OPINION: Why We Should Pay More Attention to Central Asia

Every spring, Georgetown’s up-and-coming international relations scholars cram for a final exam on the capitals, landmarks, and border histories of the modern world. The exam belongs to a class called Map of the Modern World—a required one-credit, pass-fail course that characterizes a fateful coming-of-age experience for School of Foreign Service (SFS) students. At best, I expected to remember “Maps” as a memorable finals-week grind, but the course unlocked a new region of the globe for me. While memorizing the names of every country and capital in the world, I surfed Wikipedia and let my curiosity wander during a study break. A five-minute rest became an hour-long deep-dive on Kazakhstan’s post-Soviet history and a subsequent Facetime with my Kazakh friend. With my curiosity piqued but three more finals looming, I put my interest on pause and committed to doing further research when time allowed.

Before my Maps final, I knew too little about Central Asia for a self-proclaimed Asia enthusiast. Although one of my closest high school friends was from Almaty, Kazakhstan, and my grandmother taught English at a university there, I had never heard the term “Central Asia” outside the classroom. However, studying for my Maps final and writing for the Caravel’s Middle East and Central Asia section required that I become familiar with the region quickly. I learned that Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan constitute a misunderstood pocket of international politics that increasingly demands our resources and attention.

(Wikimedia Commons)

Central Asia’s neighborhood is fascinating. Bordering Russia to the north, China to the east, and the Middle East to the south ensures constant political and economic activity in the region. Though Central Asia’s location seems to lessen its relative importance, robust scholarship suggests otherwise. In fact, Central Asia’s proximity to key global players makes the region more important than we think.

Central Asia’s low-integration problem is history

Multilateral trade in Central Asia is expanding faster than ever. From 2005 to 2013, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan quadrupled their regional trade. Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan more than tripled their trade volume in the same period, while Tajikistan’s doubled. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan constitute the largest Central Asian economies, and their bilateral trade turnover reached $2.3 billion in 2013—five times higher than in 2005.

China’s rise has revitalized Central Asian shipping routes, freeing the region from what Wolfgang Fengler of Brookings calls a “border inefficiency” problem. Rather than ship goods to Europe by boat, China often opts for an up-and-coming ground route through its Xinjiang province and Kazakhstan. Ethnic conflict in Xinjiang between the Muslim Uighur minority and Han Chinese majority means that Central Asian politics have new implications, as Uighur social activists look beyond China’s borders for support. China’s central party routinely imprisons Uighurs, though it is unlikely that Central Asian governments would push back on China and risk interrupting trade. It is unclear which path Central Asia will take, but as a “bystander” to human rights violations in Xinjiang, Central Asian governments will be forced to weigh their ethical and fiscal values.

Nepotism and corruption are on the decline, at least for now

Uzbekistan recently legalized the study of political science following a six-year ban. Kazakhstan’s former-president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, retired in June 2019, ending a regime built on decades of rigged elections and politically-charged imprisonments. Still, Transparency International’s 2018 Corruption Index scored Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan the lowest in all of eastern Europe and Central Asia. There is progress to be made, and corruption represents Central Asia’s greatest challenge. However, continued pressure from international watchdogs like Transparency International and the growth of political science as a vocation could establish greater parity between long-time regime leaders and their opponents.

The United States is redefining its strategic approach to Central Asia and should continue to do so

For a nation whose foreign policy history is riddled with bad decisions in Asia, the U.S. is approaching Central Asia the right way. The Obama administration’s 2015 “Enduring Vision for Central Asia” plan affirmed the United States’ growing interest in Central Asian economies following the War on Terror.

“We see a region of enormous potential,” then-Deputy Secretary of State Anthony Blinken told policy researchers at Brookings. “A region that could act as an economic bridge from Istanbul to Shanghai … a region that could offer goods and energy to the booming economies of South and East Asia, [and] a region that could serve as a stabilizing force for Afghanistan’s transition.” Indeed, Blinken’s remarks indicate Washington’s long-term interest in Central Asia, but more substance will bring tangible gains. 

The U.S. should start by expanding subsidized exchange programs, which have allowed more than 24,000 Central Asian students to attend American universities since 1992. Russia and Eurasia Program Senior Associate Andrew C. Kuchins of the Center for Strategic and International Studies notes that while these programs have helped produce influential Central Asian policymakers, the U.S. must engage these individuals through business cooperatives and joint infrastructure projects. These institutions might provide alternatives to the agendas of oligarchs in heavily regulated local economies.

Finally, the U.S. must consider foreign direct investment, particularly in sectors that aid Afghanistan. As border regions liberalize and Central Asian infrastructure growth booms on its own, the United States need not pick and choose where in Central Asia to invest. Rather, Washington should take an Afghanistan-centric position and provide financial support to Central Asian economies whose operations funnel currency and capital into Afghanistan. Furthermore, the United States must ensure that Central Asia’s development helps the right people. Afghanistan’s political situation is delicate, so infrastructure growth and trade might fund rogue non-state actors whose true intentions are unknown to Central Asian leaders.

Central Asia is ripe for peace. It is up to the rest of the world to leave political rivalries behind and incorporate Central Asia into the world order.