As Nargiza Umarova notes, cooperation between Central Asian countries in the field of transport and transit has become one of the key areas of regional integration since 2018, when the mechanism of Consultative Meetings of the Leaders of the Region was launched. Despite political will and common goals, in practice there is a lack of coordination: Central Asian states are focused primarily on developing international routes rather than strengthening intra-regional connectivity. This leads to competition between countries and hinders the formation of a single transport space.   The author emphasises that, despite some progress in modernising infrastructure and launching new routes — such as the TITR, CKU and Trans-Afghan railway corridor — the countries of the region act more as rivals than allies. In particular, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan are developing parallel alternative routes to the west, which could lead to duplication of efforts. Umarova emphasises the need to coordinate and harmonise transport policy in order to avoid fragmentation of the regional space and achieve mutual benefits.   As the researcher points out, serious obstacles to effective integration remain, including varying levels of infrastructure development, low institutional coordination, lack of investment, and the existence of tariff and non-tariff barriers. These factors require a systematic approach and the formation of a common coordinating body with legal entity status, capable of developing a coordinated strategy and ensuring the stable implementation of transport initiatives.   Umarova concludes that only through the synchronised development of intra-regional and international transport connectivity will Central Asia be able to realise its transit potential. She insists on the need to intensify joint efforts to harmonise the regulatory framework, digitise logistics and institutionalise integration processes. Without this, the author warns, the region may miss a unique opportunity to establish itself in the global transport architecture.   * 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.

In her analysis for the Central Asia–Caucasus Institute, Nargiza Umarova warns that the growing number of trans-Afghan transport initiatives risks fragmenting Central Asia rather than integrating it. The recent India–Central Asia Dialogue reaffirmed support for Iran’s Chabahar port, which offers India and Central Asian republics an alternative trade route to the Indian Ocean while bypassing Pakistan. Uzbekistan has supported this strategy, seeing Chabahar as a way to diversify transit corridors. However, the rise of competing infrastructure projects — such as China’s Belt and Road-linked rail lines, Russia’s extension of the International North–South Transport Corridor, and the Taliban’s backing of the Herat–Kandahar route — has led to overlapping, and at times conflicting, regional agendas.   Ms. Umarova highlights that the development of new routes like the Khaf–Herat railway and the proposed Mazari Sharif–Herat–Kandahar line could undercut Uzbekistan’s preferred Trans-Afghan Railway through Kabul. The Taliban’s engagement with Russia, China, and India, coupled with Iran’s push to integrate into regional corridors, makes it difficult for Tashkent to maintain its strategic advantage without broader regional coordination. The increasing importance of Chabahar may also weaken the Chinese-backed Gwadar port, intensifying the geopolitical rivalry between Beijing and New Delhi.   The author notes that instability in Pakistan and the risk of military escalation involving Iran — especially in the context of tensions with Israel — further complicate these dynamics. If conflict disrupts access to Iranian routes, Central Asian states may have to reconsider their reliance on Chabahar, while also being vulnerable to shifting freight flows and diminished influence in regional transport planning. Ultimately, Uzbekistan’s success in navigating this complex landscape hinges on fostering consensus among Central Asian neighbors and presenting a united front in negotiations with the Afghan authorities. Without such coordination, regional competition could erode their shared strategic and economic interests.   Read on CACI Analyst   * 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.

As Azamat Seitov notes, the phenomenon of rumors in Uzbekistan today is taking on new forms under the influence of the digital environment and requires not only sociological understanding, but also a systematic approach to neutralizing it. He analyses how social networks are becoming not just platforms for communication, but also accelerators for the spread of so-called viral rumors — misinformation that can undermine public trust, provoke panic or radicalization. The author emphasizes that rumors today operate in conditions of information noise and high user engagement, where emotions prevail over facts.   Seitov bases his conclusions on a number of Western sociological theories, including the approaches of Shibutani, Sansstein and other researchers who interpret rumors as a form of ‘improvised news’ arising in conditions of a lack of reliable information. He emphasizes that rumors most often spread in conditions of uncertainty and social anxiety — and it is at such moments that they are most dangerous. Particular attention is paid to how rumors can be exploited by extremist structures, which makes the problem particularly relevant in the context of information security.   The author gives examples of so-called viral rumors in Uzbekistan, including those related to vaccination, power cuts, and banking failures, to show how quickly and uncontrollably mass opinion can form without verified sources. He emphasizes that the digital transformation of communication requires a new media environment, where media literacy plays an increasingly important role as a tool for countering disinformation. In this context, Seitov proposes strengthening educational and institutional measures, including digital hygiene and algorithmic control over the spread of false messages.   At the end of the article, Seitov emphasizes the need to develop a national strategy for society’s resilience to disinformation. In his opinion, only through the joint efforts of the state, society and the information sector can an environment be created that is resistant to rumors and panic. It is important not only to combat the consequences, but also to create an educated and critically thinking information society in advance, in which lies will have less chance of taking root.   * 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.

As Prof Azamat Seitov emphasizes, sustainable social development is impossible without the formation of mature civic consciousness in each member of society. He views civic maturity not as an abstract virtue, but as a specific social condition that directly affects the effectiveness of state institutions and the level of trust in society. In this context, characteristics such as legal responsibility, work ethic and personal involvement of citizens in social processes become key.   The author argues that double standards — others can’t, but I can — not only undermine the legitimacy of the rule of law, but also contribute to the reproduction of corruption as a social phenomenon. According to Seitov, true citizenship begins with the rejection of conspicuous consumption and a transition to conscious participation in society through work, honesty, and compliance with the law. He emphasizes that if people expect change only from the state, reforms will not have the desired effect.   Seitov refers to the classics of sociology — Marx, Weber, Durkheim, Tocqueville, Merton and others — to substantiate his position. He shows that real change is only possible through the internal motivation of citizens and their active participation in public life. His analysis of classical theories confirms the idea that no social system can be sustainable without the involvement of individuals in the common cause.   In conclusion, the author calls for a transition from criticism to action, from expectations to real contribution. He is convinced that only if every citizen realizes their role in the social mechanism and acts for the benefit of the common future will it be possible to overcome systemic crises and build a more just and developed society.   * 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.

In their research, Ashwin Raghuraman and Davronbek Mamasoliev, IAIS Volunteer, explore the structural evolution and growing fragility of Iran’s proxy-based foreign policy in the Middle East. As regional tensions peaked with the unprecedented June 2025 military exchange between Iran and Israel, the authors argue that the limits of Tehran’s reliance on non-state actors such as Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas have become increasingly evident. The weakening of these proxies, especially following the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria, has eroded Iran’s ability to operate through its traditional asymmetric warfare strategy, pushing it toward more direct and overt confrontation, exemplified by the launch of Operation True Promise III. The study highlights that the loss of Syria as a logistical hub and the growing scrutiny of Iranian influence in Iraq are significantly constraining Tehran’s ability to sustain its regional network.   The authors trace how economic constraints, primarily driven by the reimposition of U.S. sanctions, have deepened Iran’s dependency on cost-efficient proxy groups while simultaneously undermining the very infrastructure necessary to support them. In the oil sector, Iran’s strategy of circumventing sanctions through clandestine exports to allies such as Syria is described as both adaptive and fragile, especially in light of Israel’s recent targeted strikes on oil infrastructure, which sent ripples through global energy markets. The reduction in Iranian oil flows to Syria and diversification efforts, reportedly expanding crude sales to up to 17 countries, are portrayed as key indicators of Iran’s shifting economic diplomacy under pressure.   Further, the paper delves into the sociopolitical landscapes that shape regional perceptions of power and legitimacy. While identity-driven societies in Yemen and Iraq are more likely to interpret proxy resilience through ideological and symbolic lenses, technocratic Gulf states approach Iran’s actions through pragmatic geopolitical calculations. This divergence in perception influences both local support for Iran’s partners and the regional balance of alliances. The authors also examine the instrumental use of the Houthis in the Bab al-Mandab Strait, whose attacks on maritime routes — like the Rubymar tanker incident — serve as both strategic disruption and ideological posturing in line with Iranian messaging.   The concluding section positions the collapse of Iran’s proxy strategy not only as a tactical vulnerability but as a geopolitical turning point. As proxies lose their deterrent effectiveness and domestic unrest increases within Iran, Tehran’s threshold for open conflict lowers. Raghuraman and Mamasoliev contend that Iran’s June 2025 missile strikes on Israeli territory mark a significant departure from decades of shadow warfare. In this new phase, Tehran’s foreign policy is entering an era of overt confrontation, shaped less by strategic ambiguity and more by a need to reassert its influence in a region undergoing rapid realignment. The authors argue that this transformation may permanently alter the security architecture of the Middle East, with grave implications for both regional actors and the broader international community.   * 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.

Rustam Makhmudov’s article, presented at the international scientific and practical conference on The Politics of Unity in Central Asia: Uzbekistan’s Role in Ensuring Stability in the Region, offers a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of Tashkent’s course in Central Asia. The author identifies three key stages: the first (2016–2020) – the launch of large-scale reforms and active rapprochement with neighboring countries through increased trade, tourism and cultural exchanges, as well as the establishment of a format for consultative meetings between the heads of state of the region; the second (2020–2023) – overcoming the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, when Uzbekistan provided humanitarian aid and restored economic ties, while maintaining a proactive policy in Central Asia; and the third stage, which began in recent years, is characterized by deepening transport and economic cooperation, the opening of the Afghan market and the integration of resources into regional supply chains.   In the second part of the article, Makhmudov analyses the macro-factors that determine the challenges and opportunities for the new phase of regional policy. Global geopolitical transformation is leading to a transition from a bipolar to a non-polar world, where major powers are forced to build situational alliances, creating security challenges in Central Asia. Technological rivalry between the United States and China in the fields of AI and quantum technologies exacerbates the need for a common regional strategy for training personnel and developing an innovative economy. The philosophy of growthism and consumer society conflicts with the region’s climate constraints, especially in the context of water scarcity, which requires a rethinking of the green growth paradigm for sustainable development. Finally, strengthening the pan-regional identity requires a shift from a discourse of cultural and historical unity to the formation of bottom-up integration ideas capable of uniting young people and experts throughout Central Asia.   The author emphasizes that an adequate and timely response to these challenges creates the conditions for a transition from multilateral cooperation to full-fledged regional integration. Thanks to Tashkent’s proactive line and pragmatic approach based on maximizing the dividends from joint projects, Uzbekistan is capable of acting as a locomotive for sustainable cooperation, providing a safe haven in the raging global sea. This strategic vector not only strengthens political and economic stability in Central Asia, but also sets new benchmarks for integration processes that meet the realities of the 21st century.   * 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.