Regional integration - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 22

B5+1

B5+1 in Bishkek: Business at the Center of Regional Integration Strategy

A two-day B5+1 business forum is underway in Bishkek, bringing together government officials from Central Asian countries, regional business leaders, and a U.S. delegation. Once viewed as a business extension of the C5+1 diplomatic dialogue, participants now describe the format as evolving into an independent and pragmatic economic platform. The forum is organized by the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), in cooperation with the Cabinet of Ministers of Kyrgyzstan, under the IBECA program supported by the U.S. Department of State. A defining feature of this year’s forum is the size and prominence of the U.S. business delegation. More than 50 representatives from major corporations, which, according to official documents, include Boeing, GE Healthcare, Nasdaq, Abbott, Pfizer, Honeywell, Coca-Cola Company, Mastercard, FedEx, Apple, Wabtec, and Franklin Templeton, have convened in Bishkek. Discussions are structured around panel sessions and working groups focusing on key sectors: transport and logistics, agriculture, e-commerce, information technology, and critical mineral extraction. U.S. Special Envoy for South and Central Asia Sergio Gor stated he has arrived in Bishkek with a “clear message from Donald Trump.” He emphasized that Central Asia is among the top foreign policy priorities of the current U.S. administration. At a press conference, Gor underlined a strategic shift away from traditional intergovernmental agreements toward support for private enterprise and the development of commercially viable projects. “The U.S. government is ready to expand its tools for supporting investment cooperation, and today's discussion is only the first step toward further joint development,” he said. Focus on Regional Connectivity Transport infrastructure and regional connectivity were major themes on the opening day of the forum. Gor highlighted the U.S.-backed TRIPP initiative, which aims to establish a transport corridor through the South Caucasus linking Central Asia to Western markets. He argued that expanding alternative trade routes would support deeper economic integration within the region and boost its position in global trade networks. Forum participants echoed this sentiment, stressing that major international investors are increasingly evaluating Central Asia not as isolated national markets but as a single economic space. Representatives from Central Asian governments noted that the region’s aggregated potential, in logistics, natural resources, and consumer demand, is what attracts large multinationals. Kazakhstan’s Minister of Industry, Yersayin Nagaspayev, said over 600 American companies are currently operating in Kazakhstan, with many managing regional operations from within the country. “Our shared goal is to position Central Asia as a reliable, competitive, and attractive region for long-term business cooperation,” he stated. Redefining the Role of Business in Governance Kyrgyzstan’s Minister of Economy, Bakyt Sydykov, emphasized that the B5+1 platform is reshaping the nature of business-state interaction. “Today, business is not just a participant in the process, but a full-fledged co-author of economic reforms,” he said. He noted that the working groups had proposed recommendations in line with Kyrgyzstan’s ongoing reform agenda. These include reducing administrative barriers, digitizing public services, and improving access to finance for small and medium-sized enterprises. Toward a New Geopolitical Self-Image The forum in Bishkek also reflected a broader regional...

Energy Security

Central Asia Considers Single Gas Ring to Link Regional Energy Systems

A proposal to connect the five Central Asian capitals into a unified, synchronized gas network has generated widespread debate among regional energy experts following a major industry forum in Tashkent. The idea, referred to as the “Central Asia Gas Ring,” was introduced by Kazakh oil and gas analyst Askar Ismailov during the Central Asia Oil & Gas Forum in early November. An analysis of the proposal was later published by the Uzbek outlet Upl.uz, citing assessments from regional and international experts. The concept envisions physically linking the gas transportation systems of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan into an integrated regional ring, modeled on the existing Central Asian Unified Power System, which already enables cross-border electricity coordination. According to Ismailov, natural gas should be seen not only as a tradable resource but as a strategic instrument for regional integration and energy security, especially in the context of growing geopolitical volatility. Experts cited by Upl.uz argue that a gas ring could help countries better manage seasonal fluctuations in demand and reduce the risk of widespread energy shortages. Recent winter blackouts, particularly in Uzbekistan, have heightened concerns about supply resilience. The proposed system could also ensure more stable gas flows to Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, which lack significant domestic hydrocarbon resources and frequently experience shortages. The initiative has attracted interest beyond Central Asia. Valérie Ducrot, head of the Global Gas Center, described the plan as a new model of energy cooperation that could attract international investment if the five participating states align their energy policies. Research groups such as SPIK and SpecialEurasia, also cited in the analysis, view the project as a potential cornerstone of regional infrastructure, aligning national interests around shared goals for stability and integration. Economic incentives vary across the region. For Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, the ring could provide enhanced flexibility in export routes and pricing mechanisms. For gas-dependent Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the proposal promises greater energy security, seen as essential for long-term economic and social development. External stakeholders, including China and the European Union, are expected to show interest in financing the project, while Russia is likely to seek continued influence over pricing structures and logistics. Ismailov estimates the total cost at between $4 billion and $5 billion, with most of the funding needed for modernization of aging Soviet-era pipelines and construction of select new infrastructure segments. While Upl.uz notes that technical and political hurdles remain, the proposal highlights growing momentum toward collective energy solutions in Central Asia.

Regional Relations

Kazakhstan–Uzbekistan Partnership Signals a New Era in Central Asia

For many years, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan were seen as regional rivals, with many analysts believing this long-standing competition impeded the realization of sustainable regional strategies. However, leadership changes and expanded cooperation frameworks in Central Asia have significantly shifted these dynamics. Today, countries in Central Asia are shaping policies at the intersection of Western, Chinese, and Russian interests, whilst looking even further afield. As Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan assert themselves more on the global stage, they are increasingly finding common ground. In part because of their geographic size and numbers, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are seen as the leading states in Central Asia. Kazakhstan has the largest territory by far, while Uzbekistan boasts the largest population, which stands in excess of 37 million. Both nations possess significant resources and development potential. While their current leadership has dismissed notions of rivalry, its roots stretched back for decades. Historical Competition Tensions between the two republics date to the Soviet era, when the rivalry was evident even to ordinary citizens. The influence of Dinmukhamed Kunaev, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan, often clashed with that of his Uzbek counterpart, Sharaf Rashidov. Beyond personal rivalries between republican leaders, Soviet-era administrative borders were often drawn without regard for demographic realities or resource flows. Competition for Moscow’s attention and investment funding pushed union republics to emphasize different sectors - Kazakhstan’s development of virgin lands turned it into a major grain hub, while Uzbekistan long benefited from its cotton industry - creating distinct economic identities that later persisted into independence. These divergent economic structures shaped early regional competition and informed differing policy priorities in the 1990s and 2000s. Both republics had substantial industrial capacity, though analysts argue that Kazakhstan maintained an edge in economic growth. The Baikonur Cosmodrome, still operational today, was also a long-standing strategic asset within Kazakhstan’s borders. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, this rivalry only intensified. Nursultan Nazarbayev and Islam Karimov, then presidents of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, were widely viewed as competing for regional leadership. While their economies were initially on par, Uzbekistan gradually turned inward, while Kazakhstan opened to foreign investment, particularly in the extractive sector. In the 2000s, despite successful border delimitation, disputes flared over boundaries, water, and natural resources. Some analysts contend that it was this lingering friction that hindered efforts to preserve the Aral Sea, once the world’s fourth-largest lake, which has now largely disappeared, at least in its southern section, causing dust storms so vast they are visible from space. In 2002, the border villages of Bagys and Khiyobon, inhabited by ethnic Kazakhs but situated in Uzbekistan, demanded to be recognized as part of Kazakhstan. These territories had been transferred to Uzbekistan in 1956. They were officially reincorporated into Kazakhstan only in 2021. Presidents Reject Rivalry Narrative Kazakh political scientist Gaziz Abishev maintains that there is no leadership struggle today between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. “An important point that was made is that there is no unhealthy rivalry between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, or between Kazakhs...

Regional integration

Opinion: Central Asia Is Consolidating Its Role as a Full-Fledged Actor in Global Processes

The seventh Consultative Meeting of the Heads of State of Central Asia, held in Tashkent, was far more than a routine regional gathering. It marked a pivotal moment with the potential to shape the political and economic architecture of the region for the next decade or two. President Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s keynote address stood out for articulating a forward-looking and comprehensive strategic vision. Notably, he proposed redefining the format itself from a loose “consultative mechanism” into a more cohesive and institutionalized “Central Asian Community.” At the summit, leaders endorsed several landmark documents: the Concept for Regional Security and Stability in Central Asia, the Catalogue of Threats to Central Asia’s Security and measures for their prevention for 2026-2028 and its implementation plan, a joint appeal supporting the Kyrgyz Republic’s candidacy for the UN Security Council, and the decision to admit Azerbaijan as a full-fledged participant. Taken together, these steps signal that Central Asia increasingly sees itself not as a passive bystander amid global geopolitical turbulence, but as an emerging regional actor capable of shaping its own trajectory. Two broader trends deserve special emphasis. First, the region is moving beyond reactive engagement with external initiatives and power blocs. Rather than relying solely on structures created by outside actors, Central Asia is beginning to develop its own institutions. This shift mirrors a global pattern: as the international order becomes more fragmented and unpredictable, regional communities are strengthening their internal mechanisms as a means of resilience. Second, the format envisioned in Tashkent diverges from “Brussels-style integration.” It does not require the transfer or dilution of sovereignty. Instead, it relies on soft integration, consultation, consensus-building, and phased convergence. As President Mirziyoyev noted, having a shared and realistic sense of “what we want our region to look like in 10-20 years” is essential. Without such a vision, Central Asia risks remaining the object of great-power competition rather than an autonomous participant in it. One of the summit’s most consequential developments was the decision to welcome Azerbaijan as a full-fledged member of the format. The emerging political and economic bridge between Central Asia and the South Caucasus is quickly becoming not only a transit nexus but also a cornerstone of a broader geopolitical space. The strengthening of Trans-Caspian corridors, the advancement of the “China – Kyrgyzstan – Uzbekistan” railway, the Trans-Afghan corridor, and the alignment of Caspian Sea transport routes will significantly expand the region’s strategic and economic potential. A further nuance is worth highlighting: Azerbaijan’s long-standing ties with the Western political and security architecture, through NATO partnership mechanisms and energy corridors, as well as its membership in the Organization of Turkic States, introduce new layers of connectivity. Its inclusion repositions the “Central Asian Community” from a post-Soviet platform into a wider geopolitical constellation spanning Eurasia, the South Caucasus, and the Middle East. For Central Asian states, this new configuration opens additional room for multi-vector diplomacy and reduces the risks of unilateral dependence. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not...

Regional integration

Central Asian Leaders Welcome Azerbaijan’s Accession at Tashkent Summit

The leaders of Central Asia convened in Tashkent on November 16 for a high-level Consultative Meeting, marking a significant step toward deeper regional integration. The summit welcomed Azerbaijan as a full participant and endorsed a roadmap to formalize cooperation in trade, infrastructure, security, and water management. Hosted by Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, the summit brought together the presidents of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan, alongside a United Nations representative. Ahead of the meeting, Tashkent’s central streets were adorned with national flags and floral installations, underscoring the political and symbolic significance the Uzbek government placed on the event. Mirziyoyev hailed Azerbaijan’s accession as “a truly historic day,” as the country became a full member of the Consultative Meeting of the Heads of State of Central Asia. He proposed forming a “Community of Central Asia,” establishing a rotating Secretariat, appointing special presidential envoys for coordination, and creating a Council of Elders to promote cultural and humanitarian dialogue. [caption id="attachment_39410" align="aligncenter" width="1280"] Image: president.uz[/caption] Regional Economic and Connectivity Agenda Economic cooperation dominated the multilateral agenda. Leaders agreed to develop a Comprehensive Regional Program for Trade and Economic Cooperation through 2035 and to draft a Declaration on a Common Investment Space. “In essence, we will build a strong bridge between Central Asia and the South Caucasus and pave the way for the formation of a single space of cooperation, which will undoubtedly strengthen the strategic interconnectedness and stability of both regions,” said Mirziyoyev. Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev also highlighted deepening bilateral ties with Uzbekistan. Trade between the two countries has reached $4 billion in 2025, with plans to increase it to $10 billion through expanded industrial cooperation and import substitution. Over 6,500 joint enterprises now operate between the two countries, with new projects worth more than $8 billion under development. Several initiatives, such as the Silkway Central Asia logistics center, new industrial facilities, and cultural programs, were launched in Tashkent during the visit. [caption id="attachment_39411" align="aligncenter" width="1280"] Image: president.uz[/caption] Tajikistan’s President Emomali Rahmon met with Mirziyoyev on the sidelines of the summit. The two leaders noted the steady growth in political dialogue and agreed to expand cooperation in energy, industry, agriculture, and innovation. Bilateral trade surpassed $440 million in the first nine months of 2025. They also discussed regional security, including collaboration against terrorism, extremism, cybercrime, and drug trafficking. Security, Water, and Cultural Cooperation To advance regional integration, Tashkent also hosted the first meeting of the Council of Ministers of Trade and Investment of Central Asian countries and Azerbaijan on November 13. Ministers discussed boosting trade, investment, and industrial cooperation, with the goal of increasing regional trade turnover to $20 billion. Plans were also made to develop joint production platforms under a “Made in Central Asia” label. Uzbekistan’s trade with Central Asian partners rose from $3.2 billion in 2017 to $6.9 billion in 2024, while trade with Azerbaijan has grown by 13% this year. Connectivity remained a focal point. Participants reaffirmed their commitment to the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway and the Trans-Afghan corridor. Azerbaijan’s President...

Regional integration

Opinion: The Integration of Afghanistan into Central Asia

Shared rivers and joint water management can shape a new regional partnership Central Asia and Afghanistan sit on the same rivers, yet often behave as if they belong to different regions. Water ties them together more firmly than any border, but the politics of the past have kept Afghanistan outside the regional system. Today, as climate pressures intensify and development accelerates on both sides of the Amu Darya, the case for integrating Afghanistan into Central Asia has never been stronger. And the path to that integration begins with water. The debate around the Qosh Tepa Canal makes this evident. Afghanistan was never part of the agreements that govern the Amu Darya River (Protocol 566 of the Soviet Union and the Almaty 1992 agreement). It did not sign allocation protocols and never joined regional basin institutions. Still, it was expected to follow rules it had no hand in shaping. Now, that old arrangement has reached its limit. The canal will bring new agriculture to the north of Afghanistan, but downstream states depend on the same river. The real question is not whether Afghanistan should develop, but how to shape that development jointly so the river can sustain all sides. Central Asia already has cooperative models that Afghanistan could join. Uzbekistan and Tajikistan have shown how two neighbors can jointly manage a transboundary river through their collaboration in hydropower on the Zarafshan. Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan have signed a similar mechanism with the KambarAta-1 project, which will generate energy and regulate seasonal flows for downstream agriculture. These experiences show that once countries share responsibility for a river, trust can grow and benefits expand. Afghanistan can become part of this regional architecture. The 161-meter-high planned dam on the Kokcha River, set to generate 445 megawatts of electricity, offers a clear entry point. A jointly governed dam on this river would give Afghanistan energy, while downstream states would benefit from its flow in terms of agriculture. When operations are transparent and agreed upon, water becomes a field of cooperation rather than tension. Energy trade adds another layer of opportunity. Central Asia has a long record of exchanging electricity and gas in return for upstream releases. Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan have done this with Kyrgyzstan for many years through a joint water and energy agreement. The same model can work with Afghanistan. The country needs power, and it can offer coordinated water management in return. A structured energy for water arrangement would give Afghanistan an incentive to cooperate and offer Central Asia predictability. Agriculture is another arena where cooperation promises immediate gains. Uzbekistan’s policies on water-saving technologies offer a strong example. They subsidize drip, sprinkler systems, canal improvement, land levelling, efficient pumps, and even solar-powered irrigation. These investments reduce water losses while increasing yields only if their rebound effect, such as further expansion of agriculture, is controlled. The same approach could be applied in the northern provinces of Afghanistan, including in the area under the Qosh Tepa Canal. With similar financial support and technical guidance, Afghan...