Latest news with #CentralAsia
Russia Today
14 hours ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
Forget the Middle East: This region could be next to see a major crisis
The war in the Middle East poses a growing threat to Central Asia. If Iran undergoes a radical change in its political system or descends into internal turmoil, its territory could become a conduit for foreign infiltration into a region long seen as within Russia's strategic orbit. Anyone with a grasp of international affairs understands that Russia's most defining geopolitical feature is the absence of natural borders. Even where physical barriers exist, such as in the Caucasus, historical experience has taught Russians to treat them as illusory. In this context, central Asia has always been viewed as part of Russia's extended strategic space. Threats to the region's stability are thus perceived in Moscow not as distant disruptions, but as direct national security concerns. One of the central foreign policy challenges for Russia in the coming years will be determining how far it must go to prevent such threats from materializing. For the first time since gaining independence in the 1990s, Central Asia may now be seriously vulnerable to destabilizing forces. Geographically removed from the conflict-prone neighborhoods of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Israel, the region has enjoyed a period of relative calm. Only Mongolia, bordered by friendly Russia and China, is arguably more fortunate. Central Asia, until now, has been largely insulated. But this insulation is now under threat. Since the late 19th century, Afghanistan has been the primary concern. But the danger has rarely come from Afghan state actors. Instead, the country has served as a base for extremists targeting neighboring post-Soviet republics. Both Russia and China have long had a vested interest in shielding the region from such spillover, largely for their own domestic reasons. Both powers have large Muslim populations and strong incentives to keep Islamist radicalism at bay. It is precisely this self-interest that has formed the basis of effective cooperation and restraint in international relations. However, this relatively stable picture is beginning to change. Israel's current posture – driven by an elite seeking to maintain power through perpetual military confrontation – is creating ripple effects far beyond its borders. The escalation since October 2023 has triggered a direct conflict between Israel and Iran. There is even talk in some Israeli circles of targeting Turkey next, due to its regional ambitions. While many of Israel's Arab neighbors may prefer to stay out of such a spiral, the intensification of conflict makes neutrality increasingly untenable. This trajectory has implications not only for the Middle East, but for the wider Eurasian space. The possibility that Iran could be destabilized – either through external pressure or internal collapse – should concern all those who value regional stability. Iran is a key player in the Eurasian balance, and a descent into chaos could turn it into a launch pad for foreign interference aimed at Russia and China via Central Asia. Russia must therefore prepare for all scenarios. So far, Iran has shown resilience. The leadership is maintaining control, and the population remains broadly patriotic. But dramatic changes cannot be ruled out. Should Iran fracture, the security vacuum created could expose Central Asia to manipulation from actors who view the region not as a priority in itself, but as a lever against Moscow and Beijing. It bears emphasizing: Central Asia is not significant to the West in the way it is to Russia or China. The region's population of under 90 million is dwarfed by the likes of Iran or Pakistan. Its global economic footprint pales in comparison to Southeast Asian nations such as Vietnam or Indonesia. The West views it not as a partner, but as a resource base – useful insofar as it weakens Russia and China. Should Iran descend into disorder, foreign actors could use it as a staging ground to project influence or destabilize Central Asia, without facing any real consequences themselves. For Washington, Brussels, or London, events in the region are an abstraction – something to exploit diplomatically, not something to defend materially. Beyond the external threats, there are internal risks as well. Israel's aggressive foreign policy, when broadcast globally, generates resentment among Muslim populations. In Central Asia, where ties to Russian culture and the Soviet past are strong, many citizens have a finely tuned sense of justice. They are not passive observers. Perceived injustice in the Middle East could radicalize sections of the population, making them susceptible to extremist messaging. The governments of Central Asia have done much to avoid becoming pawns in global geopolitics. The creation of the 'Central Asian Five' – a regional platform for dialogue and coordination – has been a major step. Russia supports this initiative, recognizing the importance of local agency and regional cooperation. These states are wisely building stronger relations with key neighbors, including China and Russia, while maintaining a cautious stance towards Turkey's neo-Ottoman ambitions. Ankara's push for a 'Great Turan' is treated with polite skepticism. Its economic and military capacities remain limited, and Central Asian leaders understand that. Overall, the region's foreign policy is marked by pragmatism. It seeks flexibility without compromising core obligations to strategic partners such as Russia. Moscow has no reason to take offence. And yet, even the best foreign policy cannot insulate these states from chaos beyond their borders. Russia must be realistic. It cannot – and should not – assume total responsibility for defending Central Asia. History teaches caution. The First World War stands as a cautionary tale of Russia committing to allies at great cost, only to reap instability and collapse. Moscow should now make clear that the preservation of sovereignty in Central Asia is a matter for the region's governments themselves. Russia remains a friend, a neighbor, and a responsible partner. But it will not mortgage its future for vague promises or ill-defined obligations. In the age of collapsing norms and rising brute force, this sober, balanced approach is the only one that can ensure both regional peace and Russia's own long-term article was first published by Vzglyad newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.
Russia Today
18 hours ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
Forget Middle East: This region could be next to see a major crisis
The war in the Middle East poses a growing threat to Central Asia. If Iran undergoes a radical change in its political system or descends into internal turmoil, its territory could become a conduit for foreign infiltration into a region long seen as within Russia's strategic orbit. Anyone with a grasp of international affairs understands that Russia's most defining geopolitical feature is the absence of natural borders. Even where physical barriers exist, such as in the Caucasus, historical experience has taught Russians to treat them as illusory. In this context, central Asia has always been viewed as part of Russia's extended strategic space. Threats to the region's stability are thus perceived in Moscow not as distant disruptions, but as direct national security concerns. One of the central foreign policy challenges for Russia in the coming years will be determining how far it must go to prevent such threats from materializing. For the first time since gaining independence in the 1990s, Central Asia may now be seriously vulnerable to destabilizing forces. Geographically removed from the conflict-prone neighborhoods of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Israel, the region has enjoyed a period of relative calm. Only Mongolia, bordered by friendly Russia and China, is arguably more fortunate. Central Asia, until now, has been largely insulated. But this insulation is now under threat. Since the late 19th century, Afghanistan has been the primary concern. But the danger has rarely come from Afghan state actors. Instead, the country has served as a base for extremists targeting neighboring post-Soviet republics. Both Russia and China have long had a vested interest in shielding the region from such spillover, largely for their own domestic reasons. Both powers have large Muslim populations and strong incentives to keep Islamist radicalism at bay. It is precisely this self-interest that has formed the basis of effective cooperation and restraint in international relations. However, this relatively stable picture is beginning to change. Israel's current posture – driven by an elite seeking to maintain power through perpetual military confrontation – is creating ripple effects far beyond its borders. The escalation since October 2023 has triggered a direct conflict between Israel and Iran. There is even talk in some Israeli circles of targeting Turkey next, due to its regional ambitions. While many of Israel's Arab neighbors may prefer to stay out of such a spiral, the intensification of conflict makes neutrality increasingly untenable. This trajectory has implications not only for the Middle East, but for the wider Eurasian space. The possibility that Iran could be destabilized – either through external pressure or internal collapse – should concern all those who value regional stability. Iran is a key player in the Eurasian balance, and a descent into chaos could turn it into a launch pad for foreign interference aimed at Russia and China via Central Asia. Russia must therefore prepare for all scenarios. So far, Iran has shown resilience. The leadership is maintaining control, and the population remains broadly patriotic. But dramatic changes cannot be ruled out. Should Iran fracture, the security vacuum created could expose Central Asia to manipulation from actors who view the region not as a priority in itself, but as a lever against Moscow and Beijing. It bears emphasizing: Central Asia is not significant to the West in the way it is to Russia or China. The region's population of under 90 million is dwarfed by the likes of Iran or Pakistan. Its global economic footprint pales in comparison to Southeast Asian nations such as Vietnam or Indonesia. The West views it not as a partner, but as a resource base – useful insofar as it weakens Russia and China. Should Iran descend into disorder, foreign actors could use it as a staging ground to project influence or destabilize Central Asia, without facing any real consequences themselves. For Washington, Brussels, or London, events in the region are an abstraction – something to exploit diplomatically, not something to defend materially. Beyond the external threats, there are internal risks as well. Israel's aggressive foreign policy, when broadcast globally, generates resentment among Muslim populations. In Central Asia, where ties to Russian culture and the Soviet past are strong, many citizens have a finely tuned sense of justice. They are not passive observers. Perceived injustice in the Middle East could radicalize sections of the population, making them susceptible to extremist messaging. The governments of Central Asia have done much to avoid becoming pawns in global geopolitics. The creation of the 'Central Asian Five' – a regional platform for dialogue and coordination – has been a major step. Russia supports this initiative, recognizing the importance of local agency and regional cooperation. These states are wisely building stronger relations with key neighbors, including China and Russia, while maintaining a cautious stance towards Turkey's neo-Ottoman ambitions. Ankara's push for a 'Great Turan' is treated with polite skepticism. Its economic and military capacities remain limited, and Central Asian leaders understand that. Overall, the region's foreign policy is marked by pragmatism. It seeks flexibility without compromising core obligations to strategic partners such as Russia. Moscow has no reason to take offence. And yet, even the best foreign policy cannot insulate these states from chaos beyond their borders. Russia must be realistic. It cannot – and should not – assume total responsibility for defending Central Asia. History teaches caution. The First World War stands as a cautionary tale of Russia committing to allies at great cost, only to reap instability and collapse. Moscow should now make clear that the preservation of sovereignty in Central Asia is a matter for the region's governments themselves. Russia remains a friend, a neighbor, and a responsible partner. But it will not mortgage its future for vague promises or ill-defined obligations. In the age of collapsing norms and rising brute force, this sober, balanced approach is the only one that can ensure both regional peace and Russia's own long-term article was first published by Vzglyad newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.
Al Jazeera
20 hours ago
- General
- Al Jazeera
‘The Caspian Sea is shrinking. It is visible with the naked eye'
Aktau, Kazakhstan – During his childhood, Adilbek Kozybakov's mother always kept a jar of sturgeon caviar in the fridge. Each day, she would spoon it on small pieces of bread and butter for him and his siblings. Caviar would keep them in good health, she believed. Kozybakov did not like it. It was salty and 'smelled like the sea', said Kozybakov, an ecologist, now 51. He grew up in Aktau, a city in western Kazakhstan on the shores of the Caspian Sea. But now, more than 40 years later, he looks back at this family ritual with nostalgia. Today, there is no more natural caviar left in Aktau's shops. Sturgeons are an endangered species due to overfishing and the degradation of their habitat. And soon, the sea might be gone, too. According to a study published in Nature magazine in April, the Caspian Sea level is likely to decline by up to 18 metres (59 feet) and could lose up to 34 percent of its surface by the end of the century. Water decline of even five to 10 metres may disrupt key ecosystems in the area, including habitats for endemic Caspian seals and sturgeon, the study says. For residents like Kozybakov, who is a member of a civil advisory body on the environment at the Ministry of Ecology, this has been clear for years. 'We don't have to conduct any studies to know that the sea is shrinking. It is visible with the naked eye,' Kozybakov told Al Jazeera. Located between Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Iran and Azerbaijan, the Caspian Sea is the world's largest landlocked body of water, part of the 'Middle Corridor' – the fastest route from China to Europe bypassing Russia, and a major source of oil and gas. Many fear that the Caspian Sea may share the fate of the nearby Aral Sea, located between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, which began to shrink in the 1960s as the rivers supplying it were extensively used by the Soviets to irrigate cotton fields. Currently, the sea occupies only 10 percent of its original surface, and its decline has had a tremendous effect on the local ecosystem and people's health. As in the case of the Aral Sea, the Caspian's woes are not been driven only by climate change. 'Polluted by oil companies' The Volga, Europe's largest and longest river located in Russia, has been the source of 80 to 85 percent of the Caspian water. According to experts, Russia's water management has affected the sea. 'Over the years, Russia has built a lot of dams and water reservoirs on the Volga and has used its water for agriculture and industry. As a result, much less water has been flowing into the Caspian Sea,' Kozybakov told Al Jazeera. 'A hundred years ago, the sturgeon would live for many decades, and no one would touch it. It grew to huge sizes which we can see at historical photos. Today, the population of sturgeon has been destroyed by poachers and its environment polluted by oil companies.' Kazakhstan's three major oil fields, discovered in Soviet times, are operated by foreign companies. In February this year, Vadim Ni, an environmental lawyer from Kazakhstan behind a campaign to 'Save the Caspian Sea' decided to sue his own government. He argues that the state's contracts signed with the multinational oil and gas companies have been kept secret, which makes it impossible to determine their real impact on the environment around the Caspian Sea. In the 1990s, Kazakhstan was newly independent, emerging after the collapse of the Soviet Union. When it became clear that its oil and gas reserves could be extracted and transported to other countries, large energy companies and their lawyers flocked to the country to secure deals. They negotiated their contracts with the Kazakh state to be subject to international private law, ensuring details of the deals remained confidential. As a result, in case of conflict between the signatories, international arbitration courts would need to resolve disputes. Ni said that this is unjust and against international law, as per the Aarhus Convention, which ensures open access to environmental information. 'Oil companies do not want to reduce their revenues and increase their liability and responsibility for the environment. While they often conduct environmental research to demonstrate due diligence, there is a reason to question the objectivity and reliability of these results, given their vested interests,' said Ni. 'In addition, we are discussing energy transition and German investments in hydrogen energy on the Caspian. But it will be green energy for Europe, not for us. Hydrogen requires huge amount of electricity produced by renewables and we will have to deal with the waste and water pollution,' he told Al Jazeera. The court has not admitted the case, claiming that there are no grounds to launch a lawsuit. But Ni said if his appeal fails, he will pursue the case under the international legal system. Meanwhile, the fight to save the Caspian Sea has already begun. In Aktau, Kozybakov works with the local administration, residents and civil society groups, while raising the alarm at the national level by joining environmental initiatives. 'We want to raise these issues from the bottom to show the government that people are concerned,' said Kozybakov. 'Not only ecologists but also average citizens, residents of Aktau who grew up here and who are worried about the future of their children and grandchildren.'
BBC News
a day ago
- Politics
- BBC News
SCO: India refuses to sign joint statement at the summit
India has refused to sign a joint statement at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in China as it did not reflect the country's concerns on terrorism, India's foreign ministry has Randhir Jaiswal said on Thursday that India's desire for its concerns to be reflected was "not acceptable to one particular country".While he did not share more details, Indian media reported that Delhi refused to sign the statement after it omitted the Pahalgam attack, a deadly militant attack that killed 26 tourists in Indian-administered has blamed its neighbour Pakistan for sheltering a militant group it blames for the attack. Pakistan has rejected the allegations. China, Russia and four Central Asian countries formed the SCO in 2001 as a countermeasure to limit the influence of the West in the region. India and Pakistan joined in 2017. The latest signing ceremony took place during the SCO defence ministers' meeting in China, held ahead of the leaders' annual summit this to media reports, India perceived the joint statement as being "pro-Pakistan" after it omitted the Pahalgam attack but mentioned militant activities in has accused India of backing the Balochistan freedom movement, which India the meeting, India's Defence Minister Rajnath Singh urged the SCO to hold the perpetrators of cross-border terrorism accountable, though he didn't explicitly mention Pakistan."Some countries use cross-border terrorism as an instrument of policy and provide shelter to terrorists. There should be no place for such double standards. SCO should not hesitate to criticise such nations," he said in a and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir, which they claim to own in full but administer in Pahalgam attack in April brought the two nuclear-armed countries to the brink of another war. In May, India launched a series of airstrikes, targeting sites it called "terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir".Pakistan denied the claim that these were terror camps and also responded by firing missiles and deploying drones into Indian hostilities between the two countries continued until 10 May when US President Donald Trump announced that India and Pakistan had agreed to a "full and immediate ceasefire", brokered by the has, however, consistently denied any intervention by the US.
Bloomberg
2 days ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Uzbekistan's Largest Digital Banking Platform Names Board Chairman
Uzbekistan's largest digital banking platform named Oliver Hughes, who previously ran Russia's biggest fintech business, to be chairman of the supervisory board, as the firm aims to ramp up its expansion in Central Asia's most populous nation. The board will also include directors David Nangle, co-founder of Stockholm-listed investment firm Vef AB, and Matthew Risley, a partner emeritus at US-based QED Investors, TBC Digital JSC said in a statement on Wednesday.
