On June 4, 2024, a round table on the topic “Central Asia: Development prospects” was held in Almaty, Kazakhstan, organized by the CSTO Secretariat with the participation of the Kazakhstan Center for Topical Studies “Alternative”. The event brought together representatives of scientific and research organizations and experts from the Eurasian region.
The participants discussed the medium- and long-term prospects for the development of the Central Asian region, the formation of the Eurasian pole of stability in a multipolar world, as well as challenges and threats to Central Asia, one of the sources of which is Afghanistan.
Experts noted that Central Asia is now one of the most rapidly developing regions that have maintained constructive relations with both Russia and the West. At the same time, it is obvious that under any conditions, Central Asia will primarily focus on its neighbors, primarily on Russia and China.
In this context, the example of Kazakhstan is interesting. The conference participants stressed that Kazakhstan has always pursued and will continue to pursue a multi-vector policy, but not to the detriment of anyone. This is probably why Kazakhstan is increasingly becoming a platform for negotiations between conflicting parties, as it was in the case of Armenia and Azerbaijan or Iran and the Western world. Kazakhstan has no fundamental conflicts with any of the countries of the world, and this equidistant position allows it to effectively act as a mediator.
– Kazakhstan is, in fact, almost the only player who does not have any global interests. If we take the issue of, for example, the same Afghan track, we will see that our neighbors still have their own interests. They are countries bordering Afghanistan, they have their own system of relations, and, after all, there are diasporas that are located on the territory of Afghanistan. And in this case, we again act as the key country that has no contradictions with Afghanistan, but has an interest in the stability of the situation, including in Afghanistan,” Kazakh expert Sultan Akimbekov stressed.
Regarding Afghanistan and the attitude towards the Taliban movement that came to power, many experts, such as Sultan Akimbekov and Alexander Knyazev, proceed from the positions of real politics, according to which it is necessary to act from the realities prevailing on earth.
– The current political regime in Afghanistan is a long–term factor. I would characterize the situation in Afghanistan after the Taliban came to power as a long–term uncertainty. This long-term perspective is actually already a given, we are very close to the time when the Taliban regime will be 3 years old, and I personally do not observe any signs of possible instability in the country, for example,” the Russian political scientist shared his opinion Alexander Knyazev.
From this point of view, it is important for the Central Asian countries to further contribute to the stabilization of the internal political situation in Afghanistan, which, occupying a key geopolitical position, is potentially a link between transport routes.
On the other hand, Uzbek expert Bakhtiyor Ergashev believes that the Taliban are not the best partners for the states of the regions. Thus, the Taliban movement has taken an uncompromising position with all its neighbors on water issues, continuing to implement the Kush Tepe Canal project, which will change the water balance of the entire region. Already, this harsh policy is resulting in conflicts over the Helmand River basin with Iran and the Kunar River basin with Pakistan.
At the moment, the issue of recognition/non-recognition of the Taliban is being raised. Alexander Knyazev believes that there are no international legal mechanisms for recognizing a particular government in the world, and as a result, political recognition means a public statement of readiness for cooperation. Thus, in practice, the very existence of diplomatic missions and established relations with the Government is its recognition. And de facto interaction with the Taliban is their recognition as the Afghan government.
At the same time, the territory of Afghanistan remains a haven for many terrorist groups that are hostile to both the Taliban and neighboring States.
According to the data provided by the participants of the round table, the number of “ISIS Khorasan” in Afghanistan, at the time when in August 2021, when the Taliban movement took Kabul, ranged from 5 to 7 thousand people. Now this figure varies from 15 to 17 thousand active bayonets, which are controlled by ISIS Khorasan. In addition to supporters of ISIS Khorasan, members of Katibat Imam al Bukhari and Katibat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, who come from Uzbekistan and have gained combat experience in Syria and Iraq, are actively settling in the north-west of Afghanistan, on the border with Central Asian countries.
Therefore, the Taliban actively cooperate with external forces, including through counter-terrorism activities. In Iran, with the assistance of the Main Intelligence Directorate of Afghanistan, several dozen terrorist attacks that were being prepared by the Islamic State have been prevented over the past year. The director of the FSB of Russia openly said that there is now an active exchange of intelligence between the special services of the CIS countries and the current Afghan government.
Separately, the conference participants discussed the issue of the formation of a multipolar world. In particular, this process is accompanied by a change in the form of warfare. Increasingly, the war is becoming hybrid in nature, which gives rise to new challenges and threats to national security. Following this, the role of the CSTO for its member states is changing.
– At any moment, our countries may be involved in certain destructive projects. And if earlier we were preparing to repel some exclusively external global threats, now it is within our states that such situations may arise when our states and political elites will not be able to keep the situation. And the risk of this, using the example of our Republic of Kyrgyzstan, is always high. In my opinion, the CSTO has shown that it can react quickly and prevent the situation from slipping into civil confrontation, coups, and regional conflict,” Kyrgyz expert Aman Saliev stressed.
At the same time, at this stage, neither Russia nor the Central Asian states can clearly define the new functions of the CSTO. Moreover, the CSTO shows itself in a new capacity and assumes other obligations than those prescribed in the Collective Security Treaty. In this regard, the Kazakh political scientist Eduard Poletaev recalled that the events in January of the 22nd year were unpredictable, and all the events, trainings and various exercises conducted within the framework of the CSTO, in principle, did not envisage exactly such events that took place in Kazakhstan.
Many of the experts stressed that along with the processes of globalization, there is a clear trend towards regionalization. Regionalization in some of its forms can slow down globalization, and be an important factor in the international system over the next 10-15 years.
– More than ten 5+1 formats have already been formed, that is, the countries of Central Asia and other regional actors. And in this regard, there is a high probability that other external actors will use this format to expand ties with Central Asian states. That is, key external players already consider our region as a whole,” Tajik political analyst Sherali Rizoen shared information.
Predicting the further development of the Central Asian region, Sherali Rizoen emphasizes that the attention of global actors to the region will increase. For this reason, the Central Asian states will continue to expand the multi-vector nature of their foreign policy, while maintaining a neutral position in relation to the global confrontation of major actors. At the same time, according to the Uzbek political scientist Bakhtiyor Ergasheva, the risk of Central Asia becoming an arena of confrontation between global players is only increasing.
– Ahead of us lies an even greater escalation of conflict in relations between the blocs of countries, which you and I are well aware of. And in these circumstances, Central Asia is a unique region that is surrounded by three future global centers of power – China, Russia, and India – and which directly borders two serious regional powers in the form of Pakistan and Iran. Turkey’s economic presence, if not ideological and political, is increasing in the region. The region has been, is, and will continue to be, in the medium and long term, the arena of a very tough confrontation between these forces, each of which, by and large, offers its own agenda for the countries of Central Asia, – said Bakhtiyor Ergashev.
In the context of the issue of the formation of a multipolar world order, the experts of the round table raised the topic of the formation of the Eurasian pole of sustainability.
– This pole of stability will consist of various mini-poles or mini-subsystems, and Central Asia may not be its core, but it will be one of these very subsystem poles. Central Asia is heterogeneous, but the promise of regionalization has really begun to emerge in our country. But the basis of this very cooperation is different in our understanding,” the Kazakh political scientist explained Lydia Parkhomchik.
At the same time, many participants of the round table agreed that Central Asia includes too different countries to talk about the unity of the region. Kazakh political scientist Rustam Burnashev believes that, in principle, the positioning of the Central Asian states as a single region exists only in the field of rhetoric, and the real region of Central Asian states has yet to be built. However, the States themselves see the regionalization process differently.
The experts also touched upon the issue of participation Armenia in the CSTO. Recently, the Armenian Republic has significantly distanced itself from the Organization. However, the possible withdrawal of Armenia from the CSTO, according to Central Asian political scientists, will have little effect on the importance of this Organization for the Central Asian states that are members of it.
Kazakh political scientist Rustem Kurmanguzhin noted that the CSTO lacks additional forms of cooperation with other external players.
– The OSCE Summit took place in the 10th year, it was dedicated to the OSCE partners. Let’s use the term “CSTO partners”.
Let’s take an analogy with the policy of the European Union, they also have an association. Let’s make a CSTO association.
Why not make humanitarian cooperation of the CSTO? Cargo can be sent not only with the emblem of the Ministry of Emergency Situations, but with the emblem of the CSTO. NATO is sending supplies. Especially let the third world countries – the association or the CSTO partners – get used to it. And then this NATO influence will narrow down to the member countries,” the expert put forward ideas.
At the end of the round table, experts unanimously stated the need to create a “network analytical center” under the auspices of the CSTO. It is assumed that within the framework of this unified structure, think tanks in the CSTO space could exchange information. Experts suggested that the functioning of the analytical structure would allow, among other things, to coordinate the work of the CSTO and the SCO.
Источник
