Consistency, Not Priority, Is The Key To U.S. Central Asia Policy
Central Asian leaders want tangible, long-term cooperation that contributes to their economic development, strengthens their security, and respects their sovereignty.
As a new administration settles into Washington, the global chessboard is being reset. While Central Asia may not be occupying the top squares of that board, it remains a strategically vital region. For the incoming administration, the key to effectively engaging with this complex region isn’t a sudden spotlight or grand pronouncements but rather a commitment to consistent and well-defined engagement. Central Asia doesn’t need to be a top priority; it needs consistent attention.
No one expects Central Asia to be the administration’s immediate focus. Crises in Ukraine and the Middle East, as well as the ongoing challenges posed by China, will understandably dominate the headlines and agendas. However, the very fact that Central Asia is not likely to erupt into a major conflict demanding immediate military or diplomatic intervention is precisely why a steady, long-term approach is so crucial. The five nations of the region—Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan—have a long history of navigating complex geopolitical landscapes and are unlikely to be swayed by fleeting attention or pronouncements that lack follow-through. They prioritize reliability over rhetoric.
The previous Trump administration deserves credit for recognizing this and formalizing a new United States Strategy for Central Asia 2019–2025. This strategy aimed to bolster the region’s independence, sovereignty, and resilience while emphasizing economic connectivity and reforms. However, the implementation of this strategy was often hampered by inconsistencies and a lack of sustained engagement. While the blueprint existed, the practical execution fell short. For instance, while the strategy highlighted the importance of trade diversification, few concrete initiatives were launched to facilitate U.S. business engagement beyond existing limited partnerships.
Furthermore, outdated restrictions were sometimes used as political leverage, creating unnecessary complications. A prime example is the persistence of the Jackson-Vanik amendment for Kazakhstan, which prevents normal trade relations with the United States. Originally intended to target the USSR for restricting Jewish emigration, this legacy legislation continues to apply to post-Soviet states. Despite bipartisan agreement on its obsolescence, a recent CRS report highlights its continued use as potential leverage for promoting democratic governance. This demonstrates how upholding superficial limitations, ostensibly for values-based reasons, can undermine interest-based policy.
The C5+US summit on September 21, 2023, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York offered a glimmer of hope for renewed engagement. The dialogue was positive, and commitments were made on various fronts, from regional security to economic cooperation. However, the follow-up has been underwhelming. Where are the tangible investment plans spurred by the summit? Where are the concrete joint projects addressing water scarcity or border security that were discussed? The Critical Minerals Dialogue, established in February 2024 to address the critical issue of the region’s rare-earth reserves and the American need for secure supply chains, has yet to yield any publicly announced initiatives or agreements. This is despite the increasing urgency of the situation, with China becoming more willing to impose bans and restrictions on critical mineral exports. This gap between pronouncements and practical action is precisely what breeds skepticism in a region accustomed to navigating the long game.
What Central Asia truly needs from the United States is a competent, clearly articulated strategy that is consistently implemented at the ground level. The leaders of the regional states are pragmatic actors. They prioritize tangible, long-term cooperation that contributes to their economic development, strengthens their security, and respects their sovereignty without imposing undue conditions or forcing them to choose sides. This pragmatic approach aligns directly with crucial U.S. interests. Economically, Central Asia represents a significant, yet largely untapped, treasure trove of resources, including rare earth elements vital for both high-tech industries and the green energy transition.
A prime example of this untapped potential, and a clear illustration of the current dynamic, is Kazakhstan. While possessing significant reserves, the country has seen a 3.8-fold increase in its rare earth mineral (REM) exports since 2020, in real terms. Kazakhstan is also among the few nations capable of producing gallium and indium, rare earth elements on which China currently holds a near-monopoly. Yet, China was the sole importer of these Kazakhstani REMs in 2023. For Washington to capitalize on this potential, the region requires targeted and strategic investments, technology transfer, personnel education, and comprehensive high-level exploratory work to map deposits effectively. Equally important are long-term commitments to import these products. This represents a mutually beneficial scenario: the United States gains a diversified supply chain, gaining a crucial edge in future geopolitical competition, while regional states benefit from new workplaces, increased budget revenue, and the ability to build their market share.
Beyond economics, a consistent U.S. policy towards the region is crucial for fostering regional stability. Central Asian states have long played a constructive role as mediators in regional disputes, offering platforms for dialogue. The increasing connectivity facilitated by projects like the Middle Corridor creates economic interdependence, fostering a shared interest in peace and stability. The ongoing, albeit fragile, peace talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan are indirectly influenced by the growing importance of transit routes that benefit both nations, highlighting the power of economic incentives in promoting peace.
Shifting to another pressing challenge, Afghanistan presents a painful issue where Central Asian engagement can be particularly valuable. While direct engagement with the Taliban poses significant obstacles for the United States, it is evident to the countries of the region that ignoring the reality on the ground will not make the challenges disappear. In 2024, there have been significant efforts to normalize relations and engage in pragmatic dialogue with the Taliban, for example, in delivering humanitarian aid and ensuring border security. Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has taken a leading role, consistently advocating at the UN for the establishment of the UN Regional Sustainable Development Goals Center for Central Asia and Afghanistan in Almaty, an idea that was realized this summer. As a follow-up, Kazakhstan removed the Taliban from its list of terrorist organizations and accredited a Chargé d’affaires from Afghanistan. Discussions are now underway to expand trans-Afghan railways further, opening trade routes for other nations in South and Central Asia, as well as the Middle East. By supporting these regional actors, the United States can contribute to preventing Afghanistan from becoming a breeding ground for instability and terrorism without necessarily endorsing the Taliban regime.
The new administration should understand that a consistent, well-defined, and diligently implemented strategy is the most effective path to engaging with Central Asia. It is crucial not to think about the region arena for winning a zero-sum game against Russia or China but rather as a space to build mutually beneficial partnerships that advance U.S. interests while respecting the sovereignty and agency of the Central Asian nations. By focusing on concrete, ground-level cooperation in areas like trade diversification, infrastructure development, and regional stability, the United States can cultivate lasting relationships that yield far greater dividends than sporadic bursts of high-level attention. A steady hand, guided by a consistent strategy, will secure America’s long-term interests in this region.
Miras Zhiyenbayev is the Head of the Foreign Policy Analysis and International Studies Program at MIND, the Maqsut Narikbayev Institute for Networking and Development, a university-based think tank at Maqsut Narikbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan.
Image: Vladimir Tretyakov / Shutterstock.com.