In her recent article, published in Central Asia-Caucasus Analyst, Nargiza Umarova explores the geopolitical and economic implications of developing trans-Afghan transport routes. She argues that Central Asia is striving to reclaim its historical role as a vital land-based transportation hub connecting East and West, as well as North and South. The diversification of trade routes, particularly through Afghanistan, is a strategic priority for many Central Asian states, as it reduces reliance on traditional transit through Russia. However, she warns that the involvement of major powers — such as China, Russia, India, and Iran — introduces a complex web of competing interests that could complicate regional cooperation.   Ms. Umarova highlights how Afghanistan, under the Taliban government, has actively pursued infrastructure projects, including the Kabul Corridor (linking Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan) and the Lapis Lazuli Corridor. She notes that multiple Central Asian countries are competing to shape the region’s transit landscape. Uzbekistan, for instance, champions the Termez-Mazar-i-Sharif-Kabul-Peshawar railway, while Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan back an alternative Trans-Afghan Corridor linking Turkmenistan to Pakistan. These rival projects not only reflect economic ambitions but also intersect with broader geopolitical strategies, as regional players seek to secure their positions in South Asian trade networks.   The article also discusses the strategic interests of external powers. Russia is keen on integrating Afghanistan into its North-South Transport Corridor to facilitate trade with South Asia, while Iran is pushing for alternative routes that bypass Central Asian competitors. Iran’s near-completed Khaf-Herat railway and its long-term vision for a transit corridor via Afghanistan and China pose a challenge to Central Asia’s transit ambitions. Similarly, the author outlines India’s efforts to connect with Central Asia via Iran’s Chabahar Port, bypassing Pakistan entirely. She further notes China’s cautious engagement in Afghan transit, particularly in relation to the Wakhan Corridor, which could create a direct trade link between Afghanistan and China but also diminish Central Asia’s relevance as a transit hub.   In conclusion, Nargiza Umarova underscores that while the expansion of Afghan transport corridors presents opportunities for Central Asia, it also introduces risks of intensified competition and geopolitical rivalry. To navigate these challenges, she advocates for a coordinated regional approach, where Central Asian states collaborate rather than compete to maximize mutual economic benefits. Without such coordination, she warns, external powers could exploit divisions within the region, potentially undermining Central Asia’s ability to leverage its strategic transit potential.   * 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 new article, IAIS Senior Research Fellow Nargiza Umarova analyses the impact of Afghanistan’s transport infrastructure on regional integration and Central Asia’s economic prospects. The author emphasizes that since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, the countries of the region have intensified efforts to diversify their trade routes, reducing their dependence on Russia. Particular attention is paid to the southern direction of transit, where the key partners of Central Asia are Iran and Afghanistan. The Taliban, while in power, have shown determination in developing transport corridors, including the construction of railways and infrastructure facilities such as the Kabul and Lazurite corridors.   An important part of the study is to look at the competition and interaction between different states in transport policy. Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan are promoting an alternative route via Torghundi-Gerat-Kandahar-Spin-Buldak, which could compete with the Trans-Afghan railway Termez-Mazar-i-Sharif-Kabul-Peshawar actively supported by Uzbekistan. The author emphasizes that the development of these routes increases the transit capacity of the region, but could also lead to geopolitical rivalries and revision of strategic interests of major players such as Russia, Iran and China.   The article also touches on Moscow’s role in Afghan transit. In the face of Western sanctions, Russia has shown interest in expanding the North-South International Transport Corridor with access to Pakistan via Afghanistan. In this context, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan can play a key role by attracting significant cargo flows. At the same time, Iran and India are developing their own initiatives, such as the Chabahar port and railway routes, in an effort to provide alternative routes to Central Asia, which could weaken the position of the Uzbek Kabul corridor.   Nargiza Umarova concludes by noting that the dynamics of Afghan transit bring both opportunities and challenges for Central Asia. In order to avoid interregional competition and increased influence of external players, Central Asian countries should work out a coordinated strategy for the development of the southern direction of transit. Such an approach will maximize economic benefits and strengthen their position in the international transport system.   * 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 his article, Islomkhon Gafarov analyzes the strategic approaches of Russia and China to the integration of Central and South Asia. As noted in the work, the interconnectedness of these regions is gaining increasing importance on the geopolitical agenda, with Russia and China demonstrating constructivist approaches to the development of integration processes. The author emphasizes that Central Asian countries are interested in access to seaports, while South Asian states seek access to markets in the Central Asian region.   Speaking about Russia, the author indicates that its policy is based on the concept of “new Eurasianism”, within which it aims to strengthen integration with India, China, Iran, and other states. Moscow is intensifying ties with South Asia through SCO mechanisms, as well as employing the concepts of Global South and World Majority, which, as the author notes, may accelerate integration processes in the Eurasian macro-region.   Regarding China, the article highlights its long-term strategy focused on creating infrastructure and economic corridors, such as the Belt and Road Initiative. In this context, Beijing views Central and South Asia as crucial links in global economic interaction, developing transport routes and strengthening trade ties. The author concludes that, despite differences in strategies, Russia and China share a common interest in deepening the interconnectedness of these regions.   Read the article on CABAR.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.

As Jeon Hongpyo, Visiting Research Fellow at the Centre for Asia-Pacific Studies, states, the role of Koryo-saram (ethnic Koreans in Central Asia) within South Korea’s K-Silk Road Initiative is of significant historical and cultural importance. In his analysis, Jeon highlights the transnational agency of Koryo-saram and their potential contributions to Korea’s diplomatic and economic engagement with Central Asia. However, he argues that despite their strategic importance, Koryo-saram continue to face considerable socio-economic challenges that hinder their full participation in South Korea’s broader vision for the region.   As the researcher asserts, one of the critical issues confronting Koryo-saram is the disparity in South Korea’s overseas Korean policies. He critiques these policies for their emphasis on national homogeneity and identity reinforcement, which, he argues, often overlook the unique historical and socio-political realities of diaspora communities. Furthermore, as the study illustrates, educational barriers and limited financial support further exacerbate the challenges faced by Koryo-saram, placing them at a disadvantage compared to other overseas Korean groups. The author contends that such limitations are rooted in nationalistic policymaking frameworks that fail to account for the diverse and complex experiences of ethnic Koreans abroad.   In addressing these concerns, Jeon Hongpyo proposes a range of comprehensive strategies aimed at fostering inclusivity. As he suggests, reforms in scholarship programs, the development of tailored visa policies, and the creation of initiatives focused on cultural exchange and global citizenship are essential steps toward bridging the existing gaps. The author advocates for a fundamental shift in South Korea’s approach, moving away from a possessive nationalistic paradigm toward a model grounded in diversity and humanitarianism. Such a transition, he argues, would not only support Koryo-saram in overcoming socio-economic challenges but also enable South Korea to leverage their potential as valuable intermediaries in strengthening ties with Central Asia.   As the author concludes, by embracing inclusive and forward-looking policies, South Korea can reinforce its position as a global leader while simultaneously deepening its engagement with Central Asia. He maintains that the active participation of Koryo-saram in the K-Silk Road Initiative would be instrumental in achieving its objectives, facilitating deeper diplomatic, economic, and cultural cooperation between Korea and the Central Asian region.   Read and download the article   * 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 November 2024, Dr. Islomkhon Gafarov, Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Afghanistan and South Asian Studies, received his Ph.D. in political science, having successfully defended his dissertation on Modern Foreign Policy of the USA in South Asia (in the case of India and Pakistan).   His research presents a comprehensive analysis of the transformation of the US foreign policy strategy in the South Asian region. Special attention was paid to international relations through the prism of constructivism. This approach occupies a key place in the theoretical part of the work, as constructivism considers international processes not only through the traditional factors of power and interests, but also through ideological and cultural aspects. Using the example of US foreign policy in South Asia, the author shows how this theory is applicable to analysing long-term relations with India and Pakistan. The author argues that US foreign policy in the region reflects not only pragmatic strategic goals such as containing communism or fighting terrorism, but also constructivist aspects such as democratic values and perceptions of allies. This is particularly evident in relations with India, which is seen by the US as an important democratic partner that shares similar ideological principles.   The study demonstrates how, over the past seven decades, South Asia has emerged as one of the key regions shaping global geopolitical dynamics. The author identifies seven historical periods in the evolution of American foreign policy in the region, beginning in 1947 and ending with the current phase following the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. It also analyses the factors that have influenced the transformation of US regional policy, including India’s rise as a global player, the development of the North-South international transport corridor, India and Pakistan’s entry into the SCO, and Pakistan’s strategic pivot towards cooperation with China.   The key conclusion of the study is the identification of the cyclical nature of American foreign policy in the region, characterised by alternating periods of active engagement and relative distancing. At the same time, there is a significant transformation of US priorities: if during the Cold War Pakistan was the main regional partner, in modern conditions the emphasis has shifted to the development of strategic partnership with India.   The dissertation abstract summarising the main findings of the study is presented for your attention.   Read and download the abstract   * 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.

Among the proceedings of the international conference on Afghanistan under the Taliban: Reactions of Neighboring Countries and Great Powers is an article by Rustam Makhmudov, leading research fellow at IAIS, written in co-authorship with Madina Abdullaeva, senior lecturer at the Department of Political Science, UWED, and Mushtariy Usmonova, research fellow at IAIS. The study analyses Afghanistan’s abundant natural resources and their significance in the emerging geopolitical context. The authors take a detailed look at strategically important deposits of copper, lithium and rare earth metals, whose combined value is estimated to be between $1 trillion and $3 trillion.   The article focuses on the growing interest of world powers, including China, India and Russia, in these resources and their role in competing for their exploitation. The authors focus on the challenges and opportunities facing Afghanistan, including lack of international recognition, sanctions and internal political barriers. It is noted that proper resource management and investment linkages can be key to the country’s economic recovery, opening up new opportunities for its integration into global economic processes.   Read and download the article (in Russian)   * 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.