Follow us on social

C5+1 leaders

Central Asia becomes middle power contender in new Trump era

These five countries have evolved into a grouping that could pack a powerful trade and security punch

Asia-Pacific

President Donald Trump has caused quite a stir in the media in recent months with his bold statements on a diplomatic solution to the military conflict in and around Ukraine. One of his moves in this direction at the beginning of December was a phone call with Kazakhstan’s president Kassym-Jomart Tokayev asking the latter for his opinion on the issue.

The fact that Trump would pick up the phone to talk to Tokayev suggests that Kazakhstan could play a role as an actor in the search for a diplomatic solution in Ukraine. Furthermore, it underscores Central Asia’s potential to shape the peace and security architecture in Eurasia and beyond. In view of the aspirations of the new Trump administration, it is likely that U.S. policy towards Central Asia may be in line for an upgrade.

Central Asia's evolution as a middle power

In the past, Central Asia has tended to be perceived internationally as a troublemaker because of its security problems: the threat of Islamic extremism, domestic instability and recurrent political and social clashes, water and environmental issues as well as border conflicts among Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Despite various incidents, recent years have shown that Central Asia could well turn into a stabilizing factor, an independent security actor and a middle power in international politics.

First and foremost, regional cooperation has intensified and relations between countries have improved. The border demarcation between Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan was officially completed in early 2023, and Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan reached an agreement on disputed territories at the end of 2024. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, which have been competing for political and economic supremacy in the region for decades, signed an alliance agreement in 2022. A tandem of these two economically most dynamic and populous countries is fundamental for regional cooperation and security.

Finally, the first meeting of the secretaries of the security councils of the Central Asian countries took place last year. By peacefully resolving inherited or emerging conflicts and pooling the potential of each country, the region is becoming a stronger and more influential actor on the international stage in the process of reshaping the global peace and security architecture.

The C5+1 (the five Central Asian states plus the U.S.) foreign policy format established at the highest level since January 2022 is another step in that direction. Whether at a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, or Russian President Vladimir Putin, the leaders of the five Central Asian states (including Turkmenistan, which has long taken an isolationist approach) sat around the same table — a development that is extremely promising.

The region’s external assertiveness had already begun with the Western withdrawal from Afghanistan. While the countries of Central Asia were once a bridgehead for Western operations in Afghanistan, they are now largely on their own to deal with the challenges that remain.

C5 meets the new Trump administration

It was during Trump's first presidency that the current United States Strategy for Central Asia 2019-2025 was formulated. It is defined as building a more stable and prosperous Central Asia that is free to pursue political, economic, and security interests with a variety of partners on its own terms and that is connected to global markets. It is noteworthy the U.S. strategy coincides with the region's aspiration for greater strategic autonomy, which is characteristic of emerging middle powers.

In practice, the C5+1 format at the level of foreign ministers, as envisaged in the strategy, was raised to the level of heads of state by Trump's successor, Joe Biden, when he met with the leaders of five Central Asian states in New York in 2023. The newly established B5+1 format — the private sector-led counterpart to the C5+1 — facilitates public-private dialog to promote greater economic partnership between the U.S. and Central Asia.

However, since the U.S., whether governed by Republicans or Democrats, seeks to reduce its dependence on China, it is highly likely that cooperation in the area of strategic resources will be of interest for Trump's interaction with the region. In that context, the dialogue with Central Asia on critical minerals, established in 2023, is of utmost significance. China is the most important source of imports for many of the minerals identified by the U.S. government as strategic, such as lithium, cobalt or nickel. Strategic resources and the long-standing energy cooperation are thus potential key areas of relations between the new Trump administration and Central Asia.

An update of the Central Asia Strategy will be necessary in the light of at least two major developments. First, the growing importance and need for further development of the Trans-Caspian Transport Corridor (TCTR), also known as the Middle Corridor, which runs across the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus, bypassing Russia, and is intended for the transport of industrial goods and fossil energy to Europe. The U.S. and EU recently agreed on a partnership to strengthen the Middle Corridor.

Second, the 2019-2025 strategy was essentially focused on Afghanistan. Since the U.S. withdrawal in 2021, the U.S. has not recognized either the Taliban or any other organization as the government of Afghanistan, making the Central Asian states all the more important as a link in monitoring developments in Afghanistan and coordinating the continued relocation of U.S.-Afghan allies. In both cases, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan — rising middle powers and strategic partners of the U.S. in the region — are likely to play a role.

Maneuvering as a group

The geography of Central Asia at the intersection of the interests of Russia, China, Turkey, Iran and the West means that a single country, even one as large and economically relatively powerful as Kazakhstan, is unlikely to effectively maintain the maneuverability of a middle power in the long run.

Rather, the five countries in the region are best placed to pursue their interests when acting as a group with a regional agenda. This is what Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have been trying to do since 2022 in particular.

Having this in mind, it is logical for the Trump administration to pursue a deal-driven approach that would accommodate foreign policy pragmatism shown by the Central Asian countries. The new U.S. administration would be well advised to take advantage of the increased interaction among Central Asian states, as well as within their widespread network of strategic partnerships and alliances, that includes Russia, China, Turkey and the Arab world, by engaging on energy, connectivity and security to the benefit of all actors involved.



Top photo credit: Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang attends the China-Central Asia Foreign Ministers' meeting with Kazakhstan's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Murat Nurtleu, Kyrgyzstan's Minister of Foreign Affairs Kulubaev Zheenbek Moldokanovich, Tajikistan's Minister of Foreign Affairs Sirojiddin Muhriddin, Turkmenistan's First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Vepa Hajiyev and Uzbekistan's Minister of Foreign Affairs Bakhtiyor Saidov, in Xian, Shaanxi province, China, April 27, 2023. (Reuters)
Asia-Pacific
US military border
U.S. Army Strykers from 1st Battalion, 41st Infantry Regiment, 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, assigned to Joint Task Force - Southern Border (JTF-SB) in May 2025. (Army Spc. Michael Graf)

Military seizing massive swaths of public lands at the border

North America

The Trump administration has transferred thousands of acres of federal land along the U.S.-Mexico border to be controlled by the Department of Defense (DoD). The transfer is part of an ongoing expansion of the military’s presence along the border which the administration claims is necessary to “control” illegal immigration.

Critics of the land transfer, including some who live near the affected areas, have raised concerns about the environmental impact of military operations on these large swathes of land. Additionally, much of the land now under the jurisdiction of the military encompasses national parks and other federal lands which the public is losing access to.

keep readingShow less
Warfare movie A24
Top photo credit: (official trailer for Warfare/A24)
'Warfare': Rare Iraq film that doesn't preach but packs truth

'Warfare': Rare Iraq War film that doesn't preach but packs punch

Media

Unlike Alex Garland’s Civil War, his Warfare, co-directed with war vet Ray Mendoza, is not just another attempt at a realistic portrayal of war, in all its blood and gore. Warfare, based on a true story, is really a parable about the overweening ambition and crushing failure of empire, a microcosm of America’s disastrous adventure in Iraq.

A Navy Seal mission reconnoiters a neighborhood in Ramadi. “I like this house,” says the team commander, reflecting the overconfidence of the empire at its unipolar moment. But it soon becomes clear that the mission has underestimated the enemy, that the whole neighborhood has, in fact, been tracking the Seals’ movements. Surprised and scared, the mission requests to be extricated. But extrication becomes a bloody, hellish experience despite the Seals’ technological edge in weapons, IT, and logistics, and it barely succeeds.

keep readingShow less
vietnam war memorial washington DC
Top photo credit: Washington, DC, May 24, 2024: A visitor reads the names of the fallen soldiers at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial at the National Mall ahead of Memorial Day. (A_Kiphayet/Shutterstock)

Veterans: What we would say to Trump on this Memorial Day

Military Industrial Complex

This Memorial Day comes a month after the 50th anniversary of the Fall of Saigon, which was largely used to recall the collapse of the entire American project in Vietnam. In short, the failure of the war is now viewed as both a rebuke of the American Exceptionalism myth and the rigid Cold War mentality that had Washington in a vice grip for much of the 20th Century.

“The leaders who mismanaged this debacle were never held accountable and remained leading players in the establishment for the rest of their lives,” noted author and professor Stephen Walt in a RS symposium on the war. “The country learned little from this bitter experience, and repeated these same errors in Iraq, Afghanistan, and several other places.”

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.