As discussions intensify over Greater Eurasian integration and cooperation in transport and logistics—with a special focus on involving Central Asian nations—it’s become crucial to establish a format for meetings among Central Asian leaders to bolster regional collaboration. The Consultative Meeting of Central Asian countries, convened on September 14, 2023, serves as a foundational stone for processes in Greater Eurasia, marking significant achievements including the formation of a joint commission to oversee the execution of agreements aimed at enhancing land transport connectivity in Central Asia.
Crystallization of integration processes and strategy of Central Asian countries
In the midst of burgeoning ambitions to augment cargo movement along the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, often termed the Middle Corridor, nations of Central Asia are dynamically championing enhancements to this route within various global consortiums and discussions. Notable among these are the robust dialogues of regional leaders at high-profile engagements with powerhouses like China and the European Union, not to mention their involvement in frameworks like the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Furthermore, the recent Central Asia-U.S. summit saw a significant emphasis by Central Asian representatives on bolstering transportation corridors as a linchpin of US collaboration. In several affiliations, the region’s nations have started institutionalizing resolutions, predominantly addressing transportation and infrastructure. This momentum is especially poignant as we witness the solidifying of integrative movements in the larger Eurasian landscape. It’s intriguing to reflect on how the ‘Greater Eurasia’ blueprint, ardently advocated by Kazakhstan’s first President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, envisioned an expansive regional alliance encompassing entities like the Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia, and ASEAN [1, pp. 45-46]. This alliance would potentially span myriad domains, from economic synergies to security frameworks. At the heart of Nazarbayev’s Eurasian perspective was a vision of Eurasia acting as a vital conduit connecting Europe and Asia, underscoring economic collaboration, buttressing stability, and fortifying regional connections. Indeed, Nazarbayev’s staunch endorsement of various Eurasian integrative endeavors, notably the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union, echoes his aspiration to elevate Kazakhstan as a formidable regional stakeholder and foster deeper, multilateral engagements across the continent.
Tokayev remains a steadfast advocate of this overarching vision, vigorously operationalizing it within the purview of the highlighted conglomerates. Broadly speaking, this strategy is emblematic of Central Asian nations. Scholars like Aliya Tskhai and Filippo Costa Buranelli underscore that deciphering both the formal and informal dynamics of these regional groupings is paramount. Engaging in regional dialogues, even those of an informal nature, facilitates nations in acknowledging their affiliation to a distinct regional matrix, wherein particular norms, behavioral etiquettes, conduct codes, identity markers, and interests are sustained [2, p. 1040]. The authors elucidate three pivotal mechanisms: “Bridging”, “Dovetailing”, and “Branding” [2, p. 1044]. “Bridging” essentially links disparate associations in Central Asia, as evidenced by overtures advocating synergies between the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), or bolstering ties between the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA) and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). [2, pp. 1045-1046].
Central Asian nations deftly leverage their affiliations with entities like the SCO and the CSTO as conduits to champion their agendas and fortify collaborative security endeavors. This is palpable in endeavors such as collective strategies to enact the UN’s Counter-Terrorism blueprint and liaisons with NATO affiliates. Engaging in multifaceted dialogues across diverse platforms engenders a “dovetail” approach. Yet, as spotlighted by Karolina Kluczewska from Ghent University’s Institute of International and European Studies, there are inherent challenges. Taking Tajikistan as a case in point, she illustrates the escalating complexities Central Asian states confront in striking a harmonious equilibrium between Eastern and Western orientations.
Reference: The term “dovetail” refers to a specific joint employed in carpentry and furniture construction. It is characterized by a series of interlocking projections on two components that fit seamlessly into one another. This design enhances the rigidity and strength of the perpendicular connection.
Against the tapestry of deepening collaboration in multiple entities, the recent successes of the Consultative Meetings of Central Asian Countries dovetail neatly with these broader movements. One can draw parallels to the integration mechanisms in Europe. The evolution of Europe’s economic and security framework witnessed a procession of diverse associations and shifting operational modalities, ranging from the European Coal and Steel Community to the European Economic Community and spanning entities like the Western European Union and the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Concurrently, the bedrock of a reshaped global order was set. The genesis of today’s international structure is inextricably linked with the post-World War II economic recalibration. It’s pivotal to underscore various determinants that shaped this trajectory. The war’s extensive devastation, for instance, compelled nations to forge collaborative infrastructures to bolster global commerce, investment, and assistance. Paramount financial institutions—like the World Bank, IMF, and initially the GATT, later supplanted by the WTO—played instrumental roles in anchoring economic equilibrium and progression.
Beyond championing transparency and democracy, these bodies have further advanced the embrace of liberal economic tenets, encompassing free trade, deregulation, and privatisation. Such liberal economic doctrines, in the aftermath of a dissolved bipolar global structure, underpin today’s international order. Current dynamics around Central Asian nations are setting the stage for a nascent global architecture, one capturing the interest of significant regional actors. Central to this groundwork is the seamless linkage across diverse Eurasian regions, necessitating solutions to infrastructure and transport challenges. This integration strategy, or “dovetailing”, is discernible in Central Asian nations’ foreign policies, a notable case being Kazakhstan. Subsequently, a comprehensive review of each Central Asian nation’s foreign policy within the context of aforementioned groupings is apt. The region’s countries remain pivotal in the evolution of integration within Greater Eurasia, given their membership in myriad entities and perpetual quest for enhanced collaborative formats.
Addressing Transportation and Infrastructure Challenges in Central Asia: A Kazakhstan Case Study
Drawing from Kazakhstan’s propositions across diverse forums, it’s evident that the nation strategically leverages the unique strengths or opportunities presented by each association. An examination of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s interventions at gatherings such as the Eurasian Economic Council, SCO, Organization of Turkic States, Central Asia-China, and Central Asia-European Union sheds light on this.
On global stages, President Tokayev has consistently underscored a suite of primary initiatives, all designed to drive modernisation, foster integration, and catalyse infrastructural advancement in the vicinity.
Within the framework of the Organization of Turkic States, emphasis was squarely placed on amplifying regional integration. Of note, was the proposition to modernise border checkpoints and inaugurate a “digital transport system”. The overarching intent here is to streamline the transit of people and commodities, buttressed by an enhanced and secure border management regime.
Within the cooperative framework between Central Asia and China, deliberations centred around the establishment of a second dry port at the Kazakhstan-China frontier. Envisioned as a pivotal transit juncture for the broader Central Asian region, this initiative also broached the idea of housing storage facilities for major internet behemoths within Kazakhstan’s borders. Moreover, there was talk of amplifying collaboration in enhancing port infrastructure along the Caspian Sea, a venture that would encompass both digital transformation and the co-production of transportation vessels. At the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council, the spotlight was firmly on crafting a unified, unobstructed market, ensuring a seamless flow of goods.
Tokayev underscored the imperative of nurturing the North-South route and the inception of high-velocity freight trains traversing between Chelyabinsk and Iran, coupled with collaborative investments in the ports of Iran and Turkmenistan. In engagements with the EU, paramount focus resided in diversifying energy transit pathways and propelling the transport and logistical infrastructures forward. The objective is to solidify economic interconnections and guarantee supply constancy. Within the SCO’s architectural framework, Tokayev highlighted the need for harmonious interplay between the infrastructure enhancement initiatives of the member and observer nations. The spotlight here was on the SCO’s road development blueprint. The concluding accord was a bilateral agreement to synchronize the Trans-Caspian route with China’s Belt and Road Initiative. This is anticipated to solidify the regional transportation integrations and unveil novel avenues for economic symbiosis amongst the nations.
This instance delineates the operationalization of the “dovetail” mechanism, illustrating the meticulous and selective approach a Central Asian leader adopts addressing transport and infrastructure collaboration across varying dialogues.
Central Asian Ambitions and Milestones within Various Alliances
With the evolving focus on diverse transportation routes crisscrossing Central Asia, there’s been an amplified discourse by the region’s nations on potential collaborative ventures in this domain across varied platforms. Assessing the strides and accomplishments within associations where these nations are actively engaged reveals foundational groundwork for the transport sector’s enhancement. Central to this evolution is the consultative assembly of Central Asian countries, a forum enriched by the comprehensive participation of the region’s states. The collective aspirations of these nations in the transport and logistical arena seemingly stem from shared challenges.
As highlighted by the Eurasian Development Bank’s report, infrastructural shortcomings and constraints in customs and technical domains hinder the full unleashing of the region’s transit prowess [3, p. 47]. Furthermore, 2022’s uniformity in customs operations fell short of fuelling a dynamic evolution in both external and regional commerce. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) study corroborates this perspective, suggesting an urgent need for extensive revamps in transport avenues, addressing choke points, and introducing nuanced strategies. These encompass digitising transport paperwork, amplifying operational compatibility, and streamlining trade procedures. [4, pp. 26-45].
A fitting commencement point is the Organization of Turkic States (OTS). Transport thoroughfares intersect the domains of its members and observers – a list that, beyond Central Asia, includes Azerbaijan and Turkey. A sharpened focus by OTS countries (Turkey among them) on transport corridor expansion becomes evident when contrasting the declarations from the 8th summit in 2021 with those of the 9th in 2022. The earlier summit’s document set primarily featured the “Agreement on International Combined Freight Transport between the Member States of the Organization of Turkic States” [5, p. 5]. The subsequent year’s declaration expanded the roster, referencing not only the aforesaid agreement but also the “Trade Facilitation Strategy of the Organization of Turkic States”, the “Agreement on Free Trade in Services and Investments in Line with the National Legislation of the Member States”, and the “Transport Connectivity Program” [6, p. 3-7]. A significant highlight of the 2022 summit was the ratification of the “Agreement on the Creation of a Simplified Customs Corridor”. This accord is primarily geared towards slashing customs control durations and fortifying information exchange related to goods and vehicles. Additionally, trade affiliates navigating this corridor will enjoy certain privileges, prime among them being expedited customs processing at border stations [7].
In collaboration with the European Union, the unveiling of the Global Gateway Initiative ensued, signaling a reinforced commitment to an array of projects across Central Asia. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) emerges as a pivotal figure in these undertakings. From 2017 to 2021, the EBRD’s foremost objective centred on “Balancing Public and Private Participation.” However, fast forward to the 2022-2027 strategy for Kazakhstan, the spotlight shifts to “Boosting the Competitiveness of the Private Sector and Transport Connectivity”. A significant aspect of this strategy encompasses funding for transport and logistics infrastructures, such as roads, storage facilities, and dry ports – often nested within the purview of the EU’s Global Gateway Initiative [8, p. 9-15]. A cursory glance at project trajectories reveals a pronounced uptick in transport-related ventures in Central Asia backed by the EBRD come 2022.
In a parallel vein, post the Central Asia-China summit, China pledged a substantial 26 billion yuan (equivalent to $3.7 billion) to “fortify Central Asia’s cooperative and developmental endeavours.” In a noteworthy development, a trilateral memorandum crystallized, sanctioning the construction of the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway.
Within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), there’s a discernible push towards enhancing interconnectivity across various Eurasian territories. Discussions are in motion with countries like Egypt, Iran, the UAE, Indonesia, Israel, and India concerning the establishment of free trade zones or the formulation of trade pacts. Meanwhile, Vietnam, Serbia, and Singapore have already integrated into the EAEU’s free trade realm. Additionally, there exists a trade and economic pact with China.
A parallel trajectory is observed within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). This is further underscored by the involvement of heads of state from non-SCO nations, with Turkmenistan’s leadership being particularly active of late. Indications suggest that nations including the UAE, Syria, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia are considering membership within the organization.
Developments within these associations spotlight Central Asia’s escalating stature as a pivotal nexus for transport and commerce. Elevating the transport arteries crisscrossing Central Asia has risen to the fore of regional priorities, a trend underscored by the uptick in dialogues across diverse forums. Yet, challenges persist. Previously cited reports underscore the region’s underutilized transit potential, attributed to infrastructural gaps, uneven customs procedures, and technical constraints.
Amid the expansive regional dynamics, the Organization of Turkic States is sharpening its emphasis on transport avenues, evident in its regularly refreshed summit proclamations and freshly inked pacts. On the European front, initiatives steered by the EBRD and the EU Global Gateway seek to galvanise the private sector and bolster transportation networks. To the east, the ambition is underscored by endeavours like the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway initiative. Concurrently, the Eurasian Economic Union’s bid to weave tighter Eurasian connections, along with the SCO’s broadening scope, signal a sweeping intent to draw the region closer in terms of infrastructure and economy. Central to these ambitions are the dialogues among Central Asian nations, spotlighting collaborative blueprints.
The Role and Impact of Central Asian Consultative Meetings
In contrast to the previous Central Asian consultative session, all five nations of the region endorsed documents at the Fifth meeting. This stands out, given the lingering doubts about ‘consultative regionalism’ which Klyuchevska once described in an interview as primarily informational with a foundation of non-interference. Indeed, forging consensus in regional collaboration can be challenging. However, a review of regional leaders’ remarks indicates convergence on certain matters, notably the development of Central Asian transport routes.
In this paper, we employed the ‘R’ programming language to dissect the addresses of all Central Asian leaders at the fifth consultative meeting. Through the construction of a ‘Heat map’ via the ‘Topic Models’ technique, the aim was to unearth the predominant themes in these presidential speeches. To achieve this, we leaned on the ‘Latent Dirichlet Allocation‘ (LDA) model—a statistical approach that discerns concealed subjects across a collection of texts. Essentially, LDA surmises that any given document melds various topics and associates each word with a topic. By deploying LDA, our goal was to reverse-engineer this synthesis to pinpoint existing themes and their corresponding lexicons. The analysis also entailed sidestepping common ‘stop words’—like pronouns and prepositions—and lemmatizing adjectives, given the Russian language’s adjective-rich nature.
In the confines of this study, ten pivotal themes were distilled from the textual analysis of the speeches:
- History and Civilization;
- Production within the region;
- World economic events;
- Ecological problems;
- Cooperation with external actors;
- Interstate cooperation;
- Achievements of Central Asian civilization;
- Food security;
- Innovative development;
- Partnership and support.
In Figure 1, by examining the distinctive terms tied to each theme, one can discern the degree of preference each Central Asian leader has for various topics. The shading of the rectangles indicates the relative importance of each theme to a given leader. Horizontal lines above delineate topic connections, while vertical lines on the right depict links between the pronouncements of each president. Such associations are forged by spotting common terms and their context within the broader discourse.
A pivotal takeaway from this study is the nuanced connection within top-priority themes among the speeches of Central Asian leaders. They hint at common concerns without directly overlapping. The Kyrgyzstan leader, for instance, highlighted the escalating environmental challenges faced by the nation, pointing to “the intensifying repercussions of climate change: severe cold snaps, crises, extended droughts, and diminished water levels.” In contrast, Turkmenistan’s president discussed the establishment of the Central Asian Council on New Technologies to spearhead collaborative ventures in the arena.
The examination revealed that for Tajikistan’s President, the chief concerns were centred on partnership and mutual support within Central Asia, whereas for Uzbekistan’s leader, Shavkat Mirziyoyev, the emphasis was on regional production, connoting collaborative projects and food security.
However, despite such contextual nuances, the strides made during the latest summit depict a concerted resolve, evidenced by the formal accords signed to augment land transport synergies in Central Asia. Nevertheless, there lingers a strain of scepticism among certain observers regarding the unanimous endorsement of such a pact by all Central Asian nations. The backdrop to such reservations stems from the preceding summit where the heads of Tajikistan and Turkmenistan abstained from ratifying an accord on friendship, amity, and cooperation aimed at Central Asia’s development. A perusal of the preliminary accord underscores several objectives:
- Fostering conditions conducive to international land transport development.
- Cultivating a competitive landscape for transport services within Central Asia.
- Elevating efficiency and carving out new international, even multimodal, corridors.
- Streamlining land transport and transit procedures.
- Advancing contemporary transport and logistical services.
- Embracing innovative technologies, with an emphasis on digitalising land transport operations.
- Championing and expanding the use of eco-friendly transport modalities [9].
While the agreement’s language might come across as broad, its crux lies in the formation of a joint commission, mandated to oversee its execution. This signifies an institutional approach towards a topic of paramount importance for the region. It’s worth highlighting that earlier sections of this analysis touched upon diverse forums where transport and logistics were hot topics over the past year. Yet, not every such forum led to the establishment of dedicated institutions, nor did they invariably include all Central Asian nations.
Complex interdependence in the region
The establishment of a collaborative commission tasked with overseeing the accord’s execution is emblematic of institutional intertwinement. Central Asian nations stand cognizant of the exigency for constructing administrative frameworks aimed at supervising collective endeavors within the realm of transportation and logistics. This process of institutionalization serves as a tangible testament to their steadfast resolve in efficiently managing their interdependence. Furthermore, the language embedded within the agreement stipulates, “This Agreement is open after its entry into force to any state wishing to accede to it by submitting an instrument of accession to the depositary.” This clause unmistakably signifies the region’s inclination to embrace other nations within the ambit of their expansive transportation network. It is not unreasonable to speculate that Afghanistan might feature prominently in this calculus.
Coclusion
Conclusively, the ever-evolving terrain of Central Asia underscores its burgeoning role as a pivotal nexus for transportation and commerce, an allure that is increasingly drawing the gaze of external stakeholders. Central Asian nations actively participate in various consortia, undertakings, and coalitions dedicated to fortifying transportation corridors and tackling shared quandaries.
Nonetheless, as the region advances, it must confront lingering challenges, such as infrastructural lacunae, incongruous customs procedures, and technological constraints. These obstacles accentuate the imperative for modernization, digitization, and the streamlining of trade facilitation throughout the area.
The Organization of Turkic States (OTS), European initiatives like the Global Gateway, the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway ventures, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and the burgeoning scope of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) collectively epitomize a resounding yearning for economic and infrastructural amalgamation within Central Asia. Rooted in the bedrock of these collaborative strategies are consultative dialogues among the Central Asian states themselves.
In the chessboard of Central Asian geopolitics, a recent conclave of its leadership served as a poignant testament to both divergence and unity. Despite contrasting priorities, these leaders converged on a seminal juncture: the ratification of a pact to bolster land transport links.
The intricate fabric of Central Asia’s interdependency becomes manifest through its nuanced regional engagements. This is further underscored by the codification of governance mechanisms that supervise its transport and logistics functions. Evoking the term “transport complex” brings to light the deep-seated economic symbiosis within the region.
Navigating this milieu, Central Asian nations are poised to be not merely architects of regional amalgamation but also conduits of expansive global connections. A discernible inclination to assimilate other nations, notably Afghanistan, into this transport nexus signals an ambition to broaden both interdependence and regional camaraderie.
In essence, Central Asia’s trajectory towards cementing its role as a pivotal transport and commerce nexus underscores its salience on the global stage and its resolute spirit to navigate impediments through collaborative ingenuity.
References:
- The First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev. Chronicle of Activities. 1994–1995. Business World Astana, 2011.
- Tskhay, A., and Costa Buranelli, F. “Accommodating Revisionism through Balancing Regionalism: The Case of Central Asia.” Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 72, no. 6, 2020, pp. 1033–1052, https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2020.1779184.
- Economy of Central Asia: A New Look. Reports and Working Papers 22/3. Eurasian Development Bank, 2022.
- Sustainable Transport Connections between Europe and Central Asia. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 2023.
- Declaration of the Eighth Summit of the Organization of Turkic States. Organization of Turkic States, 2022.
- Samarkand Declaration of the Ninth Summit of the Organization of Turkic States. Organization of Turkic States, 2022.
- “On the Signing of an Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Governments of the Turkic States of the Republic on the Creation of a Simplified Customs Corridor.” Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, no. 890, 10 Nov. 2022.
- Kazakhstan Country Strategy 2022-2027. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 2022.
- “On the Signing of the Agreement on Strengthening the Interconnectedness of Land Transport in Central Asia.” Open Regulatory Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
- Keohane, R., and Nye, J. “Power and Interdependence.” Survival, vol. 15, no. 4, 1973, pp. 158–165, https://doi.org/10.1080/00396337308441409.
Main photo: President.az