After U.S. Bombs Iran, Central Asia Calls for Diplomacy and Restraint

In the early hours of June 22, the United States launched airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, triggering widespread concern across Central Asia. Despite the potential economic upside for Kazakhstan, with the possibility of rising oil prices, the region’s governments have uniformly called for restraint and a peaceful resolution. The operation, dubbed “Midnight Hammer” by the U.S. Department of Defense, reportedly targeted facilities in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. While Washington claimed success, the Iranian authorities asserted they had evacuated uranium from the Fordow site in advance, calling the mission a failure. Military experts continue to debate the extent of the damage. Coordinated Responses from Central Asian Capitals The foreign ministries of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan issued similarly worded statements expressing concern over the rapidly deteriorating situation. Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that the U.S. airstrikes marked a dangerous escalation and emphasized the need for negotiations grounded in the UN Charter. “Kazakhstan is part of the group of Caspian countries and is developing cooperation with Iran in various areas. Our country believes that all disagreements, including nuclear issues, should be resolved through negotiations,” the statement said. It also urged international efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation and establish security guarantees for nations adhering to the non-proliferation regime. Uzbekistan’s Foreign Ministry echoed this sentiment and advised citizens to avoid traveling to Israel and Iran. It also urged those currently in those countries to leave high-risk areas where possible. Kyrgyzstan called on all parties to exercise “maximum restraint” and avoid steps that could exacerbate the crisis. Turkmenistan reaffirmed its policy of "positive neutrality," stressing the importance of diplomacy and adherence to international law. Ashgabat stated that it “does not accept the use or threat of force as a means of resolving political and other disputes”. Tajikistan, meanwhile, issued the strongest statement, condemning the U.S. and Israeli strikes outright and warning that the conflict could lead to a prolonged regional war. Dushanbe called on the UN, IAEA, and other global bodies to prevent violations of international law and work towards peace and environmental safety. The Economic Subtext: Rising Oil Prices While official reactions were uniformly cautious, analysts in Kazakhstan noted the economic implications. Expert Olzhas Baidildin pointed out that shares in KazMunayGas surged by 11% following the strikes, with its market capitalization rising to 10.3 trillion KZT ($19.8 billion). Baidildin previously argued that Iran is unlikely to follow through on threats to block the Strait of Hormuz. Nevertheless, he noted that such a move would dramatically increase the strategic importance of Kazakhstan and other Central Asian energy producers to major consumers such as China and India. Financial analyst Andrei Chebotarev agreed, stating: "Iran’s threat to close the Strait of Hormuz is no longer the ace it once was. The West has diversified away from Gulf oil, while the real impact would fall on China, the region’s largest importer. Meanwhile, the U.S. could benefit from a price surge through its shale exports". It is estimated that China purchases approximately 90% of Iran's oil exports...

Central Asia and Israel, a Pragmatic Relationship That Never Truly Blossomed

The conflict between Israel and Iran is having both international and regional repercussions. The situation has been further inflamed by the U.S. bombing of several Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend, with Tehran responding by threatening retaliation on U.S. soil through the use of sleeper terrorist cells and the possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which over a fifth of the world’s oil supply passes. While Israel's geographical position places it at the heart of the Middle East, Iran's location brings the Islamic Republic into close contact with Central Asia. The consequences of the conflict are therefore likely to be felt heavily in the Central Asian region. The close relations between Tehran and the capitals of Central Asia, due in part to their geographical proximity, are often highlighted. Less explored is the nature of the relationship between Tel Aviv and Central Asia and the lines along which it has developed since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. On both the Israeli and Central Asian sides, despite all the differences, relations began in the early 1990s, mainly based on certain mutual interests. From Israel's point of view, relations with Central Asia would mean expanding the circle of Muslim countries with which it had friendly ties, gaining greater influence in the region, and reducing its diplomatic isolation. From the Central Asian perspective, the appeal lay in increasing the number of its international partners, coupled with a desire to access Israeli know-how in numerous fields, and the possibility, through relations with Tel Aviv, of having a privileged channel of dialogue with the United States. More than three decades after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, relations remain good for the most part. “The positive relationship between Israel and Central Asia is driven by a combination of strategic, economic, and geopolitical factors,” Dr Zeev Levin, Coordinator of the Central Asian Research Unit at the Harry S. Truman Institute, told The Times of Central Asia. “One of the primary drivers is mutual interest in security and counterterrorism. Economically, Israel’s expertise in water management, agriculture, and technology is highly attractive to the arid, resource-seeking nations of Central Asia that aim to modernize their infrastructure and diversify their economies beyond oil and gas. Additionally, fostering ties with Israel provides a means of diversifying the foreign policy portfolios of the Central Asian republics.” This positive relationship, however, seems to have lost momentum in recent years due to several factors. Central Asian republics have increasingly oriented towards the East, moving closer to China and other players such as South Korea, Japan, and India, or towards other partners, such as the European ones, with Italy at the forefront in this regard. As Levin points out, the relation has cooled due to several factors: “Central Asian republics did look to Israel in the first decade of independence, but in the last decade to a much lesser extent, since Turkey and China are less complicated and cheaper options. For Israel, the region was never a priority or a point of...