The US Approach Towards Central Asia Revisited

How the US Lost its Credibility in Central Asia

After the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States almost immediately recognized the independence of fifteen former Soviet republics, including the five Central Asian states, and announced that the US would support and strengthen their sovereignty. Nonetheless, this support amounted to little more than token gestures with limited regional involvement. Additionally, the American democracy promotion policy caused mistrust among Central Asian states towards the US.
Due to geographic distance, the United States did not have vested economic interests in Central Asia but perceived the latter as of geostrategic importance in forestalling the dominance of Russia and, later, China in the region. That is why Washington`s goal in the region has always been strengthening the independence and integrity of Central Asian republics. However, until terrorist attacks on American soil, Washington did not bother to establish a fine-tuned strategy towards and engage with the region as it was encumbered with transforming Russian domestic politics (Kuchins, 2023). Thus, Central Asian affairs were parceled out among different departments and sub-departments within the US government (Starr, 2023).

The 9/11 events precipitated a U-turn change in the US attitude towards the region. The Global War on Terror, declared by George W. Bush, prompted the United States to shift from a stance of indifference towards Central Asia to one of active engagement. This gave impetus to the emergence of military and political cooperation between the US and Central Asia. As a result, all five republics supported the American Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan by providing military bases, over-flight rights, and re-fueling facilities. However, the US did not consider the region on its own terms but primarily viewed it through the lens of Afghan stabilization efforts. Also, rather than fostering connectivity among Central Asian republics that could unite the region from within, the US tried in vain to tie the fragmented region with South Asia through gas pipeline (TAPI) and electricity (CASA-1000) projects within a New Silk Road initiative.

The foregoing initiatives did not materialize because Washington`s democracy-first approach undermined the trust of Central Asian republics in American presence in the region. The US almost excluded the “carrot” and resorted mostly to the “stick” in its policy of promoting good governance and the rule of law in Central Asia. Instead of fostering political and economic reforms through technical and financial assistance, the US adopted a top-down approach towards democracy promotion in the region. Washington used boycotts, various black lists, sanctions, and the 1974 Jackson-Vannick Amendment to improve the human rights situation in Central Asia, negatively impacting trade relations between the US and the region.

Additionally, the West stigmatized some Central Asian republics for human rights violations. Although these policies were pertinent amid the deterioration of the human rights situation in the region, they turned out to be detrimental to pragmatic relations between the West and Central Asia. This fostered distrust among them because Central Asian leaders perceived Washington`s democracy and human rights agenda as a regime change strategy. This, in turn, led them to abandon a multi-vector foreign policy and pushed them closer to Russia and China, which actively support authoritarianism.

A Window of Opportunity for the US in Central Asia

A dynamic change that has taken place recently in two major countries in Central Asia – namely, political reforms in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan – and the weakening of the Russian authority amid the Ukrainian crisis, offer a window of opportunity for the US to regain its credibility in the region. Recent developments in American foreign policy towards Central Asia indicate that the US intends to capitalize on this critical juncture and to prioritize pragmatic relations over its erstwhile democracy-first approach.

The new US Strategy for Central Asia 2019-2025 (U.S. Embassy in Uzbekistan, 2020) purports to strengthen the sovereignty and independence of the Central Asian states by promoting private-sector engagement and creating a favorable business environment. The participation of Joe Biden in the New York summit of C5+1 was a milestone in the relations between the US and Central Asian republics, which had lacked coordination since the platform’s foundation. The business Forum B5+1 held recently in Almaty demonstrates Washington`s commitment to fostering regional connectivity from within. The US seeks to repeal Jackson-Vanik for Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan to create favorable conditions for an American business community in the region. The US Senate also contributes to this strategy, which is evidenced by the formation of the Senate Central Asia Caucus on July 10, 2024.

The US is also providing feasible support to diversify trade routes and expand investment in the region, the proof of which is the financial support totaling $50 million disseminated through the Economic Resilience Initiative in Central Asia.

Of course, this bottom-up approach is still in its infancy, and American efforts cannot substitute Russian and Chinese political and economic roles in Central Asia. However, the very presence of the US can improve the negotiation positions of local states against Moscow and Beijing. Additionally, helping the region diversify trade routes through funding the Middle Corridor, which holds strategic importance for global trade – especially amid ongoing conflicts in the Red Sea and Ukraine – will alleviate the dependence of Central Asian states on Russia-dominated Northern Corridor.

The existence of alternative great powers in the region is urgently needed. The US should keep increasing its presence in the region as some Central Asian countries are distancing themselves from Moscow and gradually moving towards (Akromov and Aslanov, 2024) integration; otherwise, Central Asia might be unable to decrease the Russian-Chinese influence. However, Washington should avoid forcing Central Asian states to choose sides. Instead, it should contribute to diversifying the array of available great powers, allowing these states to strike a balance against Russia and China.

” Helping the region diversify trade routes through funding the Middle Corridor, which holds strategic importance for global trade – especially amid ongoing conflicts in the Red Sea and Ukraine – will alleviate the dependence of Central Asian states on Russia-dominated Northern Corridor”

Thus, the US should play a long game by supporting Central Asian reform agendas and fostering regional connectivity through economic cooperation rather than imposing good governance standards as preconditions for cooperation as it has done in the past. This does not mean that Washington should stop raising human rights issues, but it should adopt an incremental approach by pragmatically working with governments to promote institution-building and civil society programs.

In the long run, the US could regain its influence in this resource-rich region and restore its credibility and reputation, which was damaged after the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Also, developments in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan offer some optimism amid the global trend of autocratization. Active engagement in the region would allow the US to prevent the Central Asian republics from descending into repressive regimes and to cultivate reliable partners who, if not fully democracies, would at least make a rhetorical commitment to democracy.

Otabek Akromov is a PhD researcher in Political Science at the University of Minnesota and a research and policy analyst at the Center for Progressive Reforms in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. His academic interests lie at the intersection of Comparative Politics and International Relations. Specifically, he is scholarly interested in state- and nation-building, authoritarian politics, and the foreign policy of small states in the post-Soviet region.

References

Akromov, O. and Aslanov, M. (2024, August 10). At Astana Leaders’ Summit, Uzbekistan’s President Highlights Ambitions to Deepen Regional Integration. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2024/08/at-astana-leaders-summit-uzbekistans-president-highlights-ambitions-to-deepen-regional-integration/

Kuchins, A. (2023, November 15 ). How did we get Russia so Wrong? The National Interest. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-did-we-get-russia-so-wrong-207284

Starr, F. (2023, May). U.S. policy in Central Asia through Central Asian eyes. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute Silk Road Studies Program. https://www.silkroadstudies.org/resources/230504-SRP-Fred-full.pdf

U.S. Embassy in Uzbekistan. (2020, February 5). United States Strategy for Central Asia 2019-2025: Advancing Sovereignty and Economic Prosperity. https://uz.usembassy.gov/united-states-strategy-for-central-asia-2019-2025-advancing-sovereignty-and-economic-prosperity/

Share this on social media