Nargiza Umarova explores how transport integration between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan has become both a driver of regional connectivity and a source of strategic competition in Eurasian transit politics. It situates bilateral cooperation in the broader transformation of Central Asian regionalism since 2016, when Uzbekistan reoriented its foreign policy towards deeper engagement with its neighbours and prioritised Central Asia as the core vector of its diplomacy. Within this renewed framework, Tashkent has consistently promoted a vision of Central Asia as a stable and interconnected region, where intraregional trade growth and expanded transit capacity reinforce one another. The brief shows how this vision is reflected in national strategies, including Uzbekistan’s Transport Strategy to 2035, which emphasises the alignment of national transport and communication systems as a precondition for unlocking the region’s full transit potential.
The study provides a detailed overview of the current state of transport connectivity between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, underscoring the structural asymmetries created by Uzbekistan’s double-landlocked status and Kazakhstan’s advantageous geography, seaports and direct rail links to both China and Russia. Despite these asymmetries, the two countries have made notable progress in integrating their transport systems, as seen in the growth of bilateral trade to over USD 4.3 billion by the end of 2024 and the expansion of joint infrastructure projects. Key initiatives such as the planned Uchkuduk–Kyzylorda corridor, the Darbaza–Maktaaral railway to decongest the Saryagash checkpoint, the Beineu–Shalkar highway, and the newly launched International Center for Industrial Cooperation “Central Asia” illustrate how connectivity projects are intended not only to shorten distances and reduce travel times, but also to turn border regions into new hubs of industrial and logistics activity linked to transcontinental routes.
At the same time, Umarova demonstrates that this integration is accompanied by intensifying competition over control of transit flows and strategic corridors. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are simultaneously partners and rivals in shaping the geography of Eurasian transport, particularly along the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (Middle Corridor) and emerging Trans-Afghan links to South Asia. Kazakhstan’s long-standing institutionalisation of the TITR and its ambition to remain the primary logistics hub of Eurasia contrast with Uzbekistan’s efforts to diversify access routes via multimodal corridors that bypass existing Kazakh monopolies, including the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan highway and the planned railway on the Kashgar–Torugart–Makmal–Jalal-Abad–Andijan axis. Parallel initiatives – such as the CASCA+ corridor and competing Afghan transit schemes – risk fragmenting governance frameworks, duplicating infrastructure and diluting Central Asia’s collective bargaining power with external actors like China, the European Union, Turkey and Gulf partners.
In its policy conclusions, the brief argues that without stronger coordination mechanisms between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, the region may fall short of realising its full potential as a central bridge in Eurasian connectivity. Umarova calls for the alignment of tariff policies, customs digitalisation, and transport strategies; the creation of unified supervisory structures for Trans-Caspian transit that can reconcile CASCA+ with TITR; and a mutually agreed architecture for Trans-Afghan routes to the Indian Ocean that avoids a zero-sum race for transit rents. She also highlights the importance of reviving earlier regional proposals for a joint strategy and institutional frameworks on transport communications, potentially under UN auspices. Ultimately, the experience of Uzbekistan–Kazakhstan relations is presented as a microcosm of transport-driven regionalism in Central Asia: genuine progress in integration is evident, but only a cooperative, rather than competitive, approach will enable the region to consolidate its position as a resilient and indispensable connector between Europe and Asia.
* The Institute for Advanced International Studies (IAIS) does not take institutional positions on any issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IAIS.
