Consistency, Not Priority, Is The Key To U.S. Central Asia Policy

As a new administration arrives in Washington, the global chessboard is being reset. While central asia may not occupy the upper fields of that plate, it remains a strategically vital region. For the incoming administration, the key to effective engagement in this complex region is not a sudden thrust into the spotlight or grand pronouncements, but a commitment to consistent and well-defined engagement. Central Asia need not be a top priority; that’s what it takes consistent attention.

No one expects Central Asia to be an immediate focus of the administration. The crises in Ukraine and the Middle East, as well as the ongoing challenges posed by China, will understandably dominate the headlines and agenda. However, the very fact that Central Asia is unlikely to erupt into a major conflict that would require immediate military or diplomatic intervention is precisely why a stable, long-term approach is so crucial. The five nations in the region – Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan – have a long history of navigating complex geopolitical landscapes and are unlikely to be swayed by short-term attention or statements that do not follow through. They to prioritize reliability over rhetoric.

The previous Trump administration deserves credit for recognizing this and formalizing the new one United States Central Asia Strategy 2019–2025. This strategy aimed to strengthen the independence, sovereignty and resilience of the region with an emphasis on economic connectivity and reforms. However, the implementation of this strategy was often hampered by inconsistencies and a lack of sustained engagement. While the blueprint existed, the practical implementation failed. For example, while the strategy emphasized the importance of trade diversification, few concrete initiatives were launched to facilitate American business engagement outside of existing limited partnerships.

Furthermore, outdated restrictions have sometimes been used as political leverage, creating unnecessary complications. The main example is the persistence of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment for Kazakhstan, which prevents normal trade relations with the United States. Originally intended to target the USSR to limit Jewish emigration, this legacy law continues to apply to post-Soviet states. Despite bipartisan agreement on its obsolescence, the recent Highlights of the CRS report its continued use as a potential lever for promoting democratic governance. This shows how supporting superficial restrictions, ostensibly for value-based reasons, can undermine interest-based politics.

The Summit C5+USA On September 21, 2023, at United Nations headquarters in New York, he offered a glimmer of hope for re-engagement. The dialogue was positive, and commitments were made on various fronts, from regional security to economic cooperation. However, follow-up was unsatisfactory. Where are the tangible investment plans spurred by the summit? Where are the concrete joint projects dealing with water shortages or border security that have been discussed? The Dialogue on critical mineralsestablished in February 2024 to address the critical issue of rare earth reserves in the region and America’s need for secure supply chains, it has yet to make any publicly announced initiatives or agreements. This is despite the increasing urgency of the situation, with China becoming more prepared impose prohibitions and restrictions on the critical export of minerals. This gap between statements and practical actions is precisely what breeds skepticism in a region accustomed to playing the long game.

What Central Asia really needs from the United States is a competent, clearly articulated strategy consistently implemented at the country level. Leaders of regional states are pragmatic actors. Their priority is tangible, long-term cooperation that contributes to their economic development, strengthens their security and respects their sovereignty without imposing unnecessary conditions or forcing them to choose sides. This pragmatic approach is directly in line with core US interests. Economically, Central Asia represents significant but largely untappeda treasure trove of resources, including rare earth elements vital to high-tech industries and the transition to green energy.

A prime example of this untapped potential and a clear illustration of the current dynamics is Kazakhstan. Although it has significant reserves, the country has seen a 3.8 times increased the export of rare earth minerals (REM). from 2020, realistically. Kazakhstan is also among the rare nations able to produce gallium and indiumrare earth elements that China currently has a near monopoly on. Yet China was the sole importer of these Kazakh REMs in 2023. For Washington to capitalize on this potential, the region requires targeted and strategic investment, technology transfer, personnel education, and comprehensive high-level research work for effective reservoir mapping. Equally important are long-term obligations to import these products. This represents a a mutually beneficial scenario: The United States gains a diversified supply chain, gaining a key advantage in future geopolitical competition, while regional states benefit from new jobs, increased budget revenue, and the ability to build their market share.

Beyond the economy, a consistent US policy towards the region is essential to fostering regional stability. Central Asian states have long played a constructive role as mediators in regional disputes, offering platforms for dialogue. The increasing connectivity made possible by projects like Middle corridor it creates economic interdependence, fostering a common interest in peace and stability. Ongoing, albeit fragile, peace negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan are indirectly influenced by increasing importance transit routes that benefit both nationsemphasizing the power of economic incentives in promoting peace.

Turning to another pressing challenge, Afghanistan presents a sore point where Central Asian engagement can be particularly valuable. While direct engagement with the Taliban poses significant obstacles as for the United States, it is obvious to countries in the region that ignoring the realities on the ground will not make the challenges disappear. In 2024, significant efforts were made to normalize relations and start a pragmatic dialogue with the Taliban, for example, in providing humanitarian aid and ensuring border security. Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev took a leading role, consistently advocating in the UN for the establishment of the UN Center for Regional Sustainable Development Goals for Central Asia and Afghanistan in Almaty, an idea that it was realized this summer. As a follow-up, Kazakhstan removed the Taliban from its list of terrorist organizations and accredited chargé d’affaires from Afghanistan. Expansion talks are now underway the Trans-Afghanistan Railway furthermore, opening trade routes to other nations in South and Central Asia, as well as the Middle East. By supporting these regional actors, the United States can contribute to prevention Afghanistan not to become a hotbed of instability and terrorism, without necessarily supporting the Taliban regime.

The new management should understand that a a consistent, well-defined and diligently implemented strategy is the most efficient route to connect with Central Asia. The key is not to think about the regional arena to conquer a zero sum game against Russia or China, but as a space for building mutually beneficial partnerships that promote US interests while respecting the sovereignty and actions of Central Asian nations. By focusing on concrete cooperation at the country level in areas such as trade diversification, infrastructure development, and regional stability, the United States can cultivate lasting relationships that pay far greater dividends than sporadic outpourings of high-level attention. A firm hand, guided by a consistent strategy, will secure America’s long-term interests in this region.

Miras Zhiyenbayev is Head of the Foreign Policy Analysis and International Studies Program at MIND, the Maqsut Narikbayev Institute for Networking and Development, a university think tank at Maqsut Narikbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan.

Image: Vladimir Tretyakov / Shutterstock.com.