Middle Corridor - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 158

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 Corridors

Opinion: Eurasia’s New Corridors Are More Than a Transit Race

Across Eurasia, new transport corridors are usually described as instruments of rivalry: routes to bypass Russia, ports to outflank competitors, or rail links to shift influence between regions. The conflict around Iran, the rivalry between India and Pakistan, instability in the Afghanistan-Pakistan zone, crises in the Middle East, sanctions, competition over transport routes, and growing struggles for transit influence all reinforce the image of a continent divided by political contradictions. Increasingly, this is the lens through which Eurasia is viewed. The development of transport routes and connectivity is now often explained through the logic of rivalry. Some corridors are described as alternatives to others. Certain ports are positioned against competing ports. Routes are increasingly perceived as tools of competition, circumvention, or geopolitical influence. The continent can also be viewed differently. Alongside political crises, another reality is visible: the continent continues to connect itself through new routes and networks. Railways, ports, energy grids, dry ports, container corridors, digital cables, and trade chains are gradually linking spaces that only recently were seen as separate regions. In many ways, Eurasia has always been a space of movement, exchange, and connectivity. The Silk Road Was a Network, Not a Single Route A recent article by News Central Asia made a simple but important observation: the Silk Road functioned because it belonged to everyone. This idea contains one of the central lessons of Eurasian history. The Silk Road was never a single road. It was not one unified highway built according to a master plan or controlled by a single center. For centuries, the continent was connected by a vast network of caravan routes, maritime pathways, mountain passes, cities, and trade hubs through which goods, people, knowledge, and ideas circulated. Some routes gained importance while others temporarily declined. States, empires, and commercial centers changed. New pathways emerged. Yet the network itself endured. The strength of the Silk Road lay not in one route, but in the multiplicity of connections. When one corridor became unsafe, trade shifted elsewhere. When political conditions changed, commerce adapted to a new geography. The continental network remained flexible and multilayered. This offers an important lesson for today’s Eurasian space as well. Many modern transport corridors did not emerge from nothing. In many respects, they follow historical logic. Railways have replaced caravan paths, dry ports have succeeded old trade hubs, and container routes continue along directions in which goods moved for centuries. Corridors and the Logic of Rivalry Today, most transport and economic corridors are interpreted as competing projects. Nearly every new route is framed through confrontation, alternatives, or attempts to bypass another direction. The Middle Corridor is often described as an alternative to northern routes. The International North-South Transport Corridor is presented as a separate geo-economic axis. Trans-Afghan projects are portrayed as competitors to other links between Central and South Asia. Chabahar and Gwadar are depicted as rival ports. Even the South Caucasus transport hub is increasingly viewed through the prism of struggles over control of routes and flows. Yet historically,...

EAEU

Putin’s Astana Visit Shows What Russia Still Wants From Kazakhstan

The Eurasian Economic Union summit in Astana gave Vladimir Putin's state visit a wider stage. The summit produced technical documents and familiar language about integration. The bilateral Russia-Kazakhstan package around it was more concrete. It showed what Moscow still wants from Kazakhstan, and what Astana expects in return. The detail lies in infrastructure, where contracts can last for decades. The setting echoed history. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia signed the treaty creating the Eurasian Economic Union in Astana on May 29, 2014, with Armenia joining in January 2015, and Kyrgyzstan in August of the same year. In 2026, the bloc returned to Astana for the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council and the V Eurasian Economic Forum. The theme of the forum was artificial intelligence, digital regulation, and the EAEU's place in the global technology race. Its website said 14 integration documents were signed on the sidelines, including memoranda, agreements, protocols, and joint action plans. Those documents gave the visit a regional frame. The larger result came on May 28, when Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and Putin oversaw a broad set of bilateral agreements. Akorda listed nuclear power, Russian export credit, expanded oil-sector cooperation, a tenge-ruble currency swap, education projects, financial monitoring, transport digitalization, and nuclear safety regulation. That package points to the real agenda: energy, transit, payments, industrial production, and public-facing alliance language. For Moscow, Kazakhstan’s primary value is geographic: it sits between Russia and China, and across routes that connect Central Asia to Europe, the Caspian, and South Asia. Russian crude already crosses Kazakhstan on the Priirtyshsk-Atasu-Alashankou route to China. A KazTransOil contract keeps transit at 10 million tons a year until the end of 2033. The tariff is $15 per ton, excluding VAT. The Atasu-Alashankou pipeline has a design capacity of 20 million tons a year and belongs to Kazakhstan-China Pipeline LLP, a 50-50 venture between KazTransOil and China National Oil and Gas Exploration and Development Company. Reuters has reported that Russia and Kazakhstan agreed last year to raise that flow by 2.5 million tons, although the extra volume had not started flowing before Putin’s visit. The new agreement on oil-sector cooperation gives the issue a political push. For Moscow, the route strengthens access to China as Western sanctions keep pressure on Russian exports and payments. For Kazakhstan, it brings fees and gives Astana a useful position in Russia-China energy flows. The nuclear agreement, meanwhile, gives Russia a long-term role in Kazakhstan’s shift to nuclear power. Kazakhstan and Russia signed a $16.5 billion agreement for the Balkhash nuclear power plant at Ulken, near Lake Balkhash. The project covers two VVER-1200 III+ reactors. Kazakhstan held a groundbreaking ceremony for the plant in August 2025, with the active construction phase expected to begin in 2027, and the first reactor expected in early 2034. Russia will provide export credit for the first plant, with Rosatom leading the Balkhash project after competition with China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), France’s EDF, and Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power. But Kazakhstan has not handed the wider program to Moscow....

Middle Corridor

Can Caspian Cargo Fleets Meet Middle Corridor Demands?

Construction of infrastructure along the Middle Corridor, also called the Trans-Caspian International Trade Route, to ship goods between China and Europe is progressing at a frantic pace. When Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in late February 2022, it inadvertently gave a new impetus to the development of a trade network through Central Asia and the South Caucasus that had been slowly taking shape since the end of the 1990s. One of the most formidable challenges along the Middle Corridor is boosting maritime cargo across the Caspian Sea. Steps are being made, including some significant recent moves, but the capacity of shipping east-to-west over the Caspian Sea faces challenges in meeting the ever-growing demand for commercial vessels. By Leaps and Bounds In 2022, the volume of cargo through the Middle Corridor was some 1.5 million tons, more than twice the amount transported in 2021. In 2023, it topped 2.7 million tons, in 2024 was about 4.5 million tons, and in 2025 it was expected to be approximately 5.2 million tons. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Kazakhstan on May 13-14, where his host, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, said the figure could reach 10 million tons “in the near future,” and are predictions it could happen as soon as 2027. The roads, railways, and port facilities along the Middle Corridor are expanding rapidly. However, according to a report from Azerbaijan’s Trend news agency in mid-May, the Azerbaijani Caspian Shipping Company (ASCO) says that since 2013, only “a total of 35 new vessels have been commissioned.” The Merchant Fleets of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan On the eastern side of the Caspian Sea, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan have been working to increase their maritime shipping. Both countries invested heavily in upgrading their Caspian ports, in Kazakhstan’s case at Aktau and Kuryk, and for Turkmenistan at Turkmenbashi City. Since the end of April, both countries have moved to boost their potential to ship cargo across the Caspian. Kazakhstan’s state railway company, Kazakhstan Temir Zholy (KTZ), announced on April 30 that it would build its own maritime fleet starting with six new vessels, each with a deadweight of up to 9,900 tons and able to carry up to 537 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU). Once completed, those six cargo ships will join the two dry cargo and three container vessels in the Caspian Sea operated by Kazakhstan’s state maritime shipping company Kazmortransflot. The three container ships – Berkut, Sunkar, and Barys – all started operation in 2019, have a deadweight of 5,200 tons, and can each carry up to 350 TEU. The two dry cargo ships, the Beket Ata and Turkestan, have a deadweight of 5,467 tons and can carry 4,182 tons. On May 12, the dry cargo ship Gadamly arrived at the Baku International Sea Port. The Gadamly is Turkmenistan’s first dry cargo vessel and is able to carry up to 240 TEU. A second cargo vessel, Manzil, should be launched before the end of this year. Arif Aghayev, the deputy chairman of Azerbaijan Railways, said at...

TCA Interviews

Interview: Kazakhstan Pushes Middle Corridor as Global Trade Routes Shift

As war, sanctions, and disruption reshape trade between Europe and Asia, Kazakhstan is trying to turn the Middle Corridor from an alternative route into a more predictable logistics system. The route, formally known as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, links China and Central Asia with the Caspian Sea, the South Caucasus, Turkey, and Europe, bypassing Russia. For Kazakhstan, the project is both economic and geopolitical. It promises faster access to foreign markets, new transit revenue, and a stronger role for the country as a logistics hub between China and Europe. However, the corridor still faces practical constraints, including port capacity on the Caspian Sea, uneven digital systems, border procedures, tariffs, and coordination between several states and operators. The Times of Central Asia spoke with Alua Korpebayeva, Head of the Project Office for Transport and Logistics under the Presidential Administration of Kazakhstan, about what still needs to change and how Kazakhstan views the corridor’s long-term role. TCA: Why has the Middle Corridor become more urgent for Kazakhstan and Central Asia, and how much have the war in Ukraine and tensions around Iran and the Persian Gulf changed the calculation? Alua Korpebayeva: The government of Kazakhstan has assigned the national railway company, Kazakhstan Temir Zholy, a strategic objective of increasing total transit volumes to 55 million tons by 2026, representing a 65% increase compared to last year. This target reflects the scale of the country’s ongoing transport transformation. Achieving this goal is closely tied to the development of the Middle Corridor. The route is especially important because it is becoming a foundation for stable and predictable supply chains in global trade. The Middle Corridor provides Central Asian countries with an opportunity to strengthen connectivity with both Europe and China while increasing the region’s role as an independent transport and logistics hub. Geopolitical factors have undoubtedly increased business interest in alternative routes. For Kazakhstan, however, development of the Middle Corridor is primarily part of a broader effort to expand transport capacity and improve logistical resilience. That is precisely why deeper regional cooperation is so important. Unlocking the corridor’s full potential requires close coordination among all participants, from infrastructure modernization and tariff harmonization to end-to-end digitalization and simplified customs procedures. The World Bank has noted that a fully functioning Middle Corridor could strengthen supply-chain resilience and, if accompanied by investment and efficiency measures, could triple freight volumes and cut transportation times in half by 2030. TCA: Are Kazakhstan and its partners moving toward unified transit rules and tariffs along the corridor? What has already been agreed, and where do gaps remain? Alua Korpebayeva: Work on creating unified transit rules and coordinated tariff policies is ongoing. The current focus is shifting from fragmented national tariffs toward a unified through-route pricing system across the corridor. Within the framework of the Action Plan for Eliminating Bottlenecks along the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, signed by the railway administrations of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Georgia, the parties agreed to establish a single long-term tariff for the route. In practical terms,...

Middle Powers

Opinion: Middle Powers and the “Voice of the Region” – Is Central Asia Becoming a Coordinated Actor?

Against the backdrop of growing global fragmentation and the weakening of universal international institutions, the role of so-called middle powers is increasing. These are states able to influence regional agendas without possessing great-power status. In this changing system, Central Asia is gradually moving beyond its long-standing image as a geopolitical periphery and is beginning to act more like a region with shared interests. For decades, the region was viewed mainly as a space where the interests of external powers, including Russia, China, the U.S., and others, intersected. Today, that paradigm is beginning to shift. Central Asia is showing greater signs of agency through what may be described as a cluster effect: individually, the countries have limited influence, but collectively they form an important transit hub between Europe and Asia, a growing market, a significant resource base, and a strategic security zone. This creates the conditions for a more coordinated regional position, even if a single regional voice is still emerging rather than fully formed. C5+Azerbaijan as a Foundation for Regional Architecture The institutional foundation of this process is the Central Asian leaders' consultative format, which is now expanding through Azerbaijan's participation. That is turning what was once a C5 dialogue into a looser C5+Azerbaijan, or C6, framework focused on transport, energy, and practical cooperation. Within this framework, the countries of the region are learning to act in a more coordinated manner without supranational pressure. In practice, this process is developing through three main areas. The first is transport and logistics. Azerbaijan's participation has strengthened efforts to make the Middle Corridor more coherent, though the route still faces bottlenecks in capacity, customs coordination, and Caspian crossings. Through tariff coordination, simplified border procedures, and investment in port and rail infrastructure, Central Asia and the Caucasus are increasingly functioning as parts of a single transport artery. That gives the region a faster option for cargo between China and Europe, even if it remains far smaller than traditional maritime routes. Shipping goods via the Suez Canal or the northern route can take between 35 and 45 days, whereas the Middle Corridor can reduce transit times to around 13-21 days under favorable conditions. According to forecasts cited by BCG, shipping volumes along the route could increase three- to fourfold during the current decade. Beyond logistics, the project is creating a new economic framework for the region. Its status as a crossroads is attracting investment in transport hubs and manufacturing facilities along the route, with the potential to turn transit corridors into zones of economic growth. This gives participating countries not only transit revenue but a stronger basis for long-term strategic resilience. The second major area is energy integration, where historical disputes over water and fuel resources are increasingly being supplemented by models of joint development. The Kambarata HPP-1 hydropower project in Kyrgyzstan, being developed with Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, has created an important precedent for shared management of water and energy interests. The project is expected to support cleaner electricity generation while helping stabilize irrigation flows...