Russia - The Times Of Central Asia

Viewing results 1 - 6 of 820

Politics

Finland’s President Stubb Warns Russia’s Imperial Thinking Poses Risks for Central Asia

Russia’s imperial worldview may pose a greater long-term risk to Central Asia and the South Caucasus than to NATO member states, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said in an interview with The Washington Post, highlighting concerns that continue to resonate across the post-Soviet space. Speaking with columnist David Ignatius, Stubb referenced Finland’s long and complex history with its eastern neighbor, noting that expansionist thinking remains deeply rooted in Russian political culture. “I think the DNA of Russia is still expansion and imperialism,” he said, arguing that President Vladimir Putin views the collapse of the Soviet Union as a historical injustice. While much of the Western debate centers on potential threats to NATO countries such as the Baltic states, Finland, or Poland, Stubb suggested that more vulnerable regions lie elsewhere. “I think the more worrying aspect for others is the Central Asian countries, the Southern Caucasus and others,” he said, pointing to what he described as a top-down political system driven by the ideology of Russkiy mir, or the “Russian world.” Stubb also spoke about his personal interactions with Russian officials, including Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, stressing that meaningful political dialogue remains unlikely while the war in Ukraine continues. As previously reported by The Times of Central Asia, Russian television host Vladimir Solovyov sparked backlash after suggesting that Moscow could conduct “special military operations” in Central Asia and Armenia. The remarks were widely condemned by Uzbek scholars, journalists, and analysts as destabilizing and provocative. More recently, Russian ultranationalist Alexander Dugin, often described as an ideologue of the “Russian world”, publicly questioned the sovereignty of several former Soviet republics, including Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan. A video of his comments circulated widely online, drawing sharp criticism across the region. Russia’s Foreign Ministry later sought to distance the Kremlin from such statements. Spokesperson Maria Zakharova stated that Solovyov’s remarks did not reflect official policy and reaffirmed that Moscow’s relationships with Central Asian countries are based on partnership and respect for sovereignty.

Russia

Uzbek Citizen Sentenced to Life in Russia Over Killing of Russian General Kirillov

A Russian military court has sentenced Uzbek citizen Ahmadjon Qurbonov to life imprisonment for his involvement in a bombing that killed Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, head of Russia’s Radiation, Chemical and Biological Protection Troops, and his aide, Major Ilya Polikarpov. The verdict was issued by a panel of judges at the 2nd Western District Military Court, according to a report by Russian outlet RBK. Qurbonov, who admitted guilt and cooperated with investigators, was also fined one million rubles (approximately $13,100). Prosecutors accused him of carrying out an attack on December 17, 2024, near the entrance of Kirillov’s apartment building in Moscow. Investigators allege that Qurbonov planted a remote-controlled bomb on an electric scooter and detonated it as the general and his aide exited the building. Russia’s Investigative Committee claims Qurbonov acted under orders from Ukraine’s Security Service. The attack was reportedly filmed and streamed live to Ukraine. Qurbonov was allegedly promised $100,000, forged documents, and residency in a country in the European Union. He was arrested within hours of the explosion and, according to investigators, never received the promised compensation. Several other individuals were implicated in the case. Prosecutors said Vladimir Safaryan delivered the explosive device, which was reportedly brought into Russia from Poland. Batukhan Tochiev and Ramazan Padiev were accused of providing Qurbonov with an apartment where he attempted to hide after the attack. All three denied knowledge of the planned bombing. Russian authorities further alleged that the operation was financed using USDT stablecoins. Qurbonov reportedly received multiple cryptocurrency transfers, later converted into cash through cryptomats in Moscow. The total cost of preparing the attack was estimated at 842,000 rubles (approximately $10,936), while damage to surrounding apartments and vehicles was valued at 3.3 million rubles (around $42,863). The trial, which began in November 2025, was held behind closed doors. Prosecutors argued that open proceedings could be exploited by foreign-linked media to justify the attack.

Alexander Dugin

Russian Philosopher Sparks Outrage by Questioning Sovereignty of Former Soviet States

A fresh wave of controversy has erupted in Central Asia after Russian philosopher and political theorist Alexander Dugin publicly questioned the sovereignty of several post-Soviet states, including Uzbekistan. A video fragment of Dugin’s recent remarks circulated widely online, prompting strong backlash from regional analysts and commentators. In the recording, Alexander Dugin, founder of the International Eurasian Movement and often described as the ideologue of the so-called “Russian world,” said that national sovereignty should no longer apply to former Soviet republics. He specifically named Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan as states that, in his view, should not exist independently under any future political order. “Nothing sovereign can exist in this new model. That’s it. Sovereignty is over. National states are a thing of the past. This is garbage,” Dugin said, adding that “it is impossible to agree with the existence of a sovereign Uzbekistan.” Backlash from Uzbek Analysts Dugin’s remarks prompted immediate criticism in Uzbekistan. Journalist Ilyos Safarov described the comments as part of a broader ideological pattern rather than an isolated statement. “Yesterday it was Solovyov calling for a ‘special military operation’ in Central Asia. Today it is Dugin denying our sovereignty,” Safarov said. “This shows that post-imperial thinking is still alive in certain Russian political circles.” He warned that ignoring such rhetoric could further embolden these narratives. “Silence is often interpreted not as diplomacy, but as weakness. If these ideas are left unanswered, they begin to look acceptable to a wider audience,” Safarov said, noting that even unofficial figures can influence public discourse and political attitudes in Russia. Zavqibek Mahmudov, an associate professor at the Abdulla Avloniy National Institute of Pedagogical Excellence, echoed these concerns. He argued that ideological declarations, even from non-state actors, can translate into real-world political agendas. “History shows that radical political projects often begin with philosophical justifications,” Mahmudov said. He criticized Dugin’s rhetoric as part of a political chauvinism that categorizes countries as either "real" or "artificial." “When the existence of an entire nation is questioned, this is no longer academic debate, it is a direct challenge to international law and the principle of sovereign equality.” Mahmudov called for a coordinated legal and diplomatic response from all the countries mentioned in Dugin’s remarks. “A collective stance would be far more effective than individual national responses,” he noted. Official Distancing from Moscow The controversy follows recent remarks by Russian television host Vladimir Solovyov, who had floated the possibility of military action in Central Asia. That incident prompted a response from Russia’s Foreign Ministry. On January 16, ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova stated that Solovyov’s views did not represent official Russian policy and reaffirmed that Moscow’s relationships with Central Asian countries are grounded in “partnership and respect for sovereignty.” Despite this distancing, analysts caution that repeated rhetorical assaults on Central Asian sovereignty, whether from state actors or affiliated intellectuals, may reflect deeper ideological currents that could have lasting consequences for regional stability.

Aviation

Kazakhstan’s Transport Ministry to Investigate “Serious Aviation Incident” Involving Russian and Uzbek Flights

A serious aviation incident involving Russian and Uzbek commercial aircraft occurred in the airspace over southern Kazakhstan, according to Kazakhstan’s Department for the Investigation of Transport Accidents and Incidents. The incident was first reported by Kazinform, citing official comments from the agency. The event took place on the morning of January 10, within the area of responsibility of the Shymkent regional air traffic control center. At approximately 05:42 Astana time, air traffic controllers were managing two international flights when the incident occurred. The aircraft involved were Pobeda Airlines flight PBD997, en route from Moscow’s Vnukovo airport to Samarkand, and Uzbekistan Airways flight UZB9609, flying from Termez to Moscow. “In the A2I sector of the Shymkent regional dispatch center, during the handling of Pobeda Airlines flight PBD997 and Uzbekistan Airways flight UZB9609, an aviation event occurred,” the department stated, as quoted by Kazinform. The incident was classified as a “serious aviation incident” under national regulations, triggering a mandatory investigation by the relevant authorities. Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Transport has announced the formation of a special commission to investigate the case. According to the ministry’s press service, the standard duration for such investigations, from the establishment of the commission to the approval of the final report, is typically no more than three months, barring the need for additional analysis or technical assessments. At this stage, no information has been released regarding injuries, aircraft damage, or specific operational details, as the investigation remains ongoing. This incident follows a similar near-miss that occurred in September 2025, when an Uzbekistan Airways passenger jet narrowly avoided a collision with a private business aircraft in Russian airspace near Serpukhov, south of Moscow. That event took place shortly after midnight on September 29, during descent into Vnukovo airport. It involved an Uzbekistan Airways Airbus A320 arriving from Samarkand and an Embraer Legacy 650 business jet flying from Bodrum in Turkey. Investigators later attributed the incident to radio miscommunication, which resulted in a breach of the minimum required separation between the two aircraft.

Society

Uzbek Professor Hits Back at Vladimir Solovyov for Central Asia “Military Operation” Comments

Controversial remarks by Russian television host Vladimir Solovyov, suggesting that Moscow could conduct “special military operations” in Central Asia and Armenia, have continued to provoke a strong reaction in Uzbekistan. Scholars, journalists, and political analysts have all weighed in on the rhetoric as indicative of a dangerous political mindset developing in Russia. During a recent broadcast, Solovyov referred to Russia’s role in the region in terms that some Uzbek experts interpret as veiled threats of interference in the affairs of sovereign Central Asian states. The comments drew immediate responses from Uzbek academics, who underscored their nations' independence and territorial integrity. Political scientist and university professor Sherzodkhon Qudratkhodja issued a detailed rebuttal, emphasizing the historical and strategic gravity of Solovyov’s words. “As a citizen of a sovereign state, such remarks are unacceptable,” he said. “They challenge our independence, our territorial integrity, and our peoples' right to determine their own futures.” Qudratkhodja rejected the notion of Central Asia as a geopolitical periphery. “We are not subjects of external governance. Central Asia is a region with its own history and geopolitical agency. We are no longer objects in foreign policy, we are actors.” He warned that such public commentary normalizes the concept of military intervention by gradually expanding the so-called Overton window, the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse. “When statements like this are introduced as provocation, then normalized through discussion, and ultimately proposed as policy, it becomes a form of normalizing violence through public speech,” he said. Qudratkhodja also highlighted Central Asia’s long-standing sovereignty and global contributions. “Our history spans at least 3,500 years. Turkic peoples, including Uzbeks, pioneered the domestication of horses, early metallurgy for agriculture and warfare, and other advancements. Our ancestors were defenders of their lands and civilizations.” Turning to the geopolitical relationship between Russia and Central Asia, he said that strategic partnerships must be based on mutual respect. “Partnerships are not built on public threats or innuendo. Statements like Solovyov’s are unacceptable, especially when made about strategic partners in an increasingly multipolar world.” While Qudratkhodja acknowledged that Solovyov’s views do not represent official Russian policy, he warned that silence from Russian authorities allows such rhetoric to gain legitimacy. “Even when expressed as personal opinion, if such statements go unanswered by officials, they gain undue influence and risk becoming perceived signals that can destabilize the region.” Uzbek experts also pointed to the cultural and historical resilience of the region. Qudratkhodja invoked the legacy of Tamerlane, arguing that Central Asia has played pivotal roles in shaping regional history. “If our ancestor Tamerlane had not defeated Tokhtamysh in 1395, there would be no Russian Federation as we know it today. Our strategic role in Eurasia cannot be dismissed.” He also directly addressed Solovyov, rejecting any sense of professional kinship. “I do not consider Mr. Solovyov a colleague. His worldview belongs to the propaganda of the past. Today, discourse must be grounded in historical fact and mutual respect, not threats or insinuations.” The reaction in Uzbekistan has extended beyond academia. Social...

Iran

From Tehran to Tashkent: How Iran’s Crisis and U.S. Tariffs Reverberate Across Central Asia

At the end of 2025, Iran once again emerged as a flashpoint on the global political map. Mass protests erupted across the country, fueled by spiraling inflation and economic hardship. At present, the Iranian rial has plummeted to the point where it is effectively worth less than the paper it's printed on. The current wave of unrest, already the largest and deadliest nationwide unrest Iran has seen since 2022, is not occurring in isolation. U.S. President Donald Trump has renewed what his administration describes as a policy of “maximum pressure” on Tehran, and his administration is now pursuing what observers have characterized as a strategy of “pushing the falling,” a move aimed at reshaping the political order of the Middle East. What might this mean for neighboring Central Asia? Tajik political analyst Muhammad Shamsuddinov argues the crisis must be viewed within a broader geopolitical context. “The situation in Iran is directly tied to Trump’s second-term pressure campaign,” Shamsuddinov said, referencing a string of destabilizing events. “These include the 12-day U.S.-Israel war against Iran and the reimposition of U.N. sanctions in September 2025," he added, referring to the 12-day June 2025 conflict between Israel and Iran, during which U.S. forces also struck Iranian nuclear facilities. "All of these have deepened the domestic crisis in Iran.” In a further escalation, on January 12, Trump announced 25% tariffs on countries conducting trade with Iran. The move appears targeted primarily at Russia, China, and India - Iran’s largest international partners, but also has implications for Central Asian economies. In the first nine months of 2025, trade between Kazakhstan and Iran grew by nearly 45%, reaching $310.8 million. Tajikistan, which maintains the closest economic ties to Tehran among Central Asian states, reported trade worth $430.7 million in the first eleven months of 2025, an increase of 28% over the same period in 2024. Uzbekistan, while less directly exposed to Iran than Kazakhstan or Tajikistan, has also moved cautiously in recent years to expand trade links with Tehran, making it sensitive to further sanctions pressure. Turkmenistan, meanwhile, faces its own exposure through gas swap arrangements involving Iran, which could become collateral damage of escalating regional tensions. Iranian investments in Tajikistan are also substantial. Among the most prominent projects is the Sangtuda-2 hydroelectric power plant, estimated at $256 million. The Iranian government contributed approximately $180 million, with an additional $36 million from an Iranian contractor. The remainder was financed by Tajikistan. According to official data, roughly 160 companies with Iranian capital are currently operating in Tajikistan across multiple sectors. In Kazakhstan, around 650 Iranian companies are registered, with over 350 operational, primarily in manufacturing, infrastructure, and agriculture. By contrast, trade between Iran and Russia, a strategic partner since the signing of a bilateral cooperation agreement in January 2025, increased by only 8% in the first nine months of 2025, according to official figures. Despite modest growth, Russian analysts view the figures optimistically. “Growth is happening under challenging geopolitical conditions, with sanctions, logistical restructuring, and financial hurdles,” said...