as regional organizations continue to evolve and expand their influence, the ascendancy of national interests over external pressure, and the emergence of a firm refusal to pick sides in the midst of frictions between competing global pressures. Dr. Raj Kumar Sharma, a member of the India Central Asia Foundation, stated: “The conference provided an important platform to move beyond theoretical discussion and toward practical engagement. With Central Asia’s ambassadors to India present, we focused on exploring concrete mechanisms to promote peace through sustained diplomatic efforts. Despite the proximity of the conflict in West Asia to both Central Asia and India, participants expressed confidence that dialogue and restraint – buttressed by trade and investment – will ultimately guide outcomes, with particular concern for civilians and those enduring hardship. Notably, the crisis did not overshadow the conference’s primary agenda or its scholarly contributions. Overall, the gathering can be seen as a constructive step in reinforcing diplomatic initiatives dedicated to peace and stability in a conflict-affected region.” The conference witnessed the release of three significant publications on India–Central Asia relations: India – Kazakhstan Partnership in a Changing Geopolitical Order (eds. Ramakant Dwivedi, Lalit Aggarwal, Kuralay Baizakova), Manas: Kirgiz Vir Gatha Kavya by Ramakant Dwivedi & Hemchandra Pandey and India and Central, East and Southeast Asia: Enhancing the Partnership (eds. Ramakant Dwivedi & Lalit Aggarwal). [caption id="attachment_46364" align="aligncenter" width="1379"]...

Central Asia Avoids Fuel Shock as Global Pressures Build

Central Asia has so far avoided the immediate fuel shocks spreading across much of the world following the U.S. and Israel’s war with Iran. There are no lines at gas stations, no visible shortages, and no signs of panic buying. But that stability sits within a rapidly tightening global market, where disruptions in Asia and policy responses in Europe are reshaping fuel flows in ways the region will struggle to avoid. Across Southeast Asia, governments are already taking precautionary steps. Some state agencies and private firms are shifting parts of their workforce to remote work to reduce fuel consumption and prepare for potential price spikes and logistics disruptions, while Thailand is preparing contingency measures, including possible fuel rationing. China, one of Asia’s largest suppliers of refined fuels, has moved to restrict exports of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel in an effort to prevent domestic shortages linked to the war. The move is expected to tighten supplies across Asia, especially for countries that rely on Chinese fuel imports. China supplied about one-third of Australia’s jet fuel last year, highlighting the wider regional impact, and roughly half of the Philippines’ and Bangladesh’s in 2024. Vietnam has already warned airlines to prepare for flight reductions in April due to the risk of shortages caused by these export restrictions. Indonesia is also imposing limits on fuel sales.  Fuel-related pressures have begun to emerge in Europe as well. Poland has introduced tax measures aimed at reducing fuel prices, with the government saying this will lower prices for consumers. Slovenia, meanwhile, has introduced significant restrictions on fuel consumption. Under new rules, private motorists are limited to purchasing a maximum of 50 liters per day, while businesses and farmers may purchase up to 200 liters daily. The combined effect of war-driven energy shocks and renewed tariff barriers is raising global costs and adding pressure across trade, transport, and inflation. Against this backdrop, Central Asia’s apparent stability is misleading. It is highly unlikely that import-dependent states such as Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan will be as well protected as Kazakhstan, which may benefit in the short term from higher crude prices. Starting April 1, Russia is banning gasoline exports in an effort to stabilize its own domestic market. Russia is a key fuel supplier to Central Asia. However, according to assurances from the Ministry of Energy of the Russian Federation, the temporary export ban will not affect supplies to Uzbekistan. Deliveries under intergovernmental agreements are expected to continue, ensuring that at least part of the region’s supply remains uninterrupted. In Kyrgyzstan, despite recent developments, fuel prices and supplies remain relatively stable. The government is considering lowering taxes or temporarily waiving excise duties for fuel importers should the crisis continue. Information from Turkmenistan is difficult to verify independently. Despite reports of fuel shortages at gas stations last year, official media are now indicating a significant increase in domestic gasoline production. The production plan for January-February 2026 was reportedly fulfilled at 122.7%, according to Deputy Chairman of the Cabinet of Ministers Guvancha...

The Iran Conflict Is Stress-Testing Central Asia’s Southern Corridors

Kazakhstan President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s proposal of Turkestan city as a venue for Iran-war negotiations shows how directly the conflict had already begun to affect Central Asia itself. The region is no longer simply observing events in Iran. By the time Tokayev made the offer, Central Asian governments were already dealing with evacuations, route disruption, emergency diplomatic coordination, and growing concern over the war’s economic effects. The Iran war has thus become a real test of Central Asia’s southern diversification strategy. Governments across the region have, in recent years, sought to widen access to world markets through Iran, the South Caucasus, and, in some cases, Afghanistan and Pakistan. These channels reduce dependence on northern routes by opening access to Türkiye, Europe, Gulf markets, and the Indian Ocean. The present crisis subjects that strategy to wartime conditions. The strain of war makes it easier to distinguish durable links, conditional ones, and routes that remain more aspirational than real. The C6 and Crisis Coordination The first effects have been practical. Turkmenistan has opened four additional checkpoints along its frontier with Iran, supplementing the Serakhs crossing, while Azerbaijan’s overland route through Astara became another critical outlet, evacuating 312 people from 17 countries between February 28 and March 2. Turkmenistan, according to official reporting, transited more than 200 foreign citizens from 16 countries during the same period. Uzbekistan used the Turkmen route to repatriate its citizens, while Kazakhstan directed its nationals toward overland exits through Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Türkiye. The war is already affecting borders, consular work, and the regional diplomatic agenda. This immediate response gives sharper political meaning to the widening of the Central Asian C5 into a C6 with Azerbaijan. The March 2 call among the five Central Asian foreign ministers and Azerbaijan showed that the format was already there to be used under pressure. What had until now appeared mainly as a corridor framework shaped by summit diplomacy and expert work appeared instead as a working format for crisis coordination linking Central Asia to the South Caucasus. The C6 idea is becoming more practical and more overtly diplomatic. The Organization of Turkic States adds a second, broader layer. Its foreign ministers met in Istanbul on March 7 and issued a joint statement expressing concern over the escalation in the Middle East, condemning actions that endanger civilians, warning against further regional destabilization, and affirming that threats to the security and interests of member states concern the organization as a whole. The statement was cautious, and the OTS is not turning into a military instrument. Even so, the war is testing whether a Turkic political space extending from Turkey through the South Caucasus to Central Asia can do more than express concern as regional security deteriorates. The C6 is becoming a working format for immediate coordination, while the OTS remains the broader political frame within which that coordination takes on institutional meaning. Corridor Stress and Resilience The trans-Iran transit option offers Central Asia a continuous land arc from regional railheads and road networks...

Caspian Escalation Raises Stakes for Central Asia

Central Asia, which has increasingly sought to present itself as a coordinated actor on the global political stage, has until recently maintained a cautious, non-aligned stance regarding the escalation in the Middle East. However, attacks affecting infrastructure in the Caspian region have altered the diplomatic balance. The Caspian Sea is a critical transit zone for Central Asia, linking Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to Azerbaijan and onward to European and Middle Eastern markets. It forms part of key east–west and north–south trade corridors that have gained importance since Russia’s war in Ukraine disrupted traditional transit routes. In recent years, regional dynamics have also been shaped by Azerbaijan’s growing engagement with Central Asian states, including its formal inclusion in the expanded Central Asian consultative format, which has effectively evolved from the C5 into the C6. Baku has played an important role in regional connectivity. It has developed close relations with both Turkey and Israel, factors that influence geopolitical calculations in the Caspian basin, which directly borders Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. This growing alignment has reinforced efforts to develop the Middle Corridor across the Caspian, linking Central Asia to Europe via the South Caucasus. Turkey maintains political, economic, and cultural influence in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan through the Organization of Turkic States. Russian political discourse has at times portrayed this cooperation as part of a broader pan-Turkic geopolitical project, a characterization widely dismissed by officials and analysts in Central Asia. Nevertheless, Astana and Baku continue to maintain strong relations with Ankara, a development that has periodically caused concern in Moscow. Under President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, Kazakhstan has also strengthened ties with Gulf states. Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia have become significant investors in the country’s economy. In this context, Iranian attacks on Gulf states not directly involved in the conflict have shaped Astana’s diplomatic positioning during the current crisis. Reports of drone attacks widely blamed on Iran targeting the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhchivan have further heightened regional tensions. At the initial stage of the escalation, Kazakhstan’s response was largely limited to diplomatic contacts with regional leaders. At the same time, several Central Asian countries, along with Azerbaijan, expressed concern over the humanitarian consequences of the conflict and began dispatching aid to Iran. Azerbaijan sent nearly 30 tons of food and medical supplies on March 10, followed by another 82 tons of humanitarian aid on March 18. Uzbekistan delivered approximately 120 tons of humanitarian supplies, including flour, vegetable oil, sugar, and canned food, according to regional media reports. Turkmenistan also sent humanitarian aid consisting of medicines, medical supplies, and other goods, primarily intended for children. The Tajik government reported sending a convoy of 110 heavy trucks carrying humanitarian cargo to Iran, with a total weight of 3,610 tons. The diplomatic environment shifted further after Israeli air strikes on March 18 targeting Iranian naval facilities in the Caspian Sea. According to Israeli military statements cited by international media, the targets included a major port of the Iranian Navy, where, reportedly, "dozens of ships were destroyed,”...

Central Asia’s Airspace Is Growing in Value as the Iran Conflict Reshapes Routes

The war involving Iran has made Central Asia’s skies more important, but it has not made them a replacement for the Gulf. The change is narrower and more practical. As previously reported by The Times of Central Asia, the conflict has already reshaped Europe–Asia flight routes, with airlines forced to reroute around high-risk airspace. As EASA’s conflict-zone bulletin for Iran remains in force through March 31, and its broader Middle East and Persian Gulf bulletin advises operators to avoid a wide band of regional airspace, airlines flying between Europe and Asia now have fewer safe and efficient options than they did even a month ago. That matters for Central Asia because the region sits just north of the disrupted corridor. Iran’s airspace is considered high risk and is being widely avoided by airlines, while large parts of the central Middle East corridor are closed or heavily restricted. Safe Airspace’s March 21 summary states that the normal central route has been effectively shut for many operators, while Oman has become a heavily used southern bypass. That leaves a northern arc running through the Caucasus and Central Asia as one of the few workable alternatives for many carriers. The roots of this go back further than this month’s escalation. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, many Western and Europe-bound operators have had to rethink routes that once crossed Russian airspace. In January 2025, Uzbekistan Airways began rerouting its Europe flights around Russia and Belarus. The airline said the Tashkent–Munich route grew from 4,849 kilometers to 5,156 kilometers, adding 30 to 40 minutes to each flight. The conflict has now squeezed traffic again, this time from the south. That double squeeze raises a harder question. Can Central Asia handle more strategic weight in the air, not just on a map but in daily operations? Kazakhstan is the strongest candidate. Kazaeronavigatsiya says Kazakhstan’s airspace handled 216,616 flights in the first half of 2025. Of those, 161,029 were flown by foreign airlines in transit or landing operations, while 55,587 were operated by Kazakh carriers. The same state operator lists 124 air traffic service routes with a combined length of 113,530 kilometers. These are substantial figures for a landlocked state positioning itself as a Eurasian transit hub. The country’s broader aviation system has also been expanding. The Civil Aviation Administration of Kazakhstan says airports served 31.8 million passengers in 2025, up from 29.7 million in 2024. Airlines carried 20.7 million passengers, and Kazakhstan’s compliance with international aviation safety standards reached 95.7%. The same report points to a three-year development plan, a new accident investigation center, and continued work on digital systems and urban air mobility rules. Still, higher value does not mean unlimited capacity. Central Asia is not one integrated aviation market. It is a set of separate national systems with uneven infrastructure, uneven investment, and different regulatory speeds. Kazakhstan has scale, but it is also expanding passenger traffic, cargo capacity, and international routes at the same time. More overflights can bring revenue, but...